UPdate rules under review – “Mexican soldiers were making a political statement” when they DETAINED US soldiers on US soil. Put on notice

April 23, 2019
This is utter nonsense 
There are protocols in place

US military rules under review after soldiers surrendered pistol to Mexican troops on American soil

SUBMIT
A senior defense official says the Pentagon is reviewing how U.S. soldiers responded during an incident this month in which Mexican troops detained and disarmed Americans on Texas soil.

The standoff between two U.S. soldiers and as many as six Mexican military officials on April 13 is believed to be the first of its kind, according to the senior defense official from Northern Command, or NORTHCOM. “This is the first incident that we’re aware of that the two militaries came together,” the official told the Washington Examiner.

Two Army soldiers from Washington state were sitting in an unmarked Customs and Border Protection vehicle south of the U.S. barrier but north of the international boundary near Clint, Texas, when Mexican troops moved in on them.

The Mexican soldiers, each carrying FX-05 Xiuhcoatl rifles, detained, disarmed, and questioned the U.S. troops. One soldier’s Beretta M9 service pistol was taken from him and temporarily confiscated.

The Pentagon is now investigating the incident, which the official said “will help us modify any instructions that we’re giving the troops” about how to deal with such a situation.

Troops deployed to the U.S.-Mexico boundary go through joint readiness staging, or training on how to handle dangerous situations in the area. The official said he could not recall anything similar to last Saturday’s encounter having taken place during a previous active-duty troop deployment.

No official protocol exists for how to navigate a run-in with a foreign military, but the senior official said the soldiers were trained to “de-escalate” the situation. By surrendering at least one gun, they followed existing protocol, though it left them unarmed.

The NORTHCOM official also defended the U.S. soldiers being in the location. The pair had been assigned by Customs and Border Protection to be at those coordinates on the U.S. side of the border. The two soldiers were one of 150 teams serving on mobile surveillance missions who had been assigned that specific location to stake out and monitor surveillance feeds.

Mexican soldiers spotted the pair and did not recognize their unmarked vehicle. The U.S. troops did not recognize the unmarked truck. There was mutual confusion about why either party was at that location.

“That area of the border is kind of confusing,” a second NORTHCOM official told the Examiner. “It may have been difficult for them [Mexican forces] to know if they didn’t know the area as well or were new or something. I don’t think — it definitely wasn’t trying to overtake the U.S.”

Much of the physical barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border does not sit on the international boundary and is located a few dozen to a few hundred feet north of it.

In areas such as southwestern Arizona and eastern Texas, rivers serve as the official border, but in other regions, it can be more difficult to determine the official line in the sand.

The language barrier further complicated the situation. “There was a U.S. Army soldier that was one of the two that spoke Spanish. That was about when they came to realize they were Mexican military,” the official said.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/us-military-rules-under-review-after-soldiers-surrendered-pistol-to-mexican-troops-on-american-soil


 

They KNEW where they were, because the soldiers have their orders and maps down to the millimeter.   They have NOT apologized.  This was a CLEAR message to our soldiers.  US soldiers put on NOTICE!!!

 

Mexican soldiers detain American soldiers on U.S. soil. Government response: ?

 · April 22, 2019
   

US and Mexican flags

ronniechua | Getty Images

The Mexican government is powerless to control the cartels at our border. But somehow when it comes to belligerently confronting our own soldiers on our own soil, the Mexicans seem to muster the personnel and temerity to defend their side of the border. Moreover, they apparently have the unbridled impudence to complain about armed American citizens defending our border, while they have permanently transformed our country in the worst way imaginable through their disrespect of our sovereignty. This is clearly no longer about immigration, but about a pure invasion that requires a military buildup.

On April 13, at around 2 p.m. Central Time, a group of five or six suspected Mexican soldiers approached an unmarked vehicle of two U.S. soldiers stationed at the border in El Paso County, Texas, and ordered them out of the vehicle. According to Newsweek, which obtained the “serious incident report,” the soldiers were in fact active duty members of B Battery, 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment, not from a National Guard unit. The Mexican soldiers disarmed one of the U.S. soldiers and placed his sideaerm in the U.S. vehicle.

While the soldiers were parked south of the border fence near Clint, Texas, they were north of the Rio Grande riverbed, which placed them “appropriately in U.S. territory,” according to Maj. Mark Lazane, a spokesman for NORTHCOM. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Defense (DOD), after inquiring of the Mexican government, were informed that the Mexican soldiers thought that the Americans were south of the border. “Throughout the incident, the U.S. soldiers followed all established procedures and protocols,” according to NORTHCOM.

NORTHCOM confirmed that there are approximately 2,800 service members assigned to the border mission. “This includes approximately 1,200 on the Mobile Surveillance Camera mission, plus about 1,000 service members hardening ports of entry in Texas and New Mexico. There are approximately 200 personnel as part of a crisis response force, with the remainder being headquarters and logistics personnel supporting the mission.”

When I asked both NORTHCOM and the State Department if our government had conveyed our concerns to Mexico and asked for an apology, both departments declined to comment.

Zach Taylor, a retired 26-year veteran of the Border Patrol who has formed a group of retired border agents to better educate the public on the border, told CR that he is convinced these Mexican soldiers were making a political statement. “At the reported location the Rio Grande River is distinct and easily identified in relation to the actual international boundary,” asserted Taylor, who still lives near the border in Arizona. “That one of the supposed Mexican soldiers took one sidearm from an American and put it in the American vehicle is curious, as if the Mexicans knew exactly who they encountered, where they were encountered, and were simply making a statement. What the purpose of that statement was is open to broad speculation, but on the face of it, this was probably political – as in showing that to Mexico, borders mean nothing.” Taylor confirmed that he regularly saw this behavior during his time in the Border Patrol.



We have tens of thousands of soldiers stationed in other parts of the world fully equipped for war and with at least manageable rules of engagement. Why are the soldiers at our own border too few, so lightly armed, and seeking to “de-escalate a potentially volatile situation” of Mexican aggression rather than deterring it?

What is particularly disturbing about this incident is that one could defend Mexico’s powerless response to this border crisis and the robust cartel and smuggler activity as a lack of resources to secure its own border from non-state actors. But why is it that the Mexican government suddenly has the ability to cross into our own country and detain our own personnel, but is seemingly powerless to deal with the cartels on its own side of the border?

What is also disturbing is the lackluster response from our own government, juxtaposed to its aggressive posture against private militia groups seeking to secure our border. Our government refuses to hold the line at the border and defend the ranches from cartel activity by placing the military there in meaningful numbers and with a heavy deterrent. They certainly are not deterring the migrants. Just last week, 12,500 more illegals were released into our country with no regard for the public charge, safety concerns, or potential contagious diseases. That is literally the number one job of our federal government, as distinct from a state government. While nobody wants to see vigilantes patrolling our border, they are clearly not the problem, but a symptom of the lack of government control over our sovereignty.

Yet it appears that the FBI has arrested a leader of one New Mexico militia that recently detained a group of illegal immigrants until Border Patrol was able to get to the scene. On Saturday, the FBI arrested Larry Hopkins, the “national commander” of the United Constitutional Patriots, on firearms charges two days after the ACLU complained about the presence of this group at Sunland Park, New Mexico. According to Reuters, this is a group of mainly military veterans who have detained as many as 5,600 aliens until Border Patrol was able to arrive.

Why is it that our government, which appears unable or unwilling to deal with Mexican aggression, the cartels, or illegal immigration, is suddenly pursuing a zero-tolerance policy for American militias seeking to do a job the federal government won’t do? Failing to secure our borders is a breach of the social contract of government, as laid out in the Declaration of Independence, and if there is anything that would ever justify the citizenry to take action, it is this issue. It’s not something we want to see, but where is our own government in dealing with the problem?

Mexico’s Foreign Relations Ministry expressed its “deep concern” that these militia groups would “drive human rights abuses of people who migrate or request asylum or refuge in the United States.” That’s a pretty rich statement from a government that evidently refuses to apologize for stepping on our soil and detaining our own soldiers.

It’s also self-evident from this statement that Mexico, rather than working with us to stop this bogus asylum-seeking, is helping encourage it.

The president would be wise to announce a buildup of the military in Texas and New Mexico and change the rules of engagement. He should also renegotiate NAFTA while making border and immigration issues the main sticking points.

If our government would only go after those violating our sovereignty with as much rigor as they do those American veterans trying to defend it, justifiably or not, this entire issue would go away. As Trump often says, either we are a country, or we are not.

Mexican soldiers detain American soldiers on U.S. soil. Government response: ?

 


US War Hero –Army Sgt. Derrick Miller – To Be Released from Leavenworth Prison

March 21, 2019

Army Sgt Derrick Miller, a US war hero has been sitting in a prison cell at Ft Leavenworth where he has been serving a life sentence for killing a terrorist. The bad news is that he never should have been there in the first place. It’s time to weed out the military of snowflake officers, like the ones who sent Miller away. There were only two witnessesd of the shooting and one of them had initially testified on Miller’s behalf, but changed his story when the military prosecutors threatened to charge him with being an accessory to murder. The second witness was offered permanent legal status in the United States if he would testify against Miller. So he did.

From The Gateway Pundit

Sgt. Miller shot and killed an Afghan civilian following the civilian attempting to grab Sgt. Miller’s weapon during a period of intense questioning. The Afghan civilian was a suspected insurgent that was walking through Sgt. Miller’s “platoon defensive perimeter observing their defensive positions”.

Following the shooting, Sgt. Miller’s unit was attacked horrifically on all sides and the Afghan National Army fighters that were assigned to stay with the platoon disappeared prior to the onset of the firefight. They hid behind a building.

Sgt. Miller was embroiled in a firefight the night he killed the Afghan man. The Afghan man was an insurgent and yet no one in the military wants to say this and directly confront the duplicitous Afghanis. The firefight was not instigated by American soldiers; the firefight was meant to kill American soldiers, and Afghan National Army fighters were nowhere to be found.

On Wednesday news broke that Sgt. Derrick Miller will be released from Leavenworth.

This is wonderful news for all the patriots who worked to free this American hero.

My book is here!  And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

BOOK – Why I Couldn’t Stay Silent

Thank you @RealCandaceO for writing the foreword for it!!! #BLEXIT #Woke#WeTheFree #WalkAway

From <https://davidharrisjr.com/politics/great-news-us-war-hero-army-sgt-derrick-miller-to-be-released-from-leavenworth-prison/>

 


Obama should not be President – Obama is setting Israel up for a WAR and the same logic would lead to a WAR in the US – He is setting a DANGEROUS precedent

May 21, 2011

This President is dangerous to the US.  The logic that started the war in Libya has nothing to do with Gadhafi, per se.  It has to do with setting the stage.  This president is not a leader.  He IS an actor.  The stage is being prepared by others.  He is only the lead role at the moment.  And this is WHY he is dangerous.  Nothing is REAL.  It’s all staged.  No one that is a REAL player gets hurt, according to the globalists.

I’m convinced that there is a fracturing in the Globalists clique.  Some of them are Global Capitalists and others are Global Communists.  There is an ideological strife a foot. The reason I believe that is because there are leaks of information surfacing that would otherwise NOT be there.

Be that as it may, the other agents in play are the Muslims.  They are outmaneuvering the Globalists on some fronts and the Globalists are making hasty errors in judgement.  They are forced to move more quickly, but some have already made deals with the other side.  Those, I believe, are the Capitalists, because they have only one goal, money, but not money in that they have paper or stuff like that, but money in terms of true wealth and that is Control driven.  They have to get CONTROL of the commonly accepted currency, because in the end, that is their only truest commodity.

So, how does that correlate to Gadhafi and how does that set the stage for a war that the US be subjected to?

It’s the Logic.  The UN is the Global GUN.  The reason that Gadhafi was attacked is to begin to set the precedent and NO other reason.  The next casualty will be potentially Syria, in my opinion.  The following, and this may not occur until AFTER the election, is Israel.  And the reasoning is nice outlined below, in Gaffeney’s article.  However, I would take it a step farther.  The same situation is setting itself up here too, in the US.  The next casualty, may indeed be, the US.  Hezbollah and Hamas have set up shop in South America and Mexico.  They are taking over the cartels.  They got their FEET in the door by selling weapons and training the Cartels.  Now, they are tenured within those “armies.”  The same situation is setting itself up.  What difference is there in logic?  It is the same.  The Palestinian’s cry that they were removed from their land.  The Mexicans cry the same.  US children are being taught toward sedition and outright treason of their own country by “teachers” whose agenda is to overthrow the state that they teach.  Even the methods are the same between the Palestinians and what they are doing to Israel and what the “Mexican’s”  are doing to the US.   The similarities should not go unnoticed.  The fish ALWAYS stinks from the HEAD.

<thanks to Mandy for the Gaffney article.>

I would also like to mention that Obama sitting as the head of the UN security council is a direct violation of the nobility clause in Article 9 of the US CONSTITUTION.

The Senate Armed Services Committee should convene immediately to prevent Obama from using our people in his and the NWO’s war. The military should stand down.

The ATF who’s under the Homeland security, which the CIA is also under, is headed by a CZAR.  This agency is NOT steered by an elected official.  This is an appointment by the PRESIDENT.  These CZAR headed agencies have taken control of legitimate agencies and are run by executive fiat.  This is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.  How is it that they have been allowed these POWERS?  These agencies have seized control of America.  They overrule the Constitutional limitations of power.

Communist China may be bad, but America is going to be much worse, if this continues unchecked.

The Gadhafi precedent: Could attack on Libya set the stage for action against Israel?

By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | There are many reasons to be worried about the bridge-leap the Obama administration has just undertaken in its war with Col. Moammar Gadhafi. How it will all end is just one of them.

Particularly concerning is the prospect that what we might call the Gadhafi precedent will be used in the not-too-distant future to justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel.

Here’s how such a seemingly impossible scenario might eventuate:

It begins with the Palestinian Authority seeking a United Nations Security Council resolution that would recognize its unilateral declaration of statehood. Three top female officials in the Obama administration reprise roles they played in the council’s recent action on Libya: U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, a vehement critic of Israel, urges that the United States support (or at least not veto) the Palestinians’ gambit. She is supported by the senior director for multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, Samantha Power, who in the past argued for landing a “mammoth force” of American troops to protect the Palestinians from Israel. Ditto Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, whose unalloyed sympathy for the Palestinian cause dates back at least to her days as first lady.

This resolution enjoys the support of the other four veto-wielding Security Council members – Russia, China, Britain and France – as well as all of the other nonpermanent members except India, which joins the United States in abstaining. As a result, it is adopted with overwhelming support from what is known as the “international community.”

With a stroke of the U.N.’s collective pen, substantial numbers of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israeli citizens find themselves on the wrong side of internationally recognized borders. The Palestinian Authority (PA) insists on its long-standing position: The sovereign territory of Palestine must be rid of all Jews.

The Israeli government refuses to evacuate the oft-condemned “settlements” now on Palestinian land or to remove the IDF personnel, checkpoints and facilities rightly seen as vital to protecting their inhabitants and, for that matter, the Jewish state itself.

Hamas and Fatah bury the hatchet (temporarily), forging a united front and promising democratic elections in the new Palestine. There, as in Gaza – and probably elsewhere in the wake of the so-called “Arab awakening” – the winner likely will be the Muslim Brotherhood, whose Palestinian franchise is Hamas.


The unified Palestinian proto-government then seeks international help to “liberate” its land. As with the Gadhafi precedent, the first to act is the Arab League. Its members unanimously endorse the use of force to protect the “Palestinian people” and end the occupation of the West Bank by the Israelis.

Turkey, which is still a NATO ally despite its ever-more-aggressive embrace of Islamism, is joined by Britain and France – two European nations increasingly hostile to Israel – in applauding this initiative in the interest of promoting “peace.” They call on the U.N. Security Council to authorize such steps as might be necessary to enforce the Arab League’s bidding.

Once again, Team Obama’s leading ladies – Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Power and Ms. Rice – align to support the “will of the international community.” They exemplify and are prepared to enforce the president’s willingness to subordinate U.S. sovereignty to the dictates of transnationalism and his personal hostility toward Israel. The concerns of Mr. Obama’s political advisers about alienating Jewish voters on the eve of the 2012 election are trumped by presidential sympathy for the Palestinian right to a homeland.

Accordingly, hard as it may be to believe given the United States’ long-standing role as Israel’s principal ally and protector, Mr. Obama acts in accordance with the Gadhafi precedent. He warns Israel that it must take steps immediately to dismantle its unwanted presence inside the internationally recognized state of Palestine lest it face the sort of U.S.- enabled “coalition” military measures now under way in Libya. In this case, they would be aimed at neutralizing IDF forces on the West Bank – and beyond, if necessary – in order to fulfill the “will of the international community.”

Of course, such steps would not result in the ostensibly desired endgame, namely “two states living side by side in peace and security.” If the current attack on Libya entails the distinct possibility of unintended (or at least unforeseen) consequences, application of the Gadhafi precedent to Israel seems certain to produce a very different outcome from the two-state “solution”: Under present and foreseeable circumstances, it will unleash a new regional war, with possible worldwide repercussions.

At the moment, it seems unlikely that the first application in Libya of the Gadhafi precedent will have results consistent with U.S. interests. Even if a positive outcome somehow is forthcoming there, should Mr. Obama and his anti-Israel troika of female advisers be allowed, based on that precedent, to realize the foregoing hypothetical scenario, they surely would precipitate a new international conflagration, one fraught with truly horrific repercussions – for Israel, the United States and freedom-loving people elsewhere.

A Congress that was effectively sidelined by Team Obama in the current crisis had better engage fully, decisively and quickly if it is to head off such a disastrous reprise.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney032211.php3

– Here’s another article as food for thought –

WHY THE FRAMERS INCLUDED THE “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” CLAUSE

by Tom Deacon


The greatest defeat of the American Revolution was the fall of Charleston, SC to the British in 1780

(May 16, 2010) — Section 1 ofArticle II of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as President of the United States:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Try to understand this: At the time of the adoption of the Constitution there were no “natural born Citizens” (no country yet = no citizens, period?), so yes, the Founders wrote in a “grandfather” clause to allow those present (already born) at the time the Constitution was signed to qualify to be president.  However, if you weren’t born yet when the Constitution was adopted (that includes Obama), then you had to be a “natural born Citizen,” meaning both parents must be U.S. citizens. It is amazing how tough this is for some people to understand. The reason Congress “investigated” McCain was because he was not born in the USA. They concluded in their report that that was OK, because his “parents” (notice the plural form of “parents”) were both U.S. Citizens.  This is not true for Obama, and he clearly was not held to the same standard.

The Constitution says you must be a natural born Citizen, or a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted. The Founders wanted the president to be a natural born Citizen, but they recognized that there were NO natural born Citizens until after the Constitution was adopted. They didn’t know that 200+ years from the signing, the education system would have dumbed down the USA’s population to the point that understanding it was an endangered ability.

Some may believe the natural born Citizen clause isn’t fair. The Founders of our nation believed it was the right thing to do because they had just fought a war with those who had allegiance to a country other than the one they were fighting to create….that country was the one they left to come to America, namely, England.  The Founders did not want to elect a newborn to the office of the president, nor did they want to wait 35 years for a natural born Citizen to meet the age requirement to be president. So they grandfathered themselves in with the statement “or a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.” No doubt they trusted themselves and their children who were born prior to the signing of the Constitution to be loyal only to the USA, fighting a war with England would have had that effect on them.

Obama is the “poster child’ who proves once again that the wisdom of America’s Founders was impeccable.

You can make up excuses till the earth fries from global warming, but you can’t change the truth.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/05/16/note-to-obama-supporters-even-a-birth-in-hawaii-is-not-enough/


Middle East – the “Democratic” uprising is really a CIVIL WAR between Sunni and Shiite

May 7, 2011

No only is the uprising in the ME NOT Democratic, it’s a sort of CIVIL WAR.

I say civil war, because if one looks at the entire area as PERSIA and Muslim, then the area and issue becomes VERY clear.

Iran is not the head.  There is no HEAD.  The HEAD is ISLAM.

The wars are over control of the region.  The issue is who will be the leader of the coming LARGER fight.  Who wins here is who will take the baton of ISLAM to carry it forward in to the NEW MILLENNIAL.

2011 is 1432 H in Islam.

Bahrain Sees Hezbollah Plot in Protest

 BahrainBahrain

In Report to U.N., Government Says Lebanese Militant Group Has Been Working to Overthrow Ruling Khalifa Family

by Jay Solomon

Bahrain At Night

Bahrain At Night

Bahrain has accused the Iranian-backed militia Hezbollah with seeking to overthrow the island-state’s ruling family, in a report to the United Nations, escalating the growing cold war between Sunni Arab states and Shiite-dominated Iran.

The confidential report, sent to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last week, alleges that Hezbollah has been training Bahraini opposition figures at camps in Lebanon and Iran. Bahrain’s government also accuses Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and other senior members of the Islamist Lebanese organization of directly plotting with Bahrain’s largely Shiite opposition on how to challenge the ruling Khalifa family.

Iran, Hezbollah and Bahrain’s opposition movement deny …

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703907004576279121469543918.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Below is a good understanding of the ME.  Look at each countries -“Constitution and the Rule of Law .”  This will give a good feel for each.

Analysis: How will the Mideast dominoes fall now?

Hizballah to pull its heavy missiles from Syrian safekeeping
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report May 1, 2011, 9:30 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tags:  Bashar Assad   Hizballah   Israel   missiles   Syrian uprising 
Syrian army tank in Daraa

The Lebanese Shiite Hizballah has obviously decided the Assad regime is sinking.DEBKAfile’s military sources report the organization is preparing to pull its heavy, long-range weapons out of storage in Syrian military facilities – no longer sure they are safe there – and risk transporting them to Lebanon.

Last year, Syrian President Bashar Assad agreed to store Hizballah’s incoming Iran-made Fatah-110 surface missiles and its Syrian equivalent the M-600 and the mobile SA-8 (Gecko) anti-air battery which holds 18 warheads with a maximum range of 12 kilometers. Tehran paid for the upkeep of the Hizballah hardware on Syrian side of the border after Israel threatened to bomb these potential game-changers if they crossed over.

Deployed at Hizballah bases in Lebanon, the Fatah-110 and M-600 would place almost every corner of Israel within range of bombardment, while the SA-8 would seriously restrict Israeli Air Force operations over southern Lebanon and Galilee.
However, as the uprising against Assad rolls ever closer to Damascus, Hizballah see a very real threat of it infecting the Syrian army and has decided that now might be its last chance to get hold of the core arsenal it has standing by for war with Israel before events get out of hand in Syria.

Hizballah’s headquarters in Dahya, Beirut, became alarmed when they heard about strong resentment building up in the Syrian 11th Division over the Assad crackdown against the dissidents – among officers as well as other ranks.
The 11th Division, which is camped outside Aleppo, is the best trained and organized of all Syrian army units, equipped as its strategic reserve with the most advanced weaponry. If the unrest has reached this elite unit, Hizballah reckons there is no time to losing for pulling its missiles out of Syrian military safekeeping.

Meanwhile, top Hizballah and Iranian offices in Tehran are working on the best way to transport the missiles into Lebanon without exposing them to Israeli attack, DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources report. Some of them calculate that Israel would not venture to strike them while still on Syrian soil because it would lay itself open to interfering, or even getting in the way of, the revolt against President Assad and playing into his hands.

A security emergency might well take the wind out of protest movement’s sails.
But already, Tehran’s Lebanese surrogate is beginning to distance itself from Bashar Assad, its longtime strategic partner and arms supplier, having decided he has his back to the wall.  April 28, the Hizballah-controlled Lebanese Al Akhbar newspaper started criticizing the Assad regime on its op-ed pages.

http://debka.com/article/20891/


Hezbollah – To Osama with Love – His death strengthens them.

May 7, 2011

Osama is dead.  Ding Dong, the witch is dead….

Meanwhile OZ is still pulling the strings and Hezbollah takes the lead.

This is like passing the football.

Osama killed but Hezbollah increasing its power in Lebanon

May 2nd, 2011 7:04 am ET

By Jim Kouri
Law Enforcement Examiner

While millions of Americans are celebrating the killing of the world’s Number One terrorist, Osama bin Laden, the global war on terrorism is far from over. Intelligence reports coming out of Israel and Lebanon reveal some disturbing events taking place in Lebanon.

Since the Second Lebanon War in 2006,  Hezbollah has increased its power in munitions and number of operatives with tens of thousands of weapons stored in civilian villages throughout southern Lebanon, a direct violation of UN Resolution 1701, according to an Israeli Defense Force intelligence report.

According to the IDF Spokesperson, the Hezbollah terrorist organization is spread out between as many as 1,000 facilities in southern Lebanon, located in 270 civilian villages. The organization continues to acquire munitions and strengthen, funded by Syria which is also smuggling weapons to it. This includes weapons which can reach populations in the center of Israel in cities such as Tel Aviv.

According to IDF intelligence, since the end of the Second Lebanon War in 2006, Hezbollah has built more that 500 bunkers in the southern Lebanon region, each one holding various weapons. In addition, the organization has built about 300 underground facilities and 100 storage units for munitions including rockets, missiles and other weapons.

The terrorist group has made certain these terror centers filled with explosives and munitions are located near hospitals, private homes and schools.

“Apparently this is Hezbollah’s way of taking advantage of the civilian population of Lebanon. And the sad thing is the news media and United Nations know this situation exists but they don’t allow the truth to stop them from condemning Israel when it must ‘take out” one of these facilities and there’s collateral damage,” said former Marine intelligence officer and police executive Mike Snopes.

According to the IDF Northern Command, Hezbollah militants have doubled in number since the end of the last war.

Today, Hezbollah is estimated to have an arsenal of more than 40,000 rockets. This being the case, if war breaks out, Hezbollah will be able to launch between 500 and 600 rockets at Israel every day. One of the organization’s main civilian centers for storing munitions is the village of Al Khiyam in southern Lebanon, where hundreds of rockets and mortar shells with varying ranges are stored. More than 100 Hezbollah militants operate in the village, including special forces ready for combat with IDF soldiers.

Washington - The Israeli military presented evidence on Wednesday that it says shows Hezbollah fighters in southern Lebanon are preparing for a confrontation, Haaretz reported Wednesday.

Hezbollah is thus trying to distort the balance of power in Lebanon and return to full, routine militant activity in southeast Lebanon, similar to its activity levels just prior to the war in 2006. Hezbollah militant activities are based in southern Lebanon, funded and maintained by Syria and Iran. All of these are in direct violation to the UN Security Council’s 1701 decision.

Jim Kouri, CPP, formerly Fifth Vice-President, is currently a Board Member of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, an editor for ConservativeBase.com, and he’s a columnist for Examiner.com.  In addition, he’s a blogger for the Cheyenne, Wyoming Fox News Radio affiliate KGAB (www.kgab.com). Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty. He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations.  He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country.   Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer and columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com.   Kouri appears regularly as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Fox News Channel, Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, etc.

To subscribe to Kouri’s newsletter write to COPmagazine@aol.com and write “Subscription” on the subject line.

Osama killed but Hezbollah increasing its power in Lebanon – National Law Enforcement | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/osama-killed-but-hezbollah-increasing-its-power-lebanon#ixzz1LhQCHst7


OBAMA wants to PUSH for illegal alien amnesty – Hezbollah and Hamas agents can’t wait to be legalized.

May 7, 2011

Sanctuary cities aren’t enough?

Mexico – Hezbollah and Hamas is partnered with drug cartels – ties to Lebanon – tunnels in San Diego

Terrorists are using Americans and Mexicans to conduct all sorts of operations and this idiot is wanting to OPEN the borders?

Idiot.

Obama to push immigration reform in Texas; Rep. Lamar Smith says it’s ‘unlikely he will succeed anytime soon’

President Barack Obama will use the Texas-Mexico border as a backdrop next week for a speech on the need to pass sweeping immigration reform, officials said Friday.

President Obama is planning to take Air Force One to El Paso on Tuesday to talk immigration. (AP photo)

Obama is traveling to El Paso where he will call on Congress to fix the nation’s broken immigration system and address the 11 million immigrants in this country illegally – including 1.6 million in Texas.

“I want to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, to enforce our laws and also to address the status of millions of undocumented workers,” Obama told Latino leaders at a “Cinco de Mayo” reception at the White House.

Immigration reform has stalled in Congress and Obama conceded that passing comprehensive legislation “is not going to be easy.”

“We’ve got to keep doing the hard work of changing minds and changing hearts and changing votes, one at a time,” said Obama, who will deliver his speech in El Paso on Tuesday before traveling to Austin for a fundraiser.

Republican leaders in the GOP-controlled House are opposed to measures that would grant citizenship or legal status to immigrants who entered the country illegally.

“The president wasn’t able to pass his version of immigration reform when he had large Democratic majorities in the House and Senate because of bipartisan opposition, so it’s unlikely he will succeed anytime soon,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

The last sweeping immigration reform bill died in the Senate in 2007.

Republicans, like Texas Sen. John Cornyn said the president has failed to secure the border and failed to build consensus needed to pass reform legislation.

“What Sen. Cornyn is looking for President Obama cannot deliver with another speech or photo op, and that’s presidential leadership. Words matter little when there is no action,” said Kevin McLaughlin, a Cornyn spokesman.

But Obama’s trip to the Texas border to renew his commitment to immigration reform comes after three weeks of White House gatherings to get input from mayors, lawmakers and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

“I’m hoping the president can get more people thinking about it – the business community and Republicans – and convince them that the time is now. There should not be any political posturing,” said Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, D-San Antonio, Congressional Hispanic Caucus chairman.

Immigration advocates say the president has laid the groundwork for reform legislation, which would lead to more secure borders.

“We need to address the real threats of cash of drugs of guns that are smuggled and moved across our border that cause harm to our communities, not the imaginary threats of landscapers and nannies,” said Ali Noorani with the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigration advocacy group.

A man holds a Mexican flag with red stains as he demonstrates along the Mexico-Cuernavaca 95D highway to protest against drug violence. (AP photo)

Obama administration officials claim the U.S.-Mexico border is more secure than at any time in history, despite the raging war being waged by narcotics cartels just across the Rio Grande.

The Border Patrol has increased to 20,700 agents, more than double the number of agents in 2004, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

Illegal immigration has dropped due to increased enforcement and the economy, Obama administration officials claim.

The number of illegal immigrants in the country is estimated at 11 million by the Pew Hispanic Center, using U.S. Census data. That is down from an estimated 12 million in 2007.

There are roughly 1.6 million illegal immigrants in Texas, about 6.5 percent of the state’s population. Some 1 million illegal immigrants are in the state’s workforce, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.

Border Patrol is intercepting between 70 percent and 90 percent of illegal crossers on the Southwest border, said William Moore with the Texas Border Coalition, which represents cities and countries along the Rio Grande from Brownsville to El Paso.

“The strategy that the administration is put into place between the ports of entry is working,” Moore said.

The Texas Border Coalition is asking Congress and the administration to shift resources to upgrade border land ports to better screen and confiscate contraband without hampering trade between the United States and Mexico.

“Those land ports of entry are the doorways through which nearly all of the drug cartels’ product enters the United States,” Moore said.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/05/obama-to-push-immigration-reform-in-texas-rep-lamar-smith-says-its-unlikely-he-will-succeed-anytime-soon/


Osama bin Laden – Blackout during the killing. Was the reason for the killing because Osama knew too much and was about to come out from hiding?

May 5, 2011

Why the secrecy?

Why the confusion?

The truth is not confusing.

So, what is the truth here?

Was Osama looking to come out of the “closet?”

Was the tenth anniversary of the TWIN TOWERS collapse going to bring a new revelation from the ME?  Was Osama going to deliver yet another blow?

Osama bin Laden dead: Blackout during raid on bin Laden compound

The head of the CIA admitted yesterday that there was no live video footage of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound as further doubts emerged about the US version of events.

President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, along with with members of the national security team, receive an update on the mission against Osama bin Laden in the Situation Room of the White House

By Steven Swinford 10:25PM BST 04 May 2011

Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

In an interview with PBS, Mr Panetta said: “Once those teams went into the compound I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we really didn’t know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information.

“We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound.”

Mr Panetta also told the network that the US Navy Seals made the final decision to kill bin Laden rather than the president.

Afghan men watch television coverage announcing the killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden at a local restaurant in Kabul, Afghanistan Monday, May 2, 2011. al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden was slain at a fortress-like compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, early Monday in a firefight with U.S. forces, ending a manhunt that spanned a decade. (AP Photo/Musadeq Sadeq)

He said: “The authority here was to kill bin Laden. And obviously, under the rules of engagement, if he had in fact thrown up his hands, surrendered and didn’t appear to be representing any kind of threat, then they were to capture him. But they had full authority to kill him.

“To be frank, I don’t think he had a lot of time to say anything. It was a firefight going up that compound. And by the time they got to the third floor and found bin Laden, I think it – this was all split-second action on the part of the Seals.”

The President only knew the mission was successful after the Navy Seals commander heard the word “Geronimo” on the radio, a code word from commandos reporting that they had killed bin Laden.

The absence of footage of the raid has led to conflicting reports about what happened in the compound. According to Pakistani authorities one of bin Laden’s daughter’s, who was present during the raid, claimed that her father was captured alive before he was killed.

There was also growing doubt about the US claims that Pakistan’s intelligence agencies involved in the raid.

Lieutenant General Asad Durrani, former head of the ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service, said it was “inconceivable” that his government was unaware of the US raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound.

He claimed his country was forced to deny any knowledge of the raid to avoid a domestic backlash. The ISI’s official line has been that bin Laden’s compound had “slipped off our radar” after it raided the building in 2003 while hunting for another senior al-Qaeda operative.The agency claims it was unaware that bin Laden was hiding there.

Lieutenant General Durrani, however, said that the denial was a “political” maneuver by the intelligence services to avoid claims that they were working too closely with the US.

He said: “It is more likely that they did know [about the raid]. It is not conceivable that it was done without the involvement of Pakistani security forces at some stage. They were involved and they were told they were in position.

“The army chief was in his office, the cordons had been thrown around that particular place. The Pakistani helicopters were also in the air so that indicates that it was involved.

“[There are] political implications back home. If you say that you are involved there is a large, vocal faction of Pakistani society that will get very upset because we are carrying out repeatedly these operations with the Americans.”

http://newstrust.net/stories/6152155/toolbar?ref=nld&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=20110505_listing


%d bloggers like this: