William Coopers The Hour of the Time

From my Friend at the Daily Resistance, Nathan Laurensen

Obama Is The Commander In Chief For ISIS

December 29, 2015 Nathan Laurenson Filed Under: Original Articles

NATHAN LAURENSON

The examples over the last 3 and half plus years of the west funding and giving ISIS weapons are beyond blatant. In this article we will layout a timeline with example after example. It is up to you the reader  to look inside yourself and accept the information being presented. The documentation provided comes straight from the culprits themselves and proves unequivocally without a shadow of a doubt that our government and the corporate government controlled media is complicit with this lie, that we are fighting a war on terror. The war on terror is a giant pork project boondoggle pushed by the military industrial complex and contractors in order to rake in billions of dollars.  This lie is so big, so in your face that if we the people and politicians admit this , then it may just bring down the whole system. This is truly a lie that is too big to fail and the people involved are to big to jail.

The  Council on Foreign Relations  published an article on August 6th, 2012 titled Al Qaeda’s Specter in Syria   which states that the Free Syrian army needs Al Qaeda in their ranks to bring discipline and may help their morale. This is the same Free Syrian Army that the administration has been  supporting to topple Assad. For everyone who says so what, who the hell is the CFR anyway, their not our government. This is a  secret round table group that sets, steers and pushes policies  for the government. In essence they are the government that operates illegally behind closed doors. Hillary Clinton even admitted in 2009 that she gets her marching orders from no one other than guess who the CFR.

I know everyone reading this article remembers the infamous Benghazi ordeal, which cost 4 Americans their lives. The Obama administration pushed a lie about a video that caused the uprising September 11, 2012.  A 100 plus page document obtained by Judicial Watch from the Department of Defense and Department of State  through freedom of information requests, which was previous marked secret proves that event was planned at least 10 days in advance of attacks. This clearly illustrates the administration was lying about the film being the driving force and  reason behind attacks. The documents also provide proof that the Obama administration knew of weapons being shipped from from Port of Benghazi to Syrian rebels in Syria.

A Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), dated September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack, details that the attack on the compound had been carefully planned by the BOCAR terrorist group “to kill as many Americans as possible.” The document was sent to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council. The heavily redacted Defense Department “information report” says that the attack on the Benghazi facility “was planned and executed by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman (BCOAR).” The group subscribes to “AQ ideologies:”

According to an Associated Press article published April 20th, 2013 we gave the Syrian rebels 123 million more in  tax payer dollars, after already allotting 403 million dollars. In this article they admit we where using the rebels to over throw President Assad. Then in June of 2014 President Obama went to Congress to obtain a half a billion dollars for the Syrian rebels which is ISIS or Al Qaeda, or what ever flavor of the month you’d like to call these sunni wahhabists.

On Memorial day 2013,  Senator John McCain snuck into Syria to meet with FSA Commander, Gen. Salem Idris and other Al Qaeda linked groups. Is everyone making the connections now? Its 2 plus 2 level addition. Sen. McCain met with Al Qaeda on tax payers dime.

Then you have the documented proof of ISIS taking over oil fields and getting support from Gulf States and especially America’s ally Turkey. You also have experts like Günter Meyer who is Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at the University of Mainz. Meyer says he has no doubt about where ISIS gets its funding. “The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of the Gulf states, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates,” Meyer told Deutsche Welle.

In 2014 Aaron Klein reporting for World Net Daily discovered that in 2012 U.S., Turkey and Jordanian forces were training fighters for the free Syrian Army. The guardian also reported being trained by British and French instructors.

WND.com reported with sources inside the Jordanian and Syrian regimes that Saudi Arabia was aiding ,arming and was driving force of the Al Qaeda linked group.

That clearly shows how ISIS is the same group, with the same flag, that we clearly have supported in Syria. More proof we have been behind ISIS.

In September of 2013 Sen. Cruz even made the bold statement that the U. S. is not Al Qaeda’s Air Force.

The statement came after many brave servicemen in uniform took to social media holding signs in front of their faces, stating they did not sign up to fight for Al Qaeda in a Syrian civil war.

Second Lt. Scott Bennett and Brad Birkenfeld a civilian banker for the Swiss bank UBS  uncovered  the CIA was paying terrorist recruits in upwards of $600 per recruit . Both were imprisoned for whistleblowing. Scott released  a document titledShell Game which lays out and details the ties between the CIA, Booz Allen Hamilton, UBS and terrorists.

Then you have the big enchilada the DIA report  . The report outlines how the opposition in Syria was Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafist and other Sunni Muslim extremist groups. This is the same Syrian opposition rebel group our loving government supported time and time again and admit in the report that was the groups we were supporting. Also in report it states that by supporting the Syrian opposition in a proxy war against Assad would cause Russia, China and Iran to support President Assad’s forces in Syria. In this report it names Syria and Iranian forces as Infidels as well. DIA Chief Gen. Michael Flynn said it was a willful decision to allow ISIS to rise in Syria by Obama.

Under President Obama’s plan to eradicate ISIS he has led bombing campaigns that have targeted nothing. No real infrastructure of ISIS has been hit or targeted  by the U.S. and when we do target oil or supply  trucks our military has been ordered to drop leaflets giving ISIS  drivers a 45 minute warning to get out of the area bombs are about to be dropped. This proves once again that this whole war on ISIS or war on terror is only theater.

If you look at bottom right corner of picture below you will see DoD news. What does DoD stand for? If you said Alex what is The Department of Defense for the daily double, you guessed the correct answer. Now its time to win the game and go all the way with the information presented and admit to yourself what you already know. Obama is the Commander in Chief for these radicals.

Former  high ranking CIA agent and current lobbyist Jonathon Greenhill of The Greenhill Group was hired by H.E. Shaykh Abdalrazzaq Hatem al-Sulayman in 2015  to procure money to “create an autonomous Sunni region in Iraq or an independent Sunni State.”

Before H.E. Shaykh Abdalrazzaq Hatem al-Sulayman  was lobbying for tax payer funds, the Pentagon and CENTCOM was giving him hundreds of millions of dollars to during  the Iraqi insurgency. More proof that the highest levels of our Government has been complicit and front and center of funding Sunni Jihadis.

This predated, the current Criminal in Chief. The point of this  article naming Obama commander in Chief of ISIS is meant to illustrate that the leader of the free world is actually a war criminal no matter the administration. How many examples do you need for this to register in your brainwashed propagandized  mind? Go to the mirror look yourself in the face admit it, then open your window and scream WE ARE FUNDING ISIS. Once you do that,  the awakening process will take place and finally at that point,  everything will start to make since.

One more little nugget of truth for you to chew on and  to help guide your awakening process, is that our beloved Government is funding actual Muslim charter schools here inside the United States.The school is receiving hundreds of millions of tax dollars to operate. These schools are led by a radical Turkish Cleric who is living here inside of the U.S. in exile from Turkey. He had help coming here from none other than the CIA and lives in a Pennsylvania compound. This group also is bringing in Turkish immigrants with fast tracked green cards to teach at the schools. Are these the people you want molding your child’s mind, while hing under the moniker of science and technology.Do you really need anymore proof?

The global elite who are the true puppet masters of these coward politicians need these radicals to keep the public in perpetual fear, so the tax dollars keep flowing into the giant pork projects called defense contracting corporations who run the intelligence agencies, and military industrial complex. Its also a fantastic reason to build the giant police slash surveillance state and control. How will the government get the  people to give up control to them? Bring in a threat and  cause a clash of civilizations. Then at that point the average lemming will believe their  security is being threatened and will accept any police state measures to make them feel safe. We all know those who give up their freedom for security will have and deserve neither. Classic Hegelian dialectic, problem, reaction, solution.

WAKE UP RESIST DAILY OR BECOME A SLAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Calling the Gun Grabbers

I just called the cosponsors of the gun ban bill and read them this information, along with the second amendment.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/cosponsors

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.
From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves,
were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915
to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from
1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend
themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to
1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From
1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971
to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975
to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in
the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or
hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and
property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding
citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too
late!

Manipulating the Environment to Turn Patriots into Terrorists By David Risselada

Americans, after recovering from the holidays, are anticipating another round of executive orders focusing on stricter gun control, after the President returns from his Hawaii vacation. At this point, as evidenced by the massive increase in gun sales, the American people understand that gun control is not about gun safety, it is about control, period. Honestly, the gun control debate can be used to sum up the exact differences between the left and right wing worldviews. Most of us understand that the left generally believes we are too stupid to govern our own affairs, and, an intellectual elite is needed to dictate how we live our lives. The right on the other hand, believes in principles like individual liberty and personal responsibility, and that people are best off when left to self govern. What most people fail to understand is that the left had been mastering the manipulation of human behavior for the past century, and most of our reactions, whether we like to admit it or not, are the result of purposefully fed stimulus designed to generate a reaction that either way, could push us towards the desired end of total control. As I wrote in Psychology: Silent Weapon of the Elites Pushing us all Toward the Same End, the social controllers have discovered that manipulating the environment around us can force us into predictable behavior patterns that can be studied and counted on to produce the same results. The environment, unbeknownst to most of us, is used in more ways than can be imagined to gain social control, especially when it comes to pushing, and gaining support for certain issues. So they like to believe.

The television media is playing a huge role assisting the Obama administration demonize certain people, promote or denigrate certain political issues and give the overall appearance that the Democrat agenda is widely accepted, and the Conservatives are downright hated. While it may be commonly known that the main stream media is extremely biased, this will matter little in one hundred years after history has been rewritten by the progressive liberals. No matter the issue, whether it be guns, race, the economy, immigration or terrorism, the media is there to give the appearance that the majority of Americans disapprove of Conservative attempts to stop the democrat/communist agenda. This of course, is a method of social control. Most people can understand the concept of Republican politicians going along in an attempt to avoid being labeled as a racist, or uncompassionate towards people’s needs. This technique is very effective, perhaps so much so that Paul Ryan felt compelled to pass the recent omnibus spending bill out of fear the left would make another commercial portraying him throwing granny from a cliff over proposed Medicare cuts. While many people may be wondering what new information is being presented here, many have no idea just how refined this technique is, and how much of a science manipulating human behavior has become.

In this article, I am going to continue explaining our current political environment through B.F. Skinners “Beyond Freedom and Dignity,” in an attempt to make readers aware of just how “inhumane” the left wing world view really is, and the extent to which they are attempting to manipulate us.

As described in the first paragraph, there is a distinct difference between the left wing view of man, and the right wing view. While it is a sufficient comparison enabling readers to understand the difference on a fundamental level, it in no way does this difference in world views any justice. The difference is purely scientific, and once this is understood, everything else falls into place. For instance, on page 101 of “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” B.F. Skinner explains this difference from a psychological perspective and it is completely Darwinian/Marxist in nature. He refers to mans ability to freely choose his behavior as the “Pre-Scientific” view of mankind. Pre-Scientific man was responsible for his own successes and failures, he was able to decide for himself and act based on his own beliefs.

A political view that sought to make the most of man, and build upon his growth, would likely refer to these attributes as the “post-scientific” view of man; however, this is not the case. Science has learned to manipulate and control behavior, and this has drastically changed the way science views mankind. It is now believed that if individuals cannot be molded, and made to accept certain behaviors and beliefs, that the individual is defective.  This attitude is what led to the deaths of nearly 100,000,000 people in the twentieth century as communist dictators brutally murdered those that opposed communism because it was believed that only defective people could not be brought to see the reasonableness of social control.

Skinner writes that the more that is learned about the effects of the environment on human behavior, the less it can be attributable to any “autonomous” controlling agent. This simply means that man is not in control of his behavior, and through manipulating the environment, his behavior can be controlled. Consider Skinners thoughts on “post”-scientific man.

In the scientific view (and the word is not necessarily honorific) a person’s behavior is determined by a genetic endowment traceable to the evolutionary history of the species and by the environmental circumstances to which as an individual he has been exposed. Neither view can be proved, but it is in the nature of scientific inquiry that the evidence should shift in favor of the second. As we learn more about the effects of the environment, we have less reason to attribute any part of human behavior to an autonomous controlling agent. And the second view shows a marked advantage when we begin to do something about behavior. Autonomous man is not easily changed: in fact, to the extent that he is autonomous, he is by definition not changeable at all. But the environment can be changed, and we are learning how to change it. The measures we use are those of physical and biological technology, but we use them in special ways to affect behavior. (Skinner, 101)

This comparison to what Skinner describes as pre-scientific man and scientific man highlights perfectly what it is we are up against when considering the lefts agenda. This however, is not all. On page 91 Skinner describes how effective manipulating the environment to form public opinion truly is. This brings us back to our example with Paul Ryan and throwing granny from a cliff. The fear of disapproval, it has been found, is a powerful motivator when seeking conformity. Consider the following statement.

People who get along together well under the mild contingencies of approval and disapproval are controlled as effectively as (and in many ways more effectively than) the citizens of a police state. Orthodoxy controls through the establishment of rules, but the mystic is no freer because the contingencies which have shaped his behavior are more personal or idiosyncratic. Those who work productively because of the reinforcing value of what they produce are under the sensitive and powerful control of the products. Those who learn in the natural environment are under a form of control as powerful as any control exerted by a teacher. (Skinner, 91)

So, what does this have to do with our current political environment and the push for gun control? Well, the environment has been changed to give the impression that we live in an out of control, dangerous society where leaving your house means you risk getting shot in the head. Or at least, this is how they try to portray the environment in order to change your behavior. In America, liberty can only be lost when the people consent to it; and in a nation where liberty works and everybody is living peaceful, prosperous lives, there is little reason to give up freedom in order to feel secure. There is little doubt, after understanding the belief that human behavior can be manipulated through the environment, that social controllers are hard at work engineering environmental changes to bring about the type of behavioral controls they would wish to impose upon us. Consider Cass Sunstein for instance; he believes, and has stated so in his book “Nudge,” that human beings should be “nudged” into behaving certain ways that would be better for the planet, better for health and to help to bring about happiness. Again, the common theme here is that people do not know what is best for them and only with an enlightened, intellectual elite lording over us can we expect to live prosperous, healthy lives.

The only problem the left has is that people are not buying it. People do not want to be controlled because despite what the left believes, we were created, by our creator, to be free, plain and simple.  The left simply does not understand the “pre-scientific” view of man because everything for them has to be categorized and boxed away in easily controlled files. When Josh Earnest said the White House had no idea why Americans were buying so many guns, he wasn’t kidding. The left has no way of comprehending why Americans have not abandoned their outdated ideas of freedom and the rights to protect the ones we love in favor of more government control because for all of their efforts to manipulate and control our behavior through changing the environment, they have forgot to analyze what it is they are so afraid of. Their quest for total control represents little more than a fear of being unable to control themselves. We are just the guinea pigs. Given the fact however, that the current administration has demonstrated an unshakable resolve when it comes to creating chaos to gain more power, the possibility that Americans refusal to go along with the gun control agenda can be used against us is highly likely. They have already labeled most of us as terrorists and extremists, enacting gun control and playing on the fact that the majority of patriots will not go along will only aid in the efforts of creating a hostile environment which will be used to further “nudge” the people to change their behavior.  In effect, whether the majority of people buy it or not will matter little, they are successfully changing the environment, forcing us to respond in defense of our inalienable rights. They are using the environment and the issue of gun control to turn patriots into terrorists in the minds of the unwashed masses, and for some it is working.

Destroying Utopia by David Risselada

In my book, “Not on my Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education,” I discussed my college experience where I was educated by left wing zealots who taught the concepts of white privilege and social justice. The book is a combination of personal stories and research which describes many of the indoctrination methods being used in our universities and public schools today. One of the concepts that were continually discussed was the idea of creating “Utopia;” a world of total equality where everyone is free from want and the desire to compete with one another because everyone is provided the same basic necessities. In the minds of the left, people’s behavior is driven by the environment and they believe that capitalism, being competitive in nature, is one of the biggest contributing factors of inequality and poverty. They simply do not believe that some people achieve success based on their own hard work and merit; rather, it is a result of the environment in which they are surrounded by. Therefore, when it comes to creating “Utopia,” the idea is to change the environment to one where people’s behavior adapts with it, and they are no longer motivated by the need to survive and prosper because the environment is one where everything is provided to everyone equally.  This is a basic precept of the social and behavioral sciences. It is the argument of man being free and autonomous or an instinct driven creature whose behavior can be controlled and manipulated.

In “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” B.F. Skinner argues that human behavior is not only shaped by environment, but through conditioning. The reward/punishment model of molding human behavior is widely used in our education system and it is argued by many that support the “free, autonomous man” argument that this is greatly hampering people’s ability to think and act because they will only do so when promised a reward. The fear of punishment also influences people’s ability to act out of fear that they may say or do the wrong thing. This is obvious on some levels as the threat of jail or loss of certain privileges will certainly influence the choices some people make. While conservatives would argue that man is freely making these behavioral choices, the behaviorists argue that these choices are dictated to us based on our surroundings. This is true on some levels, our surroundings may certainly limit our behavior choices; however, man is still very much in control of the choice he makes, to argue otherwise is to say man is no different than any other beast that roams the earth, and has no inherent qualities that makes him significant in anyway. This is why the left continually makes excuses for the behavior of criminals and terrorists. Islamic radicals are justified in their actions because they are oppressed, and our culture is intolerant of them. Black Lives Matter activists arejustified in burning down cities because they live in an environment where they are allegedly hunted down by white cops and murdered in cold blood. We all know these are invalid arguments and that to treat man like an animal unable to take any responsibility for his actions is to completely dehumanize him.

B.F. Skinner Founder of Operant Conditioning

As mentioned earlier, one of the goals of the social controllers is to create “Utopia” and a world of total equality. In order to do this however, people’s ideas of freedom and control need to be changed as well as the environment around them. Skinner argues that the social environment needs to be redesigned in order to limit the aversive (negative) consequences of behavior and that once this is accomplished, the way people view social control can be changed. In other words, people can be conditioned to accept social control in a world where negative consequences of their behavior are eliminated and behavioral choices which lead to positive consequences are made for them.  Consider the following statement from B.F. Skinners “Beyond Freedom and Dignity.”

Physical technology has reduced the number of occasions upon which people arenaturally punished, and social environments have been changed to reduce the likelihood of punishment at the hands of others. Punishable behavior can be minimized by creating circumstances in which it is not likely to occur. The archetypal pattern is the cloister. In a world in which only simple foods are available, and in moderate supply, no one is subject to the natural punishment of overeating, or the social punishment of disapproval, or the religious punishment of gluttony as a venial sin. (Skinner “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” pp.64)

That is quite a telling statement. It highlights the belief held by the left that man’s behavior needs to be controlled for his own good because his choices only lead to personal harm and destruction of the world around him. It also highlights the belief mentioned in the previous paragraph. The social controllers believe that the creation of Utopia is possible by manipulating mans surroundings in a manner in which the choices he makes are the result of a controlled environment in which he is positively rewarded for making such choices. It is the belief of the left that man would rather sit back and have the peaceful, stress free life fostered upon him as opposed to having to take risk and work hard to achieve a state of autonomy. They would like to create a world where people accept that their control is necessary for people to behave. In fact, it is the belief of Skinner that the creation of a perfect world, where people are conditioned to accept social control, would eliminate the need for people to be good because the conditions created where there is no aversive stimulus to react to, and no natural punishments for negative behavior would be absent. People would therefore simply go along with the stimulus provided by the social controllers in much the same way Julia is portrayed in Barrack Obama’s “The Life of Julia.” Here, Julia, a fictional character, is being led down the path of having everything provided to her by the government, a cradle to grave form of control if you will. The left believes that this type of system creates an “automatic goodness” in people because the environment would be one where there is no need to compete, no need to be driven by selfishness and no need to be without. In essence, society would be free from want and need.

If all of this were true to any degree then we would have achieved this Utopia long ago because the social controllers have been manipulating our environment for many, many decades in its pursuit. The biggest mistake made by these behavioral scientists is believing that man is not a divine being created with free will and an ability to choose. They view everything from scientific terms, and man, in essence, is a spiritual being whether they wish to accept it or not. If man wished to be free from want and the stress of providing for himself, then all of us would simply abandon our jobs, and other responsibilities, and show up at the welfare office Monday morning.  Some people may wish to live this way because of the conditioning they have thus far received. There are people in our country that believe they are entitled to life at another’s expense because certain elements of society are privileged while others are allegedly oppressed. To convince man that he need not take responsibility for his own actions, and that he is entitled, does not create a better society; rather, it creates one of disincentive and true selfishness as man becomes focused more and more on his needs and his needs alone. When the resources are redistributed by government people rarely feel they have enough, and the fact that work is now being done for the greater good of society, and not for the pursuit of one’s individual needs, the motivation to excel is destroyed. On the other hand, when an individual is left to his own devises, and his work is based on the need to survive, and he reaps the benefits of his own labor, we all benefit because the motivation to keep succeeding leads to growing business’ and more wealth creation. The left knows this. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t devote so much time and energy to learning how to manipulate human behavior to accept otherwise. If they were truly compassionate, and not in search of total control, they would leave well enough alone and let people be free.

When my professor in “Understanding the Social Environment” proclaimed that we could create a Utopia and make a world where everyone was completely equal, I argued that America was as Utopian a country that one could ask for because we are (allegedly) free.  It was in this argument that I began to understand the mindset of the left as I heard the words of this professor and leftist students in the class. They argued that freedom failed, and that unless government took control of the economy we would continue to see increasing poverty and gaps in income equality. They argued that the system in which we live is an unfair system because some people are more successful not based on merit, but on the circumstances that surrounded them in their upbringing. They simply do not acknowledge that people are capable of rising above their circumstances through dedication and hard work, and in the event that they are forced to acknowledge such a thing; they will still claim that it is unfair that some people have to work harder than others. I argued that it was government manipulation of the economy and the massive spending that was creating the ills they were seeking to fix. In other words, it was my opinion that they were not creating a Utopia, but destroying one.

Psychology: Silent Weapon of the Elites Pushing us all Toward the Same End By David Risselada

In view of the law of natural selection it was agreed that a nation or world of people who will not use their intelligence are no better than animals who do not have intelligence. Such people are beasts of burden and steaks on the table by choice and consent. From William Cooper’s “Behold a Pale Horse”  pp39.

William Cooper Author of Behold A Pale Horse

With an ever increasing intensity, more and more Americans are becoming aware of the collectivist agenda being pushed by the Obama administration and their media cohorts. The popularity of Donald Trump is certainly an indicator of this as many of his supporters don’t really care how controversial his campaign is becoming; they just love the fact that he is not only challenging the main stream narrative, but seemingly destroying it as well. Donald Trump is the epitome of what Americans have wanted to see in a presidential candidate as he continues to make a mockery of the main stream media while defending American values. Unfortunately, it isn’t real. While it is refreshing to see that Americans are awakening to the fact that we are facing some real perilous times; they fail to understand the extent to which we are being manipulated and pushed towards the same end; total chaos.  The American public, through entertainment media and the increasing need to work harder and more hours, have become oblivious to the fact that we are being poked and prodded like a herd of cattle; placed in situations in which social scientists make behavior predictions and plan society based on those predictions. In other words, we are nothing but a big social experiment. The controllers feed us a stimulus, we respond to it, and they record the results. It is highly possible that Donald Trump is the result of carefully recording the attitudes of the American people and intentionally placed to split the party. If this isn’t true than why he is threatening to run as an independent when that issue at one time, was everyone’s main concern? This article is not about Donald Trump; rather, it is about the silent weapon of psychological manipulation.

The controllers do not view humanity as we do. To them we are not a collection of individual human beings, each complete with our own thoughts, feelings, dreams and fears. We are part of a collective where we are all intertwined and functioning as a larger whole, one mass body. Leventia Beria, author of the Soviet Manual on Psychopolitics, describes the communist view of society as individualism being a sickness affecting the larger body of humanity in much the same way an infection in the lung affects the body of an individual. In order to bring the individual back to health, the lung infection must be eradicated. The same is true in the larger view of humanity, in order to bring the body back to its proper alignment the sickness must be done away with. Unfortunately, proper alignment in the eyes of communist dictators is total compliance with state objectives.

It is no secret that the left and the right have two completely different world views. The right believes in individual liberty, the dignity of human being and the idea that men were created with free will and an ability to choose.  The left on the other hand, believes that human beings are responsible for all of the world’s problems and that mankind is no different than any other animal on the planet. They also believe that man’s behavior is not chosen, or able to be controlled by the efforts of the individual; rather, our behavior is controlled by environmental influences and situations which dictate how we are able to respond. While it is true that the environment in which we find ourselves will influence the decisions we make; the communist left believes we are unable to choose as a result of freewill, and that our behavior will be dictated by the circumstances surrounding us. Consider what B.F Skinner had to say on the subject in his book “Beyond Freedom and Dignity.”

B.F. Skinner Founder of Operant Conditioning

It is now clear that we must take into account what the environment does to an organism not only before but after it responds. Behavior is shaped and maintained by its consequences. Once this fact is recognized, we can formulate the interaction between organism and environment in a much more comprehensive way. B.F. Skinner “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” pp18.

Essentially, what the behavior psychologists is saying is that understanding how environment affects human behavior is key to determining how to manipulate society to the controller’s ends. In other words, the environment around us is being manipulated in order to draw out certain behaviors. Again, consider the words of B.F. Skinner. He argues that mankind’s struggle for freedom is nothing but a response to uncomfortable stimulus. He equates, for example, the struggle to free ourselves from a tyrannical dictator to being the same as sneezing to free ourselves from plugged or irritated sinuses. To the behaviorists and the communists, a struggle for freedom is nothing more than a predictable behavior based on environmental issues. The organism’s natural response to discomfort is to be free from it. There isn’t a thought process, simply stimulus and response psychology. Can you see where this is going?

Everything in our environment is influencing our behavior. We are being pushed in one direction only, and it doesn’t matter what side you are on, you are affected the same. We are constantly being bombarded with images of violence. We are being confused and distracted by a media that on one hand tells us we have to accept Syrian refugees or be considered a bigot and on the other, feeds us continuous images of Islamic terrorists gunning down 14 people and making pipe bombs. We are told that we should be ashamed of our country and that white Americans are oppressors while minorities are encouraged to hate through false teachings like “white privilege” education. We listen to Donald Trump demand that all Muslims be banned from entering the U.S. while the White House further infuriates us by bringing them in and threatening to disarm us. All the while, the social controllers are collecting data and planning their next move based on the stimulus they are intentionally feeding us, and because we are so gullible, and distracted, we are falling for it all. We are being pushed into inevitable conflict with each other as Americans, and there are people who will gain wealth and power because of it. They know that we will push back to their encroachment. This is why the Department of Homeland Security published the report where they claimed Christians and veterans could be considered extremists. These conclusions were based on the findings of B.F. Skinners “operant conditioning” theories in much the same way the idea to add people to terrorist watch lists was. It is a predetermined idea of how humanity will react to their push for total power based on the theory that behavior is controlled by environment and not freewill.

When a silent weapon is applied gradually, the public adjusts/adapts to its presence and learns to tolerate its encroachment on their lives until the pressure (psychological via economic) becomes too great and they crack up. Therefore, the silent weapon is a type of biological warfare. It attacks the vitality, options, and mobility of the individuals of a society by knowing, understanding, manipulating, and attacking their sources of natural and social energy, and their physical, mental, and emotional strengths and weaknesses. William Cooper “Behold a Pale Horse” pp 40-41

The Real Failures of the San Bernardino Terrorist Attacks By David Risselada

By now, most of us have seen the cover of the Daily News, a leftwing publication which pushes a far left liberal agenda. The particular cover bears the words “God isn’t fixing this.” The cover story of course is referring to the latest mass shooting, or rather, Islamist terror attack that occurred in San Bernardino California. The article seems to be mocking those that offer prayers and condolences to the families who lost loved ones, while simultaneously directing a focused rage on those the left believes to be most responsible for mass shootings; gun owners, Republicans and the NRA.

The left argues that mass shootings take place because gun lobby groups like the NRA and Gun Owners of America make it impossible to pass sensible gun laws. The only problem is it isn’t a lack of gun control laws causing people to commit mass murder. We all know that these shootings occur where guns are already heavily regulated. California is a perfect example; they have recently enacted the most draconian gun laws in the country. There is something terribly wrong when someone like Barbara Boxer (D-Ca) praises the gun laws of her state after this horrible incident. Thinking people know that an armed individual would have been able to save lives. No, it wasn’t the NRA, Republicans, or gun owners responsible for this; it was the failure of government at all levels, and liberal policies that led to the death of those fourteen people.

In 2011 the Obama Administration ordered the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to remove all references of Islamic terrorism from their training manuals. This was done because of threats made by Salam al-Marayati, president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Accordingto Kenneth Timmerman of the Daily Caller, Marayati threatened law enforcement agencies with “discontinued co-operation” if they failed to revise their manuals. He also demanded that agencies establish strict vetting processes when determining who would be writing training manuals and that an apology be issued for material that was deemed offensive and discriminatory. Judicial Watch issued a report concerning this matter in December of 2013. This report makes the claim that the purging of Islamic terrorism references was an operation of “Islamic influence” designed specifically to weaken our constitution.  This is not hard to believe as today, organizations like CAIR are playing a civil rights game, acting as if they are the victim.

There is no better example of this than Muslim communities acting as if they fear retaliation for this week’s attack in San Bernardino. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is adding flames to the fire by promising to prosecute anyone who espouses “hateful rhetoric” towards the Muslim community. This strategy seems to fall right in line with the claim by Judicial Watch in their report.  This is a direct attack on the Constitution, and the strategy revolves around silencing our criticism of Islam while they are free to attack us at will because law enforcement officers are not trained to view them as “potential terrorists.” The political correctness gripping today’s society has become so volatile that the neighbors of the San Bernardino shooters were afraid to report suspicious activity out of a fear of being called a racist.

Another thing to keep in my mind is the time it takes local responders to arrive to an active shooter situation. Authorities in California were able to respond rather quickly, they arrived on the scene within 5 minutes which in some ways is kind of suspect considering how many agencies responded; however, the average response time for police in emergency situations is10 minutes. This does not necessarily represent a failure on their part, rather an inability to be able to respond on time. The failure comes from the executive branch’s insistence we look to government to keep us safe. Liberals argue that only police and military should have guns but fail to address this issue. There is no way that government can keep everyone safe. Personal safety is a personal responsibility and in some ways, demanding that police put themselves between you and danger is immoral and selfish. The left does not believe that people are capable of protecting themselves. They believe that we couldn’t survive without them because according to their Marxist/Darwinist views, we are merely another animal that needs to be managed. People are instinct driven and have an inability to self govern according to the left, and the idea of an armed population frightens them. They give no thoughts whatsoever to the precious seconds an individual has to act in defense of their lives or loved ones. Five minutes may seem like a quick response time; however, it took far less time than that for the San Bernardino shooters to kill fourteen people and calling 911 isn’t a viable option while being raped or while trying to protect your loved ones.

Barrack Obama, as always, is trying to label this incident as anything but Islamic terrorism. In fact, he is trying his hardest to find a way to call this incident work “place violence.” Through the misguided lens of liberalism, the left see’s everything as being the fault of American society, and because of this, they fail to hold people accountable as individuals. When the left makes excuses for the actions of deranged murderer’s by blaming American society, they are doing little more than justifying murder and creating more criminals who believe they are entitled. In universities across our nation students are being taught by leftist professors that America is an oppressive society that discriminates against everyone but the privileged white man, and, that the Christian white male has exploited the rest of the world and has unfairly taken what isn’t his. CNN guest Casey Jordan, an alleged criminologist, stated that it was possible the shooters motives were driven because he was offended by a Christmas Party being thrown in the office where he gunned down fourteen people, with guns that were banned in California. This excuse making does little more than enable people to believe that they not only have a right to be offended, but they may act out in violence when they are. It also shows that the lefts real opinion of Muslims is actually quite low if they believe a man would commit murder because he’s offended by the word Christmas. Wouldn’t that make liberals the racist ones?

It’s ironic that the left would accuse God of not being able to fix this when they are the ones who have kicked God out of the country. Let’s not forget that liberals actually booed when the Democrat Party voted to restore God in the party platform. “God” was henceforth, removed.  It is also the Democrat Party that acts as if everything Christian is offensive. The left is slowly replacing the Christian religion with moral relativism and humanism. There is no longer any absolute morality in this country and because of this; almost anything can be justified, to one degree or another, under the precepts of multiculturalism. For instance, Army Green Beret Charles Martland was kicked out of the Army after losing an appeal where he was charged with assaulting an Afghanistan Army commander. He had beaten the commander because he was saving a young boy from being raped. The U.S. military has been instructed to not intervene in these rapes because men having sex with young boys is an accepted part of Afghanistan culture. We are seeing this argument being made here in the homosexual movement as well. There are groups in America arguing for the repealing of age of consent laws.  Finally, the seeds for this nation were fatally sewn back in 1962 when the Supreme Court ruled that prayer in public schools represented an “established government religion” and violated the alleged wall between church and state. The U.S. Constitution provided no wall between church and state and was written to ensure that people were free to practice religion. The results of this have had obvious ramifications. Teenage pregnancies, drug use, violent crime, low academic performance and a steady destruction of family values have all been on the increase since this time.

No, it isn’t gun advocacy groups, the GOP or gun owners in general that are responsible for the terrorist attack in San Bernardino or other mass shootings. It is the reckless policies of a government whose main priority is creating a society of total equality, while protecting the rights and feelings of certain groups and ignoring others.  It is the misguided belief that men need to be controlled and that we can’t be trusted to handle our own affairs. It is the fact that liberals are on a mission to discredit everything great about this country while teaching us that we should be ashamed because we are racist and responsible for everything wrong in the world. It is because Barack Obama makes excuses for the violent behavior of individuals while blaming that behavior on American society because others claim to be offended by our traditions, culture and heritage. In short, it is the fault of liberalism, plain and simple.

A World Upside Down, The Devil Running Loose, and Life in Liberal America By David Risselada

Liberals insist we disarm ourselves and rely upon government to keep us safe; while simultaneously advocating for and enacting policies which make the world a more dangerous place to live.

David Risselada

My reaction to the latest shooting was probably similar to many people’s; a tense anticipation to Obama’s call for more gun control, and the fear that it could have been retaliation against Planned Parenthood and their brutal practice of selling baby body parts. That would have been a liberal’s dream come true. An actual right wing conservative going on a murder spree would have provided the needed justification for why conservative Christians are labeled as potential extremists. It turns out however, that our “Dear” shooter was just another in a long line of liberal whackos taking out their frustrations with society and feelings of self hatred on everybody else. You see, Mr. Dear self identifies as a woman and is not registered with any political party, so the leftwing narrative of a disgruntled Republican nut job going off has once again, been proven false. It must be real frustrating for the left to know that real right wing Christians are not committing acts of terror that they can blame on us. Liberals would love to say that that the so called hateful speech concerning the exposed practices at planned parenthood are responsible for the shooting.  If this is the case then wouldn’t the same be true for Obama’s rhetoric concerning Islam and Black Lives Matter? I’m sorry, but the left can’t have it both ways.

President Barack Hussein Obama is an apologist for radical Islam who has stated on several occasions that the west’s offensive language and intolerance is responsible for the violent behavior and hate fueled attacks committed by the Islamic State. If the shooter had attacked Planned Parenthood in retaliation for selling baby body parts, would it not, according to this logic, be somewhat excusable as well? John Kerry even justified the Charlie Hebdo attacks using this reasoning.  He said that there was at least a rationale for the shooting based on the idea that the cartoon was offensive toward the Prophet Mohammed.  Hillary Clinton blamed an alleged anti-Islamic video for the Benghazi attacks because it too was offensive. Well, what if the shooter had found Planned Parenthoods indifference towards the life of innocent baby’s offensive? What if white America is offended by being called racist continually by Democrats, when we all know that it was the Democrat party that is responsible for this country’s tainted past when it comes to racism? Would we then be justified in the type of violence committed by ISIS? If you follow this line of thinking to its logical conclusion the answer would obviously be yes. Apparently, violence is justified when people take offense to things that hurt their little feelings, or else it is when being governed by leftist radicals anyway. They use the pretense of offense to launch their social activism in their efforts to transform America from a nation of rugged individualism to collectivism. This is what is occurring in our universities today. Black Lives Matter activists are begging for segregation on the pretense that they are oppressed, and in fact, in danger because of white privilege. It does not get any more absurd than that, and yet, here we are.

President Obama, along with Al Sharpton and Eric Holder also took the same approach to the violence we witnessed in Ferguson Mo. and Baltimore in response to the deaths of Freddie Gray and Michael Brown. Barack Obama would have us believe that police are systematically targeting black people for extermination and that Jim Crow type segregation laws are still alive and well. It even came to light that George Soros funded the racially motivated protests in order to stir up civil unrest.  Private property was damaged and local businesses were burned to the ground in these protests, and instead of holding these people accountable, President Obama once again blamed American society for being too racist. What if we took offense to these lies and the fact that we are called terrorists even though we don’t burn cities to the ground? What if we found it offensive that George Soros is funding these events in an attempt to transform our nation? We all know that more white people are killed by police than blacks, so do we get to go on a rampage and burn down a city because we are being oppressed by lies and dehumanized in the process? Of course not, nor would we even want to. Our universities are justifying black on white racism under the guise of “white privilege” and truthfully, this contributes to the unruly behavior and misguided narrative that all whites are racist. It is in fact, quite offensive. Please show me where racist, bigoted white people are targeting blacks in response to being treated like a bunch of racists?

Looking at the facts at hand I would argue that it is Barack Obama’s failure to hold people accountable for their behavior and his justification of violence based on “offensive and intolerable language” that is the most responsible for the atrocities we have been witnessing, even if it had been a right wing conservative that had shot up Planned Parenthood. Barack Obama has taught the world, through his divisive tongue, that violence is justified when offense is taken to intolerance. That is how he has handled radical Islam by blaming it on free speech and videos, and justifying the burning of cities, and murder of police officers, because black people allegedly still live in a racist America.  You see, Obama and other followers of the radical community organizer, Saul Alinsky, believe that the ends justify the means and that there isn’t any true moral principles which exist in the world. In fact when it came to morality and principles Alinsky said this in Rules for Radicals-

To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.

It doesn’t matter to them what damage they cause or who gets hurt, or who loses loved ones. All they care about is their desired ends, even if they can’t exactly describe what they are. Like I wrote in my last article, they simply want to destroy the existing society and obtain mass amounts of power. They operate on the premise that corrupting themselves somehow proves they have a superior morality, yet their superior morality prevents them from gaining a little hindsight and looking at the damage they are causing. To believe that a better, more perfect world can emerge from corruption and telling lies is to believe in a system run by Satan and not by God.  This of course is why Saul Alinsky wrote the following dedication in Rules for Radicals-

Lest we forget an over the shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins-or which is which) the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom-Lucifer.

Understanding Alinsky By David Risselada

Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no longer obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity. Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals pp. 128

That is quite a telling statement; one that implies exactly what the left thinks of Christianity that was written by a man who was a master of social change; Saul Alinsky. To the left, Christians are hypocrites who are unable to live to up to the values they espouse. That is what is meant by this statement, they believe the Christian religion is one of oppression, where the teachings of the Bible actually restrict freedom through its rigid, moral standards for human behavior, which were set by God. True Christians on the other hand, understand that liberty and the exercise of free will is dependent on these moral standards, for without them chaos would reign. Without concepts like personal responsibility and an understanding of an absolute morality, freedom could not exist; therefore, these ideas must be destroyed in the minds of Men. As Karl Marx said in the Communist Manifesto, “Religion is the Opiate of the Masses.” Alinsky, like other leftists, believed that the United States and its economic system, capitalism, represents oppression of the highest order and if there ever was to be true equality, the system must be destroyed. Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, from which the above statement is taken, is the play book in which Barack Obama and other leftists are using to bring this nation down.  There are a total of thirteen rules in the chapter simply entitled “Tactics” where Alinsky educates disciples on the art of destroying political opposition and destroying your opponent’s moral base. Clearly, the rule listed above involves making a hypocrite out of your opponent while using their values against them. This has been the most successful tactic employed by the Obama administration as virtually everything we believe in is twisted and made to appear as if our values actually represent racism and hatred.

The most recent example of this is the refugee debate. While we certainly know that these people coming from the Middle East are anything but refugees, this doesn’t stop president Obama from employing this tactic. It is done in such a subtle way most people never see how we are being made to look like hypocrites. Conservatives argue that the refugees are too dangerous to be let into America without a rigorous background check. (That’s the key word here, background check. ) This is certainly a credible argument as there is no way to vet all of these people. In other words, there is no way to determine which of these refugees will commit terrorist acts; therefore, none of them should be admitted into the country. Ironically, the conservative right is making the same argument about the refugees that the liberal left makes about gun control, and we don’t even see how we are being set up. The left argues that gun sales should be restricted for all Americans because there is no way of knowing who among the millions of gun owners is capable of committing murder. They harbor a deep resentment because we have successfully beaten back many of their attacks by counter arguing that gun ownership is a protected constitutional, human right. As far as the left is concerned, and according to the Immigration Act of 1965, which completely changed the way immigrants were allowed into the country incidentally, immigration into the U.S. is also a human right. Essentially, the left is making us look like hypocrites, (at least they think they are) because we are allegedly discriminating against one group of potentially dangerous people, while arguing for unrestricted gun rights. This argument makes much more sense when considering the fact that the left believes people are not capable of self governance, which is one of the principles of liberty this nation was founded on. So to them, anyone with a gun is a potential murderer.

This is but one example of how the left twists logic and uses our own rules against us. Another example is more of a direct assault on the fundamentals of liberty themselves. Our Declaration of Independence proudly proclaims that all men are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights; of which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  We all know of course that all men are not equal. The way the right and left views these concepts are radically different. The right understands that the term equality means that all people, no matter how rich or poor, no matter what color, are protected equally under the law and that the governments job is protecting individual rights equally, no matter an individual’s current lot in life. To the left, the term equality offers an opportunity to push an agenda based on moral relativism and multiculturalism. Today, we see a radical re-definition of equality as the left argues to make depravity a human right. The rights of pedophiles are protected under the umbrella of “equal protection” in much the same way that the rights of violent criminals are now protected over the victims they harm in the commission of their crimes. Boys who feel like girls now have a right protected by the federal government, to use girls’ bathrooms and showers in public schools in the name of “total equality,” and minority groups now have the right to openly discriminate because they are oppressed by “white privilege.” This is how the left uses equality to make us look like hypocrites, and they kill us politically every time they do.

This is the tactic being employed to silence opposition and it is very effective because no one wants to be a hypocrite. Americans are very tolerant and open minded people. We don’t need the left to tell us we have to be more open minded. There are more cultures and ethnicities in this country than in any other. Americans; or Americans who love their country rather, are not the ones threatening violence against those who do not share their world view.

While the left portrays their agenda items as a fight for equality in a world dominated by phobias and ism’s, the truth is radically different. It is all about the culmination of political power and the remaking of America. Hillary Clinton wrote her college thesis on Alinsky and called it “There is Only the Fight: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.” What this title means is that the issues are only used to gain attention and that underneath the issue is the larger agenda, which is the revolution.

From the moment the organizer enters a community he lives, dreams, breathes and sleeps only one thing and that is to build the mass power base of what he calls the army. Until he has developed this mass power base he confronts no major issues. Rules For Radicals pp. 113

It is hard to understand why anyone who claims to care about human rights would view a nation that espouses individual liberty and property rights as oppressive; however, that is how the left views this country. David Horowitz writes in his ebook “Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution: The Alinsky Model”  that Saul Alinsky was taken in by the mob and worked for the likes of Al Capone and his enforcer, Frank Nitti. Alinsky viewed the mob and other criminal organizations as being the result of a capitalist system. Like other leftists, his belief was that private property rights and an alleged “meritocracy” held people down and forced them into a life of crime. Today, Barack Obama is releasing thousands of criminals into the streets. He is doing this because he shares these beliefs. To him, these people were wrongly imprisoned and were forced into a life a crime because they are oppressed by the capitalist system. He gives no thought whatsoever to the potential consequences of such an action, the only thing he cares about is the creation of a mass power base, or voting base to be more specific.

The left is operating on a completely different moral base than what most Americans are able to understand. To them, there isn’t necessarily a desired end outside of destroying the existing society in pursuit of a better, more ideal one. It is the means in which they do this that matters to them. Alinsky taught his followers that to care about corrupting themselves in pursuit of political objectives meant that they were not committed to the cause, and the willingness to corrupt one’s self in the pursuit of a better society was in some ways, a higher level of morality. Barack Obama knows that he and his administration are corrupt; however, he also believes that the United States is oppressive and in need of fundamental transformation. To corrupt himself in pursuit of this higher “ideal,” is, in a twisted sort of way, a higher level of righteousness.

In action one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of personal salvation; he doesn’t care enough for the people to be corrupted for them. Rules for Radicals pp. 25

This explains Barack Obama and his actions perfectly. He, along with the rest of the professional left, believes they are superior in every way. They believe the vision they have for society is ideal and because they are willing to corrupt themselves in its pursuit, they believe they are better than the rest of us because they care about us so much. They become filled with delusions of grandeur as their ideas of “utopia” guide their actions and blind them to the consequences of the policies they enact. They then begin to harbor a deep resentment because their visions never come to fruition and they can’t get the people to go along with their insane ideas. The anger and hatred they then begin to display towards society is actually a deeply rooted hatred of themselves because they have allowed themselves to become corrupt in the first place. This is the insanity that ensues when leftists govern because they enact policies not based on truth and precedent, but on fairy tale visions of a perfect society where they are willing to lie, cheat and steal to get what they want while destroying anyone who stands in the way. The left may have many opinions about the conservative right, but at least we understand a perfect society cannot be created with corrupted methods and that is the truth of absolute morality that guides real freedom.