John, This happened
to me today.
I went to buy a pack of smokes today and was told by the gas
station attendant that HE HAD to swipe my drivers license into the register to
prove I was old enough to buy them. (I'm 51) new policy he said. I
thought I had heard him wrong and asked what he had just said ? Then he
repeated it again.Without even thinking I threw the pack at him and said "
Its none of their f...ing business what I buy or where I buy it" Then
picked up my money and walked out.
Has anyone else ever mentioned anything like this? I was so ticked off about
this and still am. They used to just ask to see i.d. now they want to swipe it
so they can record what you smoke, drink. The station was a sunoco station on
Telegraph road just south of Flat Rock, mi. I will push my car to the next
station before I stop there again. Post if you like
Regards, Brian
Friday, October 19, 2012
Citizens Grand Jury
Subject: Citizens Grand Jury
All,
This is the website that Larry Klayman has set up for the Citizens Grand Jury. http://obamaballotchallenge.com/ocal-fl-grand-jury-to-convene-10-31-on-obamahillary-and-other-political-crimimals
This is the website that Larry Klayman has set up for the Citizens Grand Jury. http://obamaballotchallenge.com/ocal-fl-grand-jury-to-convene-10-31-on-obamahillary-and-other-political-crimimals
DID REUTERS FILE MISLEADING BENGHAZI REPORT?
Follow author
Subscribe to author feed- Text smaller
- Text bigger
- Hair Club For Men® DealSave $250 - October 2012 Only... Book Online Or Call 888-805-5770!HairClubSpecial.com
NEW YORK – In the immediate aftermath of the jihadist attack against the U.S. mission in Benghazi, did Reuters file a false or misleading report quoting a purported protester by his first name who described a supposedly popular demonstration against an anti-Muhammad film outside the U.S. building?
According to new, vivid accounts provided by the State Department and intelligence officials, no such popular demonstration took place. Instead, video footage from Benghazi reportedly shows an organized group of armed men attacking the compound, the officials said.
- Medigap Plans - AARP®Medicare Supplement Ins Plans from UnitedHealthcare Ins Co. Go Long!www.GoLong.com/AARP-Medigap
- Win a 2 lb. Silver CoinValued at More Than $1,200, This 99% Pure Silver Coin Can Be Yours!IndependentLivingBullion.com
The new account directly contradicts multiple statements by President Obama and White House officials who had claimed there was a civilian protest before the attacks and that the demonstration was an expression of anger over a YouTube video that mocked Muhammad.
The new account also conflicts with a Reuters report from Sept. 13 – two days after the attack – describing a supposedly popular protest outside the U.S. mission and even claiming to quote a protester.
Reads the report: “Accounts from Libyan and U.S. officials, and from locals who watched what began as a protest on Tuesday against a crudely made American film that insults the Prophet Mohammad spiral into violence and a military-style assault on U.S. troops, point to a series of unfortunate choices amid the confusion and fear.”
The article quotes one protester and only by his first name, described as “a 17-year-old student named Hamam, who spoke to Reuters at the devastated compound on Wednesday.”
Reuters quotes “Hamam” as saying, “When we had heard that there was a film that was insulting to the Prophet, we, as members of the public, and not as militia brigades, we came to the consulate here to protest and hold a small demonstration.”
“Hamam” further claimed that a rumor had spread that a protester had been wounded by firing from inside the U.S. mission, and so Hamam and many others went off to retrieve guns which, Reuters reported, like many Libyans, they keep at home for security.
What really went on at Benghazi ‘consulate’
Like scores of news articles worldwide, the Reuters piece repeatedly referred to the attacked U.S. compound in Benghazi as a “consulate.”
However, as WND reported earlier this week, the building was not a consulate and at no point functioned as one. Instead, the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi served as a meeting place to coordinate aid for the rebel-led insurgencies in the Middle East, according to Middle Eastern security officials.
Among the tasks performed inside the building was collaborating with Arab countries on the recruitment of fighters – including jihadists – to target Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria.
The distinction may help explain why there was no major public security presence at what has been described as a “consulate.” Such a presence would draw attention to the shabby, nondescript building that was allegedly used for such sensitive purposes.
Since the mission was attacked last month, countless news media reports around the world have referred to the obscure post as a U.S. consulate. That theme continues to permeate the media, with articles daily referencing a “consulate” in Benghazi.
U.S. officials have been more careful in their rhetoric while not contradicting the media narrative that a consulate was attacked.
In his remarks on the attack, Obama has referred to the Benghazi post as a “U.S. mission.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has similarly called the post a “mission.”
A consulate typically refers to the building that officially houses a consul, who is the official representatives of the government of one state in the territory of another. The U.S. consul in Libya, Jenny Cordell, works out of the embassy in Tripoli.
Consulates at times function as junior embassies, providing services related to visas, passports and citizen information.
On Aug. 26, about two weeks before his was killed, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens attended a ceremony marking the opening of consular services at the Tripoli embassy.
“I’m happy to announce that starting on Monday, August 27, we are ready to offer a full range of consular services to Libyans,” stated Stevens at the ceremony in Tripoli. “This means non-immigrant visas, as well as assistance to Americans residing in, or visiting, Libya.”
The main role of a consulate is to foster trade with the host and care for its own citizens who are traveling or living in the host nation.
Diplomatic missions, on the other hand, maintain a more generalized role. A diplomatic mission is simply a group of people from one state or an international inter-governmental organization present in another state to represent matters of the sending state or organization in the receiving state.
The State Department website lists no consulate in Benghazi.
Last week, the State Department gave a vivid account of Stevens’ final day during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. It was disclosed that about an hour before the attack began, Stevens concluded his final meeting of the day with a Turkish diplomat. Turkey has been leading the insurgency against Assad’s regime.
Last month, WND broke the story that Stevens played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian security officials.
Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, said the security officials.
The officials said Stevens also worked with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria, said the officials.
Stevens and three other American diplomats were killed on Sept. 11 in an attack blamed on Islamists.
One witness to the mob scene in Libya said some of the gunmen attacking the U.S. installation had identified themselves as members of Ansar al-Shariah, which represents al-Qaida in Yemen and Libya.
The al-Qaida offshoot released a statement denying its members were behind the deadly attack, but a man identified as a leader of the Ansar brigade told Al Jazeera the group indeed took part in the Benghazi attack.
Al-Qaida among U.S.-supported rebels
As WND reported, questions remain about the nature of U.S. support for the revolutions in Egypt and Libya, including reports the U.S.-aided rebels that toppled Muammar Gadhafi’s regime in Libya consisted of al-Qaida and jihad groups. The U.S. provided direct assistance, including weapons and finances, to the Libyan rebels.
Similarly, the Obama administration is currently aiding the rebels fighting Assad’s regime in Syria amid widespread reports that al-Qaida jihadists are included in the ranks of the Free Syrian Army. Earlier this month, Obama announced $50 million more in aid to the Syrian rebels.
During the revolution against Gadhafi’s regime, the U.S. admitted to directly arming the rebel groups.
At the time, rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi admitted in an interview that a significant number of the Libyan rebels were al-Qaida fighters, many of whom had fought U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but he added that the “members of al-Qaida are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader.”
Adm. James Stavridis, NATO supreme commander for Europe, admitted Libya’s rebel force may include al-Qaida: “We have seen flickers in the intelligence of potential al-Qaida, Hezbollah.”
Former CIA officer Bruce Riedel went even further, telling the Hindustan Times: “There is no question that al-Qaida’s Libyan franchise, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, is a part of the opposition. It has always been Gadhafi’s biggest enemy and its stronghold is Benghazi. What is unclear is how much of the opposition is al-Qaida/Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – 2 percent or 80 percent.”
In Syria, meanwhile, the U.S. may be currently supporting al-Qaida and other jihadists fighting with the rebels targeting Assad’s regime.
In August, WND quoted a senior Syrian source claiming at least 500 hardcore mujahedeen from Afghanistan, many of whom were spearheading efforts to fight the U.S. there, were killed in clashes with Syrian forces last month.
Also last month, WND reported Jihadiya Salafia in the Gaza Strip, a group that represents al-Qaida in the coastal territory, had declared three days of mourning for its own jihadists who died in Syria in recent weeks.
There have been widespread reports of al-Qaida among the Syrian rebels, including in reports by Reuters and the New York Times.
WND reported in May there was growing collaboration between the Syrian opposition and al-Qaida as well as evidence the opposition is sending weapons to jihadists in Iraq, according to an Egyptian security official.
The military official told WND that Egypt has reports of collaboration between the Syrian opposition and three al-Qaida arms, including one the operates in Libya:
- Jund al-Sham, which is made up of al-Qaida militants who are Syrian, Palestinian and Lebanese;
- Jund al-Islam, which in recent years merged with Ansar al-Islam, an extremist group of Sunni Iraqis operating under the al-Qaida banner and operating in Yemen and Libya;
- Jund Ansar al-Allah, an al-Qaida group based in Gaza linked to Palestinian camps in Lebanon and Syria.
U.S. officials have stated the White House is providing nonlethal aid to the Syrian rebels while widespread reports have claimed the U.S. has been working with Arab countries to ensure the opposition in Syria is well armed.
Wayne Allyn Root discuss Romney Landside
|
"Hit the road, Barack"
THIS
IS TRUE - CHECK IT OUT FOR YOURSELF.
|
Take
a few minutes to read this --
The liberal Washington Post and Newsweek hit Obama
 THE WASHINGTON POST HITS OBAMA Finally, the Washington Post and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is timely and tough. As many of you know, the Washington Post and Newsweek have a reputation for being extremely liberal. The fact that their editors saw fit to print the following article about Obama and the one that appears in the latest Newsweek makes this a truly amazing event and a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to trickle through the “protective wall” built around him by the liberal media. ___________________________ I Too Have Become Disillusioned By Matt Patterson (columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner) Years from now historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job? Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and, in fact, nearly devoid of his attention so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor;" a real-life actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: How on Earth was such a man elected president? Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers would have lasted a single day, but because Mr. Obama was black and, therefore, entitled in the eyes of liberal-dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.
Let
that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard -
because of the color of his skin.
As
many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished
grades at Occidental;. He was told he was good enough for the US Senate
despite a mediocre record in Illinois. He was told he was good enough
to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life,
every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step in
spite of ample evidence to the contrary.Podhoretz continues: And, in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest? Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course, but certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail. Liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell and,if that isn't racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008 many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect and cool character. Those people - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his teleprompters in front of him. When the prompter is absent, he can barely speak. It's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles: Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly? In short: Our president is a small-minded man with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office. |
INTELHUB UPDATE
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
 |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)