BENGHAZIGATE PANEL:POTUS’S “MISSING TIME” RISES TO TOP TIER! AWOL COMMANDER-in-CHIEF MUST ‘FESS UP…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

IntelligenceInsider

This site’s most trusted contacts kept pointing in two directions when Benghazigate first exploded and they duly “advised”: it would be prudent to rely on, to pass on, their insider information (Northeast Intelligence has Insider “W”, others have…), that which these sources developed over time. Significantly, it was this information which played out when Benghazigate broke.Concomitantly, they realized that the captured media would not report on key developments (under any circumstances) and only a few alternative media sites would even enter the fray.

In this regard, they counted on this site to do the right thing. Well, not only were said contacts spot on re the underbelly of Benghazigate, but a paltry few conservative sites touched the second tier of this explosive story, heretofore referenced below. However, for the most part, various media came on board with the first tier when its efficacy could no longer be denied.

Specifically, the first tier involved definitive markers which led towards the largest weapons running operation in Mid East history, illegal on its face. Not only was Congress left in the dark, vitiating the War Powers Resolution, but the toppling of Qadafi – no longer a strategic threat to the U.S. – became “necessary” to give open sesame to Muslim Brotherhood strongmen to attain hegemony. 

The Constitution of the United States divides the war powers of the federal government between the Executive and Legislative branches: the President is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces (Article II, section 2), while Congress has the power to make declarations of war, and to raise and support the armed forces (Article I, section 8). Over time, questions arose as to the extent of the President’s authority to deploy U.S. armed forces into hostile situations abroad without a declaration of war or some other form of Congressional approval. Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to address these concerns and provide a set of procedures for both the President and Congress to follow in situations where the introduction of U.S. forces abroad could lead to their involvement in armed conflict…..

Now, it is a fact that al-Qaeda has been the beneficiary of Barack HUSSEIN’s wildfires in the Mid East, so much so that they are embedded in places heretofore less “hospitable” to their terror forces. The knock-on effects of the Islamist-in-Chief. The “gift” that keeps giving.   

al-Qaeda terror thug celebrates after Benghazi compound explodes

On top of tier one, let us segue over to the all important tier two, the one which is so germane, so explosive, that very few sites dare to touch it. Radioactive. Cowards.

Nevertheless, several commentaries (at this site…some even questioned if this American-Israeli lives in a bunker…oh yeah…) spelled things out and they couldn’t have been clearer.

Starting with the general query: what/who was occupying Barack HUSSEIN Obama when Benghazigate went down? to: POTUS AWOL during Benghazigate slaughter, sexually compromised, drugged up and inebriated too, could it get any starker? Not much, unless one requires video evidence! But never mind, it is hard for committed ideologues to think outside the box, for if they did, the most intrinsic piece of the puzzle, its missing piece, would tell the very tawdry tale.

Regardless, if bonehead Boehner’s special panel to investigate Benghazi does not include his “missing time”, well, a key piece to the AWOL POTUS will stay buried and that would be a travesty of mega injustice and historical falsehood. Unfathomable. Unconscionable. Indeed, if most understood what REALLY went down with Barack HUSSEIN Obama while Americans were slaughtered, it is very likely that even the captured media could not stop them from “storming the gates”. 

Obama with Reggie Love

The “down low” POTUS & his “body double”: Reggie Love, his hunk of lovin’!

The Single Most Dangerous Question To Obama Re Benghazi – Northeast Intelligence Network

22 May 2014:  Although numerous unanswered questions continue to plague the Obama White House about the criminal and murderous events of the Benghazi attacks on September 11, 2012, there is one single question that needs to be asked with absolute precision and answered with authenticated specificity.

It is the question that Obama and a very small contingent of his innermost circle fear the most, for it is my professional investigative assessment, based on insider information, that the answer to this question alone will cause the immediate demands for the impeachment and removal from office of Barack Hussein Obama. It is this precise question:

Where exactly within the White House was Barack Hussein Obama, from the time he left the Oval Office at approximately 7:30 p.m. ET, until the following day when he boarded Air Force One destined for Las Vegas, who was he with, and what were the exact nature of his activities during this period?

Unfortunately, I have significant doubts that specific answers to this multi-part question, subject to verification by Secret Service logs, will be forthcoming or cross-referenced with other internal White House logs and other records that are known to be kept and maintained. I also have serious doubts that the Select Committee will press the issue beyond any vague, superficial and peripheral testimony offered by those called before the investigative body.

It is this one particular question—and a complete, truthful and verifiable answer—that has the ability to completely change the perception of events that have been carefully crafted like a cheap paint-by-numbers picture set suitable for children 8-12 years of age.

Just where was the Commander-in-Chief while Americans were fighting for their lives and awaiting assistance that would never arrive? We now know where he wasn’t, which was in the White House situation room. What activities could possibly take precedence over even a brief “pop-in” to the Situation Room for a strategic, election year photo-op? Think about that and all that it implies for a moment.

Based on information supplied to me by two insider sources, the truthful answers to this multi-part question will never be disclosed—ever. Based on one DC insider who is legally muzzled by multiple national security secrecy oaths, “negotiations” are in progress (or perhaps complete) to make certain the committee will stay away from this question beyond a very narrow line of inquiry. This explains the ostensible partisan cooperation under the direction of Nancy Pelosi, according to my source. There is immense pressure being forced upon the committee chair and others to stay away from this line of questioning beyond the requisite superficiality designed for our entertainment.

Moreover, I have been informed that the Secret Service logs, White House visitor logs, and cross-referencing records “including and especially of those individuals present in the private presidential quarters that would identify the names, ages and alleged purpose for their presence” will never be remitted, at least not in their original form, if at all. Furthermore, any answers relating to this question by witness testimony will not be properly reconciled with any documentation at the depth required.

Robert “Tosh” Plumlee, CIA whistle blower, posed 11 questions about Benghazi to elected officials from both political parties and received no responses in return. I pose one, publicly, for it is the truthful answer to this question that is, and forever will be, the “third rail” of the deepest recesses of insider knowledge.

Wait. Watch. And mark my words.

It gets worse, if you dare imagine. The foxes in the Repub hen house have already compromised the investigation, by dint of the fact that the LEAD Executive Director of the select committee is tied into both far left AND Islamist groups! Need proofs?

The American people are supposed to trust Republicans appointed to investigate Benghazi but as it turns out, the Executive Director appointed to the House Select Committee on Benghazi – Philip Kiko – is a lobbyist for the Smith-Free Group, in which his clients include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the radical environmentalist group the Sierra Club, Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), National Council of La Raza “the Race” (NCLR), and the National Organization for Women (NOW), NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (NLDEF) and others.

And it even gets worse, it also turns out that he lobbied for a group with strong connections to Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the U.S.

Philip Kiko

This constitutes a major problem

Select Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy and House Speaker John Boehner.

Let’s address the elephant in the room. When it comes to Benghazi, the attackers all resided under the Muslim Brotherhood umbrella.

Muslim Advocates
Kiko, appointed by Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, has been a lobbyist for Smith-Free Group since 2013. One of Smith-Lee’s clients is the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, a consortium of racial and liberal organizations that includes the highly suspect Muslim Advocates (MA). There also appears to be a connection to Wisconsin politicians. The head of MA used to work for U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Kiko for Rep. James Sensenbrenner as Deputy Chief of Staff from 2001 – 2007. Sensenbrenner is credited with authoring the Patriot Act.

MA’s President and Executive Director Farhana Khera worked directly for Feingold for six years and was Counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Ironically, a primary focus of Khera has been to water down the Patriot Act to protect Muslims. The degree to which she was successful can be seen in both how politically correct the law is as well as Feingold being the only U.S. Senator to vote against the law.

Farhana Khera with Nancy Pelosi.

Khera represented the Muslim Students Association (MSA) in the U.S. and Canada in a suit filed against the City of New York over the surveillance of the Muslim community. MSA is a known Muslim Brotherhood front group and Khera is clearly a pro-Muslim activist who has argued that sting operations lead to “anti-Muslim sentiment”.

In 2010, Khera spoke at the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention. In her speech, Khera tipped off Muslim leaders about law enforcement surveillance techniques. ISNA is also a Muslim Brotherhood front.

Perhaps one of Khera’s most prized accomplishments was a letter she received from then-Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan, who is currently the Director of the CIA. Brennan’s letter was in response to a letter sent by Khera and 57 Muslim organizations requesting that training materials offensive to Muslims be purged from counter-terrorism manuals. Brennan expressed agreement with Khera in his response.

When it comes to other Muslim Advocates members advocating for terrorist organizations, at a 2007 Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) convention, Muslim Advocates counsel Akil Vohra vouched for the Holy Land Foundation, insisting that it was not connected to terrorism. One year later, the HLF was found guilty on all charges related to terrorism.

When former Deputy Chief of Staff to Hillary Clinton Huma Abedin found herself at the center of controversy after Rep. Michele Bachmann raised questions about Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, at least one Muslim Advocates member expressed support for Abedin. Board member Amber Khan sent out the following tweet about Abedin’s attendance at the White House iftar dinner in 2012:

Amber_Khan_Praise_Huma

Curiously, Kiko’s former boss – Sensenbrenner – was one of a handful of Republicans who publicly defended Abedin, thereby siding against Bachmann.

Rep. Keith Ellison, one of two Muslim U.S. Congressmen, was one of Abedin’s staunchest of defenders against Bachmann. Ellison responded to Bachmann’s questions with an incoherent two-page letter that was rebuked with a 16-page letter from Bachmann; it would be her last public words on the matter.

Ellison also has a connection to Muslim Advocates. The organization’s Director of Program to Strengthen Muslim Charities, Mohamed Sabur, was once an employee of Ellison.

Mohamed Sabur

Mohamed Sabur (r) selling Islamic materials circa 2002.

Sabur is also credited with founding The Qunoot Foundation. This organization is a partner with CAIR. Muslim Advocates is identified as a kind of offshoot from the Muslim Brotherhood front. In fact, their advocates work with CAIR. In fact, on CAIR’s official website, an application was accepted for a CAIR / Qunoot Fellowship.

Another co-founder of Qunoot Foundation – Zahier Janmohamed – supports Hamas, which is itself a Muslim Brotherhood group whose beliefs are in line with the Benghazi attackers.

Other figures on the Muslim Advocates website that warrant further scrutiny are Deputy Director Naheed Qureshi and Board Asifa Quraishi-Landes. As we have learned, the Qureshi name (can be spelled differently) is quite prominent within the Muslim Brotherhood. Suheir Qureshi was identified by Shoebat.com as one of the 63 Muslim Sisterhood leaders. Naheed joined other Muslim Brotherhood figures at the 2010 White House Iftar Dinner, to include Huma Abedin’s mother Saleha Abedin.

Here is a promo video on the Muslim Advocates website, the organization Kiko has lobbied for. The video features Sabur, Khera, and Ellison:

Foley and Lardner
Another potentially noteworthy aspect to Kiko’s background is his time with Foley and Lardner as Of Counsel.One of the partners of this firm is Cleta Mitchell, who inexplicably defended Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan in the face of overwhelming evidence of their complicity in the Muslim Brotherhood agenda.

Mitchell: Insists Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan are clean.

The evidence against both Norquist and Khan is incontrovertible. Yet, Mitchell chose to vehemently defend them while smearing those who pointed out their Muslim Brotherhood connections, as Shoebat.com reported. The extent of Kiko’s relationship with Mitchell is unclear but it is noteworthy that both Mitchell and he have either advocated for or defended individuals or groups with connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. As a partner with Foley, Mitchell would have been senior to Kiko, who was listed as ‘Of Counsel’.

Kiko Should Recuse Himself
Shortly after Speaker John Boehner appointed Trey Gowdy to head the House Select Committee on Benghazi, Gowdy appointed Kiko. To what extent Boehner may have had a hand in Gowdy’s naming of the longtime DC lobbyist is not known but Boehner sure seemed pleased with the appointment immediately after it was announced, saying:

“Phil Kiko is a man of unquestioned integrity with a record of distinguished service to the House and the American people. His appointment today is further proof of Chairman Gowdy’s commitment to an investigation that is serious, fact-based, and professional. The American people deserve the full truth about what happened in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, and there is no better person to help lead this effort than Phil.”

Select_Committee

Like Sensenbrenner, Boehner was one of the handful of Republicans who defended Abedin against Bachmann, as Shoebat.com reported.

Let’s face it, Congress has a poor track record with the American people. It’s a place where corruption thrives like weeds in a garden that needs constant tending. Despite this, there is an industry in Washington, DC that is viewed with even more contempt, perhaps the most unprincipled profession in the nation’s capital – lobbying. Often, the extent to which any one lobbyist’s principles – or lack thereof – can be known are by looking at his clients.

When doing this with Kiko, it becomes apparent that he should recuse himself from the Benghazi investigation. Boehner, Gowdy and every member of the House Select Committee should demand it.

 

ASIDE from all the mutating, co-joining and bedding patterns between Demsters and RINO’s with Islamic mouthpieces, let us never forget the part played by “dear Hill”. Now, there are several hot commentaries demonstrating why she too belongs in jail due to her immeasurable complicity re Benghazigate, but we don’t even have to rely on her recent crimes.

In a nutshell, if the buck is truly going to stop with Obama Inc, don’t let the Clinton machine off the hook either. Via their body counts over the years, especially when Hill runs for POTUS, Benghazigate is just her latest criminal activity. 

So for your (dis)pleasure, sit back, bring out the popcorn or whatever suits your personal taste buds, and view the following movie, one which Clinton’s gang is desperate to hide!

DOMESTIC TERRORIST,BILL AYERS,ENTERS THROUGH OBAMA’s “BACK DOOR”:DEBORAH LEFF VETS PRESIDENTIAL CLEMENCIES! HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

REGARDLESS of this and that spin from the radical left’s quarters – backing up the POTUS’s tall tale, that domestic terrorist Bill Ayers “was just some guy who lived in Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s neighborhood”  well, put said lie in the (mental) garbage heap. Burn it. More on that later…

What is most significant is where the truth really lies, demonstrating exactly how close they still ! are. Now, for the requisite back-up ammunition, look no further:

Bill Ayers, the foremost leader of the Weathermen “is in his third decade as a national leader in the movement to radicalize the educational training of schoolteachers”. His wife, Bernardine Dohrn, a top leader too “is a professor of law at Northwestern and a high-ranking officer in the American Bar Association.” Eleanor Raskin (ne Stein) “is a law professor at S.U.N.Y Albany and, astonishingly, a NYS administrative law judge”. Jeff Jones “currently heads the New York-based Apollo Alliance, a highly influential coalition of labor leaders and environmentalists, and was responsible for drafting President Obama’s 2009 Recovery Act.”

The list of “respectable” cover, of other “notables” in the Weathermen, is equally impressive. Through a stringently planned operational “stealth jihad”, yesteryear’s Weathermen have returned, fully primed to carry out their original goal — the “transformation” of Amerika. Most significantly, they subvert the national interest from a distinctly dangerous vantage point. They are currently ensconced in some of the most powerful positions in academia and political life. The only difference is, this time they are dressed in “capitalist” garb, not only in their clothing choices, but in the wealth they have accumulated, paradoxically, through joining the “establishment”. Who said one can’t enrich oneself, but at the same time deny the masses/proletariat said wealth potential? Highly dangerous in their bomb-making days, their capacity to cripple America, sans firing actual weaponry is that much greater at this critical juncture in time. Deeply involved in the “transformation” process, as promised by President Obama, many of them working inside the executive branch, while others operate through progressive think tanks, they want nothing more than to distance themselves from their bloody past. Therefore, an omerta has descended from the denizens of the leftist media and their powerful organs.

obama-ayers

STUNNING REVEAL: DESPITE OBAMA CLAIMS THAT TERRORIST BILL AYERS NOT A CLOSE FRIEND, 1987 DOCUMENTS PROVE HE SOUGHT JOB FOR HIS BROTHER

The research conducted by this blogger for the above excerpted book review at American Thinker, Bringing Down America, revealed more than enough iron clad proof of their past relationship, as well as their present one. Why does this matter? More importantly, how could it not?

Proof One:

For the record, if NOT for Billy boys Ayer’s relationship with the POTUS, Common Core, aka ObamaCore, would be DOA! Isn’t that proof enough of their DEEP and abiding connection?

Proof Two:

How much more do we need to dig up, in order to demonstrate the duo’s – Ayer’s and Obama’s – red manifesto and their plans for America? 

Proof Three:

But you know what? Sometimes even the smug left-set gets tripped up, and this is one of those times:Ayers confirms his connection to Obama!

Therefore, as this site back-tracks into their relationship, the following becomes more than self explanatory. Self evident.

Enter: Eric Holder, a comrade-in-arms, his revolutionary (red/green)”legally-cloaked” hatchet man….as he appoints attorney Deborah Leff to take over the Office of the Pardon Attorney, the KEY link to connecting the Criminal-in-Chief to domestic terrorist Ayers, all those years ago. Full circle? You betcha!

DEBORAH LEFF TIED INTO AYERS & HIS WIFE, BERNADINE DOHRN!

Pardon me? Obama, Bill Ayers, crack cocaine

The new head of the U.S. pardon office, the official responsible for vetting federal inmate applicants for presidential grants of clemency, was the key point person in connecting President Obama to Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers.

Also yesterday, the Justice Department announced six new guidelines for presidential pardon that will drastically broaden the number of those eligible among the prison population of non-violent offenders.

The new guidelines will make it easier to pardon offenders convicted of long drug offenses under laws that were stricter at the time of conviction.

Deputy Attorney General James Cole told reporters the new guidelines will focus on shortening sentences for those imprisoned under previous rules that saw little disparity between powdered cocaine and crack cocaine.

In 2010, Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act, which lowered the amount of crack and powdered cocaine that would violate federal law from a 100:1 weight ratio to 18:1 while eliminating a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for possession of crack cocaine.

Major news media reports yesterday covered the new pardon guidelines as well as the appointment of Leff to her new position. However, entirely unreported was Leff’s previous relationships with Ayers and Obama as well as her anti-gun activism.

Leff served in the 1990’s as president of the Joyce Foundation, an education reform and anti-gun activist group.

Obama served on the Joyce Foundation board from 1994 to 2002. He was named to the board by Leff.

While Leff served as Joyce’s president, the non-profit provided critical start-up capital to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, or CAC, an education reform group founded by Ayers.

Obama worked closely with Ayers at the CAC and was appointed in 1995 as chairman of the organization’s board.

Obama would later cite his CAC position as evidence of his qualification for public office.

Leff told the New York Times in 2008 that she was the one who first suggested Obama as Annenberg Challenge board chairman.

Obama worked closely with Ayers

Working at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge in 1995, Obama had a close relationship with Ayers, according to the CAC’s own archived records. The records also show Obama’s and Ayers’ foundation granted money to radical leftist activist causes.

News reports, archived records, interviews and Ayers’ own curriculum vitae document that Ayers was the founder of the CAC, which billed itself as a school-reform organization. Ayers also served as co-chairman of the Chicago School Reform Collaborative, one of the two operational arms of the CAC, from its formation in 1995 until 2000.

In response to a query by National Review Online writer Stanley Kurtz, the Obama 2008 presidential campaign issued a statement claiming Ayers was not involved with Obama’s “recruitment” to the CAC board. The statement said Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham, who served as presidents of other foundations, recruited Obama.

But Kurtz reviewed the CAC archives at the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago, which houses CAC board meeting minutes and other documentation from the education foundation. He found that along with Leff and Graham, Ayers was in a working group of five people who assembled the initial board of the CAC, which hired Obama.

“Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval,” Kurtz wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece.

Indeed, several articles in 1994 and 1995 in the Chicago Tribune detailed Ayers’ extensive work to secure the original grant for the CAC from a national education initiative by Ambassador Walter Annenberg, as well as Ayers’ molding of the CAC guidelines. It would have been unusual for Ayers not to have been involved in the selection of Obama.

Kurtz reported that the CAC archives demonstrated Obama and Ayers worked as a team to further the foundation’s agenda. Obama was in charge of fiscal matters, while Ayers’ position was more concerned with shaping educational policy.

The documents showed Ayers served as an ex-officio member of the board that Obama chaired through the CAC’s first year. Ayers also served on the board’s governance committee with Obama and worked with him to craft CAC bylaws, according to the documents.

Ayers made presentations to board meetings chaired by Obama. Ayers also spoke for the Chicago School Reform Collaborative before Obama’s board, while Obama periodically spoke for the board at meetings of the collaborative, the CAC documents reviewed by Kurtz show.

According to the documents, the CAC granted money to far-left causes, such as the now-defunct Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, which, WND previously reported, had done work on behalf of Obama’s presidential campaign.

WND broke the story that while Obama chaired the board of the CAC, more than $600,000 was granted to an organization founded by Ayers and run by Mike Klonsky, a former top communist activist. Klonsky was leader of the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party, which was effectively recognized by China as the all-but-official U.S. Maoist party.

Confirms Kurtz: “Instead of funding schools directly, [the CAC] required schools to affiliate with ‘external partners,’ which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as ACORN.”

In 1995, the year Ayers founded the CAC, he gave an interview for author Ron Chepesiuk’s book “Sixties Radicals” in which Ayers stated, “I’m a radical, leftist, small ‘c’ communist.”

Kurtz notes that in his book “Teaching Toward Freedom,” Ayers states his goal is to “teach against oppression,” which Kurtz noted Ayers defines as “against America’s history of evil and racism, thereby forcing social transformation.”

The CAC, however, was not Obama’s only working relationship with the unrepentant terrorist, Ayers.

In a widely circulated article, WND first reported Obama served on the board of the Woods Fund, a liberal Chicago nonprofit, alongside Ayers from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund’s website. Tax filings show Obama received compensation of $6,000 per year for his service in 1999 and 2000.

The two appeared together as speakers at several public events, including a 1997 University of Chicago panel titled “Should a child ever be called a ‘super predator?’” and another panel for the University of Illinois in April 2002 titled “Intellectuals: Who needs them?”

Ayers has written about his involvement with the Weather Underground’s bombings of the New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972.

“I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough,” Ayers told the New York Times in an interview released Sept. 11, 2001.

“Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon,” Ayers wrote in his memoirs, titled “Fugitive Days.” He continued with a disclaimer that he didn’t personally set the bombs but that his group set the explosives and planned the attack.

So, at a juncture in which a (once) great, glorious nation, the United States of America, is falling off a financial cliff; losing its hyper-power status; has become a laughingstock among western nations, and even within third rate powers, how worrisome is it that an unrepentant domestic terrorist, Billy Ayers, is still pulling America’s strings, in league with too many to enumerate revolutionary forces?

ATTENDING THE SAME REVOLUTIONARY “CHURCH”….YOU KNOW, THE 

DOWN LOW POTUS & REV WRIGHT’s GUIDING HANDS!

The Gay Agenda & Its Dangerous Militancy: The COMPLETE Stripping Of Judeo/Christian Moorings…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Let’s get this straight – no pun intended: this American-Israeli is hardly a religious “zealot”, or whatever bugaboo one seeks to attach to those who resist being strong-armed by so called “liberals.” More aptly, let’s term them as they really are: cultural/political storm troopers.

Be that as it may, in reality, don’t dare mess with traditional moorings – either in the U.S., Israel or any other so called western nation  – this blog will not stand still for such societal treachery.

And, to be as clear as possible, gay militants continually target their frontal campaigns on traditional underpinnings. In fact, as one example, a Christian-owned bakery shut down citing “Mafia-style” tactics of homosexual activists, and this is just one of their countless shots across the (traditional) bow!

For without their deconstruction/destructive forces it is impossible to “transform Amerika” (and the west as a result) into a totalitarian society sans normative sanctuaries – mental and physical. Socialist “havens” thrive best when religion is on the chopping block, and this is precisely why Churches – which were viewed in a favorable light in Germany, until seen as an obstacle to Hitler’s designs – are targeted. The ability to control the populace following said transformation – as demonstrated in Nazi Germany – through a society which no longer has a spiritual anchor becomes increasingly feasible. Ah ha…the “art” of transformation.

Hence, Christians require “rehabilitation”, as well as all those who are grounded in Judeo-Christian teachings.

Liberals’ quest to ‘rehabilitate’ Christians

Author

Today’s liberals seek to “rehabilitate” Christians to their way of thinking under penalty of law. Liberals of old just threw us to the lions. I guess that’s what they mean by “progress.”

The homofascist rainbow-shirts are at it again. They’ve unsheathed, once more, their anti-Christian long knives.

Back in April, I wrote the following in a column headlined “Religious freedom and ‘gay marriage’ cannot coexist”: “‘Gay pride’ necessitates anti-Christian hate. It must. ‘Gay marriage’ and other ‘sexual orientation’-based laws do violence to freedom and truth. They are the hammer with which the postmodern left intends to bludgeon bloody religious liberty and the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic.”

Liberals are anything if not predictable.

Chai Feldblum, President Obama’s EEOC commissioner – a lesbian activist who supports “plural marriage” – has called the clash between religious liberty and unfettered sexual license a “zero-sum game,” meaning that someone wins and someone loses.

Guess who loses in Feldblum’s book? She has “a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win” and candidly admits that liberals “want to revolutionize societal norms.” She believes that “gay sex is a moral good.”

She’s not alone.

Here’s the latest example of Feldblum’s words in action. The Oregonian reports:

“A same-sex couple who requested a cake for their wedding in January but were refused service by a Gresham bakery have filed a complaint with the state, alleging Sweet Cakes by Melissa discriminated against them based on their sexual orientation.

“Oregon’s Bureau of Labor and Industries’ civil rights division will investigate to determine if the business violated the Oregon Equality Act of 2007, which protects the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexual and transgender people in employment, housing and public accommodations. …

“Rachel N. Cryer, 30, said she had gone to the Gresham bakery on Jan. 17 for a scheduled appointment to order a wedding cake. She met with the owner, Aaron Klein.

“Klein asked for the date of the wedding and names of the bride and groom, Cryer said.

“‘I told him, “There are two brides and our names are Rachel and Laurel,”‘ according to her complaint.

“Klein responded that his business does not provide its services for same-sex weddings, she said.

“‘Respondent cited a religious belief for its refusal to make cakes for same-sex couples planning to marry,’ the complaint says. …”

“‘We are committed to a fair and thorough investigation to determine whether there’s substantial evidence of unlawful discrimination,’ said Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian. …”

Mr. Avakian then revealed what he views as a “fair and thorough investigation”: “Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but that doesn’t mean that folks have the right to discriminate,” he said.

What does it mean when a government official says Christians who speak against homosexuality need to be ‘rehabilitated’? (Poll Closed)

He regards Christianity as a mental disorder 39.43%  (1,242 votes)

He feels comfortable being openly hostile to biblical beliefs 39.43%  (1,242 votes)

He knows he won’t be condemned by mainstream media 21.14%  (666 votes)

Total Votes: 3,150

Here’s the kicker. Read it closely:

“‘The goal is never to shut down a business. The goal is to rehabilitate,’ Avakian said. ‘For those who do violate the law, we want them to learn from that experience and have a good, successful business in Oregon.’”

George Orwell much?

Get the not-so-thinly-veiled threat? Christians have a right to own a “successful business” in Oregon, so long as they don’t, well, be Christian – so long as they shelve their faith and submit to our ever-”progressive” government’s anti-Christian demands. “The goal is never to shut down a business,” but either you abandon the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic and dutifully observe postmodern sexual relativism, or government will shut you down in a Sodom and Gomorrah minute.

Brad, Rachel, Laurel and the rest of you left-wing bullies need to get this straight (so to speak): The godless left has been trying to “rehabilitate” Christians for over 2,000 years. We haven’t caved yet. What makes you think we will now? Those of us who wish to remain obedient to God will not – indeed, cannot – accommodate you and play along with your sin-centric “gay marriage” delusion.

Ain’t gonna happen.

Ever.

Look, you have every right to dress up in two wedding gowns or two tuxedos, get pretend “married” and play house to your hearts’ content. You do not have the right, however, to force others to abandon their sincerely held religious beliefs, thousands of years of history and the immutable reality of human biology to engage your little fantasy. No amount of hand-wringing, gnashing of teeth, suing Christians or filing charges against those of us who live in marriage reality will make us recognize your silly so-called “marriage equality.”

Rather than trying to compel these Christians to participate in their counter-Christian mock marriage, all Ms. Rachel and Ms. Laurel had to do was take their business down the street. There are, no doubt, many bakers who share their worldly sexual morals (or lack thereof).

Imagine if a Christian came into a “gay”-owned bakery and demanded a cake with these words: “Homosexual behavior is shameful: Romans 1:27.” Think the left would be clamoring for charges against the baker if he refused? Me neither. In fact, I’d be the first to defend his right to “discriminate” against the Christian.

Or what if some anti-gun nut printing service refused to produce flyers for an NRA rally? Shouldn’t they have that right?

Or if some hippy bed-and-breakfast owner refused to host a conference challenging global warming alarmism. Shouldn’t he have the right to operate his business in accordance with his sincerely held beliefs?

Of course he should.

And so should Christians.

But … But … discrimination! “Homophobia”!

I know. Cry me a river.

Seriously, lefties, give it a rest. So-called “sexual orientation” laws are nothing like laws prohibiting racial, age, disability or gender discrimination. Those qualities are based on neutral, immutable characteristics. Even liberals admit that “sexual orientation” is based on “fluid” feelings and behaviors. It’s about what you do, not who you are. It’s about what you believe and who you choose to have sex with, not the color of your skin.

Ken Hutcherson, an influential black pastor from the Seattle area, put it well: “It has been said loudly and proudly that gay marriage is a civil rights issue. If that’s the case, then gays would be the new African-Americans. I’m here to tell you now, and hopefully for the last time, that the gay community is not the new African-American community.

“Don’t compare your sin to my skin!” he demands.

Some things never change.

Other things do.

Today’s liberals seek to “rehabilitate” Christians to their way of thinking under penalty of law. Liberals of old just threw us to the lions.

I guess that’s what they mean by “progress.”

(Matt Barber is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action.)
Most significantly, there is zero tolerance at this site for those who use “homophobic” nonsense/bludgeons as a rejoinder to all of the above. In fact, this blog has repeatedly stated – in relation to the Gay-in-Chief – that it is hardly anyone’s concern which way consenting adults swing, unless they are a “down low” POTUS (due to the real potential for blackmail, etc) or militant activists bent on foisting their lifestyles on society.
Now, considering the facts at hand, isn’t the above – re militaristic gay activism – more than noteworthy? Dare this site suggest: isn’t it prudent in the extreme to keep them at bay, whatever the costs?