European History

Who Wrote The Benghazi Cover-up Story of The Anti-Islamic YouTube Video for Rice, Clinton, and Obama? Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communication–Propagandist Speech Writer? — Videos

Posted on May 8, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Comedy, Communications, Culture, Diasters, Economics, Education, European History, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Islam, Islam, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Radio, Rants, Raves, Religion | Tags: Barack Obama, Ben Rhodes, Cover Story, Cover Up, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communication, Glenn Beck, Hillary Clinton, Photos, Propagandist, Speech Writer, The Blaze |

President Barack Obama jokes with Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communication, aboard Air Force One

Cover-up

A cover-up is an attempt, whether successful or not, to conceal evidence of wrongdoing, error, incompetence or other embarrassing information. In a passive cover-up information is simply not provided; in an active cover-up deception is used.

The expression is usually applied to people in positions of authority who abuse their power to avoid or silence criticism or to deflect guilt of wrongdoing. Those who initiate a cover up (or their allies) may be responsible for a misdeed, a breach of trust or duty or a crime.

While the terms are often used interchangeably, cover-up involves withholding incriminatory evidence, while whitewash involves releasing misleading evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover-up

Glenn Beck – Benghazi: Truth coming out

Glenn Beck Ties Together Benghazi, IRS, & AP Scandals ‘Fundamental Transformation’

Treason: Benghazi Revelations Could Sink Obama

Obama Hiding Arms Shipments To Syrian Jihadists

Benghazi–Stand Down – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Program

Who wrote the video Benghazi coverup story or lie for Rice, Clinton and Obama? Ben Rhodes?

Benghazi – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Program – 2013.05.06

Glenn Beck – Benghazi: How did we get here?

Glenn Beck – The Benghazi Hearings

Lt Gen Mclnemey Is Ashamed Our Military Responded Benghazi Libya & Blames Obama Admin – Lou Dobbs

FOX News Confirms US Was Holding Prisoners at Benghazi Annex

From Rice to the White House: An Alumnus’ Journey

The Anti-Anti-Islam Film TV Ad By US in Pakistan Repudiating Film

Innocence of Muslims Full Movie HD 1080P Trailer

Press Briefing with Jay Carney and Ben Rhodes

Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communication

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 1

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 2

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 3

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 4

From the Rhodes — The President in Mexico

President Obama gets ready to leave Israel

President Obama Speech to Muslim World in Cairo

White House denies changing story on Benghazi

Benghazi-Gate: Ex-CIA Michael Scheuer “Obama’s Benghazi Cover-up Worse than Watergate”

Rice University, and New York University. He has been described as a realist by The Washington Post,^[2] and was mentioned by Time on the “40 Under 40″ list of powerful and prominent young professionals in 2011.^[3] His brother, David, is president of CBS News.

Rhodes wrote Pres. Barack Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech A New Beginning.^[4]

Rhodes was the one who advised Pres. Barack Obama to withdraw support from Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak, becoming a key adviser during the Arab Spring.^[5]

Rhodes euphemistically described the United States’ military involvement in Libya as “kinetic military action.”^[6] In a March 16, 2013 feature story appearing in The New York Times, Rhodes declined to comment on his role in Obama administration policy decisions, saying, “My main job, which has always been my job, is to be the person who represents the president’s view on these issues.”^[5]

During the Benghazi Hearings in Washington, D.C. May 8, 2013, an article was published in an online magazine The Patriot Newswire suggesting that Ben Rhodes may be responsible for a Benghazi cover up. Is This Man The Mastermind Behind The Benghazi Cover Up? http://patriot-newswire.com/2013/05/is-this-man-the-mastermind-behind-the-benghazi-cover-up/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Rhodes_%28speechwriter%29

White House denies changing story on Benghazi

The White House continued to fend off suggestions it misled the public about the attack on the US mission in Libya in September, a day after ex-CIA chief David Petraeus told Congress that mentions of al-Qaeda were edited out of public talking points.

The White House insisted on Saturday that it did not make significant changes to its talking points about the September attack on a US diplomatic building in the Libyan city of Benghazi, as it continued to fend off accusations by Republicans that the Obama administration had misled the American public about the terrorist nature of the attack.

“The only edit that was made by the White House and also by the State Department was to change the word ‘consulate’ to the word ‘diplomatic facility,’ since the facility in Benghazi was not formally a consulate,” deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters aboard Air Force One on Saturday.

“Other than that, we were guided by the points that were provided by the intelligence community. So I can’t speak to any other edits that may have been made,” Rhodes said about notes that were used by UN Ambassador Susan Rice to speak to the press about the attack that left Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead.

On Friday, former CIA chief David Petraeus revealed that the original taking points about the attack had mentioned groups linked to al-Qaeda, but those mentions were removed from the texts used by Rice, according to US lawmakers who heard Petraeus’ testimony to Congress.

Petraeus –who is caught up in a career-ending sex scandal– appeared before House and Senate intelligence panels that were closed off to reporters. The respected ex-spy chief also said the changes to talking points were not made for political reasons during President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign, as some Republicans have suggested.

After his testimony to Congress, Petraeus was escorted through a back exit to avoid contact with journalists. His testimony to Congress was later relayed by Republican and Democratic lawmakers who attended the closed-door hearings.

‘Changes made to protect classified information’

On Saturday, Rhodes deflected responsibility for removing the Al Qaeda references onto the CIA and other members of the US intelligence community. “If there were adjustments made to them [the talking points] within the intelligence community, that’s common, and that’s something they would have done themselves,” the deputy national security advisor told reporters.

Democratic lawmakers said that Petraeus was adamant that there had been no White House interference. The recently resigned four-star general explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public statement by Rice and others so as not to tip off those groups that US intelligence was on their trail.

“There was an interagency process to draft it, not a political process,” Congressman Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California said. “They came up with the best assessment without compromising classified information or source or methods. So changes were made to protect classified information.”

Republicans remain skeptical

However, Republicans remained skeptical over the White House and Petraeus’ explanation, maintaining that the Obama administration may have watered down information to cover up for poor intelligence or inadequate security of US personnel in Libya.

Ambassador Rice has been floated as a possible successor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is stepping down early next year, but some Republicans are threatening to block Rice’s nomination.

Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican from Florida, said Petraeus’ testimony showed that security measures were inadequate “despite an overwhelming and growing amount of information that showed the area in Benghazi was dangerous, particularly on the night of September 11.”

Peter King, a Congressman from New York and the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters on Friday he saw a contradiction between the account Petraeus had given to an earlier House hearing and the one given during his most recent appearence.

“His testimony was he told us that from the start it was a terrorist attack. I told him that was not my direct recollection. The clear impression we were given was that the overwhelming amount of evidence was that it arose out of a spontaneous demonstration and [not] that it was a terrorist attack.”

On Saturday King told Fox News television that it remained unclear who had made the edits concerning al Qaeda involvement in Benghazi, and did not rule out the White House.

“That’s why it’s important to find out why it was done. It could be anywhere in the Defense Department, the State Department, the Justice Department, the White House,” King told the right-wing news channel. “[We need] to find out why it was done, what the purpose of it was.

http://www.france24.com/en/20121118-usa-white-house-obama-no-edited-talking-points-benghazi-mission-al-qaeda-rice-king-rubio

The Benghazi Talking Points

And how they were changed to obscure the truth

May 13, 2013, Vol. 18, No. 33 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES

Even as the White House strove last week to move beyond questions about the Benghazi attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2012, fresh evidence emerged that senior Obama administration officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days following the assaults. The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.

As intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of events unfolding in Libya, they concluded even before the assaults had ended that al Qaeda-linked terrorists were involved. Senior administration officials, however, sought to obscure the emerging picture and downplay the significance of attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The frantic process that produced the changes to the talking points took place over a 24-hour period just one day before Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her now-famous appearances on the Sunday television talk shows. The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.

The exchange of emails is laid out in a 43-page report from the chairmen of five committees in the House of Representatives. Although the investigation was conducted by Republicans, leading some reporters and commentators to dismiss it, the report quotes directly from emails between top administration and intelligence officials, and it includes footnotes indicating the times the messages were sent. In some cases, the report did not provide the names of the senders, but The Weekly Standard has confirmed the identities of the authors of two critical emails—one indicating the main reason for the changes and the other announcing that the talking points would receive their final substantive rewrite at a meeting of top administration officials on Saturday, September 15.

The White House provided the emails to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees for a limited time and with the stipulation that the documents were available for review only and would not be turned over to the committees. The White House and committee leadership agreed to that arrangement as part of a deal that would keep Republican senators from blocking the confirmation of John Brennan, the president’s choice to run the CIA. If the House report provides an accurate and complete depiction of the emails, it is clear that senior administration officials engaged in a wholesale rewriting of intelligence assessments about Benghazi in order to mislead the public. The Weekly Standard sought comment from officials at the White House, the State Department, and the CIA, but received none by press time. Within hours of the initial attack on the U.S. facility, the State Department Operations Center sent out two alerts. The first, at 4:05 p.m. (all times are Eastern Daylight Time), indicated that the compound was under attack; the second, at 6:08 p.m., indicated that Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda-linked terrorist group operating in Libya, had claimed credit for the attack. According to the House report, these alerts were circulated widely inside the government, including at the highest levels. The fighting in Benghazi continued for another several hours, so top Obama administration officials were told even as the fighting was taking place that U.S. diplomats and intelligence operatives were likely being attacked by al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. A cable sent the following day, September 12, by the CIA station chief in Libya, reported that eyewitnesses confirmed the participation of Islamic militants and made clear that U.S. facilities in Benghazi had come under terrorist attack. It was this fact, along with several others, that top Obama officials would work so hard to obscure.

After a briefing on Capitol Hill by CIA director David Petraeus, Democrat Dutch Ruppersburger, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, asked the intelligence community for unclassified guidance on what members of Congress could say in their public comments on the attacks. The CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis prepared the first draft of a response to the congressman, which was distributed internally for comment at 11:15 a.m. on Friday, September 14 (Version 1 at right). This initial CIA draft included the assertion that the U.S. government “know[s] that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.” That draft also noted that press reports “linked the attack to Ansar al Sharia. The group has since released a statement that its leadership did not order the attacks, but did not deny that some of its members were involved.” Ansar al Sharia, the CIA draft continued, aims to spread sharia law in Libya and “emphasizes the need for jihad.” The agency draft also raised the prospect that the facilities had been the subject of jihadist surveillance and offered a reminder that in the previous six months there had been “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy.”

After the internal distribution, CIA officials amended that draft to include more information about the jihadist threat in both Egypt and Libya. “On 10 September we warned of social media reports calling for a demonstration in front of the [Cairo] Embassy and that jihadists were threatening to break into the Embassy,” the agency had added by late afternoon. And: “The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al Qaeda in Benghazi and Libya.” But elsewhere, CIA officials pulled back. The reference to “Islamic extremists” no longer specified “Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda,” and the initial reference to “attacks” in Benghazi was changed to “demonstrations.”

The talking points were first distributed to officials in the interagency vetting process at 6:52 p.m. on Friday. Less than an hour later, at 7:39 p.m., an individual identified in the House report only as a “senior State Department official” responded to raise “serious concerns” about the draft. That official, whom The Weekly Standard has confirmed was State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, worried that members of Congress would use the talking points to criticize the State Department for “not paying attention to Agency warnings.”

In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors—she did not say which ones—were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,” and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, “White House officials responded by stating that the State Department’s concerns would have to be taken into account.” One official—Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy—further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.

There is little information about what happened at that meeting of the Deputies Committee. But according to two officials with knowledge of the process, Mike Morrell, deputy director of the CIA, made broad changes to the draft afterwards. Morrell cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points—148 of its 248 words (see Version 2 above). Gone were the reference to “Islamic extremists,” the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to “jihadists” in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests.

What remained—and would be included in the final version of the talking points—was mostly boilerplate about ongoing investigations and working with the Libyan government, together with bland language suggesting that the “violent demonstrations”—no longer “attacks”—were spontaneous responses to protests in Egypt and may have included generic “extremists” (see Version 3 above).

If the story of what happened in Benghazi was dramatically stripped down from the first draft of the CIA’s talking points to the version that emerged after the Deputies Committee meeting, the narrative would soon be built up again. In ensuing days, administration officials emphasized a “demonstration” in front of the U.S. facility in Benghazi and claimed that the demonstrators were provoked by a YouTube video. The CIA had softened “attack” to “demonstration.” But as soon became clear, there had been no demonstration in Benghazi.

More troubling was the YouTube video. Rice would spend much time on the Sunday talk shows pointing to this video as the trigger of the chaos in Benghazi. “What sparked the violence was a very hateful video on the Internet. It was a reaction to a video that had nothing to do with the United States.” There is no mention of any “video” in any of the many drafts of the talking points.

Still, top Obama officials would point to the video to explain Benghazi. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even denounced the video in a sort of diplomatic public service announcement in Pakistan. In a speech at the United Nations on September 25, the president mentioned the video several times in connection with Benghazi.

On September 17, the day after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows, Nuland defended Rice’s performance during the daily briefing at the State Department. “What I will say, though, is that Ambassador Rice, in her comments on every network over the weekend, was very clear, very precise, about what our initial assessment of what happened is. And this was not just her assessment, it was also an assessment you’ve heard in comments coming from the intelligence community, in comments coming from the White House.”

“Innocence of Muslims” FULL MOVIE HD Anti-Muslim Anti-Islam Prophet Muhammad

Is Ben Rhodes the Mastermind Behind the Benghazi Cover Up?

wrote yesterday about how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) knew that the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 was a terrorist attack by Al-Qaeda operatives. We know the Obama White House put out the story for nearly a week that it was just Muslims upset over a benign YouTube video. In spite of knowing what was going on and having the ability to intervene, the Obama administration did nothing to stop or assist Americans who they knew were being attacked by Al-Qaeda. Instead, they chose to cover it up and intimidate witnesses. Stephen F. Hayes has an excellent piece at the Weekly Standard titled The Benghazi Talking Points, in which he fingers the man he believes is the main person behind the Benghazi cover up, Ben Rhodes.

Of course, one would immediately have to wonder about those who would be around a man who has vowed to stand with the Muslims instead of America. If you recall, Barack Obama made a speech in Cairo, Egypt to an audience which included the Muslim Brotherhood, in which he distorted the Qur’an to put it in a good light and then attempted to make out like Islam had made great contributions to both America and the world. That speech was written by Ben Rhodes, Obama’s foreign policy speechwriter and now a part of a his National Security Council.

Hayes writes in his article about the talking points that were first put out to officials. He writes:

The talking points were first distributed to officials in the interagency vetting process at 6:52 p.m. on Friday. Less than an hour later, at 7:39 p.m., an individual identified in the House report only as a “senior State Department official” responded to raise “serious concerns” about the draft. That official, whom The Weekly Standard has confirmed was State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, worried that members of Congress would use the talking points to criticize the State Department for “not paying attention to Agency warnings.”

In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors—she did not say which ones—were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,” and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, “White House officials responded by stating that the State Department’s concerns would have to be taken into account.” One official—Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy—further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.

There is little information about what happened at that meeting of the Deputies Committee. But according to two officials with knowledge of the process, Mike Morrell, deputy director of the CIA, made broad changes to the draft afterwards. Morrell cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points—148 of its 248 words (see Version 2 above). Gone were the reference to “Islamic extremists,” the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to “jihadists” in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests.

Ed Lasky writes concerning Rhodes, “Ben Rhodes should be called to account for trying to divert blame away from Islamic terrorists and the Obama team members whose feckless negligence led to the Benghazi massacre.”

“I have previously written about Ben Rhodes and his role in the Obama White House,” writes Lasky. “It is shameful that this ‘kid’ (he is all of 35) has been given any responsibility at all in our government. In ‘Does it bother anyone that this person is the Deputy National Security Adviser?’ I noted his problematic background for someone given so much power by Obama. But then again he does specialize in fiction-writing. He earned a master’s degree in fiction-writing from New York University just a few years ago . He did not have a degree in government, diplomacy, national security; nor has he served in the CIA, or the military. He was toiling away not that long ago on a novel called ‘The Oasis of Love’ about a mega church in Houston, a dog track, and a failed romance. ”

Lasky concludes that Ben Rhodes is the man that attempted to whitewash Islamists and the Obama administration, not only in the Cairo speech, but in the talking points promoted by the Obama White House in the days following the attack on Benghazi that left four Americans dead.

I guess we’ll wait and see if he is even called as a witness this by the House in this week’s hearings.

Tim Brown is the Editor of Freedom Outpost and a regular contributor to The D.C. Clothesline.

Follow The D.C. Clothesline on Facebook

Meet Dozens of LOCAL Patriotic Americans Today. Join The Patriot Team Forums. It’s Time to Organize!!!

Other Articles You May Enjoy

http://www.dcclothesline.com

Source: http://dcclothesline.com/2013/05/08/is-ben-rhodes-the-mastermind-behind-the-benghazi-

Ben Rhodes

Rhodes grew up in New York City and moved to Washington in 2002, eventually taking a job writing speeches for Barack Obama, then a freshman Senator. Now, as Obama’s principal communications aide on national security, he reads the top-secret President’s Daily Brief, advises the President on key decisions and runs meetings with advisers much older than he is. “It was awkward for the first few weeks,” says Rhodes, 32, “but you get used to it.”

Who is your political hero/inspiration?
Robert F. Kennedy.

What’s your go-to political blog?
andrewsullivan.com

If you weren’t working in politics, what would you be doing?
I’d probably be living in New York trying to write novels but making a living off of non-fiction.

What’s the most overlooked issue facing America these days?
We need a broad and sustainable consensus about the politics of national security and America’s role in the world, which we have not had in the 21st century

Where do you see yourself professionally in five years?
Transitioning out of the second Obama Administration to live in California (per my wife), trying to write novels but making a living off of non-fiction.

Background Articles and Videos

Terrorism & Jihad: An Islamic Perspective – Dr. Zakir Naik

Stephen Coughlin, Part 1: Lectures on National Security & Counterterror Analysis (Introduction)

Stephen Coughlin, Part 2: Understanding the War on Terror Through Islamic Law

Stephen Coughlin, Part 3: Abrogation & the ‘Milestones’ Process

Stephen Coughlin, Part 4: Muslim Brotherhood, Arab Spring & the ‘Milestones’ Process

Stephen Coughlin, Part 5: The Role of the OIC in Enforcing Islamic Law

Background Articles and Videos

Meltdown (pt 1-4) The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse 2010

Meltdown (pt 2-4) The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse 2010

Meltdown (pt 3-4) The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse.2010

Meltdown – pt 4-4 The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse (2010)

The Fall of Lehman Brothers

Goldman Sachs: Power and Peril – Documentary

The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of The World by Niall Ferguson Epsd. 1-5 (Full Documentary)

The Fall of the Dollar – The Death of a Fiat Currency part 1

The Fall of the Dollar – The Death of a Fiat Currency part 2

The First 12 Hours of a US Dollar Collapse

LIFE HIDDEN TRUTH 2013 GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS

Billionaires Dumping Stocks, Economist Knows Why

Despite the 6.5% stock market rally over the last three months, a handful of billionaires are quietly dumping their American stocks . . . and fast.

Warren Buffett, who has been a cheerleader for U.S. stocks for quite some time, is dumping shares at an alarming rate. He recently complained of “disappointing performance” in dyed-in-the-wool American companies like Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and Kraft Foods.

In the latest filing for Buffett’s holding company Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett has been drastically reducing his exposure to stocks that depend on consumer purchasing habits. Berkshire sold roughly 19 million shares of Johnson & Johnson, and reduced his overall stake in “consumer product stocks” by 21%. Berkshire Hathaway also sold its entire stake in California-based computer parts supplier Intel.

With 70% of the U.S. economy dependent on consumer spending, Buffett’s apparent lack of faith in these companies’ future prospects is worrisome.

Unfortunately Buffett isn’t alone.

Fellow billionaire John Paulson, who made a fortune betting on the subprime mortgage meltdown, is clearing out of U.S. stocks too. During the second quarter of the year, Paulson’s hedge fund, Paulson & Co., dumped 14 million shares of JPMorgan Chase. The fund also dumped its entire position in discount retailer Family Dollar and consumer-goods maker Sara Lee.

Finally, billionaire George Soros recently sold nearly all of his bank stocks, including shares of JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs. Between the three banks, Soros sold more than a million shares.

So why are these billionaires dumping their shares of U.S. companies?

After all, the stock market is still in the midst of its historic rally. Real estate prices have finally leveled off, and for the first time in five years are actually rising in many locations. And the unemployment rate seems to have stabilized.

It’s very likely that these professional investors are aware of specific research that points toward a massive market correction, as much as 90%.

One such person publishing this research is Robert Wiedemer, an esteemed economist and author of the New York Times best-selling book Aftershock.

Editor’s Note: Wiedemer Gives Proof for His Dire Predictions in This Shocking Interview.

Before you dismiss the possibility of a 90% drop in the stock market as unrealistic, consider Wiedemer’s credentials.

In 2006, Wiedemer and a team of economists accurately predicted the collapse of the U.S. housing market, equity markets, and consumer spending that almost sank the United States. They published their research in the book America’s Bubble Economy.

The book quickly grabbed headlines for its accuracy in predicting what many thought would never happen, and quickly established Wiedemer as a trusted voice.

A columnist at Dow Jones said the book was “one of those rare finds that not only predicted the subprime credit meltdown well in advance, it offered Main Street investors a winning strategy that helped avoid the forty percent losses that followed . . .”

The chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor’s said that Wiedemer’s track record “demands our attention.”

And finally, the former CFO of Goldman Sachs said Wiedemer’s “prescience in (his) first book lends credence to the new warnings. This book deserves our attention.”

In the interview for his latest blockbuster Aftershock, Wiedemer says the 90% drop in the stock market is “a worst-case scenario,” and the host quickly challenged this claim.

Wiedemer calmly laid out a clear explanation of why a large drop of some sort is a virtual certainty.

It starts with the reckless strategy of the Federal Reserve to print a massive amount of money out of thin air in an attempt to stimulate the economy.

“These funds haven’t made it into the markets and the economy yet. But it is a mathematical certainty that once the dam breaks, and this money passes through the reserves and hits the markets, inflation will surge,” said Wiedemer.

“Once you hit 10% inflation, 10-year Treasury bonds lose about half their value. And by 20%, any value is all but gone. Interest rates will increase dramatically at this point, and that will cause real estate values to collapse. And the stock market will collapse as a consequence of these other problems.”

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola#ixzz2RhO2R5ey
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Tory! Tory! Tory! — Videos

Posted on April 12, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Communications, Computers, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Private Sector, Public Sector, Raves, Security, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Water, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: BBC, Economics, Margaret Thatcher, Pollitics, Thatcher, Tory! Tory! Tory!, Videos |

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 1: Outsiders – BBC 2007

Series exploring the history of the people and ideas behind what became known as Thatcherism. When Thatcher became Prime Minister, the monetarist policies used to combat inflation created large-scale unemployment and weakened the unions. As riots broke out across Britain, there was growing dissent even inside the government. How would Mrs Thatcher survive her plummeting popularity?

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 2: The Road to Power – BBC 2007

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 3: The Exercise of Power – BBC 2007

Speech to Conservative Party Conference

Document type:	speeches
Document kind:	Speech
Venue:	Winter Gardens, Blackpool
Source:	Thatcher Archive: speaking text
Journalist:	-
Editorial comments:	1045. MT spoke for 41 minute 16 seconds; the BBC Sound Archive has a complete recording. Evening Standard (10 October 1975) noted that the audience applauded every passage of the speech – not one was delivered without interruption. Parts of the text have been checked against material broadcast on ITN during the day.
Importance ranking:	Key
Word count:	3722
Themes:	Conservative Party (organisation), Autobiographical comments, Conservative Party (history), Economy (general discussions), Labour Party and Socialism, Economy (general discussions), Employment, Public spending and borrowing, Economy (general discussions), Labour Party and Socialism, Foreign policy (USSR and successor states), Foreign policy (Central and Eastern Europe), Economy (general discussions), Labour Party and Socialism, Higher and further education, Industry, Science and technology, Conservatism, Social security and welfare, Labour Party and Socialism, Industry, Conservatism, Labour Party and Socialism, Agriculture, Employment, Labour Party and Socialism, Conservatism, Secondary education, Health policy, Private health care, Labour Party and Socialism, Trade unions, British constitution (general discussions), Law and order, Labour Party and Socialism, Northern Ireland

Note by MT: “Relax. Low Speaking Voice. Not too slow”.

The first Conservative Party Conference I attended was in 1946.

I came to it as an undergraduate representing Oxford University Conservative Association (I know our Cambridge supporters will not mind.) That Conference was held in this very hall and the platform then seemed a long way away, and I had no thought of joining the lofty and distinguished people sitting up there.

But our Party is the Party of equality of opportunity—as you can see. (Laughter).[fo 1]

You will understand, I know, the humility I feel at following in the footsteps of great men like our Leader that year, Winston Churchill a man called by destiny who raised the name of Britain to supreme heights in the history of the free world. (Applause).

In the footsteps of Anthony Eden , who set us the goal of a property-owning democracy—a goal we still pursue today.(Applause).

Of Harold Macmillan whose leadership brought so many ambitions within the grasp of every citizen. (Applause).[fo 2]

Of Alec Douglas-Home whose career of selfless public service earned the affection and admiration of us all. (Applause).

And of Edward Heath who successfully led the Party to victory in 1970 and brilliantly led the nation into Europe in 1973. (Applause).

During my lifetime, all the leaders of the Conservative Party have served as Prime Minister. I hope the habit will continue. (Laughter)

Our leaders have been different men with different qualities and different styles. But they have one thing in common. Each met the challenge-of-his-time.[fo 3]

What is the challenge of our time?

I believe there are two—to overcome the country’s economic and financial problems, and to regain our confidence in Britain and ourselves.

The Economic Challenge

The economic challenge has been debated at length in this hall.

Last week it gave rise to the usual scenes of cordial brotherly strife.[fo 4]

Day after day the comrades called one another far from comradely names, and occasionally, when they remembered, they called us names too.

Some of them, for example, suggested that I criticised Britain when I was overseas. They are wrong.

It wasn’t Britain I was criticising. It was-Socialism. (Applause).

And I will go on criticising Socialism, and opposing Socialism because it is bad for Britain—and Britain and Socialism are not the same thing.[fo 5]

As long as I have health and strength, they never will be. (Applause).

But whatever could I say about Britain that is half as damaging as what this Labour Government have done to our country?

Let’s look at the record.

It is the Labour Government that have caused prices to rise at a record rate of 26 per cent a year.[fo 6]

They told us that the Social Contract would solve everything. But now everyone can see that the so-called contract was a fraud—a fraud for which the people of this country have had to pay a very high price.

It is the Labour Government whose policies are forcing unemployment higher than it need have been—thousands more men and women lose their jobs every day.

There are going to be men and women many of them youngsters straight out of school—who will be without a job this winter because Socialist Ministers spent last year attacking us, instead of attacking inflation.[fo 7]Beginning of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975:

And it’s the Labour Government that have brought the level of production below that of the 3-day week in 1974. W’ve really got a 3-day week now,—only it takes five days to do it. (Applause).

It’s the Labour Government that have brought us record peace-time taxation. They’ve got the usual Socialist disease—they’ve run out of other people’s money. (Laughter).

And it’s the Labour Government that have pushed public spending to record levels.

And how’ve they done it? By borrowing, and borrowing and borrowing.

Never in the field of human credit has so much been owed. (Laughter).End of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975.[fo 8]

But serious as the economic challenge is, the political and moral challenge is just as grave, perhaps more so.

POLITICAL AND MORAL CHALLENGE

Economic problems never start with economics. They have deeper roots—in human nature and in politics.

They don’t finish at economics either.

Labour’s failure to cope, to look at the nation’s problems from the point of view of the whole nation, not just one section of it, has led to loss of confidence and a sense of helplessness.[fo 9]

With it goes a feeling that Parliament, which ought to be in charge, is not in charge—that the actions and the decisions are taken elsewhere.

And it goes deeper than that. There are voices that seem anxious not to overcome our economic difficulties, but to exploit them, to destroy the free enterprise society and put a Marxist system in its place.

Today those voices form a sizeable chorus in the Parliamentary Labour Party. A chorus which, aided and abetted by many Constituency Labour Parties, seems to be growing in numbers.[fo 10]

Anyone who says this openly is promptly accused of seeing Reds Under the Bed.

But look who’s seeing them now!

On his own admission, Mr Wilson has at last discovered that his own Party is infiltrated by extreme left-wingers—or to use his own words it is infested with them.

When even Mr Wilson gets scared about their success in capturing key positions in the Labour Party, shouldn’t the rest of us be?[fo 11]

And shouldn’t the rest of us ask him “Where have you been while all this has been going on, and what are you doing about it?” (Applause). The answer is nothing.

I sometimes think the Labour Party is like a pub where the mild is running out. If someone doesn’t do something soon, all that’s left will be bitter. (Laughter). And all that’s bitter will be Left. (Laughter).

Whenever I visit Communist countries, their politicians never hesitate to boast about their achievements.[fo 12]

They know them all by heart and reel off the facts and figures, claiming that this is the rich harvest of the Communist system.

Yet they are not prosperous as we in the West are prosperous, and they are not free as we in the West are free.

Our capitalist system produces a far higher standard of prosperity and happiness because it believes in incentive and opportunity, and because it is founded on human dignity and freedom. (Applause).[fo 13]

Even the Russians have to go to a capitalist country, America to buy enough wheat to feed their people. And that aftermore than 50 years of a State controlled economy.

Yet they boast incessantly while we, who have so much more to boast about, forever criticise and decry.

Isn’t it time we spoke up for our way of life? (Applause) After all, no Western nation has to build a wall round itself to keep its people in. (Applause).[fo 14]

So let us have no truck with those who say the free enterprise system has failed. What we face today is not a crisis of capital ism, but of Socialism. No country can flourish if its economic and social life is dominated by nationalisation and state control.

The cause of our shortcomings does not therefore lie in private enterprise. Our problem is not that we have too little socialism. It is that we have too much.

If only the Labour Party in this country would act like Social Democrats in West Germany. If only they would stop trying to prove their Socialist virility by relentlessly nationalising one industry after another.[fo 15]

Of course, a halt to further State control will not on its own restore our belief in ourselves, because something else is happening to this country. We are witnessing a deliberate attack on our values, a deliberate attack on those who wish to promote merit and excellence, a deliberate attack on our heritage and great past. (Applause).Beginning of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975:

And there are those who gnaw away at our national self-respect, rewriting British history as centuries of unrelieved gloom, oppression and failure.

As days of hopelessness—not Days of Hope.[fo 16]

And others, under the shelter of our education system, are ruthlessly attacking the minds of the young. Everyone who believes in freedom must be appalled at the tactics employed by the far Left in the systematic destruction of the North London Polytechnic. (Applause).

Blatant tactics of intimidation, designed to undermine the fundamental beliefs and values of every student.

Tactics pursued by people who are the first to insist on their own civil rights while seeking to deny them to the rest of us. We must not be bullied and brainwashed out of our beliefs. (Applause).[fo 17]

No wonder so many of our people—some of the best and brightest—are depressed and talk of emigrating.

Even so, I think they are wrong at giving up too soon. Many of the things we hold dear are threatened as never before, but none has yet been lost.

So stay here. (Applause). Stay and help us defeat Socialism, so that the Britain you have known may be the Britain your children will know. (Applause).End of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975.[fo 18]

Those are the two great challenges of our time.

The moral and political challenge, and the economic challenge.

They have to be faced together—and we have to master them both.

POTENTIAL

What are our chances of success? It depends what kind of people we are. Well, what kind of people are we?[fo 19]

We are the people that in the past made Great Britain the Workshop of the World. The people who persuaded others to buy British not by begging them to do so, but because it was best.

We are a people who have received more Nobel prizes than any other nation except America, and head for head we have done better than America. Twice as well, in fact.

We are the people who, among other things, invented the computer, refrigerator, electric motor, stethoscope, rayon, steam turbine, stainless steel, the tank, television, penicillin, radar, jet engine, hovercraft, float glass and carbonfibres. Oh, and the best half of Concorde. (Laughter).[fo 20]

We export more of what we produce than either West Germany, France, Japan or the United States.

And well over 90%; of these exports come from private enterprise. It’s a triumph for the private sector and all who work in it. Let us say so, loud and clear. (Applause).

With achievements like that who can doubt that Britain can have a great future? What our friends abroad want to know is whether that future is going to happen.

Well, how can we Conservatives make it happen?[fo 21]

Many of the details have already been dealt with in the various debates. But policies and programmes should not be just a list of unrelated items. They are part of a total vision of the kind of life we want for our country and our children. [Beginning of section checked against ITN Early Evening News, 10 October 1975] Let me give you my vision.

THE FREE SOCIETY AND THE ECONOMY

A man’s right to work as he will to spend what he earns to own property to have the State as servant and not as master these are the British inheritance.

They are the essence of a free economy. And on that freedom all our other freedoms depend. (Applause).End of section checked against ITN Early Evening News, 10 October 1975.[fo 22]

But we want a free economy, not only because it guarantees our liberties, but also because it is the best way of creating wealth and prosperity for the whole country.

It is this prosperity alone which can give us the resources for better services for the community, better services for those in need. (Applause).

By their attack on private enterprise, this Labour Government have made certain that there will be next to nothing available for improvements in our social services over the next few years.[fo 23]

We must get private enterprise back on the road to recovery, not merely to give people more of their own money to spend as they choose, but to have more money to help the old and the sick and the handicapped.

The way to recovery is through profits. Good profits today, leading to high investment, well-paid jobs and a better standard of living tomorrow. (Applause).

No profits mean no investment, and a dying industry geared to yesterday’s world.

Other nations have recognised that for years now. They are going ahead faster than we are; and the gap between us will continue to increase unless we change our ways.[fo 24]

The trouble here is that for years the Labour Party have made people feel that profits are guilty-unless proved innocent.

But when I visit factories and businesses I do not find that those who actually work in them are against profits. On the contrary, they want to work for a prosperous concern. With a future—their future. (Applause).

Governments must learn to leave these companies with enough of their own profits to produce the goods and jobs for tomorrow.

If the Socialists won’t or can’t there will be no profit making industry left to support the losses caused by fresh bouts of nationalisation.[fo 25]

And if anyone says I am preaching laissez-faire, let me say this.

I am not arguing, and never have argued, that all we have to do is to let the economy run by itself.

I believe that, just as each of us has an obligation to make the best of his talents so governments have an obligation to create the framework within which we can do so. Not only individual people, but individual firms and particularly small firms. (Applause).

Some of these will stay small but others will expand and become the great companies of the future.[fo 26]

The Labour Government have pursued a disastrous vendetta against small businesses and the self-employed. We will reverse their damaging policies. (Applause).

Nowhere is this more important than in Agriculture—one of our most successful industries made up entirely of small businesses. We live in a world in which food is no longer cheap or plentiful. Everything we cannot produce here must be imported at a high price.

Yet the Government could not have destroyed the confidence of the industry more effectively if they had tried deliberately to do so, with their formula of empty promises and penal taxation.[fo 27]

So today what is the picture? Depressed profits, low investment, no incentive, and overshadowing everything government spending, spending far beyond the taxpayers means. (Applause).

To recover, to get from where we are to where we want to be, will take time.

“Economic policy” wrote Maynard Keynes “should not be a matter of tearing up by the roots but of slowly training a plant to grow in a different direction.”[fo 28]

It will take time to reduce public spending, rebuild profits and incentives, to benefit from the investments which must be made. The sooner that time starts, the better for Britain’s unemployed.

One of the reasons why this Labour Government has incurred more unemployment than any Conservative Government since the War is because they have concentrated too much on distributing what we have, and too little on seeing that we have more. (Applause).[fo 29]

We Conservatives hate unemployment.

We hate the idea of men and women not being able to use their abilities. We deplore the waste of national resources, and the deep affront to peoples’ dignity from being out of work through no fault of their own. (Applause).

It is ironic that we should be accused of wanting unemployment to solve our economic problems by the very Government which has produced a record post-War unemployment, and is expecting more.[fo 30]

The record of Mr Wilson and his colleagues on this is unparallelled in the history of political hypocricy.

We are now seeing the full consequences of nearly twenty months of Labour Government.

They have done the wrong things at the wrong time in the wrong way.

They have been a disaster for this country.[fo 31]

EQUALITY

Now let me turn to something I spoke about in America.

Some Socialists seem to believe that people should be numbers in a State computer. We believe they should be individuals.

We are all unequal. No one, thank heavens, is like anyone else, however much the Socialists may pretend otherwise.

We believe that everyone has the right to be unequal but to us every human being is equally important.[fo 32]

Engineers, miners, manual workers, shop assistants, farm workers, postmen, housewives—these are the essential foundations of our society. Without them there would be no nation. (Applause).

But their are others with special gifts who should also have their chance, because if the adventurers who strike out in new directions in science, technology, medicine, commerce and industry the arts are hobbled, there can be no advance.

The spirit of envy can destroy. It can never build.[fo 33]

Everyone must be allowed to develop the abilities he knows he has within him, and she knows she has within her, in the way they choose.

CHOICE

Freedom to choose is something we take for granted—until it is in danger of being taken away.

Socialist governments set out perpetually to restrict the area of choice, Conservative governments to increase it.

We believe that you become a responsible citizen by making decisions yourself, not by having them made for you.[fo 34]

But they are made for you under Labour all right.

Take education.

Beginning of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975:

Our education system used to serve us well. A child from an ordinary family, as I was, could use it as a ladder as an advancement.

But the Socialists are better at demolition than reconstruction, are destroying many good grammar schools.

Now this is nothing to do with private education. It’s opportunity and excellence in our State schools that are being diminished under Socialism.

And naturally enough, parents don’t like this. But in a Socialist society parents should be seen and not heard. (Laughter).[fo 35]

And another denial of choice is being applied to health.

The private sector helps to keep some of our best doctors here, and so are available part time to the National Health Service. It also helps to bring in more money for the general health of the nation.

But under Labour, private medicine is being squeezed out, and the result will be to add to the burden on the National Health Service without adding one penny to its income.[fo 36]

Let me make this absolutely clear.

When we return to power we shall reverse Mrs Castle ‘s stupid and spiteful attack on hospital pay beds. (Applause).

We Conservatives do not accept that because some people have no choice, no one should have it.

Every family should have the right to spend their money, after tax, as they wish, not as the Government dictates.End of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975.

Let us extend choice, the will to choose and the chance to choose.[fo 37]

TRADE UNIONS

I want to come now to the argument which Mr Wilson is trying to put across the country: namely that the Labour Party is the natural party of Government because it is the only one that the Trade Unions will accept.

From what I saw on television last week, the Labour Party did not look like a party of Government at all, let alone a natural one.

But let’s examine the argument.Beginning of section checked against ITN First Report, 10 October 1975

If we are to be told that a Conservative Government could not govern because certain extreme leaders would not let it, then General Elections are a mockery we’ve arrived at[fo 38] the one party state, and parliamentary democracy in this country will have perished. (Applause).

The democracy for which our fathers fought and died is not to be laid to rest as lightly as that.

When the next Conservative Government comes to power many Trade Unionists will have put it there. Millions of them vote for us at every Election.

I want to say this to them, and to every one of our supporters in industry.[fo 39]

Go out and join in the work of your Union.

Go to its meetings—and stay to the end.

Learn the Union rules as well as the Far Left know them, and remember this. If Parliamentary democracy dies, free Trade Unions die with it. (Applause).End of section checked against ITN First Report, 10 October 1975.[fo 40]

RULE OF LAW

I come last to what many would put first. The Rule of Law.

The first people to uphold the law should be governments. It is tragic that the Socialist Government, to its lasting shame, should have lost its nerve and shed its principles over the People’s Republic of Clay Cross. And that a group of the Labour Party should have tried to turn the Shrewsbury pickets into martyrs.

On both occasions the law was broken. On one, violence was done.[fo 41]No decent society can live like that. No responsible party should condone it. (Applause).

The first duty of Government is to uphold the law. If it tries to bob and weave and duck around that duty when its inconvenient, if government does that, then so will the governed, and then nothing is safe—not home, not liberty, not life itself.

There is one part of this country where tragically defiance of the law is costing life day after day.[fo 42]

In Northern Ireland our troops have the dangerous and thankless task of trying to keep the peace and hold the balance. We are proud of the way they have discharged their duty.

This Party is pledged to support the unity of the United Kingdom. To preserve that unity and to protect the people, Catholic and Protestant alike, we believe that our armed forces must remain until a genuine peace is made.

Our thoughts are with them, and our pride is with them too. (Applause).[fo 43]

I have spoken of the challenges that face us here in Britain. The challenge to recover economically. The challenge to recover our belief in ourselves.

I have shown our potential for recovery.

I have dealt with some aspects of our strength and approach.

And I have tried to tell you something of my personal vision, my belief in the standards on which this nation was greatly built, on which it greatly thrived, and from which in recent years it has greatly fallen away.[fo 44]

We are coming, I think, to yet another turning point in our long history.

We can go on as we have been going and continue down.

Or we can stop—and with a decisive act of will we can say “Enough”.

Let us, all of us, here today and others, far beyond this hall who believe in our cause make that act of will.

Let us proclaim our faith in a new and better future for our Party and our people.[fo 45]

Let us resolve to heal the wounds of a divided nation.

And let that act of healing be the prelude to a lasting victory. (Prolonged applause).

http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/102777

Note by MT: “It’s over!”

Background Articles and Videos

Glenn Beck The Blaze TV 9-24-12 (part1)

Glenn Beck The Blaze TV 9-24-12 (part2)

Glenn Beck The Blaze TV 9-24-12 (part3)

Admin. rejects new claim about Libya attack

By KIMBERLY DOZIER AP Intelligence Writer

“…Obama administration officials defended their response to the September attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, amid new claims that the White House failed to send help quickly enough as militants overran the mission. The U.S. ambassador and three other Americans died in the hourslong battle.

Fox News reported that security officers working for the CIA in Benghazi heard the attack on the consulate but were twice told to wait before rushing to the compound. Fox also reported that U.S. officials refused when the security team asked for U.S. warplanes to bomb their attackers, which would have meant violating Libyan airspace.

In response to the report, CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood said the CIA “reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi.”

She added: “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

President Barack Obama said repeatedly Friday that his administration would “find out what happened” and punish those responsible, but he twice ducked questions about whether U.S. officials denied requests for help.

“We’re going to gather all the facts, find out exactly what happened, and make sure that it doesn’t happen again, but we’re also going to make sure we bring to justice those who carried out these attacks,” Obama said in an interview with Denver television station KUSA.

In the run-up to the presidential election, Republicans have accused the Obama administration of distorting the account of the attack on Sept. 11 that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Officials first blamed the attack on a mob set into motion by an anti-Islamic film, saying the mob had been infiltrated and overtaken by extremists. Officials later revised their account, describing the attack as a military-style operation that took place without a demonstration beforehand.

The new claims come as Republican senators demanded that the Obama administration make public the surveillance video taken during and just after the attacks.

Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire wrote to the defense secretary, CIA director and attorney general demanding that the video from Sept. 11 and 12 be declassified. Pentagon and CIA officials declined to comment on the senators’ request. Justice Department officials did not respond to requests for comment. …”

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_LIBYA_SURVEILLANCE_VIDEO?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-26-23-07-56

Bombshell: Obama Admin. Was Likely Running Arms To Islamic Jihadists Through Benghazi

“…It doesn’t get more serious than a sitting president funneling arms to Al Qaeda terrorists!Mysterious Libyan ship linked to deadly terror attack?

View at Fox News

New e-mails released today show that both the White House and State Department knew within 2 hours that an Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group was behind the attack in Benghazi…but they lied about it anyway, blaming it on a stupid video for TWO WEEKS!

Why?

Frighteningly, it may be because Obama didn’t want anyone to know that he was using the Benghazi station to funnel arms to jihadists:

During the 2011 Libyan revolt against Muammar Qaddafi, reckless U.S. policy flung American forces and money into the conflict on the side of the rebels, who were known at the time to include Al Qaeda elements. Previously the number two official at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Christopher Stevens was named as the official U.S. liaison to the Libyan opposition in March, 2011.

Stevens was tasked with helping to coordinate U.S. assistance to the rebels, whose top military commander, Abdelhakim Belhadj, was the leader of the Al Qaeda affiliate, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). That means that Stevens was authorized by the U.S. Department of State and the Obama administration to aid and abet individuals and groups that were, at a minimum, allied ideologically with Al Qaeda, the jihadist terrorist organization that attacked the homeland on the first 9/11, the one that’s not supposed to exist anymore after the killing of its leader, Osama bin Laden, on May 2, 2012.

[...] The New York Times reported in July, 2012 that CIA officers were operating out of southern Turkey to help channel weapons to fighters supposedly not allied with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. In a October 14 piece, though, the Times asserted flatly that “Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups…” And while U.S. officials continue to stick to claims that they are not providing arms directly to the Syrian rebels, but only channeling weapons that come from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, reports that those rebels now have surface-to-air missiles call to mind the thousands of such weapons looted from Muammar Qaddafi’s stockpiles during and after the revolt that ousted him in October 2011.

Read more at Family Security Matters

The evidence suggests that part of Ambassador Stevens’ mission was to recruit jihadists to fight in Syria:

Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador murdered in Libya, played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian security officials speaking to WND.

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. …”

http://beforeitsnews.com/scandals/2012/10/bombshell-obama-admin-was-likely-running-arms-to-islamic-jihadists-through-benghazi-2430222.html

White House told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack: emails

By Mark Hosenball

“… Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a “terrorist” attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of “extremists,” they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

There were indications that extremists with possible al Qaeda connections were involved, but also evidence that the attacks could have erupted spontaneously, they said, adding that government experts wanted to be cautious about pointing fingers prematurely.

U.S. intelligence officials have emphasized since shortly after the attack that early intelligence reporting about the attack was mixed.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

MISSIVES FROM LIBYA

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department’s Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time – or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began – carried the subject line “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack” and the notation “SBU”, meaning “Sensitive But Unclassified.”

The text said the State Department’s regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was “under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well.”

The message continued: “Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four … personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.”

A second email, headed “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi” and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that “the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared.” It said a “response team” was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

The message reported: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president’s secure command post.

Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command center, the source said.

It was not known what other messages were received by agencies in Washington from Libya that day about who might have been behind the attacks.

Intelligence experts caution that initial reports from the scene of any attack or disaster are often inaccurate.

By the morning of September 12, the day after the Benghazi attack, Reuters reported that there were indications that members of both Ansar al-Sharia, a militia based in the Benghazi area, and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the North African affiliate of al Qaeda’s faltering central command, may have been involved in organizing the attacks.

One U.S. intelligence official said that during the first classified briefing about Benghazi given to members of Congress, officials “carefully laid out the full range of sparsely available information, relying on the best analysis available at the time.” …”

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/24/us-usa-benghazi-emails-idUSBRE89N02C20121024

Background Articles and Videos

The currency war on Iran

A collapse in the rial, greeted with glee by some, is a cause not for celebration but for fear

Peter Beaumont

“…The continuing currency crisis in Iran, which has seen the rial go into freefall, has been cited, with some celebration in certain quarters, as proving that US-led sanctions are “working” against Tehran. Increasingly shut out from international banking and struggling to sell its oil, Iran has been forced to sell more cheaply while buying raw materials at a higher cash price. This, in turn, has led to currency speculation that the government has done nothing to halt, and to sharp devaluation.

But what does “sanctions are working” actually mean? Some hawks have read it as the possible beginning of the end for Iran’s nuclear programme and the collapse of the clerical regime. For others, including those anxious to avoid conflict over Iran, it has been seized on as a suggestion that the crisis might be resolved through negotiation and non-military pressure.

The reality is that the political, economic and social impact of sanctions can produce very different results from those allegedly desired, more often than not hurting ordinary people. And there is a third scenario, in which sanctions might actually make the confrontation with Iran more dangerous still.

The increasing popularity of economic sanctions, as Britain’s former ambassador to the UN, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, has observed, is due to the perception that no other tool exists “between words and military action if you want to bring pressure upon a government”.

When three academics – Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey Scott and Kimberly Ann Elliott – examined the history of sanctions between 1914 and 1990, in Economic Sanctions Reconsidered they determined that out of 115 cases that they looked at, only a third had seen any measure of success. The US political scientist Robert Pape has challenged even this measure, claiming that of the 40, only five can be determined genuine successes for sanctions.

As Pape argued in his essay, Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work, “The … case that we should expect sanctions to be more effective in the future is also flawed, because it relies on the expectation that economic punishment can overwhelm a state’s commitment to its important policy goals.” Rather, he argues, at times of sanctions, the opposite is often true: “Pervasive nationalism often makes states and societies willing to endure considerable punishment rather than abandon what are seen as the interests of the nation.”

Even in cases where economic sanctions are generally considered to have had a positive impact – bringing about the end of white minority rule in South Africa and Rhodesia – there is disagreement over how decisive sanctions alone were in effecting that change. And if there is a disagreement over the efficacy of sanctions, what is also obvious is that they can come at a high price in terms of the impact on populations, and the risk that, far from undermining the legitimacy of regimes, they can entrench power – in a short term at least – around the regime elites being targeted. For Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, which lived under a sanctions regime from August 1990 until 2003, that meant a sharp increase in childhood mortality for infants under five years old, even as Saddam’s regime used money earned from avoiding sanctions to reward supporters.

There is evidence too that states under sanctions have been able to use the cover provided by them to put the heaviest burden on unpopular groups and minorities.

But one thing should be clear to all from the experience of global recession, ensuing austerity programmes, and recent global disturbances prompted by high grain prices. While it is easy to predict that people may become angry as they feel rapidly poorer, in such times of febrile politics how they will react is far harder to predict.

So to those celebrating Iranian pain, be careful what you wish for in desiring a crisis. It was hyperinflation under a regime of reparations that contributed to the collapse of the Weimar Republic. Few foresaw then what might occur. And few, now, are considering what a sanctions-triggered economic crisis might really mean for Iran and the region. …”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/02/the-currency-war-on-iran

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Mitt Romney Foreign Policy Speech At Virginia Military Institute–October 8, 2012–Rand Paul Reactions To Romney’s Speech–Neoconservative Interventionism–Ron Paul on the Neocons–Videos

Posted on October 10, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Communications, Economics, Employment, Energy, European History, Federal Government, government spending, history, Inflation, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: Neoconservative Interventionism |

Mitt Romney Blasts Obama Foreign Policy At Virginia Military Institute 10 8 2012

Rand Paul on the Laura Ingraham Show: Romney Wrong on Foreign Policy – 10/10/2012

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Murray N. Rothbard–A History of Money and Banking in the United States–Videos

Posted on September 22, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, European History, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Resources, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: Economics, History of Money and Banking in the United States, Monetary History, Murray N. Rothbard |

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 1, 1/4) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 1, 2/4) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 1, 3/4) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 1, 4/4) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 2, 1/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 2, 2/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 3, 1/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 3, 2/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 4, 1/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 4, 2/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 5, 1/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

A History of Money and Banking in the United States (Part 5, 2/2) by Murray N. Rothbard

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–Mill Times–Videos

Posted on July 14, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, history, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, media, People, Philosophy, Rants, Raves, Video, Water, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: American history, Business, Clothing, David Macaulay, Industrialization, Mill Times, Mills, Sheep, Textiles, Videos, Women, Wool |

PBS – Mill Times – David Macaulay

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–Thomas E. Woods, Jr., Ph.D.–The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History Lectures–Videos

Posted on July 14, 2012. Filed under: American History, Baseball, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, High School, history, History of Economic Thought, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Railroads, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Science, Ships, Sports, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Union, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: American history, Lectures, The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Thomas E. Woods Jr., Videos |

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 1 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 1, “Themes and Lessons from Colonial America” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 2 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 2, “The Constitution: Four Disputed Clauses” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 3 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 3, “The Principles of ’98″ by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 4 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 4, “Lysander Spooner and Other Antebellum Radicalism” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 5 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 5, “Secession and the American Experience” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 6 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 6, “Secession and War” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 7 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 7, “Reconstruction” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 8 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 8, “Myths and Facts About Big Business” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 9 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 9, “World War I” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 10 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 10, “The 1920s – Domestic and International” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 11 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 11, “Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 12 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 12, “The Economics of the New Deal and World War II” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 13 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 13, “The History of Foreign Aid Programs” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 14 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 14, “Civil Rights and the Supreme Court” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Lecture 15 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Lecture 15, “Welfare Programs and the Great Society” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Presented to the Auburn University Academy for Lifelong Learners, and recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama between September 2006 and March 2007.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–Immigration–Pursuit of A Dream–Videos

Posted on July 14, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Economics, Education, European History, Fiscal Policy, High School, history, Immigration, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Religion, Resources, Security, Unemployment, Video, War, Water, Wealth, Weather, Wisdom | Tags: America, America History, illegal immigration, Immigration, Legal Immigration, Pursuit of A Dream, United States of America |

Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts

A startling look at how U.S. immigration will add 300 million people to the country this century if immigration policies are not changed. This dramatic presentation of the latest Census data raises serious immigration questions about the ability of the country to achieve environmental sustainability and to meet the quality-of-life infrastructure needs of the national community considering current immigration policy. Presented by immigration author/journalist Roy Beck

Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs – Updated 2010

Immigration – Global humanitarian reasons for current U.S. immigration are tested in this updated version of immigration author and journalist Roy Beck’s colorful presentation of data from the World Bank and U.S. Census Bureau. The 1996 version of this immigration gumballs presentation has been one of the most viewed immigration policy presentations on the internet. Presented by immigration author/journalist Roy Beck

Immigration Through Ellis Island – Award Winning Documentary Video Film

Becoming an American: The Immigrant Experience (Part 1)

Immigration to America is a unique phenomenon in world history. No other country has ever absorbed so many people from so many different places. And no other country throughout world history has taken so much of its identity, energy, and spirit from immigrants. The American spirit is the immigrant spirit; the American Dream is the immigrant dream. It is no exaggeration to say that without immigrants, the United States could not exist.

Becoming an American: The Immigrant Experience (Part 2)

Becoming an American: The Immigrant Experience (Part 3)

Becoming an American: The Immigrant Experience (Part 4)

Illegal aliens crossing the mexican border

Illegal Immigration Isn’t a Joke

The High Cost of Illegal Immigration

Obama 57 States

Idiots who voted for Obama

Southpark – They Took Our Job!

Obama On Illegal Immigration,”I Walked”

New Obama immigration policy criticized by local groups

Background Articles and Videos

IMMIGRATION BY THE NUMBERS – PART ONE

Roy Beck: Immigration by the Numbers 2

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–United States of America’s Entry Into World War I–Videos

Posted on July 13, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Employment, European History, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Railroads, Raves, Resources, Security, Ships, Technology, Transportation, Video, War, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: American history, Entry of United States Into World War I, history, Videos, War, Woodrow Wilson, World War I |

World War I: Entry Of The United States 1/4

World War I: Entry Of The United States 2/4

World War I: Entry Of The United States 3/4

World War I: Entry Of The United States 4/4

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–President John Quincy Adams–Videos

Posted on June 26, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Education, European History, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, High School, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Rants, Raves, Security, Taxes, Video, War | Tags: American history, Andrew Jackson, Character, history, John Quincy Adams, Presidency |

President John Quincy Adams Biography

President John Quincy Adams Film

The Presidents- John Q Adams to Polk 1825-1849

Amistad: The Best of John Quincy Adams

The funniest and most inspirational John Quincy Adams moments from Steven Spielberg’s “Amistad,” starring Anthony Hopkins as JQA. If you have not yet seen this movie, I hope these clips and Hopkins’ brilliant performance will convince you to do so.

Amistad – John Quincy Adams before Supreme Court on Slavery

Amistad (Full Movie)

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–Adams-Onis Treaty–Videos

Posted on June 26, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, European History, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics | Tags: Adams-Onis Treaty |

Adams-Onis Treaty

President John Quincy Adams Film

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–French and Indian War– Videos

Posted on June 19, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, European History, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Video, War | Tags: American history, French and Indian War, Video |

French and Indian War

Battle of the Monongahela

The Acadians Deportation

Battle of Fort William Henry

Battle of Carillon

[y0utube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hF6Lwvo1UBQ&feature=relmfu]

The British Conquest 1759

Invasion of Québec City

Battle Plains of Abraham

Battle of Ste-Foy and Pontiac

The American Revolution

The Lower Canada Patriots

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–The Townshend Act of 1767–Videos

Posted on June 16, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Economics, European History, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Tax Policy | Tags: American history, Boston Massacre, history, The Townshend Acts of 1767, Videos |

The Townshend Acts of 1767

The Townshend Acts and the Boston Massacre

The Townshend Acts

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–The Stamp Act–Videos

Posted on June 16, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Economics, European History, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Resources, Taxes, Video, War | Tags: American history, Stamp Act 0f 1765, Videos |

Stamp Act Part 1

Stamp Act Part 2

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–The Sugar Act 1764–Videos

Posted on June 16, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Economics, European History, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Links, media, People, Politics, Raves, Tax Policy, Taxes, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: American history, history, The Sugar Act of 1764, Videos |

The Sugar Act 1764

Background Articles and Videos

Royal Proclamation of 1763

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

British History–The Madness of King George–Videos

Posted on June 13, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, European History, history, Law, liberty, Life, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Raves, Video, War, Wealth | Tags: American history, British History, history, King George III, The Madness of King George III, Videos |

The Madness of King George is a 1994 film directed by Nicholas Hytner and adapted by Alan Bennett from his own play, The Madness of George III. It tells the true story of George III’s deteriorating mental health, and his equally declining relationship with his son, the Prince of Wales, particularly focusing on the period around the Regency Crisis of 1788. Modern medicine has suggested that the King’s symptoms were the result of acute intermittent porphyria.
The film depicts the relatively primitive medical practices of the time and the suppositions that physicians made in their efforts to understand the human body. The King’s doctors attempt cures such as blistering and purges. Meanwhile, another of the King’s physicians, Dr. Pepys, analyses the King’s stool and urine believing that body wastes may contain some clue to the Royal malady. Finally, Lady Pembrooke recommends Dr. Willis, an ex-minister who attempts to cure the insane through behaviour modification. None of the three methods of treatment entirely cures the King; eventually his illness abates.
Cast:
Nigel Hawthorne as King George III Helen Mirren as Queen Charlotte Ian Holm as Dr. Willis Rupert Graves as Greville Amanda Donohoe as Lady Pembroke Rupert Everett as The Prince of Wales Julian Rhind-Tutt as The Duke of York Julian Wadham as George III’s Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger Jim Carter as Whig MP and leader of the opposition Charles James Fox.

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 1

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 2

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 3

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 4

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 5

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 6

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 7

The Madness of King George (1994) Part 8

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

American History–The Middle Colonies–Videos

Posted on June 12, 2012. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Economics, European History, history, Homes, Immigration, Law, Life, Links, media, People, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: American history, Bread, Calvinist, Delaware, Middle Colonies, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvanna, Puritans, Quakers, Religious Toleration, Wheat |

The Middle Colonies 1 of 3

The Middle Colonies 2 of 3

The Middle Colonies 3 of 3

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

« Previous Entries

European History

The Century: America’s Time – 1929-1936 Stormy Weather

The Century: America’s Time – 1936-1941 Over the Edge

The Century: America’s Time – 1941-1945 Civilians at War

The Century: America’s Time – 1946-1952 Best Years

The Century: America’s Time – 1953-1960 Happy Daze

The Century: America’s Time – 1960-1964 Poisoned Dreams

The Century: America’s Time – 1965-1970 Unpinned

The Century: America’s Time – 1971-1975 Approaching the Apocalypse

The Century: America’s Time – 1976-1980 Starting Over

The Century: America’s Time – 1981-1989 A New World

The Century: America’s Time – 1990-1999 – Then and Now

The Red Pill or The Blue Pill–Name Your Poison–Obama or Romney–It’s A Big Club and You Ain’t In It–Videos

Red-pill/Blue Pill

LEW ROCKWELL: A Return to Totalitarianism (10/22/2012)

George Carlin – It’s a big club and you ain’t in it

Currency Wars–Go Global–Ground Zero Iran–Videos

Background Articles and Videos

The currency war on Iran

A collapse in the rial, greeted with glee by some, is a cause not for celebration but for fear

Peter Beaumont

Raymond T. Pronk

Email Subscription

Pages

RSS Links

Categories

Search

Search

Blog Stats

Calendar

Archives

Pages

Email Subscription

Search

Blogroll

Follow “Pronk Palisades”

May 2013
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

May 2013
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

European History

Cover-up

Glenn Beck – Benghazi: Truth coming out

Glenn Beck Ties Together Benghazi, IRS, & AP Scandals ‘Fundamental Transformation’

Treason: Benghazi Revelations Could Sink Obama

Obama Hiding Arms Shipments To Syrian Jihadists

Benghazi–Stand Down – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Program

Benghazi – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Program – 2013.05.06

Glenn Beck – Benghazi: How did we get here?

Glenn Beck – The Benghazi Hearings

Lt Gen Mclnemey Is Ashamed Our Military Responded Benghazi Libya & Blames Obama Admin – Lou Dobbs

FOX News Confirms US Was Holding Prisoners at Benghazi Annex

From Rice to the White House: An Alumnus’ Journey

The Anti-Anti-Islam Film TV Ad By US in Pakistan Repudiating Film

Innocence of Muslims Full Movie HD 1080P Trailer

Press Briefing with Jay Carney and Ben Rhodes

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 1

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 2

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 3

Twitter Interviews White House Ben Rhodes Deputy National Security Adviser Part 4

From the Rhodes — The President in Mexico

President Obama gets ready to leave Israel

President Obama Speech to Muslim World in Cairo

White House denies changing story on Benghazi

Benghazi-Gate: Ex-CIA Michael Scheuer “Obama’s Benghazi Cover-up Worse than Watergate”

White House denies changing story on Benghazi

The Benghazi Talking Points

And how they were changed to obscure the truth

“Innocence of Muslims” FULL MOVIE HD Anti-Muslim Anti-Islam Prophet Muhammad

Is Ben Rhodes the Mastermind Behind the Benghazi Cover Up?

Ben Rhodes

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Are there radical Islamic terror camps in North America? Apparently there are dozens author says

Radical Jihadists Training On U.S. Soil – Behind Enemy Lines – Wake Up America!!!

Glenn Beck – The Project Part 1

Glenn Beck – The Project Part 2

The Third Jihad – Radical Islam’s Vision for America

Beslan: 5 years on

Dispatches – Beslan (2006)

Jihad: Slaughter of the Innocents – Beslan (Беслан) Part 1

Jihad: Slaughter of the Innocents – Beslan (Беслан) Part 2

Jihad: Slaughter of the Innocents – Beslan (Беслан) Part 3

Jihad: Slaughter of the Innocents – Beslan (Беслан) Part 4

Jihad: Slaughter of the Innocents – Beslan (Беслан) Part 5

Glenn Beck U.S. Denial of Islamic Jihad Threat, Beslan School Massacre 4-26-13

Glenn Beck The Story of Beslan

Glenn Beck Beslan, Terror, and Chechnya

Glenn Beck Experts on Beslan

Background Articles and Videos

Terrorism & Jihad: An Islamic Perspective – Dr. Zakir Naik

Stephen Coughlin, Part 1: Lectures on National Security & Counterterror Analysis (Introduction)

Stephen Coughlin, Part 2: Understanding the War on Terror Through Islamic Law

Stephen Coughlin, Part 3: Abrogation & the ‘Milestones’ Process

Stephen Coughlin, Part 4: Muslim Brotherhood, Arab Spring & the ‘Milestones’ Process

Stephen Coughlin, Part 5: The Role of the OIC in Enforcing Islamic Law

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

BREAKING 2013 Economic Collapse Peter Schiff

Overdose: The Next Financial Crisis

James Grant and James Turk discuss gold, the Fed and the fiscal situation of the USA

USA Will Die – Economic Collapse 2013 – Jim Rogers

JIM ROGERS – 2013 to Be Bad, ‘God Knows What Will Happen in 2014′

Peter Schiff – Dollar Could Collapse This Fall 2013

Peter Schiff – Economic Collapse 2013

Marc Faber – We Could See a 1987-Like Market Crash – Be Prepared and Get OUT!

ECONOMIC CRASH WORLDWIDE STARTING

Harry Dent predicts global economic crash in 2013

Planned Economic Collapse 2013-2014

Background Articles and Videos

Billionaires Dumping Stocks, Economist Knows Why

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 3: The Exercise of Power – BBC 2007

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Glenn Beck -6/8/2010- The Road to Serfdom

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

David Cameron’s Commons tribute to Margaret Thatcher in full

MARGARET THATCHER – Pt 1 The Making of Margaret (Telegraph Documentary)

MARGARET THATCHER – Pt 2 The Falklands (Telegraph Documentary)

MARGARET THATCHER – Pt 3 World Stage (Telegraph Documentary)

MARGARET THATCHER – Pt 4 The Age of Dissent (Telegraph Documentary)

MARGARET THATCHER – Pt 5 Taking on the Unions (Telegraph Documentary)

MARGARET THATCHER – Pt 6 Public Image, Private Life. (Telegraph Documentary)