Here, I have some advice for Sean Hannity…
In George Orwell’s famous dystopian novel 1984, high officials direct robotic bureaucrats to alter the past—“pushed down the memory hole” is the famous phrase–all in order to prop up the state apparatus. Names are changed, facts disappear, and new facts are born.
Let’s look at the past for a moment:
April 15, 2013, at 2:29 p.m.: a bomb goes off near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. A second bomb goes off thirteen seconds later.
A Saudi national by the name of Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, near ground zero of the first blast, receives significant injuries to his legs, consisting of burns and embedded shrapnel.
He immediately runs from the scene and is quickly tackled by a bystander, thinking he is the bomber.
The police take him into custody and transport him to the hospital. At this point, he is only a person of interest.
By 4:46 p.m., he is named as a suspect and placed under armed guard.
At exactly 7:29 p.m., over twenty ATF, FBI, and DHS agents swarm Alharbi’s apartment in nearby Revere, carrying out dozens of bags of evidence.
Alharbi is quickly identified as having some connection to the bombing.
Slam dunk. Suspect identified and held accountable. Game over.
Not exactly. Enter the Saudi government.
At 10:00 a.m. the next day, Secretary of State John Kerry meets with with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal. Shortly thereafter, President Obama meets with the Saudi ambassador, Adel al-Jubeir. Both meetings are unscheduled and held in secret (and more than likely concern Alharbi.)
At 4 p.m. the following day, a criminal file is created for Alharbi, charging him with terrorism and linking him to the Boston bombing. The NTC (National Terrorism Center), under ICE, classifies the matter under section 212 3B, “Security and related grounds/Terrorist activities.” The Obama administration deems Alharbi a national security threat, but instead of arresting him, recommends he be deported.
Later that evening, Investigative Project on Terrorism chief Steve Emerson says on the Sean Hannity Show that according to his sources, Alharbi is being quietly deported at the request of the Saudi government.
At 5:35 p.m., Alharbi’s deportation file is altered—“cauterized” was the word an insider used— authorized from the highest levels, revoking deportation and further made to look like no deportation proceedings had been initiated.
This alteration is authorized by either the head of the National Security Agency or State Department (and may have been directly authorized by Barack Hussein Obama himself.)
When this information begins to leak to the media, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano is summoned before Congress and questioned about the matter. She calls the information a rumor, stating that Alharbi was not being deported and that he was never a suspect (and, when pressed, refuses to answer any further questions.)
The same day, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) states that the information about Alharbi is “categorically false.”
But according to a Congressional Source, the information released was in fact completely accurate.
Alharbi was in fact linked to the Boston terrorist attack. The Congressman who questioned Janet Napolitano, Rep. Jeff Duncan, was actually in possession of Alharbi’s file and knew that Napolitano was lying.
What else did we know about Alharbi?
When he received his student visa, he had been on a terrorist watch list and should have never been allowed into the country.
He has at least a dozen connections to al-Qaeda members, some presently being held in Gitmo.
And, probably most shocking of all, he was a regular visitor at the White House.
This is most likely the main reason Barack Obama tried to whisk him out of the country so quickly.
But alas, all was shoved down the memory hole, never to be heard about again.
Names were changed, facts disappeared, and new facts were born.
Welcome to Barack Hussein Obama’s 1984.
As new information emerges about last September’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Fox News host Sean Hannity is seething that it took this long for the media–and some Republicans–to acknowledge the Obama administration’s “massive, massive failure and cover-up.”
Appearing on Sean Hannity’s syndicated radio show, Ann Coulter continued her defense of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, telling the Fox host that her fellow conservatives unfairly paint the Republican governor as “too liberal.”
Last night, Mark Emerson told Sean Hannity that the non-suspect Abdulrahman Ali Alharbi is being deported back to the Saudi Kingdom.
An expert on terrorism says the Saudi national who was the original “person of interest” in connection with Monday’s Boston Marathon bombing is going to be deported from the U.S. next week.
The foreign student from Revere, Mass., is identified as 20-year-old Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi.
“I just learned from my own sources that he is now going to be deported on national security grounds next Tuesday, which is very unusual,” Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism told Sean Hannity of Fox News Wednesday night.
The Reuters news agency reported President Barack Obama met with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal on Wednesday, noting “the meeting was not on Obama’s public schedule.”
After that meeting was mentioned, Emerson told Hannity, “That’s very interesting because this is the way things are done with Saudi Arabia. You don’t arrest their citizens. You deport them, because they don’t want them to be embarrassed and that’s the way we appease them.”
Read More at WND . By Joe Kovacs.
Some Johns Hopkins students are campaigning to have Dr. Ben Carson pulled from this year’s commencement speaker line-up. They are angry about the comments the well-known neurosurgeon, made about same sex marriage. Carson has since apologized for having offended anyone and indicated he might withdraw from the commencement role. That would be a shame. The students could certainly benefit from what this self made alumnus has to say.
Dr. Carson, who rocketed to political fame after simply and eloquently pointing out the weaknesses of President Obama’s divisive policies during the National Prayer Breakfast, which Obama attended, made the same sex marriage comments on Fox News Tuesday night.
Host Sean Hannity asked Carson his opinion on same-sex marriage, given the Supreme Court’s consideration of two gay (same-sex) marriage cases this week.
Carson said I believe “Marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality — it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition.” Now that is what he said. How can anyone disagree with the logic and truth imparted by his statement.
Since the Middle Ages the term Marriage is reserved to a man and woman joining together as a unit. The word marriage has been used since Ancient Rome to describe the union of man and woman. It has always referred to the mutual consent of a man and a woman to wed (form a union). The term marriage is synonymous with another word wedlock which was also used in the Middle Ages in conjunction with Matrimony.
The Miriam Webster Dictionary defines the word marriage as a union of 2 people of the opposite sex. It does not say 3 people or 2 people of the same sex. It specifically says 2 people of the opposite sex. The only recognized source that even mentions the possibility of same-sex marriage is “Psychology Today”, a magazine. So where is Dr Carson wrong. He is not wrong, but the students have been indoctrinated to believe that homosexual activity is a good life style and is widely accepted. Today is a snapshot in history. Gay acceptance is being driven by the homosexual lobby and money in Washington DC. That is why Obama and other Liberal Progressives have evolved to accept same-sex marriage.
The Liberal oriented Health and Human Rights Student Group on Campus began circulating a petition, linked out of its Facebook page, challenging Dr. Carson’s selection as the 2013 commencement speaker for the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. That is the fallacy of the social media. Comments, opinions devoid of fact are foisted on the internet as fact. These students accused Carson of effectively comparing “gay relationships with pedophilia and bestiality.” Of course that is their slanted view. However, in many ways Dr. Carson is right. The students can’t see the forest for the trees because they have been taught to think that way by Liberal Progressive Professors who grew their teeth in the ’70′s. If same-sex is accepted, then why can’t you have bestiality, S&M, Incestuous, polygamy and any other combination of human beings. Once you open the barn door, all the animals can enter.
I bet If you asked any one of these students when the term “Gay” was coined to describe the homosexual life style they probably couldn’t tell you. Up until the 1980′s the “Gay” community as we know it today, did not exist. The word gay is defined as carefree and was used widely to describe life in the 1890′s, better known as the “Gay Nineties”. It was also used by Hollywood which had its own problems in the 1930′s. If someone cross-dressed in a comedic fashion they were referred to as gay. It wasn’t until after the Aids virus was introduced around 1986 that the term “Gay” was used as a term to describe someone who engaged in same-sex relationships. The Aids virus was described as being a homosexually transmitted disease. After heterosexual men were infected by blood transfusions, blood banks were not allowed to accept blood donated by homosexuals or someone who had sex with one or prostitutes. That practice is still in place today.
In the words of the students, “At the time of his nomination, Dr. Carson was known to most of us as a world-class neurosurgeon and passionate advocate for education. Many of us had read his books and looked up to him as a role model in our careers,” the group said. “Since then, however, several public events have cast serious doubt on the appropriateness of having Dr. Carson speak at our graduation.”
What changed. Nothing except that Dr Carson offended the Professors and supporters of President Obama. Dr. Carson is still the same simple, self reliant, and eloquent speaker who wowed the audience at the National Prayer Breakfast. He has so much knowledge and good advice to impart.
If the misguided students at Johns Hopkins can’t see that it is their loss, not his. Even to that end, Dr. Carson on Friday told MSNBC it’s “their day and the last thing I would want to do is rain on their parade.” As for Dr. Carson, he has already been elevated by so many in the country, even grudgingly by the people in Hollywood when Cuba Gooding Jr. played the part of Dr. Carson in a movie about his life. Carson was hailed by conservatives, and even landed a speaking role at the Conservative Political Action Conference, for his remarks in February. So if he doesn’t speak at the commencement it is their loss not his.
Specifically, Hannity talks about Obama going to a Muslim school in Indonesia…
Sean Hannity gets to the bottom of this question…
It’s very unlikely that the traditional media we know today at all resembles the entity our founding fathers wished to protect in their day.
It’s not even very likely that it resembles the group admired by Edmund Burke when he is said to have coined the term “the fourth estate” in reference to the press in the middle of the 19th century.
Based on their writings and the documents they co-authored, our founding fathers wished to preserve a free press for the purpose of preserving a free people. The current remnant of a once-free press is now simply an extension and arm of the government, which means that they aren’t really a “free press” at all. They have come to be, knowingly or not, for the state, or the current ultimate powers of the U.S. federal government.
To put Burke’s term into context, it’s necessary to look at the history of medieval “estates of the realm,” which formally recognized the three “estates” of the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners. Burke and Thomas Carlyle, who popularized the term “the fourth estate,” recognized the press as a group of distinction that played an important role in lending a democratic voice to the people of a true republic. It now seems, unfortunately, that those days are gone and that once again, only three estates are represented, with the press, or media, being encompassed by the estate of the nobility. In more modern and recognizable terms, those in our government and “media” are often referred to as “the elite,” even if only in terms that denote the self-perception of many in this estate.
Sean Hannity declared in 2008 that “the media is dead”; but in a historical sense, it was already dying long before then.
Ever since Cronkite’s field coverage of the Vietnam War, the mainstream media has continued on a downward spiral. The difference between the journalists of that era and the so-called “journalists” of today is that the inquiring public news consumers’ sense of objectiveness and sincerity from these anchors has now been decimated. Many journalists of the recent past at least seemed sincere in their dedication to reporting truth. Today, the messages of the media mainstream are blatantly and admittedly laden with hearsay, inaccuracy, half-truths, and whole lies.
Still, Hannity seems to be on to something, as the media has continually sunk to new lows over the course of the last five years. It can be seen in Newsweek’s post-print fake cover honoring Obama’s second inauguration as “The Second Coming,” penned by Evan Thomas, who once described Obama on MSNBC as “sort of like God” in being above the traditional political fray. We should also remember CBS Political Director John Dickerson’s plea in a January 2012 Obama-Biden ad to “Go for the Throat! Why if he wants to transform American politics, Obama must declare war on the Republican Party”… and declare and wage he has.
The legendary CBS reporter Bob Schieffer, after an Obama gun control speech, suggested that “the president is going to have to do more than just make a speech about it. This is one of the best speeches I’ve ever heard him deliver, but it’s going to take more than that from the White House. He’s going to have to get his hands dirty.”
On January 27, ABC’s Martha Raddatz of The Week conducted a six minute interview with Democrat Senator Bob Menendez without asking even one question about the ongoing FBI investigation into allegations that he solicited underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic. By now, this is a predictable double-standard that would have obviously surfaced had this interviewee been affiliated with the Republican Party.
Another example is provided by The Washington Post, who after crafting a report from a satirical piece by the Daily Currant, falsely reported in early February that former vice presidential candidate and former Fox News contributor Sarah Palin was joining the Qatari-owned news network Al Jazeera.
On several occasions, Obama himself has named Fox News as a media organization that stands in the way of “progress.” On even more occasions, in this modern era of “new media” choices, he has cited this entity without naming names. In his relentless assault on honest journalism and any who would dare stand in the way of his agenda, Obama told TNR in a recent interview that “If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News…for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it.”
Most recently, the mainstream media have given the president an unprecedented pass on his actions and inactions in the scandalous turn of events surrounding the terrorist attacks on our consulates in Cairo and Benghazi that led to murder, including the first of a standing ambassador to the United States in decades.
They have also largely handed Obama a free pass concerning the impending “sequester” budget cuts they have repeatedly described as “severe,” even though these cuts only account for about two weeks of current annual government spending. They have stated that these cuts will devastate child care institutions (few of whom receive government assistance) and end the jobs of thousands upon thousands of public educators. The most conservative of verifiable projected figures as to losses of public education jobs is about 500 positions, and the high end of these figures lands at about 2,000.
We should keep in mind that these “cuts” only amount to a 2% cut to the initially projected plan for additional spending for the remainder of the year and beyond. The real pain of these cuts…that is NEVER reported in the mainstream media…will be felt by the U.S. military, with this, by design action, to be the most significant step by this administration to carry out a verifiable agenda for a reduction in U.S. armed forces personnel comparable to post World War II levels.
Recently, even The National Review has proved to be subject to the pressures to water down truth and liberty in their concession to establishment “RINOs’” unchallenged path for modern conservatism. What would Mr. Buckley say to them now?
William F. Buckley, in the mission statement for his magazine, The National Review, once stated that “Instead of covetously consolidating its premises, the United States seems tormented by its tradition of fixed postulates having to do with the meaning of existence, with the relationship of the state to the individual, of the individual to his neighbor, so clearly enunciated in the enabling documents of our Republic.” This reality is now most painfully true.
Thankfully though, “There are those of generous impulse and a sincere desire to encourage a responsible dissent from the Liberal orthodoxy. And there are those who recognize that when all is said and done, the market place depends for a license to operate freely on the men who issue licenses — on the politicians.”