Tuesday, July 30, 2013

BENGHAZI-TRUTH GUIDE TO STEALTH ONLINE LIBERAL TROLLS PRETENDING TO BE CONSERVATIVE

LIBERAL TROLLS ARE REALLY OUT IN FORCE, so here is an important re-print from April, 2013

BENGHAZI-TRUTH DAILY MEMO

EDIT 1: People by the score have asked me in PM & DM to keep this Memo at the top of the page so they can get this information out to the larger population of conservatives. That makes sense and is appreciated. Therefore, this will remain at the top at least through Wed, 4/10/2013


Filed for Sat, April 6, 2013 -
Monday, April 8, 2013
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Note: print out this article and keep it by your computer. Over time, you'll be amazed how much of it proves true by your own experience. Have it handy at all times!

They are everywhere, well-funded and often effective against the unwary: liberal trolls pretending to be conservatives to manipulate true conservatives. We have dealt with them for the last few years, and outed a few who, when their cover was blown, went down flaming, "LOL"ing how the conservatives would be destroyed and socialism would win. As fake conservatives, they always find a way to derail decisive action with ideological masquerading, and attack effective conservatives making headway and accuse them of not being pure enough, and each attack is backed up by the appearance of a dozen "friends" of theirs you never saw before playing yes-man to their attacks.

Liberal ACORN-style trolls have a few easily-recognizable approaches and we know this "officially" because I've read notes taken from a reliable source with access to their marching orders in places where people sit in small offices and are paid to do one thing: make the conservatives ineffective on the internet (I am not the first to report on these places; this is well-known). 

We're going to blow their cover right now, mention a few names and render them useless if you follow these simple guidelines. This is how guys like Soros spend a fraction of their political money: running places like that.

THE TYPES

EDIT 2: Here is a very specific type of liberal troll pretending to be conservative I initially forgot: the "conservative" who complains bitterly about boycotting FOX NEWS even though they know our intention is to force FOX back to the right-wing, and they mock and condemn upcoming Tea Party-oriented news network One America. Does that sound like a conservative to you? No, I didn't think so. Me neither.

Here's a rundown of the basic variety.


1. THE PURIST.

These people are not Tea Party people who believe in small government or Obama's birth certificate issue - that's not what I mean by "purist". These "purists" are people for whom purity is only ever realized by doing things that ensure GOP defeat. They take up much space on message boards, Facebook and Twitter loudly endorsing un-electible candidates with no name recognition on third party tickets to split the Republican vote and open the door for the democrat to win. They proclaim that their "vote is too important to waste on a RINO" as though voting is a religious experience (No one hates RINOS more than I, but we live in an imperfect world. If after the primaries we fail on any given state or district and are stuck with a RINO, you vote for the RINO over the democrat. Sometimes there is scant little to distinguish them, but it does help the GOP maintain a majority where elected Tea Party House and Senate members can help drive the nation agenda instead of sitting in the back seat to democrats). One now-famous line from these people: "I am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils". I have news for any actual conservative who might actually agree with this absurd notion: human perfection exists only in Jesus Christ, and the last I heard, he isn't running.



2. DUMB BUT WELL-MEANING.

The operative excuse for this fake is "Oops". "Oops, I did not mean to send the thread off-topic when any idiot would know better". "Oops, I forgot how to do basic things when it really mattered." "Oops, I know better than TOPOSTLIKETHISANDMAKESPELLINGERRORS and make the entire operation look stupid but I do it anyway and always when a thread is catching fire and helping the conservative cause." Don't assume these people are well-meaning; handle it like a job: say "Please post using proper form and English or don't post with us because you are making us look bad." There is always collateral damage in any war and accidental friendly fire, but if you said that to them, the chances are 95% that you just eliminated a troll working from the inside to blunt the effect of your collective efforts. This isn't theory: we know some are ordered to operate like this.




3. THE SMILER WITH A KNIFE / THE USELESS BIG BOSS

"I love ya, darlin'!" "Happy Birthday, sweety, you're the best!". Nice words, but when they come from someone represented to be some kind of leader, like, in my strongly-held opinion  Dakota R on Twitter, who then poisonously attacks in the same breath people getting the work done and not just running on a twitter treadmill of love-speak and pompous complaining, then you have just run into a particularly nasty troll variety. Set on high by other operatives and people falling in with them unknowingly, this is a Troll for whom conservative political activist accomplishment is never apparent but the appearance is that other trolls treat that person like a God. 

This type invariably writes in a pathetic stereotype of what elite liberals think conservatives to be: twangy hicks. Basically, this kind of operative is an anchor for the others. The anchor lies, the operatives say, "So and so said so!" and they all "Ooooh" and "Ahhhh" in unison and condemn the guilty party on the authority of the anchor. If you watch carefully only one form of behavior meets their lofty standard: complaining about nothing that hurts Obama but creating a venue to loudly complain about anything that does not hurt Obama, giving the participants a way to blow off steam and feel like they are being productive while politically hurting Obama not one bit. 

Once you start to get things done, watch your back. We have seen this kind over and over and they play rough. Indeed, they are after this group now with a passion since our nation-wide media recognition for boycotting FOX to get FOX to turn hard right and therefore once again become a threat to Obama. Our boycotts are working, putting pressure on FOX to be a threat to Obama, and so then, too, do we become a threat to Obama. And that's just too damn bad.

This type is particularly nasty because it's the head of a troll snake that sets the agenda. You will see clearly how this works in two primary ways:

A. They find ways to play the role of victim against the retaliation of people they have suckered into an angry response to their unilateral first attack. In other words, they attack first, the victim responds, then the attacker complains bitterly and pretends to be the victim. From there all the otherwise invisible operatives pile on, defending the "innocent Troll 3", attempt to destroy the "offender" - the hapless guy who was targeted in the first place -  and then vanish again.

B. They find every possible cause to rally, occupy time and otherwise keep the heat off Obama. It's always a matter of, "So and so is in twitmo! Get them out!". "So and so attacked me!" "So and so is not really a conservative!" But never, "Let's tweet media and congress for a select committee to prosecute Obama". Never, "Demand FOX turn right to keep the pressure on Obama." Never, "Let's help other groups that are doing these proven-effective first two things." In other words, they engage their group participants to lead meaningless rant sessions about Obama but never to actively coordinate to raise public awareness about his scandals, suggest activity to engage the actions of the congress or anything else that hurts Obama.



4. MR. / MRS. PASSIVE/AGGRESSIVE

Anyone who, in effect, says the following; "NO! Be good conservatives! Be nice! Don't engage in activity that makes us look bad! Do everything with the best possible good manners and heartfelt consideration for the liberal democrats!" because as you can read, that is what it all amounts to - making democrats happy. 



5. MISS TOO-GOOD-TO-BE-TRUE 

The combination Christian/girl-next-door/siren promising love, agreement, companionship and delights. All at once supposedly devout to Jesus, flirtatious, fawning to men and sporting a picture of an attractive-to-beautiful girl with a supposed "real name and face", these are perhaps the most obvious and clearly deliberate characters they have created. One may have a picture of Angelina Jolie, for example, and assures the world that they/she look "just like her". Those who are trolls under disguise are usually older gray-pony-tailed liberals who have not bathed in a month, snatching pics off dating sites and the like to lure in the lonely. I outed an obvious one myself on a message board a few years ago, and they "Bwahahah"'d as they called conservatives "losers" before his/her identity vanished. Doubtless he came back again within an hour under a new, innocent identity. Make no mistake, they don't just sucker in conservatives; there are many lonely liberal guys out there convinced the "girl" admires them for their mind and doing what the admiring girl is telling them to do, unaware that the person on the other end stinks of old cigarettes and male sweat. So who's the sucker then? This is not a new trick; the only twist is that Mata Hari is now only an electronic image and nothing more. File this one under "L" for "Last but not least" because this type is everywhere by the dozen. You probably are aware of half-a-dozen yourself without understanding who and what they are. As with all else in life, if they seem too good to be true, they probably are.


None of those kinds of people, by the way, some now claiming some authorship of this group's activities (pretending to be conservatives), had anything to do with its achievements, including this:



You can see the Troll operations very clearly if you understand all this. Go to Twitter, read around and check the posting styles and content against your print-out of this article. You will see these patterns fall into place instantly. When you see someone like that, don't engage them. If you do it is an easy matter for them to whine to twitter to suspend your account and Twitter has better things to do than play nursemaid to a bunch of victims of trolls. If these people attack you, wear it as a badge of honor. Indeed, you might almost want to earn their disdain  because it means you are an effective fighter for the conservative cause and getting real things done, not living in a bubble "praying" for help from trolls saying, "Love ya darlin'". If worse comes to worse, just block them.

SUGGESTED ACTIONS:

DO

1. DO boycott FOX. IMO No conservative believes they are right-wing enough. You won't destroy them completely, you will just inspire them to turn right.

2. DO Tweet media and Congressmen and tell them you want more Benghazi coverage and a select committee on Benghazi. And most of all, you want the Benghazi witnesses freed!

3. DO follow this blog and follow @Kathy_Amidon (that is not me) to stay involved in these actions.

4. Do call out the above-described trolls and ask, WHY AREN'T YOU TWEETING THE CONGRESS? Why aren't you boycotting FOX news instead of defending the "Rino News Network". Make them explain it. In so doing, they will out themselves, even by their silence. This isn't rocket science.


DO NOT

1. DO NOT respond to their attacks directly.

2. DO NOT let them waste your time on distractions like personal fights on Facebook and Twitter - stay focused on Benghazi issues and not flame wars with trolls.

3. DO NOT SIT BACK AND DO NOTHING because of trolls or anything else. More than any activity, that is the worst, because if you do that, then the trolls win for Obama without even lifting a finger. If Obama's trolls are going to ruin America, at least get involved and make it difficult for them. The flip side is it looks like we have a 50/50 chance to win back a conservative America.

GET INVOLVED! TODAY! Or never complain about Obama to anyone again, because complaining alone won't get America on the right track again.



THIS BLOG, WWW.BENGHAZI-TRUTH.BLOGSPOT.COM IS THE ONLY OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE TEA PARTY FIRE ANTS AS REPORTED IN ALL NATIONAL NEWS STORIES. Except no imitators - they do not have our blessing nor our agreement or authorization to represent themselves as such or any organizational part of this movement.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

ADDITIONAL NEW STRATEGY STARTED: "WHERE ARE THE BENGHAZI SURVIVORS" OVERPASS BANNERS/DEMONSTRATIONS

In the last update I described how we - the Tea Party Fire Ants - are broadening our efforts. It isn't so much "Co-sponsor HRes35" anymore during the Twitter swarms as it is "Sign the discharge petition so HRes36 can get a floor vote." 162 co-sponsors is nearly 3/4 of the entire GOP House majority. That's enough. It's time to get a vote on it now.

Digressing slightly, it makes me sick to my stomach that we wound up with Boehner as Speaker for a second time despite all the obvious signals he was in no way up to the job. Little could anyone have known that our own worst enemy would be our own Speaker of the House who would prefer to play golf with Obama than engage his constitutional responsibility of oversight over Obama. In 2014 there will be a positively terrible political price payed by all those who supported Boehner as Speaker. These country club trolls on both sides of the aisle need to be driven out by solid, no-games, get-the-job done conservatives.

One of the broadening Fire Ants efforts which we have been engaging in has been discussion with "Impeach Obama Overpass" groups. These people basically have overpass demonstrations calling attention to unhappiness with Obama and as a media pro I have to admit the idea is brilliant: traffic flows by the millions and if you cannot get your message out to now-leftist FOX NEWS, the newspapers and timid radio hosts, then you can use the overpass like a living TV screen and force the message in front of people. It works. 

If you recall, we floated this idea on twitter not long ago:

Well, these truly terrific overpass organizers, many of them, anyway, were not even aware of the HRes36 resolution for a Benghazi Select Committee to do to Obama on Benghazi what the dems did to Nixon on Watergate in the 1970's. That's not their fault - the Obama-media-protection-lockdown - even by FOX - has been beyond anything we have ever seen in the United States, though people who lived through Soviet Russia are warning us that we are now clearly on the same path that ruined the lives of hundreds of millions of soviets. And many of the overpass organizers did not think to start advertising this powerful message, originating here, now retweeted over 2,300 times and seen on Twitter by an estimated nine-million-plus people: 

Here's one more step forward for the Fire Ants. The first Overpass group (there are many in states all over the US) to adopt the message, located in Tennessee, had this this past weekend:




Last but not least even though this isn't a good angle, note the blue tarp sign, as described in the floated idea graphic, and the message on it:



I'll be the first to admit that it's a small start. But then this blog was a small start before it got written up by Newsweek and a host of other leftists trying to mock away our message, a strategy that blew up in their stupid faces and made this blog huge and popular.

The better news is that in less than a week the same group is planning on having a Benghazi survivor sign - with the same message - twice that large, along with the original, at the next event in less than a week, and will have them at every event and more besides.


These overpass demonstrations catch people's attention, and all day long an endless number of car horns signal - sometimes enthusiastically -  that people agree with the message - and more importantly, many are finding out about it for the first time.

Better news still is that other Overpass Groups around the country are warming to the idea that the best way to impeach Obama is to create intense public awareness about the Benghazi Witnesses, whose testimony alone is likely to shock all of America and via the true leaders in the congressional GOP who are finally stepping up to the plate, end Obama's political rein of terror once and for all. Once the American people say, "Yes, Obama is terrible! He's a monster! Remove him" it's all over - in a legal, constitutional way - for Barry Seotoro/Sobarkah/Barack Obama in horrifying public expose that will erase for all time the sick and exaggerated "triumph" that democrats have heralded for 40 years: removing a comparatively innocent Richard Nixon for a crime he, himself, didn't actually commit. And, of course, no one was horribly m
urdered during the absurdly inconsequential Watergate break-in the way people were while Obama denied them help - and them lied about almost every possible aspect of what happened, even to the United Nations General Assembly, not to mention up-close to the faces of the grieving parents - to cover it all up. 

If you are part of a group, or just like the idea, now is the time for Overpass signs, especially in those climates where fall and winter are not so welcoming to outdoor activities.


"Where are the Benghazi Survivor witnesses?" and "Obama, Free The Missing Benghazi Survivor Witnesses!" will be on the lips of every American by September even if the media doesn't say a word.

It's summer. People are travelling. Give them something to talk about in the car. 

Sunday, July 21, 2013

TEA PARTY FIRE ANTS BROADENING BENGHAZI JUSTICE EFFORTS

This entry is primarily for those activists who consider themselves Tea Party Fire Ants (If you came to read about Obama behaving like a reverse racist despite being half-white - and why - read the post below this one)

I've taken a few private message questions from Fire Ants as to why I have not been on Twitter myself in the last few days(as Frank M Davis JR) after devising myself the very swarm activities the Fire Ants engage every night. The answer is simple: the responsibilities are getting much broader as we get close to closing the sale, and I have determined that my being on twitter every night is a duplication of effort between swarm leader @Kathy_Amidon and myself, and we cannot afford duplication of effort - not for a moment.

As we close down on the remaining GOP holdouts who have not yet sponsored HRes36 for a Benghazi Select Committee, as anticipated, the job becomes more difficult - they aren't holdouts by accident. We will never get them all, but as we wear down what is left of less than 25% of the GOP House not yet signed aboard HRes36, we increase the potential for a Select Committee by a much higher proportionate rate (I know, this is all boring behind-the-scenes geek talk, so you may want to skip it if the how-to details don't interest you). Rep Stockman's discharge petition to force HRes36 itself needs to have signatories, and while nowhere near as difficult as getting from 30 HRes36 GOP co-sponsors to 160, which is where we are now, it's another job to do. Convincing the holdouts means really bearing down on them, with art and advertising messages specific to each individual which politically embarrasses them for not signing on and makes them worry for their chances of winning the next primary. Keeping their lazy, country-club lifestyle on the public dime is almost entirely what many Reps regard as their career function, though, conversely, it must be admitted that there are some terrific ones (and most of them were the first to sign aboard HRes36).

Additionally, Stockman has also agreed to hear evidence on the fact of Obama's birth certificate forgery, and he needs to be supported in that. If we don't stay on it, that one could go quietly into the night, and that has the potential of being the most politically explosive of all, and we don't want to miss that show! 

Additionally also supposedly Tea Party-oriented One America News network is, like FOX, acting cute about Benghazi and the birth certificate, so  a few of us working on it behind-the-scenes need to enact a strategy  toward One America (more Twitter swarming, which is easy enough, but effective political advertising messages need to be crafted, and that's where much of my time is going across the spectrum). Plus we are working with overpass banner people to keep the message "WHERE ARE THE BENGHAZI SURVIVOR WITNESSES" front and center (if you read this regularly, you know those of us here involved in media and advertising believe for not one minute that the survivors of Benghazi would choose the kind of liberal publishing arm - essentially an extension, IMO, of Obama's ground support groups - to edit and publish their hair-raising, anti-Obama accounts. In other words, a whitewash).

So in a nutshell, Kathy is great at leading the Twitter swarms and will continue to do so. I will be involved deep in the nuts and bolts of the political activist message strategies, graphics, videos and larger effort outside of Twitter, though I will lead from time to time on the exclusively media-oriented twitter swarms.

IMO all is running spectacularly in favor of seeing Obama held to account for his scandals, folks. The problem is that closing a deal - in this case with congress and media outlets - always requires a lot of the sales staff in the meeting, so to speak, and duplication of effort is something we cannot afford if we are to guarantee that Obama is treated kindly and fairly on Benghazi exactly the way and to the correct proportionate degree that Nixon was on Watergate. And the situation is clearly shaping up that the tea Party Fire Ants and Benghazi-Truth can and will be seriously instrumental in ensuring that scenario as we have been up to this moment. Just ask Congressman Wolf.

This blog, of course, will continue to be updated a few times each week with important info and perspectives you won't find anywhere else.

Bit by effective bit, day by activist day, we inch towards victory. We can see it clearly on the horizon, now. It's just a few short months from our grasp. My prediction, and if I may say so I haven't done half bad in the prognostication department, as it's been a long-term career requisite in competition-savage NYC, is that if we keeping working as we have been, through the summer, this Fall is when all hell breaks loose on Benghazi and Obama's birth certificate situation, both. It will be quite an amazing, history-making show, almost certain to change this country back to the right which will make the changes which happened during Reagan's presidency seem like a dress rehearsal.

We can do this.

We will.

Thanks.

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

THE ZIMMERMAN TRIAL, OBAMA, ERIC HOLDER, AND THE BENGHAZI SELECT COMMITTEE

The Zimmerman trial is over. Zimmerman was found not guilty of the murder of Tryvon Martin, a 17-year-old who apparently attacked Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch participant, when Zimmerman asked what Martin was doing in circumstances some consider suspicious (I cannot consider it suspicious because I wasn't there. I deal in facts, like the fact that Obama's birth certificate is an obvious forgery from the evidence - program log commands showing extreme tampering with pasted elements which make up the document do not generate themselves - not ever). 

Lethal force is permissible in Florida when someone is manifestly violently attacked, and the jurors fulfilled their function: in the Zimmerman case, their verdict was "acquittal". They heard the evidence, they rendered a verdict. This happens all over America thousands of times every day. That includes murder trials. That includes the people involved being of different races. Prisons are filled with often black male inmates, many of whom are there for the rape and or murder of a white personThat's not racist, that's unpleasant statistical fact. It just is. If people want to change that statistical fact, they need to work on how people behave toward each other before it reaches the courtroom, not how they behave in response to the verdict after it leaves the courtroom.

So what does this have to do with Barack Obama and Eric Holder? If you say "Nothing", I agree with you. But they don't:
Insane. 33 U.S. citizen eyewitnesses to the murders in Benghazi remain hidden - or worse - but Obama and Holder want to use taxpayer money to second-guess our criminal justice system on an all-too-common American occurrence  a murder of a person of one race by a person of another race.

Thankfully, it looks like Holder's potential investigation doesn't stand a prayer:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/16/politics/zimmerman-holder

So why then? Why do Obama and Holder get involved in a situation in which their involvement reeks of reverse-racism, race-baiting and riot inciting? Why do it?! As usual, this blog has a considered theory. In this case: OBAMA PROTECTION.

To watch the news every day it seems like Obama is just sailing along with nary a care. He isn't. Obama is, IMO, in very, very deep trouble and that isn't only my opinion, many people hold firmly to it. Obama is in serious trouble because of two issues, Benghazi and his birth certificate forgery. Think both issues are dead? Think again.

On Benghazi, regular readers here know that HRes36, House Congressman Frank Wolf's resolution for a Benghazi Select Committee, has 160 co-sponsors - far beyond those needed to meet the Hastert Rule demanding a floor vote, but Obama's golfing pal, supposed Republican Speaker John Boehner will not allow a vote on the measure otherwise certain to pass resoundingly  hence this art from this blog:

But the danger to Obama of a Benghazi Select Committee has just become multiplied many times over, because it is now likely to become a reality.  Congressional House Representative Steve Stockman from Texas is now issuing what we have cited here months ago: a discharge petition. Basically this action forces the resolution out of committee and to the floor for a vote, where it is essentially certain to pass, creating Select Committee to investigate Benghazi and there isn't a damn thing Boehner or Obama can do about it; the law is the law. A Select Committee is important because it gets results. The most famous one was the one for Watergate, that resulted in president Richard Nixon's resignation in 1973.

A quote from THIS Press release from Stockman's office: Following the cancellation of a House hearing this week on the Benghazi attacks, Rep. Stockman announced his intention to file a discharge petition to force a vote on Rep. Frank Wolf’s H. Res. 36, which would establish a Select Committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks.

The degree to which this has not been reported is stunning. Thankfully, this is now beyond the influence of the media.

Additionally, the same Stockman has apparently agreed to hear evidence that Obama's birth certificate is a criminal forgery:



So what does this have to do with Obama and Holder on the Zimmerman case? Easy. Obama is running out of options. And in my opinion, what Obama and Holder are doing, transparently, is fanning the flames of racial anger and basically trying to terrorize whites into not impeaching a black president for fear of this on a larger scale:



Why do I suspect that? Because there is no reason for Obama and Holder to otherwise get involved. Media is my business, and quite frankly, were I not a conservative Christian with a conscience, and ethics and a moral compass, and I was working for Obama, what Obama and Holder are doing is just exactly what I would recommend they do: terrorize whites with fear that 0.1 percent of the 12% of the American population that is black would riot and frighten them.

Fortunately, there appears to be a reality settling in by the lack of riots over Martin of the kind we saw in 1992 over Rodney King, and perhaps why Holder's initial rhetoric already appears to be vaporizing: people get it, now. It isn't about race, it's about the person. And that is perhaps the biggest political danger Obama has ever faced.


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


Saturday, July 13, 2013

IS IT UN-CHRISTIAN TO HATE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA?


In the tradition of this blog, of tempting condemnation by citing extremely uncomfortable but nevertheless entirely 
irrefutable facts, I'd like to take this one on directly. Naturally hysterical libs will do what they always do with this blog when it hits a nerve: they will mock it and paint it with a broad, dishonest brush, so please read carefully and intelligently, and have your Bible handy.

The reason I'm writing this is I just read a tweet, one of countless such remarks in social media over the years - and media is my business -  saying in essence, "I know I am not being a good Christian, but I hate Obama." Or, "If I were not a good Christian, I would hate Obama." You get the picture. Many of these remarks are entirely sincerely expressed. Others, however, come from our friends the trolls who are paid to do that - indeed, the libs are now advertising on job hunting sites for "paid blog posters" to sit all day and spread Obama-protecting, Marxist propaganda.  


Paid trolls are the front-ranks strategic enemy of a free nation and say many unconscionable things regardless of truth and with often the worst of possible intentions. A new one, for example, is "Never Forget  

Benghazi." Think about that. What does that do to you emotionally in terms of wanting to take action to get to the bottom of the facts and see those responsible within the United states prosecuted? It dampens your resolve, doesn't it? Sure, you'll remember and be angry, but that doesn't hurt Obama. "Never forget"  presumes anger but defeat on Benghazi. Like 9-11 won't be forgotten, but remembering it won't roll those buildings back up into the air and bring 3,000 people killed on that day back to life. Unlike 9-11, Benghazi is not a lesson to be learned for the future, it is a murder and a cover-up which needs to still be investigated and prosecuted today. "Never Forget Benghazi" is an absurdly obvious crafted manipulative message to anyone who knows media on a professional level - it's meant to make you accept it and "move forward". Don't accept it. Every time you see "Never Forget Benghazi", post back, "I won't forget and I am doing something about it by Tweeting the GOP Reps in public to get them to do their jobs. What are YOU doing about it?" You'll see "Never forget" vanish quickly  and that's good. We and millions of others will remind everyone every single day, all day long, of Benghazi without the implied defeatism, thanks. Don't worry about it "being forgotten". As evidence of this blog/group's dedication, again:


No, we won't forget and we aren't going anywhere until this cover-up is blasted out into the sunlight and all guilty parties held to account and that's that.

So back to, "Is it Christian to hate Obama?"


The question is more a matter of, if you hate Obama are you being honest?  If you don't hate him but say you are - if you are lying -  that is against scripture, of course; not complicated - lying is forbidden (funny to consider that in today's world, isn't it?). But if you really feel he is wicked, if you feel in your gut he is evil, if you believe you hate him, this man whose first and last names are the same used by Jesus to describe Satan in the Book of Luke (look up "Lightning" and "Height" in a Hebrew-to-English translator sometime - trust me, you're in for a big shock), truly, then the answer is "Yes, it is not un-Christian to hate Obama." You can do it and you can say it. Out loud. To anyone.


For decades liberals and secularists have tried to manipulate Christian conservatives by twisting the image of Jesus the Peacemaker into Jesus the Weakling Ultra-Pacifist, because if he is weak as an example of goodness, you will follow that example and be easily defeated. Manipulation 101. Jesus, however, was not weak. He was strong and defiant and determined. He could be angry. He looked Kings in the eye and gave them a dose of reality no one else would dare to think of doing, and He did not die for that, He died because when they came for Him, knowing the Plan, He refused to hide or run. That is the example of Jesus Christ.





Here are some quotes from the King James version, which need no explanation in context:


  • Psalm 5:4-5 For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee. The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.                                     
  • Psalm 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.                             
  • Proverbs 6:16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
  • Psalm 26:5 I have hated the congregation of evil doers; and will not sit with the wicked.                                       
  • Psalm 97:10 Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.                               
  • Psalm 101:3 I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me.            
  • Psalm 119:104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.

Jesus also got in people's faces, turned over the tables of the money-changers, and did any number of things the thought of which terrify liberals if enacted by large masses of millions of angry conservatives, as perhaps may now not be such a bad idea, provided no laws are broken.




Jesus was righteous, of course, as righteous as righteous can be, as the Living Son of God, and he fought for the abused and downtrodden, and he fought for His Father's Name for Its sake.  And to help those who were innocent, abused and being led to corruption, and for it's own sake, he hated evil, and he hated those who performed evil and kept evil in their hearts. I don't say that. The Bible says that.



Partly, of course, for this discussion to have clarity, the question also in context and opinion must be, "is Obama evil"? Now, in today's world and Western society, "human evil" is seemingly really only allowed to be applied to one human being: Hitler (not Stalin who killed five-to-ten times more of his own citizens than Hitler because Stalin was Communist and to liberals communism is cool and they'd just rather not dwell too deeply on Stalin's "bad" side, so they change the subject to Hitler, thanks). The fact is, however, that Hitler is no barometer for evil as illustrated in scripture; Hitler is, essentially, 6 million times worse, and then some. The "evil bar" is not set nearly so high as those who dwell in their numbers, defend them and have been influenced by them would have us believe. "Evil" as illustrated and cited in the Bible can be readily understood as something we now take almost as commonplace. The kinds of people the Bible describes as evil can be found on police blotters around the world millions of times every day. That is an unpleasant but literal fact. That's not interpretation, that's fact, if they are guilty as charged, and the majority at any given time usually are.



So if you feel this man Obama,who we know has lied - many times over including about a video causing the Benghazi killing, a lie told to the parents of the dead - who we know supported the killing of living babies who survived abortions, who at the very least turned his back on those murdered in Benghazi and has somehow silenced - or worse - 33 survivor eyewitnesses to the events, if you feel Obama is evil by the benchmark set in the Bible, then yes, it is quite and entirely clear you may hate him. You may not do physical harm against him, but you can hate him and positively do whatever is both legal and within Biblical law to remove him from power, absolutely. In fact, to be perfectly blunt about it, to follow Jesus' example, you essentially have an obligation to do so. That's not a joke. Intense, determined, righteous hate, as Jesus hated, as God hates, is a very fine motivator for that, as hatred for Hitler inspired millions to defeat him against, for a time, increasingly pessimistic chances for success.

If you feel at-odds with this column because of the way you were raised, please don't argue it with me, argue it with God and His Son, Jesus Christ, because I am only quoting their words, not mine, and there is no conclusion to draw, per se, as the facts are inarguable. Re-stating an easy prediction made at the outset, of course liberals will be forced to say this column is "unhinged", because if I am not crazy, in the larger sense, their agenda is in a lot of trouble!  


So please don't say, "I know it's not Christian to hate Obama." You are basing your behavior and self-recrimination on the words you hear on television, not the word of God.

It's right there in black and white on the printed page. Read it, yourself.


God bless.



Thursday, July 11, 2013

10 MONTHS TO THE DAY SINCE THE BENGHAZI KILLINGS

It's been 10 months since Ambassador Chris Stevens and his communications person, Sean Smith, were killed in the initial attacks in Benghazi. Both were Obama-supporting liberals. Both were trapped in a country which all other western countries had abandoned because it was too dangerous for westerners to keep their embassies there. Trapped in a hostile, murderous Libya despite their cries for help to the liberal president they followed. Trapped by the liberal President who, at the very least, turned his back with a shrug and let them die. At the least.

Their deaths - slow, terrified and agonizing - knowing they had been utterly betrayed and possibly intentionally trapped to die by Obama, was as real for them, then, as reading this is for you now. Think about that. Let it sink in. It's a bad way to die.

It's been 10 months since the only first-responders to the initial attack, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty saved an estimated 33 Benghazi survivor eyewitnesses, before dying themselves from a mortar attack on the roof of the American Annex in Benghazi.

It's been 10 months since the 33 eyewitnesses whisked away by Obama have vanished. No one knows their names. No one has heard a thing. We only have rumors they even exist. This is what happened in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia and that is not hyperbole - that is absolute, 100% historical fact. "It can't happen here, today" is what the sophisticated elites in those countries at those times also said until the streets ran deep in their own blood. You need to pay attention and get active if you don't want to risk sharing their same fate. There is nothing wrong with investigating a murder and prosecuting whoever may be guilty in the crime or the cover-up, even if the crime and cover-up may have been ordered by Obama himself, and there is only one way to find out, and it isn't by the media ignoring the story and Boehner blocking a select committee which would otherwise investigate.

For perspective, here's a side-by-side comparison of the Watergate timeline, still heralded as a great scandal by Obama supporters and the Benghazi timeline.

Watergate Timeline

Using slow and cumbersome 1972 technology, meaning no fax, no office computers or printers, internet, security cameras or answering machines (a meandering, technological stone-age by comparison):

1. June 17, 1972 The Watergate burglars, guilty only of a politically-motivated break-in to a democrat political headquarters - not for the overthrow of a government, just stupid albeit illegal shenanigans to get a slight edge on the political competition, are arrested in the act.

2. Sept 15, 1972, Buglers are indicted.

3. May 17, 1972  Select Committee hearings begin. Many soon go to prison, media uses terms such as "Horrors" and "Massacres" which are still used today, to denote an absurdly crummy little break-in and a few firings. (11 months)

4. August 9, 1974. Nixon resigns under threat of impeachment. (Democrat Bill Clinton, member of Obama's same democrat political party, was impeached, lost his law license and had the gall to say it didn't bother him because he was not forcibly removed, is as clear an example as any of the liberal democrat culture mindset of nasty arrogance and shamelessness) 

Total: 2 years, 2 months, approx from break-in to resignation of a President.

Media devotes 134 hours to hearings alone. Many hundreds of hours total.

Benghazi Timeline

Events unfold like a snail's pace despite speed and efficiency of current cutting edge digital and computer technology. The speed of communication, depending on type, is thousands of times faster in the aggregate than 1972, and not only much cheaper, but in most cases, free. Indeed, you would not have been able to log on to a website to learn a thing in 1972.

1. Sept 11, 2012, 4 people murdered, 33 more whisked away by Obama administration under his authority and are not heard from again.

2. December 15, 2012, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in charge of the Benghazi annex/consulate under Obama, suffers "concussion" just before she is to testify before congress, NOT select committee, offering her many more defense options. Even still, during her "recuperation' she uses the extra time to compile a massive book of legalistic pre-prepared responses from which she reads without fail every response when she finally testifies on Jan 23, 2013. The process of questions and answers is laughably and "horrifically" slow as she turns pages and looks up each answer from the book during a supposedly spontaneous question and answer session. Even then, when pressed she panics and angrily yells "What difference does it make?" Liberals and left-controlled media pretend the moment never occurred.

3. More low-level, "casual" congressional hearings proceed, no eyewitness are called, no TV networks broadcast them.

4. July 11, 2013, TODAY - Liberal media almost entirely ignores the Benghazi story. Supposed "opposition" GOP Speaker John Boehner, friend to and golfing partner of Obama steadfastly refuses to allow a floor vote on Representative Frank Wolf's HRes36 to establish a Watergate-style select Committee to investigate the murders in Benghazi, even though HRes36 is co-sponsored by 160 GOP Reps (almost 3/4 of the GOP Congressional House majority). Eyewitnesses names are still not given to congress. Hard-left media activists circle around Obama and begin apparent hand in cover-up by proclaiming they will publish books by "first responders" even though the only two first responders were killed, promise there is nothing political about it. The names of the "first responders" whose book the Obama-supporting leftist media will publish? Sorry, it's a secret. FOX NEWS, Supposed "right wing" cable news network that mocked the Tea Party before CEO Roger Ailes took the network 'to the center" (further left then it was when it mocked the tea party) devotes approximately 10 hours total in as many months to Benghazi and crows loudly because they are better than left media that covered it for about 6 hours. 4 people are still dead. 33 people spirited away by Obama are still missing because, you know, it's a healthy, America-loving secret the American people cannot know.

What happened to Stevens and the rest, including the ,missing surviving eyewitnesses could happen to you, conservative or liberal. That means you can be killed and your death shrugged off with a political excuse. You could go missing into the night like the Benghazi survivors, and the Jews in Nazi Germany and 40 million in Stalin's communist Russia. If this is not investigated and prosecuted as far as law allows, as Watergate was, and quickly before more books of pre-prepared excuses are written, it is, in my opinion, the literal end of the United States as we have known it.

You have no choice in the matter. If you remain a passive audience/observer and restrain yourself to nothing but meaningless complaints to each other, you literally do so at your own peril. It is exactly as serious as that. Speak up now, or truly fear the black helicopters forever, and condemn your children and grandchildren to the same fate.

Tweet not just your own but all congressmen in the US House of representatives and demand a Select Committee on Benghazi. Boycott FOX until they get serious and let them know you are boycotting. 

Failing to get involved for whatever reason assures you have no reason to complain if Obamacare literally kills you because the panels have decided that your life is not worth the expense of your care, or the leftist agents, like those in Russia, knock on your door in the middle of the night. We're at that point. 

You need to act.

Monday, July 8, 2013

EXPLAINING THE CURRENT FOX NEWS BOYCOTT

** NOTE: please see the post below this one for ample illustrations of how successful the March "FOX TURN RIGHT" boycotts were, and the amount of national media afforded the Tea Party FOX boycotts, and this blog and the group behind this blog, the Tea Party Fire Ants, in particular.**

In March of this year 700,000 - 1 mil people joined the Tea Party boycott of FOX NEWS, in which this blog and the Tea Party Fire Ants were instrumental in organizing (not making a false claim there, we were. NYC media is my business). FOX remains at between 35% - 40% lower now than before the boycotts started, at which point - immediately - there was a 27% drop in ratings, so the causation is clear (though the MSM would like to deny that, citing the possibility of otherwise unknown intangibles they don't bother to even speculate about, otherwise known in the common vernacular as "bullshit").

Still, there are many new to the idea, and this post is for them so as to answer these burning questions. I answer these questions not as a "blogger", but as a media specialist with 20-plus NYC experience under his belt:


Q: Why boycott FOX and not the Mainstream media?


A. 1. Because FOX needs the conservative viewers to maintain its ratings and hence advertising revenue - that's the real motivator, they could care less about the popularity contest if they could lose it and still make the same money - and the rest of the media is structured to make money without us and so attacks us merrily and puts guys like Obama in the White House. 2. FOX News crows about it's ratings yet tries to pretend it isn't mainstream media. For any outfit to beat any other network, it too becomes by definition mainstream media and IMO they must know the difference and the whole "purity posturing" is a big con job. One con job of many.


Q: FOX NEWS beats all the other liberal media. Doesn't that mean they must be doing a great job?


A: Of course not. To begin with, there is a great deal of manipulation, IMO, happening with FOX; they basically say, "We are the only news station not mainstream media, and no one else will love you, conservatives" while openly supporting extremely "moderate" candidates and mocking the Tea Party, the "birthers" and other core conservatives. That very fact of manipulation is unconscionable - it's truly gross.


More to the point of the ratings, FOX is the only news network with an (utterly undeserved) reputation for servicing the conservative right. Therefore, to compare it to any of the left networks gives FOX an absurdly unrealistic advantage. The fact is, using demographics -  not raw numbers - as has been the way for TV ratings to be calculated for decades, to break even, FOX needs to beat all the other liberal news networks rolled together, because the demographics of the left are diffused over several choices while only FOX caters, supposedly, to the right. FOX does not beat all other left networks rolled together. Considering the left political view is also diffused out over many TV shows - dramas, comedies, talk - where there exists virtually no such views except for Christian Broadcast channels, FOX under-performs disastrously.  And well it should: they may have enough money from ratings to hum along (albeit down 40%, which of course must smart, deservedly), if it did what it claims in being fair to the right, it would have a much larger audience even at its best points, so, no, they don't beat the competition at all as ratings are figured per demographics. They also lose the most desirable young age ranges, so it under-performs disastrously on two demographic levels.


Q: What are you doing?! You'll ruin our only network!


A: No, this the free market model: FOX will ruin itself if it continues to behave condescendingly to its own audience and call the core of the GOP base "loons" - as O'Reilly is wont to do - instead of giving the audience what it demands. In other words, if FOX doesn't get its act together and service the core base of the GOP, the way CNN, MSNBC et al very clearly service the core liberal base, then FOX NEWS will destroy itself, and rightfully so - with times so desperate, we don't need a network which Ailes gleefully announced he was "taking to the left" and thus has been for the last year behaving - essentially literally -  like a stealth enemy dressed up as a friend. 


You don't see CNN or MSNBC call the far left "Loons" - indeed, they have some very far left people who are their hosts! The only thing surprising about these boycotts is that they did not happen years earlier.


Q: What will we do without FOX?


A: Involve yourself in enjoyable alternative sources until FOX is forced to meet the demands of the right. One of the Fire Ants, Janson Smithers, has compiled an excellent list of alternative sources. It will be seen at the bottom of this post.


FOX is second only to liberal GOP House Speaker who refuses to take any meaningful action against Obama as being a, IMO, knowing accessory to Obama's agenda by making a lot of loud noise that sounds like tough reporting but is really only bluster that hurts Obama not at all. As you have probably noticed, the moment a story gets too close to hurting Obama, they veer off fast. They are now basically reduced to covering the Zimmerman trial - a tabloid story of entirely fabricated importance - since just about everything that can be said about Obama is starting to sound like it has criminal investigation overtones.  Putting it bluntly, it is clear in my own and the opinions of many others, that FOX is absolutely willfully cover for Obama. That's not what News organizations are supposed to do. There is supposed to be a history in journalism of digging deep and brazenly rooting out the real story! Is that what you see on FOX? I see loud and hollow complaining that only got Obama re-elected.


Q: FOX is not supposed to have 'an agenda". It only reports the news, fair and balanced, don't you know that?


A: Ridiculous. Who decides what's "news"? Some heavenly abstract authority? No. People in newsrooms decide what is "news". They decide what you see and hear; which common person's murder - and life - is more important than anothers; which politician's scandals are "newsworthy" and which as "not newsworthy".


FOX has decided that the Zimmerman trial, the national importance of which is positively laughable at best, is more important than the lives of 33 eyewitnesses to Benghazi - a number more or less confirmed by frustrated congressman who can't interview them - who have essentially vanished without a trace (there is much speculation - at best - posturing as fact about non-disclosure agreements, threats from the white house and 'national security" concerns, none of which has been substantiated). The fact is those people's names would ordinarily have been given to Congress within 48 hours according to House Rep Jason Chafftez and no one has even been given the names of these people in now three days short of ten months. It appears something absolutely horrible has happened and timid GOP reps who boast of being "small business owners" at home during elections have not a clue how to deal with something this alarming. But they better learn, because the people are holding them accountable.


No witness has stepped forward. No relative, friend, co-worker or enemy. That isn't how the world works. 


In the "unsettling coincidences department", for months I have been saying that anyone with that information would have stepped forward with a million-dollar book deal, at least. Now, suddenly and somewhat mysteriously, we hear from a nest of hard-core liberals in the publishing industry that that has happened - four witnesses have stepped forward with a million-dollar book deal - from leftists - except these liberals say there is no "politics" involved in Benghazi and we don't get to know the names of the authors (the authors are supposedly "first responders" to the attacks even though we know only two SEALS - who broke ranks against stand-down orders - were the only 'first responders"). 


My personal opinion, and that's all it is, is that the book announcement has all the earmarks of an intentional political activist smokescreen to take the heat off Obama, knowing the true Benghazi story will destroy the democrat party for decades or even forever if it is half of what it appears to be. It is also my opinion that it is becoming increasingly likely the the worst possible scenario is the actual one: Obama meant to have all the people in Benghazi killed to silence witnesses to gun-running, two SEALS broke ranks, saved 33 witnesses who have since been killed or "conditioned". I say this with a fair amount of uncomfortable confidence: the very nervous and uncomfortable performances of both Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, former and current Secretaries of State, respectively, when asked about the survivor witnesses would by itself set off alarms to any police investigator checking a crime: both people lose their confidence in their voices, they both stammer, fail to maintain eye contact with the questioner and offer unconvincing vagueries to specific questions while the color runs out of their faces. That isn't the performance of people reporting on survivors who are well and good who just signed non-disclosure agreements. Most sensible people understand from such behavior that something terrible has happened and they are concealing the fact. Something truly terrible appears to have happened to those survivor witnesses. First they were unavailable because they were "in hospitals". Now? No one says. It appears that the atory was supposed to have gone away by now and there are no backup plans save for some cryptic announcement from a publisher so ensconced in hard-core liberals (see the article a few down below this one) that IMO no person with a bad story to tell about Obama would be signed by these people in a million years. That leaves us to assume no bad story exists about Obama regarding Benghazi. unfortunately, all the congressional testimony paints and startlingly different picture. In my opinion the book announcement is a smokescreen to protect Comrade Obama.

And yet, to hear FOX NEWS tell it, "Why you ridiculous right-wing loons, Zimmerman is the real news! Remember, we are your only choice in the world, so be sure to tune in to the next segment when we will call you conspiracy theorists. The segment after we will call you "Christian extremists". And be sure to turn in to Shepard Smith who will not report on the birth certificate, but will spend 10 minutes calling people who want it reported every insulting name in the book. Remember  we're FOX and only we will love ya! See you next segment!"


No! No more of that.


This network/audience marriage is over. It's been an abusive relationship filled with the most awful manipulation imaginable. It's over, we're not stupid and this is done. If FOX NEWS wants us back, they are going to have to earn it. This time, we want some public apologies as well has honest reporting. Alternatives spring up every day. Indeed, if I may pat myself on the back for knowing my own business, readers here will recall that many months back I predicted that FOX had gone so far left that some enterprising outfit would move quickly to fill the void for conservatives, as is the way of the free market. That is exactly what has happened. Herring broadcasting partnered with the venerable Washington Times to create One America News Network, and they have pledged to be, among other things, the singular TV voice of the Tea Party (we'll see if they live up to it or if we will need to boycott One America, too). It is small, but 12 years ago FOX was small. Be sure to call and tell your cable or dish provider, "I want One America news network." Anyone who at least understands the current conservative market must be given a chance to succeed and serve it.



For those few still in doubt, here are just a few examples of FOX betraying it's right-wing audience, if you still aren't convinced. Some day I will post some reasonable proportion of them when I have the time to link several hundred:




Rush Limbaugh only a week ago complained on his radio show that FOX censored him, in case you think all this talk of agendas is some 'conspiracy theory". 1 minute in:

Here's O'Reilly in a segment which, upon reflection, should make you sick (remember, this is the supposed "extreme right" vantage point from which two years later in 2011, FOX CEO Roger Ailes decided to move away from when taking FOX "to the center" - a sense of right/left demarcation only a far-left extremist could love)

There was this infamously ugly scene where Shepard Smith attacked FOX new's own core base in staggeringly hurtful terms:

How correct was FOX in the last two clips, besides being unbelievably hurtful and disrespectful to its core audience? Obama did release a birth certificate. It's a proven fake by experts and law enforcement alike, and now Congressman Stockton, among others, has agreed to hear the evidence from "Sheriff" (seems like a lame term for a guy with 5 million constituents) Arpaio, Zullo and the rest of the legal investigation team. Oh yes, that's right - that's something else FOX has failed to report - even for 10 seconds.


Now the last two clips were from 2009. Ailes said in 2011 he was taking FOX "to the center".  Well, we know that that is today: it's essentially CNN with people who act angry about Obama but never report anything that actually hurts him; it's the old "good cop, bad cop" routine: "You know, you should say what we want because my partner, here, gets a little excited...."


To those people saying "FOX is the best we have", I would like to tell you that that is what many said in 2009. Where did it get us? Obama was re-elected in 2010 and FOX has gone further to the left, by Ailes own merry 2011 press release announcement! 


Of course, it's impossible to show a clip where FOX does not report on Benghazi  but this clip with Sarah Palin recently is pretty close. 2 minutes in she brings up Benghazi and  the Fox and Friends hosts immediately change the subject to - what? - Edward Snowden and keep it there! Unbelievable.


If we are ever going to do anything other than complain and sit drinking cool drinks in loungers  pretending that complaining is enough, we have to take action - again. FOX is going to fight us on giving us - the audience that pays them through our viewership - what we want, clearly. A 40% drop should have alarmed anyone, but what we actually get is more manipulation. They re-hired Palin, clearly for appearances, then preempted her first prime time appearance for a Zimmerman update and then cut her off on the subject she herself said she felt was most important: Benghazi!  I mean, seriously, it's outrageous: the hosts are very smooth, but being clearly manipulative. They say, "What is most important to you?" She says "Benghazi" and they say, "Great, let's talk about Snowden" with graphics already cued up in the control room and force that subject for the rest of the segment and Benghazi is never heard again. Absolutely unbelievable!  That wasn't coincidence or the rambling incompetence of dim-witted hosts, not with no graphics of Benghazi but plenty cued up in the control room of Snowden - trust me, I know how this works - they knew exactly where this was going and it didn't matter what Sarah said. This clearly has 'agenda" stamped all over it, and it appears to be Obama's agenda.

BOYCOTT FOX. Or never complain about what Obama has done to America again, because, with respect, there is no neutral inaction: anyone who does not take a stand now may count themselves at this very moment as part of the problem, now and forever.


Janson's List Of Right Wing news Alternatives:


Alternatives to Fox News:

1.) One America News:
http://www.oneamericanews.com

2.) For Benghazi, this blog, Benghazi Truth.

3.) Breitbart:
www.Breitbart.com

4.) BizPacReview:
http://www.bizpacreview.com

5.) Human Events:
www.humanevents.com

6.) The Western Center for Journalism:
http://www.westernjournalism.com

7.) National Review Online:
http://www.nationalreview.com

8.) News Busters:
http://newsbusters.org

9.) World Net Daily:
www.wnd.com

10.) The Daily Caller:
http://dailycaller.com

11.) CNS News:
http://cnsnews.com

12.) NewsMax:
www.newsmax.com

13.) Media Research Center:
http://www.mrc.org This website has a few additional websites of its own listed at the top right hand side.

14.) Judicial Watch:
http://www.judicialwatch.org

15.) Weasel Zippers:
http://weaselzippers.us

16.) The Blaze:
http://www.theblaze.com

17.) The Heritage Foundation:
http://www.heritage.org





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