Anyone who takes a look at the daily news with a discrerning eye can see that big events on the world state appear to be orchestrated and pre-planned rather than spontaneous. Today's news underscores this thought. The media, either by intent or unwittingly is also playing a powerful role in these end times events:
As stated on a number of occasions, the Tribulation simply couldn't occur with a strong, potent and free America. Period. For instance, with Ronald Reagan as President and a strong U.S. military, there is no way a world dictator could successfully emerge and carry out his plans. No way.
This is a fascinating video clip and worth watching:
In the following video commentary Russian General Konstantin P. Petrov (Ret.) asks some interesting questions and includes his own thoughts (perhaps the non-official Russian position) about a variety of topics that include the end of US dollar hegemony
While here in the United States we remain enclosed in a propaganda bubble controlled by western multi-billion dollar media conglomerates, business interests and political alliances, there can be no doubt that other schools of thought exist throughout the world. What may seem like reality to our populace is perhaps nothing more than illusion.
Even if you’re the head of a mighty state and you don’t understand global politics and don’t understand the methods of global politics you’re still a hostage of the global mafia. The leadership of the USSR and the leadership of the USA carried out internal and external politics, but the global mafia carries out global politics.The USSR collapsed and the same fate has been prepared for the USA.
We are the victims of a media coup d’état and are currently living under it.
You will see that clearly in evidence on Wednesday night when the debates commence, each one moderated by a member of the liberal media nomenklatura. It is under the guidance of this liberalism, under their own version of sharia, if you will, that the debates will be conducted and Mitt Romney judged.
We have long lived under this assumed reign of liberalism – in our media, in our schools, and through our entertainment. It is as pervasive as the air we breathe and as unquestioned.
It is the media that rules us then, not politicians. Politicians come and go; journalists, pundits, commentators – in print, on television, and now on the Internet – last forever, or nearly, as they pass the baton to the next generation without a semblance of an ideological blip, seamless as a gold medal track team.
They are the ones who tell our story to us. They are our mirrors and they are indeed a new class, as resistant to change as any entrenched group of the rich and powerful. (Yes, many of them are not so rich and powerful nowadays, but the ones that count, the ones that truly rule, are. And the others stand patiently by, waiting for their turn.)
This class, more than any, determined that Barack Obama should be president and they consequently will work more assiduously than any to assure his reelection, because a failure in that would be a serious, perhaps fatal, attack on their hegemony.
The coup would be in danger of a counter-coup. That can’t be allowed to happen. No facts, no events (Benghazi, Fast & Furious, endless unemployment, a healthcare fiasco) will get in the away or be allowed to be given serious credence.
But when did this coup start and how did it get so successful?
With every new bit of information surfacing about the “Innocence of Muslims” movie trailer and its shady producer, it is looking more and more like the movie was part of an Islamist provocation, in which the film was produced to provide a pretext for widespread attacks against our embassies throughout the Middle East. It comes complete with cover story and perfect dupes. Let’s review.
As details emerged it became clear that the Benghazi raid was a premeditated, carefully planned attack by heavily armed Jihadists, coordinated with radicals in Egypt and other Mideast countries, and timed for the anniversary of 9-11, 2001. Libyan leaders confirmed as much shortly thereafter. Meanwhile, until September 27th the Obama administration was implausibly still insisting that the attacks were inspired by the movie. Now, more than two weeks after the attack, they are finally admitting they knew the truth within 24 hours.Why did they stick to their story for so long, when it was clear that this idiotic film had nothing to do with the attack?
Early news reports claimed that an anti-Muslim movie sparked the violence. This could not have legitimately been the cause of spontaneous riots. That evening, some 15 hours after the Egyptian protests began, the “Innocence of Muslims” YouTube trailer, posted way back in July, had garnered only 1,000 views. It should have been viral by then, but it is doubtful that many Muslims had even heard of the film. Furthermore, the quality and dialogue was so poor that it was laughable. Even imputing the lowest intelligence quotient to fanatic Islamist viewers, it is impossible to imagine anyone getting worked up over this joke of a film. The complete film debuted in June, according to the L.A. Times, at “a run-down theater on a seedy stretch of Hollywood Boulevard,” though fewer than 10 people were there to see it. Others question whether the full-length version actually exists. No copy has turned up since the story broke earlier this month.
At around 6 a.m. on September 11th, well before any protests were launched, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo issued the following statement, now disavowed by the State Department:
“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims—as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”
What religious incitement? No protests had yet occurred, so the Embassy clearly knew something was brewing. On September 9th, the Grand Mufti of Egypt, one the few people who had apparently heard of the film, denounced it as “Offensive to the Prophet.” He accused “extremist Copts” of producing it. How did he learn of it and why would he draw attention to such an insignificant production? How did he know it was “extremist Copts?” The filmmaker had not yet been exposed, he used an alias during the film’s production, and his cover story was that he was Jewish. Still, judging by the YouTube visits, few Muslims got the message.
So how did thousands of Muslim rioters in multiple countries come out to protest a film they never saw?
This is a long article but worthwhile. The conclusions:
None of this adds up, unless this film had the one specific purpose for which it has been used. Such a film need not be well done. It only needs to provide a pretext. In that regard it has performed admirably.
Despite his many aliases, Nakoula is obviously known to the feds. Did they know of his film production? The local police apparently did. Are the feds uncomfortable with exploring the possibility that this film was part of a premeditated provocation by Muslim terrorists? Were they taken for a ride by this “informant?” Why did the U.S. insist for weeks that the recent Middle East attacks were the result of this film when they knew better? Is this yet another effort by the Obama administration to find a pretext to suppress free speech? Islamic leaders in America are already calling for legislation limiting free speech. Why has the FBI still not departed for Libya? Are they afraid of what they might find, or is someone else afraid of what they might find?
This administration has much to answer for regarding this deadly attack and for that matter many other things. Despite its pledge to be the most “transparent” administration in history, if past is prologue, honest answers are not likely to be forthcoming soon.
Three days after Ambassador Chris Stevens was assassinated, Jay Carney told the White House press corps it had been the work of a flash mob inflamed by an insulting video about the Prophet Muhammad.
As the killers had arrived with rocket-propelled grenades and automatic weapons, this story seemed noncredible on its face.
Yet two days later, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice doubled down. Appearing on five Sunday talk shows, she called the massacre the result of a "spontaneous" riot that was neither "preplanned" nor "premeditated."
Carney and Rice deceived us. But were they deceived?
It is impossible to believe that Carney would characterize the Benghazi, Libya, massacre as the result of a protest that careened out of control unless he had been told to do so by the national security adviser, the White House chief of staff or President Barack Obama himself.
Who told Carney to say what he did? Who arranged for Rice to appear on five shows to push this line?
Throwing a rope to Rice and Carney, the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, said last week that only recently had his team concluded that Benghazi was the work of terrorists.
Yet intelligence insiders were leaking to the press the day after Stevens was murdered that it was terrorism.
Was U.S.intelligence oblivious to how dangerous Benghazi was when Stevens went in? Was not Benghazi's reputation as a haven for Islamic jihadi known to us all before we "liberated" Libya?
This is the city U.S. air power saved when Moammar Gadhafi's forces were closing in. It now appears to be an al-Qaidaville where U.S. diplomats and agents dare not tread.
As for the Arab Spring Obama embraced, that has given us the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo and jihadi in Sinai. Our departure from Iraq paved the way to a new sectarian war. The surge troops are out of Afghanistan, and the remaining U.S. troops no longer partner with the Afghan soldiers who are to take over the war.
Any doubt about the outcome there when we're gone?
Within the past month, anti-American riots, flag burnings and the raising of Islamist banners atop U.S. embassy facilities have occurred in too many countries and capitals to recite.
If this is the fruit of a successful engagement with the Islamic world, what would a debacle look like? Rep. Paul Ryan said Sunday, "The Obama foreign policy is unraveling literally before our eyes on our TV screens."
Also see:
– Large, unusual movements of U.S. special operations equipment, including combat planes and gunships, recently have been tracked departing the U.S. and heading east, and various sources believe the movement could be associated with crises brewing in the Middle East and North Africa, according to Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.The aircraft reportedly include the C-130N Combat Shadow, used to refuel special operations helicopters; HC-130P Combat King, used for personnel recovery; and the AC-130U Spooky and A-10 Thunderbolt, for close air support.
According to the open-source intelligence group Stratfor, the aircraft are used primarily by special operations. In referring to its spotters, Stratfor said some 12 U.S. Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornet fighter aircraft also are on the move, possibly for the Middle East. There reportedly are a number of what Stratfor describes as superiority squadrons involved, including a stealthy F-22 Raptor squadron.
“The deployment of this kind of aircraft, along with the unusual presence of AC-130U gunships, special operations helicopters, drones and tankers, could be the sign that something big is going to take place in the coming weeks,” according to David Cenciotti in the Aviationist.
A pro-abortion group is sending letters to 60,000 churches in an attempt to intimidate them in the upcoming elections.With churches holding voter registration drives, with pastors talking about the importance of pro-life and religious issues in the election and with churches allowing pro-lifers to distribute literature based on their First Amendment rights, the threats could adversely effect pro-life election efforts.Mathew Staver, chairman of the Liberty Counsel, a pro-life legal group, talked about the letters."In a national mass mailing, the left-wing organization Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) has advised the leadership of 60,000 targeted churches across the nation not to become involved in “partisan politicking,” he said. “Their true goal, unwritten but hidden between the lines: To SILENCE the truth from being spoken in American pulpits and to MUZZLE people of faith on the vital issues that will be decided in the 2012 elections.”
So what can churches and pastors do during election season?
“I want to remove the muzzle that secularists want to put on pastors and replace it with a megaphone. Pastors can preach on biblical issues, can educate people about where the candidates stand on these biblical issues, and can urge the people to vote for biblical values. Churches can help people register to vote, and much more,” Staver explains. “A pastor can preach on the sanctity of human life and then educate the people about where the candidates stand on this issue. We face the most important election of our life time. Silence is not an option.”
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar