Category Archives: Obama

Rumor: U.S. Army colonel on Obama’s martial law plan

I was forwarded a disturbing email from a “Bud Parker, U.S. Army, retired,” who claims that his source — a U.S. Army colonel — says Obama is planning to impose martial law under the pretext of the maintenance of law and order, after America had descended into chaos and disorder that, in part, had been engendered by racial strife fomented by Obama himself and allies like George Soros.

I can’t confirm the authenticity of Bud Parker or what he claims. But, given blogger and radio show host Dave Hodges’ recent post on a recently retired Lt. General who told him [Hodges] of a coming civil war as a result of major portions of the U.S. military refusing to participate in the subjugation of the American people by force, I decided to publish Bud Parker’s email.

In so doing, my intention is not to cause fear or panic. Rather, my abiding belief is that to be forewarned is to be fore-armed. If there’s even a chance that what Bud Parker says is true, the best way to puncture Obama’s martial law plan is to expose it to sunlight.

Note: I did an Internet search for “Bud Parker, retired U.S. Army” and found a James A. “Bud” Parker on LinkedIn, where he identifies himself as a Chevron offshore logistics coordinator and a retired U.S. Army first sergeant, and as the author of an article on BeforeIt’sNews.

Below is Bud Parker’s email of May 23, 2015.

martial law in BostonOn April 19, 2013, during a manhunt for Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, police and federal agents spent the day storming people’s homes, without warrants, in Watertown, a suburb of Boston, MA. (See “Boston Bombing: Getting the sheeple used to the police state”)

Email by Bud Parker:

When I asked my colleague the Army Colonel why he thinks Obama is doing this, the reply I received from this life-long soldier and Army leader shocked me.

Paraphrasing him, this is what he told me in a nutshell.

He said, most branches of the service routinely engage in war “games” and come up with strategies and tactics on how to handle every type of military conflict and scenario that can be imagined.  One of the big new battle scenarios being actively discussed in the military recently is how to handle civil unrest in the U.S. and fighting in the streets.  What will the Army do if called in to fight armed civilians in the streets of the United States?  How will that urban warfare be conducted?  Will troops be able to fire upon other American citizens when the troops take an oath to protect American citizens?

He said many in the military are discussing the very real possibility that Obama will attempt to stay in office beyond two terms.  It is being speculated that Obama will do this by declaring a state of martial law.  The easiest way to declare martial law is when there is massive civil unrest and riots throughout the U.S.  Thus, it is believed that Obama, and his regime, will intentionally create a situation of massive civil unrest.  Some believe he has already started to implement that strategy by forcing Obamacare on everyone (when the populace did not ask for it and less than 300 people in power voted for it). Perhaps the Obama Administration is not too concerned over the totally dysfunctional Obamacare website and the additional fact that millions will be dropped from their existing insurance policies which they already had and liked.  The Obama Administration may not care if getting health care becomes more difficult and more expensive because it is all leading toward civil unrest.  It is believed by some that Obamacare will only get worse and worse, and then in 2 to 3 years when people have a very difficult time getting medical treatment for themselves or their loved ones, people will get enraged.

Moreover, it is being speculated that around the same time when the frustration levels over Obamacare are hitting a critical point in 2 to 3 years, there will be a “glitch” in the welfare payment (or EBT) payment system.  The tens of millions who rely on EBT handouts to sustain themselves will be cut off.  The overwhelming majority of the EBT recipients are Black.  The Obama regime will then blame the “glitch” on the Republicans, i.e., Republicans froze government spending which “forced” Obama to suspension of EBT payments. (Obama will intentionally drive spending up and up uncontrolled knowing full well that one day the Republicans will be backed into a corner and finally vote for a freeze in spending.) Obama will create heightened racial tension by telling everyone that the White Republicans are racially motivated and did this to hurt the Black community.  This manufactured racial tension, combined with growing tensions over the then-collapsing medical coverage due to Obamacare, will result in race wars and civil unrest.  People will take to the streets.

By the way, you should know that my colleague, the Army Colonel who is telling me all this, is Black.  He specifically commented, and outwardly expressed his embarrassment, about how Blacks have become so dependent and enslaved by the welfare system and the Democrats that it would be very easy to create civil unrest and race wars merely by cutting off, or dramatically hindering, EBT payments for only a month or so.  He believes that most Blacks, who have a misguided sense of entitlement, will then take to looting stores and rioting. Once the race wars, civil unrest, and violence becomes pervasive throughout the U.S., Obama will declare martial law and take over.  Elections can, and will, be postponed under martial law.

My colleague noted that this possibility is clearly being analyzed and discussed inside the military because such a martial law strategy is nothing new.  Tyrannical and dictatorial leaders in the past have done the martial law strategy many times.  He noted that dictators such as Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler did basically the identical thing.  He went on to say that one of the most recent examples of this strategy was when Marcos declared martial law in the Philippines from 1972-1981 due to civil unrest.  The Philippines had democratic elections up until that time.  When martial law was declared, the Philippine constitution was suspended, its Congress dissolved, all elections were suspended, and Marcos remained in power for years beyond his elected term. The alleged “terrorist bombings” that occurred in the Philippines, which lead to Marcos declaring martial law, have always been questioned and never proven to be the acts of actual terrorists.

He concluded by saying that many believe this is the real reason behind the purging of military generals.  The older members of the military, and especially its generals and leaders, tend to be more conservative and they believe in the Constitution—and following the Constitution.  Thus, a tyrant and dictator needs to get rid of these military leaders before a state of martial law is declared if the rising dictator wants the military to follow along and do what the dictator says.  Due to the loss of many experienced military leaders the past few years, the military is now being run and guided more and more by younger, inexperienced leaders. The type who won’t really know what to do if martial law was declared.  Moreover, he noted that there is a growing mindset throughout the military now that every soldier needs to keep quiet and just follow along with what Obama says and wants to do or you will be fired and your military career ruined.  Again, I was told this is nothing new since removing strong military leaders in advance of declaring martial law is a historically-proven element of a rising tyrant and dictator.

*Bud Parker*
US Army, *Retired

On Obama’s purge of the military, see:

See also:

~Éowyn

President Lucifer’s plan to force islam on America

Guess who's coming to your neighborhood

Guess who’s coming to your neighborhood

WND EXCLUSIVE: U.S. PUSHBACK AGAINST MUSLIM REFUGEES ‘GROWING’

Government offers advice on how to quash dissent

by Leo Hohmann

WND has discovered what amounts to the government playbook for countering the rising “backlash” against the secret planting of Muslim refugees into cities and towns across America…

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/u-s-pushback-against-muslim-refugees-growing/#7kV9wf9dyGY4LLHb.99

This is a long article that is worth your time. ~ TD


Ann Corcoran on Refugee Resettlement

Watch Ann Corcoran tell her personal story of how she got interested in the refugee movement and became the nation’s leading watchdog of refugee “contractors” posing as charitable organizations.


There we have it. These plans are no response to a humanitarian crisis of any kind. They are part of conspiracy to bring America down, and hand its riches and its people to islamists. 

Majority of Americans, esp. Democrats, want to make “hate speech” a criminal act

The United States is exceptional in the world when it comes to the protection of free speech. But that distinction is now endangered.

Peter Moore reports for YouGov, May 20, 2015, that its latest research shows that many Americans support making “hate speech” a criminal offense, by a margin of 41% for vs. 37% against.

Hate speech is vaguely defined by YouGov as public statements which would “stir up hatred against a group based on such things as their race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation.”

Note that “hate speech” doesn’t mean a public statement that explicitly advocates or incites violence against a group, instead it is about “stirring up hatred,” which is vague and subjective.

What does “stir up” mean? What does “hatred” mean?

The same statement may arouse ill will in someone, but not in another. In other words, what is considered “hate speech” means many things to many people.

On this issue of supporting criminalizing hate speech, as on others, there are partisan and racial differences:

  • The majority (51%) of Democrats support criminalizing hate speech; only 26% oppose.
  • In contrast, a majority of both Republicans (47%) and Independents (41%) oppose criminalizing hate speech, with 37% of Republicans and 35% of Independents in support.
  • The majority of blacks (62%) and Hispanics (50%) support criminalizing hate speech, with only 14% of blacks and 24% of Hispanics opposed.
  • In contrast, a majority (43%) of whites oppose criminalizing hate speech, with 36% favoring criminalizing.

criminalizing hate speech

Charles C.W. Cooke of National Review points out that

It’s important to note here that “stir up hatred against” does not mean “instruct a crowd to kill” or “explicitly incite violence against.” Both of those things are already illegal under the Supreme Court’s 1969 Brandenburg standard. Rather, it is a fancy way of saying “be really mean to.”

Cooke notes that in the UK, prominent British columnist Katie Hopkins is being investigated by the police and may be prosecuted under the Public Order Act, for referring to African migrants crossing the Mediterranean as “cockroaches”. But Hopkins did not threaten African migrants, nor did she ask her readers to meet her the next day and embark upon a violent crusade. She merely called African migrants by an ugly word.

Should Americans wish to become more like the British — as YouGov’s research shows a majority of Democrats, blacks and Hispanics want to — they would have to do no less than to repeal the First Amendment.

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

~Éowyn

California Medical Association drops opposition to doctor-assisted suicide

Hippocratic Oath

According to a report from California Catholic Daily, May 22, 2015, the state of California has added a new first to its dubious list of achievements.

Formerly opposed to physician-assisted suicide — euthanasia in non-PC parlance — last Wednesday, May 20, 2015, the California Medical Association (CMA) removed its opposition to a controversial bill in the state legislature that would allow terminally ill Californians to end their lives with doctor-prescribed drugs.

In so doing, CMA became America’s first state medical association to drop its opposition to euthanasia.

Although CMA has long opposed doctor-assisted suicide on grounds that it violates doctors’ ethical and moral obligations to provide the best treatment possible, the medical association recently changed its bylaws so that it is now neutral on the issue by deleting the term “physician-assisted suicide” and replacing it with “aid in dying.” Its rationale is that it is simply acknowledging a shift in doctor and patient attitudes about end-of-life and aid-in-dying options. Dr. Luther Cobb, president of the California Medical Association and a Humboldt County general surgeon, said, “I’ve always felt that way, but I was surprised the membership of the organization had changed.”

Luther Cobb, MD

In January of this year, Sacramento lawmakers introduced SB128: End of Life Option Act, three months after Brittany Maynard, 29, set off a worldwide movement in support of “aid in dying” by sharing her own decision to die with the help of her doctor. Maynard, who had terminal brain cancer, moved to Oregon to access the state’s Death with Dignity law, which the California legislation uses as a model. Maynard claimed her final months were made more difficult by not being able to access life-ending drugs in her home state. She died Nov. 1, 2015, after using the lethal prescription. Her husband and mother have continued to share her story in the state Capitol to encourage lawmakers to change California’s laws so that others don’t have to move for similar end-of-life options.

SB128 would require two California physicians to agree that a mentally competent patient has six months or less to live before prescribing life-ending drugs. A terminal patient seeking the lethal prescription would then be required to make a written request and two oral requests at least 15 days apart.

Opponents of the bill argue that vulnerable people can be coerced into seeking the deadly prescription by heirs looking to profit or by health insurers who find it cheaper to offer aid in dying rather than chemotherapy to live. “It’s a bad bill because it has the possibility of impacting the most vulnerable in California who don’t have access to health insurance or the best of care and whose options are limited,” said Tim Rosales, spokesman for Californians Against Assisted Suicide.

SB128 passed along strictly party lines (Democrats for; Republicans opposed) in two Senate committees — health and judiciary. But since California voters persist in electing Democrats to a majority to the state legislature, the euthanasia bill is likely to become law.

Certainly, CMA’s move paves the way for passage of the bill, although opposition remains in the Catholic Church and among some disability rights groups. 

In removing its opposition to SB128, California Medical Association had sought an amendment to the bill to ensure that doctors who did not want to participate would also not be required to provide information on assisted-dying or refer a patient to a medical provider willing to offer such services, although there will still be other sources and opportunities for patients to learn about aid in dying.

The amendments are expected to be finalized and made public this week.

~Éowyn

Leader of U.S. veterans coalition renews Patrick Henry’s call to liberty

I am an American citizen

Below is the Memorial Day speech delivered by my friend John J. Molloy, Chairman of the National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition, at the Ride For Freedom Rally (of biker veterans) in Rainelle, West Virginia, on May 23, 2015.

John Molloy

Brothers & Sisters,

Though it is customary over the Memorial Day weekend to render flowery speeches about our departed veterans who sacrificed their lives for our freedom, this will not be one of them.

This year marks the 240th anniversary of the commencement of the Battle of Lexington (though some may argue that the Revolution began at the Battle of Point Pleasant, here in West Virginia). This year is also the 70th anniversary of the defeat of the Nazis and Tojo in World War II. Each event a high point in our nation’s history. However, it also marks a sad anniversary, the 40th anniversary of the fall of Saigon to the North Vietnamese, when the lives and sacrifices of American and allied South Vietnamese soldiers were disgracefully discarded by cowardly politicians.

Since that fateful day in April 1975, it appears that our armed forces have rarely been permitted to fight to win. Then as now, ridiculous rules of engagement do not permit our fighters to engage the enemy, even when being shot at, without first getting authorization.  Well, new flash! The purpose of our armed forces is supposed to be ‘kill people and break things’. Hearts and minds are won though victory and fear. We should be generous in victory, but not before.

The fact that our political leaders have abrogated all our past sacrifices is obvious.

The National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition was established to resolve those issues important to those of us who served in, as well as those who support veterans of Vietnam, the First Gulf War and all of America’s subsequent wars. The issues include:

  • Prisoners of war (POW) and missing in action (MIA)
  • Agent Orange
  • Gulf War illness
  • Homeless veterans
  • Veterans employment/unemployment
  • Veterans health care/V.A. hospitals

However, efforts to resolve these issues are meaningless if Americans lose their freedom. Upon entering our nation’s armed forces, we swore to defend the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Without freedom, we can resolve nothing.

Consequently, it is the primary objective of the Coalition — and the 70 veterans organizations and the over quarter of a million veterans it represents — to support those measures that will ensure the freedom, safety and security of the United States of America, which this administration is not ensuring.

Unlike most veterans organizations, the Coalition is not a veterans service organization. It is a political/educational organization that evaluates and endorses candidates for political office, by determining if they are capable and willing to not only support those issues of concern to veterans, but most importantly, abide by their oath of office should they be elected. Unfortunately, those who fail to abide by their oath outnumber those whom the Coalition has endorsed, and even some who the Coalition has endorsed have succumbed to the dictates of this administration and congressional leadership.

It is because of this administration’s sympathy toward those who would destroy us politically, economically and militarily, as well as the weakness and complicity of many senators and representatives, that America is now at great risk. America is besieged on all sides whether by racial-ethnic unrest, illegal immigration, Islamic terror, and even an Ebola outbreak. But this administration and the liars who support it expect us to believe that our greatest problem is climate change. They think us to be idiots and treat us accordingly. I think that I can safely assure you that this cannot continue without a reckoning. And I suspect that this administration wants it to occur so that it will be provoked into subduing us.

One only needs to look at some of our leaders to see where America is headed. Obama has failed to subdue ISIS, uses executive action to provide amnesty to illegal aliens, refers to those killed by Muslim terrorists at Benghazi as “bumps in the road,” and refers to the Fort Hood massacre as workplace terror.

Well, who are his advisors and senior cabinet members?

  • Jeh Johnson, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), who praises the Muslim Brotherhood.
  • Valerie Jarrett, White House senior advisor, an Iranian Muslim who treats our senior military leaders with disdain.
  • John Brennan, CIA chief, who is a Muslim.
  • Gen Clapper, Director of National Security, who is a moron.
  • Mohamed Elibiary, senior member of the DHS Security Advisory Council, who is an advocate of Hamas.
  • Eric Holder, U.S. attorney general (2009-2015), who wanted to take away our second amendment rights and supports the rioters who defy our police.
  • Loretta Lynch, Holder’s successor who wants to nationalize our police forces.
  • Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s advisor, whose father and brother are senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood.
  • Al Sharpton, the race baiter and agitator who defends criminals against legitimate law enforcement.

So what can we do?

Here, I must take the liberty of referring to and paraphrasing a famous speech made in the Spring of 1775, the eve of the American War for Independence.

“They tell us, sir, that we are weak, unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be next week or next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed and when members of the FEMA or DHS or the “federal protective agency” (formerly, the police) invade every house?

Shall we gather strength by irresolution or inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope until our enemies have bound us hand and foot?

We are not weak if we make a proper use of those means by which God has placed in our power. Millions of people, armed in the holy cause of Liberty, in such a country as we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battle with us.

This battle is not for the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, and the brave. Though in 2016 an election by peaceful means is desirable, there is that possibility that it may not be achievable, in which case there will be no retreat but submission or slavery.

Our chains are forged and heard on the streets of Washington, D.C. If war is inevitable to preserve our freedom, then let it come!

Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? I wonder, at times, whether we are not already there.”

******************************************************

Now friends, it may soon be up to us to prevent those freedoms which were defended by our forefathers whom we memorialize this weekend, from being lost.

These freedoms must be passed on to our descendants. However, they must not take these freedoms for granted. They must be willing to join our efforts.

Though many hope that the presidential election of 2016 will resolve America’s problems, of that I would not be too confident.

Last year, we gave a vote of no confidence to Obama when we obtained Republican majority in the Senate and retained the Republican majority in the House. Unfortunately, the leadership of those whom we elected are weak and, I daresay, treacherous. In addition, with the possibility of illegals casting ballots and the continuation of election fraud, we would be foolish to place confidence in an election that may truly be rigged or be a shallow or empty victory.

In either case whether we like it or not, hope rings hollow and achieves nothing. If ISIS or rioters were to attack our homeland, if our government attempts to disarm us, we cannot defeat them with hope. Unfortunately, based on what appears to be on the national horizon, the ultimate solution may be Bullets rather than Ballots.

As Patrick Henry said so admirably at the end of his speech that Spring day 240 years ago:

Give me Liberty or Give me Death!!!!

Patrick Henry

For Patrick Henry’s speech, “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!,” at the Second Virginia Convention on March 23, 1775, in Richmond, Virginia, go here.

In Liberty,

~Éowyn

Democrats Are Crybabies

image

Democrats are Crybabies

When I was five and six-years-old there was an expression common to most five and six-year-olds. That expression was crybaby.

A crybaby is someone who pouts and cries when then they don’t get their way. In extreme cases, a crybaby will even pout and cry when they do get their way. Crybabies are absorbed with themselves, and their outbursts often come at the expense of well-meaning people around them.

A common characteristic of crybabies is their refusal to acknowledge evidence, facts, and common sense. It does no good for mom to explain to little Debbie that she can’t have the sandbox all to herself, because other little children came to the park to play in the sandbox, too. Little Debbie will have none of it. She’ll scream and wail until the parents of those other children pull their sons and daughters out of the sandbox and she has it all to herself.

Most children are taught not to be crybabies. They’re taught that part of growing up involves seeing things from the other person’s point of view, that sometimes sacrifices have to be made for the common good, that personal feelings must often be put aside. Those are all lessons that democrats and progressives have never learned.

Democrats and progressives live life according to their feelings. If something makes them feel good, then they demand it, regardless of the consequences to other people. Like the example of Debbie above in her sandbox, they live in a myopic world ruled by their own capricious desires. They are the ultimate crybabies.

When Lincoln and the Republican Party abolished slavery, petulant Democrats flew into a rage and created the Ku Klux Klan. For more than a hundred years, they terrorized both black and white Americans. Why? Because their feelings were hurt and they didn’t get their way.

Today, 150 years later, that racism still exists in the Democratic Party via welfare, affirmative action, and dumbed down education.

More recently, we’ve seen crybaby Democrats take to the streets in looting frenzies in Missouri and Baltimore. Why? Because the media fed them a false narrative that hurt their feelings. Their reaction? Wail, scream and pout.

Have you ever seen a toddler fly into a rage and knock down a store display or hurl their own toys against the wall? Ask yourself whether there’s really any difference between that child and the childish adults you saw acting out in Ferguson and Baltimore.

Have you ever seen a toddler throw a fit in a supermarket or other public place? You would think that any reasonable parent would take the child quietly outside until they cooled down. However, my experience has been the opposite. I almost always see the parent ignoring the child, who continues to scream, wail and destroy, much to the detriment of the other shoppers. The parent doesn’t care about those other shoppers.

Ask yourself whether there’s really any difference between the actions of those parents and the actions of the Democratic Governor of Missouri, who apparently ordered the National Guard to stand down during the recent riots, or the actions of the Democratic Mayor of Baltimore who gave the rioters “space to destroy.”

Are you beginning to see a pattern here? Are you beginning to see a connection between the actions of the parent and that of the crybaby child, and the actions of the leaders in the Democrat Party and that of the crybaby rioters? Each one feeds the other, and it all stems from a lack of maturity, a refusal to face reality, and a total disregard for the wellbeing of others.

The parent of that crybaby child is unconcerned with that child’s future development. Their only concern is with their feelings in the present moment, even if it hurts the child. Likewise, the leadership of the Democratic Party is unconcerned with the future development of society and its citizens. Their only concern is with their present feelings, even if it hurts the very people who look to them for leadership.

Crybabies and those who enable them have no concern for the rights or feelings of others. Their only concern is with themselves. For a child or five or six, that’s understandable. For an adult who belongs to the Democrat Party or calls themselves Progressive, it’s inexcusable.

Democrats are crybabies.

Former intelligence officer Robert Steele: Every single terrorist incident in U.S. was a false flag

James Madison quote

A false flag, as the term is used in contemporary parlance, is a traumatic public event of mass casualties which bears the marks of falsity, in part or in whole, as the public have been told by government and media. The objective of false flags is always to rally the public in an outburst of sympathy and support for the government and its agenda, e.g., gun control, opposition to an identified enemy, etc.

Robert David Steele, 62, is a former CIA clandestine services case officer and a 20-year Marine Corps Infantry Intelligence officer. A candidate for the Reform Party’s presidential nomination in 2012, Steele is known for his promotion of open source intelligence (OSINT). In the intelligence community, OSINT refers to overt, publicly available sources (as opposed to covert or clandestine sources), and is not related to open-source software or public intelligence. Here’s his website: www.robertdavidsteele.com.

Robert David Steele

The Keiser Report is a financial news and analysis show hosted by Max Keiser on RT UK and the RT network. On the show’s episode 731 on March 13, 2015, Steele made a startling assertion that most terrorists are false flag terrorists created by the world’s intelligence services, and that every single terrorist incident in the U.S. has been a false flag. The interview with Steele begins at the 12:23 mark of the video:

Here’s a transcript of the interview beginning at the 15:08 mark:

Keiser: “There are several terror events in Europe by Europeans recently. Now, each one of the bad guys is already known to security services, a good example being here in the UK, they had somebody who was on MI5 radar, he went off to join ISIS and he became Jihadi John. So your thoughts: Is this because we have too much data or too many people on the terror watch list, or there’s not enough real intelligence? What’s going on here?”

Steele: “Well, Max, this may be too much for you guys, but let me give you the bottom line as I see it…. Most terrorists are false flag terrorists…created by our own security services. Now I have no direct access in England, but I will tell you that here in the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum. As far as Jihadi John, the best guess that I can give you is that this is funded by Saudi Arabia, trained by CIA. This destruction of ancient artifacts and so on, that’s a covert action influence operation; that’s not something they would normally do. This is, in one word, largely theater.

Note: In an October 2014 interview with Alex Jones of Infowars, Steel specifically identified Sandy Hook and Boston Bombing as false flags.

Keiser then asks if a solution to all this “skullduggery” is open source, i.e., taking all the data and make it public, and mentions Edward Snowden and Julian Assange as examples. Steele replies that Assange “has” (i.e., takes) “no sides.” At the 17:47 mark, Steele said:

“[Edward] Snowden is a good thing, but right now all indications are that he’s a CIA op that was authorized by Obama to take Assange (?) down a notch, and the reason the State Department canceled his [Snowden’s] passport while he was en route to Russia was precisely to throw him in front of the Russians as a dangle.”

Steele is the founder and publisher of Public Intelligence Blog. An advocate of open source and the New Alternative Media of citizen bloggers, Steele once said:

“You are the Paul Reveres and Patrick Henrys of our generation. Bottom-up horizontal-connection is key. Sharing at all levels, not top down control. Public intelligence and influence is about to take off. We’re about to bury rule by secrecy. Civil affairs is the focal point….

If you bloggers self-organize and attach yourselves like leeches to specific issues, corporations, organization, challenges, whatever, you will be the intelligence minutemen of this century. The power is in your hands.

There aren’t enough guns to kill us all, and Halliburton can’t build jails fast enough to keep us down…. I think we’re at a turning point. We’re at the very beginning of a historic tidal shift in power, restoring the Constitution.”

So, be not afraid! Take heart! Stand firm!

~Éowyn