VIDEO: Be prepared for something big to come soon

It is a long video, much longer than my usual videos posted here, but it is worth watching every minute of it. Lt. General Tom McInerney (RET, USAF) was right, I believe. Somebody saw this segment, and felt the need to change this story. Here I was thinking that this story would lead to another major military (SEAL Team 6) operation to save the Flight MH370 passengers and crew, something to make Obama look good (like the supposed killing of Osama Bin Laden). But now, they are talking about wreckage possibly being found West of Australia.

Which scenario would help Obama the most, though? Disparaging the thought that there is still terrorism, or a major rescue of the people on that flight, landed somewhere, like in Pakistan?

Wait, maybe the best thing would be to tell the truth, no matter how it all works out. If the missing Flight MH370 went down, it is more likely to have been caused by terrorism than a mechanical failure. If it was a mechanical failure, so they say, hopefully it will be a more convincing theory than a center fuel tank exploding from a spark. I'd hate to see how the Obama minions in the mainstream press try to make it out to be workplace violence.

So, the possible debris from the missing flight is out floating on the ocean. That's pretty convenient, just a day after relatives of Chinese passengers had a melt down about finding their loved ones! I'm just sayin'...

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged in to Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Osama bin Laden dies in firefight, body in U.S. custody

In addition to bin Laden, one of his sons, two couriers and a woman died as she was used as a human shield when the soldiers stormed the house.

Former President George W. Bush said in a statement that he had personally been informed by Obama of the death of the terrorist leader whose attacks forever defined his eight years in office.

"This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001," the former president said.

"The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done."

When I first heard the news and the President's statement, I was very happy about it. But, it hit me soon after: Do we really know it was Osama in Laden? They said a DNA test was done, and it was determined to be bin Laden. But there will always be questions. Not everyone is going to believe the government's story. I'm not sure I do or not yet. Do you? (Please see my latest update below.  I DO believe we got bin Laden. He sleeps with the fish!)

UPDATE:

WASHINGTON | Mon May 2, 2011 3:50am EDT

(Reuters) - The body of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was taken to Afghanistan after he was killed in Pakistan and was later buried at sea, the New York Times reported on Monday.

Wait a minute... Something seems to be wrong with this story. What is going on?

I heard the news about the burial at sea while listening to Coast to Coast A.M. Monday morning. George Noory, the show's host, was incredulous about the fact that we don't have the body now. Callers to the show in the last few minutes after George had heard the news about the burial at sea from his colleague and frequent guest, Richard Hoagland, were just as incredulous, disbelieving, distrustful, doubtful, dubious, hesitant, mistrustful, questioning, skeptical, suspicious, uncertain, unconvinced, and/or wary as was George. There were many words that could describe the apprehensive response to this news. But every one of the callers and guests to Coast to Coast A.M. could only come up with one thought: Something is very wrong here!

Another update:  I just heard that the other bin Laden associates killed along with the terror mastermind have NOT been buried yet (the Muslim tradition is to bury the body within 24 hours of death).


Another update (at 7:50 A.M. Central): 
I would not worry about the people that were worrying about Obama sleeping with the fish so quickly. No, I join ALL Americans in the victory rally today! We got the evil man, and let's celebrate! And my thanks to all of our military for all that they do. God bless America! Hoooo-Rah!  

Message to those that want to kill Americans:

This is America!

There WILL BE JUSTICE!

*   *   *

Osama bin Laden dies in firefight, body in U.S. custody

Al-Qaida kingpin dies in mansion outside Islamabad

May 01, 2011 ~ 11:24 pm Eastern

© 2011 WorldNetDaily

OSAMA bin LADEN

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is dead and the U.S. has his body, according to U.S. and Pakistani officials.

The terror mastermind of al-Qaida repsonsible for the 9/11 attacks on America was shot in the head by U.S. forces in a mansion outside the Pakistani capital of Islamabad.

President Obama made the announcement in a national address late Sunday night from the White House, calling bin Laden a terrorist responsible for the murder of thousands of American men, women and children.

"Last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible to lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain and it took many months to run this thread to the ground.

"Last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden, and bring him to justice. Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties.

"After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body," said Obama. "Justice has been done."

DNA testing confirmed that it was bin Laden, sources told ABC News.

His body is "being handled in accordance with Islamic practice and tradition," one senior administration official said. He is expected to be buried at sea.

The government has not said whether a photo of bin Laden will be released to the media as proof of his death.

Video provided by UpTakeVideo on May 1, 2011

Officials long believed the 54-year-old bin Laden, the most wanted man in the world, was hiding a mountainous region along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

READ MORE at WND.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Barack Obama's missing year ~ By Jack Cashill

"Like a tourist, I watched the range of human possibility on display," writes Obama of those years, "trying to trace out my future in the lives of the people I saw, looking for some opening through which I could re-enter."

Re-enter what? This seems more the reflection of a soon to be ex-fugitive than that of a metro-sexual happily browsing the Met. Ayers, by the way, uses the phrase "human possibility" twice in his memoir, "Fugitive Days."

Not surprisingly, Boerner has chosen not to return my phone call. As I said on his voice mail, all I wanted to do was clarify whether Obama actually attended class his first year in New York.

You would think we would know this by now.

Now, it isn't like this column by Jack Cashill will prove or help to determine that Obama isn't constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States. But, be aware that you don't want to mistake a sign post for the destination. It's a case where discrepancies in Barack Obama's own testimony regarding his life in "Dreams From My Father" are coming to light, and the apparent inconsistencies, if you should really care, fuel the fires of interest.

In the video shown below in the column, it starts with a picture of Obama sitting with his grandparents in a park in New York. The author of the video contends that the picture was photoshopped (graphic editing) in order to show Obama with his grandparents, but that Obama was added in to a photo with just his grandparents. Some of the writers of comments for the youtube video, however, contend that the 2nd photo, with just the grandparents, was the not the original, and that Obama was photoshopped out of the scene. I can only say one of the photos has been photoshopped, and that is pretty obvious. But, does it really matter which is the original? When you do not know for sure if evidence is solid proof in a court of law, it does add reasonable doubt for either side of a case.

As I said, though, what Jack Cashill wrote about is only a sign post. Of course, the final destination is knowing whether or not the President should be constitutionally qualified to be President or not. And, please notice, I have not ever said that the President was born anywhere else that would disqualify him as a "natural born citizen." As a matter of fact, I've only done my best to provide the full chain of evidence to the best of my abilities, in order for YOU to be the jury, and really, the jury of We the People. I think it is important that you are aware that there is even a question, because that should not have ever happened in the first place if we want to preserve the Constitution of the United States.

It seems to be very wrong, that for whatever reason, the President continues to spend vast sums of money - in the millions - in order to BLOCK us from ever knowing incontrovertible truth. And I believe that anyone that has been trying to learn about, and then keep up with this issue, would have to wonder what the motive for withholding information that could have resolved this long ago. I think Donald Trump is saying the same thing. The real question should be, "Why?" I'm just sayin'...

Barack Obama's missing year

JACK CASHILL

By Jack Cashill

April 07, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

In his definitive 2010 biography of Barack Obama, "The Bridge," New Yorker editor David Remnick features a photograph of a dapper young Barack Obama sitting between his grandparents on a Central Park bench.

The bench is real. The grandparents are real. The wall behind them is real. Barack Obama is not. He has been conspicuously photoshopped in. Who did this and why remains as much a mystery as Obama's extended stay in New York.

Video provided by Bigone5555J on Mar 29, 2011

In late October 2007, the New York Times ran a telling article on Barack Obama headlined, "Obama's Account of New York Years Often Differs From What Others Say."

Given that he was an announced candidate for president, and an underdog at that, the Times expected Obama to welcome the chance to reconcile his account in his memoir, "Dreams from My Father," with the accounts of those who knew him.

"Yet," lamented the newly neutered Times, "he declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."

A campaign spokesman, Ben LaBolt, offered a painfully lame explanation for Obama's reticence, "He doesn't remember the names of a lot of people in his life."

Lame or not, it worked, and it continues to work on a media that have spent more time in the dumpsters of Wasilla than they have investigating the preposterously unknown history of the world's best-known man.

When the media leave holes in a given narrative – in this case, the biography of a presidential candidate – bloggers individually, incrementally and indefatigably strive to fill them in, usually with mixed results.

One hole that remains strangely unfilled in that narrative is the academic year 1981-1982, a year Obama was reportedly a student at Columbia University.

The irrepressible researcher Orly Taitz secured a document through the National Student Clearinghouse on Obama's Columbia attendance.

The document confirms Obama's graduation from Columbia with a political science degree in 1983, but it places him there only in the 1982-1983 academic year.

"As there is no record of Obama residing anywhere else in the United States from September 1981-September 1982, or attending any other university," Taitz infers, "by way of simple deduction it becomes clear that his visit to Pakistan lasted not a month or two, as he claims, but over a year."

Obama's deceptions and studied opaqueness invite such speculation, but Taitz is likely unaware of competing evidence. How valid that evidence is remains to be seen.

Going back, Occidental friend John Drew confirms seeing Obama at a party in Los Angeles in June 1981. "At that time," says Drew, "the future president was a doctrinaire Marxist revolutionary, although perhaps – for the first time – considering conventional politics as a more practical road to socialism."

In "Dreams," Obama gives no account of the following summer. He moves from Los Angeles to New York in August and allegedly lands roughly. No one was present at his Spanish Harlem sublease when he arrives, and Obama sleeps in an alleyway.

Desperate, Obama calls "Sadik," a Pakistani and his one friend in the city, who just happens to be a coke-head and an illegal alien.

When Obama gives up his apartment because of a lack of heat, he and Sadik – in real life, Sohale Siddiqi – move in together, the date unspecified.

Given that "Dreams" proposes to tell the story of Obama's coming to grips with the world around him, his failure to mention a trip to Pakistan that summer raises eyebrows. Nor did Obama mention it in his 2006 book, "Audacity of Hope."

By contrast, Obama devotes considerable attention to an alleged trip to Europe a few years later, his flimsy account of which seems to have been pulled from a Michelin Guide.

In fact, it was not until April 2008 at a San Francisco fundraiser that Obama casually let it be known that he had traveled to Pakistan at all, an admission that took his own spokesman by surprise.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

WikiLeaks spurs Big Brother to strike ~ By Diana West

It is getting to feel a lot like Christmas, with Julian Assange being the Santa Claus bringing us the gift that won't stop giving. Diana writes:

WikiLeaks is exposing the way our government conducts "business." It is not a pretty process.

It seems that the released documents on WikiLeaks is telling us more about our government than Uncle Sam really wants us to know about. While WikiLeaks is damaging to our national security, and putting our troops deployed in the "overseas contingency" battlegrounds in danger, is an effort to shut down Julian Assange and his website, WikiLeaks, possibly more harmful to our freedom? Is it really that "dangerous" for U.S. citizens to know what our government has been doing in the name of "diplomacy"?


WikiLeaks spurs Big Brother to strike

DIANA WEST

By Diana West

December 09, 2010 ~ 3:07 pm Eastern

© 2010

Then came WikiLeaks, Internet publisher of leaked information, prompting the question: What is more important – the information theft that potentially harms government power, or the knowledge contained therein that might salvage our national destiny?

Whether such information was originally "classified," the body politic should be electrified by the fact, as revealed by the leaked cables, that nations from Pakistan to Afghanistan to Saudi Arabia are regularly discussed as black holes of infinite corruption into which American money gushes, either through foreign aid or oil revenue, and unstaunched and unstaunchable sources of terror or terror-financing. If this were to get out – and guess what, it did – the foreign policy of at least the past two administrations, Democrat and Republican alike, would be unmasked as a colossal failure.

And maybe that's what behind the acute distress over WikiLeaks. Last week, I put it down to political embarrassment; this week, a new, more disturbing factor has emerged. The state power structure, the establishment more or less, believes itself to be threatened. Its fearful response has been quite startling. First, there were calls for WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange's execution; these have simmered down to calls for trial. Amazon and PayPal cut off service to the WikiLeaks website. Then, in a twist or kink perhaps beyond even Orwell's ken, Assange was arrested without bond this week on an Interpol warrant over very fishy-sounding charges about "unprotected" sex in Sweden – a country, we may now ironically note, of draconian laws governing sexual intercourse and no laws whatsoever governing violent Islamic no-go zones.

Things went completely "1984"-ish when the federal government weighed in, actually warning federal employees not to read the WikiLeaks materials – still "classified," after all. Creepier still, the Library of Congress followed suit, voluntarily blocking the WikiLeaks site from library computers. Now, universities are warning students not to post public comments about WikiLeaks on Facebook or Twitter – lest Big Brother takes note and holds a federal employment grudge.

Suddenly, it's not about secret information anymore, or diplomatic relations. It's about control. The atmosphere chills.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Exposed: Saudi Arabia's secret nuke stash

From WorldNetDaily

Riyadh 'confident' it has an atomic option By Aaron Klein Posted: January 22, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily JERUSALEM – Pakistan's nuclear weapons project was partially financed by Saudi Arabia, with the two countries sharing nuclear technology, a senior Egyptian security official told WND. "The Saudis are confident they have a nuclear option via Pakistan," said the security official. "The Pakistani nukes are also Saudi nukes." The official said an agreement between the two countries was secretly inked seven years ago, although at the time such a pact was strongly denied by both Saudi and Pakistani officials. Pakistan in the late 1990s became the seventh country to successfully develop and test nuclear weapons. The Pakistani arsenal is estimated at between 35 and 95 warheads, according to the U.S. Navy Center for Contemporary Conflict. READ FULL STORY >

Bring our troops home, Part 2 ~ By Pat Boone

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Pat Boone Posted: November 21, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 I received an amazing response to my last column, in which I called loudly for the president – trying desperately to decide what to do in his newfound role as commander in chief – to issue the executive order to bring every last soldier in the Middle East home. By Christmas. Amazing to me, because most of the response was overwhelmingly affirmative and positive. I write for conservative readers, and most conservatives, like me, want to bring our troops home to waving flags and proclamations of victory. Yet most readers seem to agree with my loud call. What has become increasingly clear is that we won our victory in the first days of the invasion of Iraq. We hunted down and eventually executed Saddam Hussein, established that he had managed to sneak his WMDs over to Syria and out of our reach, and gave the Iraqi people a chance to create their own democracy – if they wanted it enough. We should have come home to the parades, declared "mission accomplished," and sent thousands of fighting men and women back to their families. But no. Partly in hubris, partly in a desire to "spread democracy," and mainly in determination to hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden, we got sucked into a rat hole, ambushed by amateurs with roadside bombs, and pushed into Afghanistan and Pakistan with our tanks and remote-controlled drones and flame throwers – to be confronted with scarcely trained but highly motivated locals who hid in caves and bushes on the hillsides. Locals who were in too many cases eager to strap on bombs and die, killing whomever they could. America's intent was to give the locals a chance at life, a better life, but many of these locals have been brainwashed to actually prefer death, if they can take others, even some of their own countrymen, with them. So what's to win? What is a "victory" for American troops in the Middle East? What can we accomplish that's worth the lives of even more of America's finest young? A couple more corrupt governments, maybe even severe setbacks to al-Qaida, possibly a dead Osama? [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

President Obama, time to make a decision ~ By Chuck Norris

From WorldNetDaily

By Chuck Norris Posted: November 02, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Let me see if I have the facts straight. Last May, President Obama removed Gen. David D. McKiernan as the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan and replaced him with Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who in September issued a dire report warning that, without as many as 40,000 more troops for the fight in Afghanistan, the mission "will likely result in failure." President Obama rebuffed that he would make no quick decision but take as long as needed to do a broad study first on the issue. Is this about genuine concern, or could this delay simply be a politically driven tactic for upcoming state elections? Meanwhile, more U.S. troops died at the hands of our enemies. Roughly a month after McChrystal's requests, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel continued to blame the Bush administration for the chaos in the war. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs blamed former Vice President Cheney. Vice President Biden blamed the generals for a bad military plan. And presidential adviser David Axelrod blamed Fox News! Meanwhile, more U.S. troops died at the hands of our enemies. Two weeks ago, when asked about Obama's indecisiveness about McChrystal's requests, White House Press Secretary Gibbs rebuffed, "The president will make a decision in the next few weeks, in the coming weeks. I don't know when that decision will be – it could be before the (Afghanistan political) run off (on Nov. 7), it might be after the run off." Meanwhile, more U.S. troops died at the hands of our enemies. Last Friday, the president met with the joint chiefs of staff and discussed the Afghan-Pakistani situation some more and then said he wants another meeting. It has been almost two months since Gen. McChrystal first warned the president of the dire situation in Afghanistan, and yet our commander in chief continues to delay a response. Meanwhile, record numbers of U.S. troop casualties mount in Afghanistan. When our president and his administration go to war against the former administration and Fox News channel, but do not give our generals on the ground the troops that they need to win the war, something is definitely amiss. Instead of a trip to Dover Air Force Base to greet the dead coming home, Obama should send more troops to Afghanistan to protect them from dying. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

This week on TheREALjohnny2k - 10/11 to 10/17/09

From johnny2k Is Home

By John Kubicek Sunday, October 18, 2009 There may be a couple things that you will notice about This Week on TheREALjohnny2k today. First, the obvious. For the last several weeks, I had been posting this series in my other blog, johnny2k's Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape. I decided to go back to putting it on this blog, as I had originally done, for a couple of reasons. This blog is where I post my own work, and I guess the videos I upload to youtube is part of my work. And secondly, I had not written much lately, and there needed to be some more content to be keeping johnny2k Is Home a bit more active, if you know what I mean. The other thing you may have noticed... or, maybe not, is that none of videos below has to do with the "Falcon, the balloon boy hoax" that dominated the news the latter part of last week. As far as I am concerned, and figuring out what a hoax it seemed to be shortly after the whole scenario began to unfold, dominating all of the cable news channels, it was nothing short of tabloid fodder, or maybe something that Geraldo Rivera or Greta Van Sustrand may be interested in analyzing for the next few weeks. Anyway, nothing about it had youtube video written on it. It just wasn't a story that needed any further moments of attention for the derelict parents of the 6 year old child that played a role in a gigantic media scam. No further elaboration required. What I did get on video this week had a lot to do with Glenn Beck, the White House and Anita Dunn. I think you are going to love this week's videos. Oh, by the way,, there is a very special treat for you at the bottom of this post. Keep a box of tissues close by. Trust me! [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE AND SEE THE VIDEOS]

Natural-born losers ~ By Ann Coulter

From WorldNetDaily

By Ann Coulter Posted: October 14, 2009 ~ 6:17 pm Eastern © 2009 The question of whether President Obama should send more troops to Afghanistan misses the point. What Obama really needs to do is: Invent a time machine, go back to the 2008 presidential campaign and not say, over and over and over again, that Afghanistan was a "war of necessity" while the war in Iraq was a "war of choice." (Oh, and as long as you're back there, ditch Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett and that gay "school safety" czar.) The most important part of warfare is picking your battlefield, and President Bush picked Iraq for a reason. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan attacked us on 9/11 – or the dozen other times American embassies, barracks and buildings came under jihadist onslaught since Jimmy Carter presided over "regime change" in Iran in 1979. Both countries – and others – gave succor to terrorists who had attacked the U.S. repeatedly, and would do so again. As liberals endlessly reminded us during the three weeks of war in Afghanistan before the U.S. military swept into Kabul, Afghanistan has all the makings of a military disaster. It is mountainous, cave-pocked, tribal, has no resources worth fighting for and a populace that makes Khalid Sheikh Mohammed look like Alistair Cooke. By contrast, Iraq had a relatively educated, pro-Western populace, but was ruled by a brutal third-world despot. It's always something with the Muslims. You either have mostly sane people governed by a crazy dictator – Iraq, Iran and Syria (also California and Michigan) – or a crazy people governed by relatively sane leaders – Pakistan and Afghanistan, post-U.S. invasion (also Vermont and Minnesota). There are also insane people ruled by insane leaders (but enough about the House Democratic Caucus). Sane people with sane rulers has not been fully tried yet. Not only could regime change in Iraq work, but Iraq's countryside was susceptible to America's overwhelming air power. Also, Iraq has fabulous natural resources. Once the U.S. got control of Iraq's oil fields, the Shia, Sunni and Kurds could decide to either prosper together or starve together. (And it's not just oil: They're basically sitting on top of most of the world's proven reserves of cab drivers.) By contrast, there aren't a lot of sticks that can be used in a wasteland like Afghanistan, where the people live in caves and scratch out a living in the dirt. The only "carrot" we might be able to offer them would be actual carrots. But Democrats couldn't care less about military strategy – at least any "strategy" that doesn't involve allowing soldiers to date one another. To the extent you can get liberals to focus on national security at all, you will find they are rooting against their own country. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Question for Nobel Appease Prize winner ~ By Joseph Farah

From WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: October 11, 2009 ~ 9:54 pm Eastern © 2009 I have a question for Barack Obama, the Nobel Appease Prize winner, and the man who told us during last year's presidential campaign that troops needed to be redeployed from Iraq to the "real" front in the war on terrorism – Afghanistan. In case your memory fails you, here's what he said in July 2008:

• "In fact – as should have been apparent to President Bush and Sen. (John) McCain – the central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was. That's why the second goal of my new strategy will be taking the fight to al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Pakistan."

• "It is unacceptable that almost seven years after nearly 3,000 Americans were killed on our soil, the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 are still at large. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahari are recording messages to their followers and plotting more terror. The Taliban controls parts of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida has an expanding base in Pakistan that is probably no farther from their old Afghan sanctuary than a train ride from Washington to Philadelphia. If another attack on our homeland comes, it will likely come from the same region where 9/11 was planned. And yet today, we have five times more troops in Iraq than Afghanistan."

• "… as president, I will make the fight against al-Qaida and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win."

• "We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region. And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights."

So what happened between then and now? Well, Obama got his wish. He became president. He is now fully in command. He can divert any resources he wishes from Iraq to Afghanistan. He got to appoint a new commander for the Afghan campaign, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal. And what did Gen. McChrystal advise? He told Obama he needs "more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region" – exactly the prescription Obama was calling for more than a year ago during the campaign. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

A nuclear Taliban? ~ By Hal Lindsey

America has enemies that want us eliminated. Exactly how God intends to fulfill His outline of future history is known only to Him. What is important to us is that no matter the details, the outcome is the same. And since we are unquestionably in the last days, the question of America's decline from power will be answered very soon. read more | digg story

The Pakistani time bomb - By Hal Lindsey

There are major issues in Pakistan, one being that the Taliban now controls Swat, in Northwest Pakistan, a region the size of Delaware, and Al Qaida is allowed to openly operate in. The other issue is that Pakistan may have up to 100 nuclear warheads, and have ballistic and cruise missiles capable of delivery. If Pakistan falls, what could happen?

read more | digg story

Terrorists' restless leg syndrome - By Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter reveals a side of Camp Guantánamo that its detractors did not want you to know about. Expensive medical procedures -- including prosthetic limbs -- at taxpayer expense. *This* is torture? This is probably Ann Coulter's most valuable column yet. ~ Temlakos And like Ann concludes, "Anyone who thinks the Guantanamo detainees can be released without consequence doesn't have a leg to stand on." read more | digg story, submitted by Temlakos