Top 10 Major Media Cover-Ups Of 2013 – WorldNetDaily
In an administration known for its dissembling, deciding which lies are its biggest is a challenge.
But as health care takes center stage in the run-up to the 2014 mid-term elections, the many lies that were used, with the aid of a compliant media, to convince the nation that the passage of Obamacare presented nothing to worry about top WND’s annual list of the 10 most “spiked” or underreported stories of the last year.
At the end of each year, many news organizations typically present their retrospective replays of what they consider to have been the top news stories of the previous 12 months. WND’s editors, however, long have considered it more newsworthy to publicize the most underreported or unreported news events of the year – to shine a spotlight on those issues that the establishment media successfully “spiked.”
WND Editor and CEO Joseph Farah has sponsored “Operation Spike” every year since 1988, and since founding WND in May 1997, has continued the annual tradition.
Produced with the help of WND readers, here are the WND editors’ picks for the 10 most underreported or unreported stories of 2013:
1. THE LIES BY OBAMA, SEBELIUS, REID, PELOSI AND OTHERS CONCERNING OBAMACARE
Before President Obama’s so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was rammed through Congress and signed by the president March 12, 2010, 85 percent of Americans had health-care coverage. Further, an ABC News/Kaiser Family Foundation/USA Today survey found that 88 percent of the insured rated their coverage as excellent or good and 89 percent were satisfied with the quality of care they received.
Those facts belie the insistence of Obama, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Democratic House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi that the health-insurance system was broken beyond repair and needed a complete overhaul orchestrated by the federal government, which, they contended, somehow could serve Americans better than the free enterprise system alone.
The Democrat leaders promised Americans that if they already had insurance, they had nothing to worry about.
They declared over and over again: “You can keep your doctor,” “You can keep your health-care insurance plan” and “The Affordable Care Act is about insuring more people and about affordable health care.”
Pelosi infamously said Congress needed to pass the bill “to see what’s in it.”
Americans certainly are finding out what’s in it as millions lose their insurance while only a fraction of the number needed to sustain the system have signed up.
By the end of November, only 137,204 people had “selected a marketplace plan.” By Sunday, the administration announced, 1.1 million had signed up, far short of the expectation of 3.3 million. But the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services won’t say how many people have actually enrolled. To become enrolled, the insurer must receive the first month’s premium payment.
Some who have signed up for coverage on the notoriously failed website are receiving email notices informing them they shouldn’t assume they are covered unless they “have seen the Confirmation Letter from the Disbursing Office.”
A poll in December found that 58 percent of uninsured haven’t even looked at exchanges yet. Also, 59 percent of those without coverage think getting insurance would “hurt them financially.”
Those who have signed up might have insurance beginning Jan. 1, but analysts are warning that the plans are likely to give them access to fewer doctors and hospitals. So much so, they warn, that the system could begin to resemble Medicaid, the health care program for low-income Americans.
A panel of doctors testified before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that they are being dropped from patient provider networks because of Obamacare.
While much has been made about the Obamacare website’s inaccessibility, those who have been able to complete the process have become susceptible to ID theft because the site doesn’t fails to meet the standards of the Federal Information Security Management Act.
Sebelius has refused to answer forthrightly about whether and how often she met with President Obama about Obamacare and the website prior to the rollout. HHS, meanwhile, is obstructing a congressional investigation by instructing contractors working on the website not to release documents to the investigators.
Among the many other problems: Most insurers aren’t advertising the Obamacare taxes that are added to premiums. Individual tax filers earning more than $200,000 and families earning more than $250,000 will pay a 0.9 percent Medicare surtax in addition to the existing 1.45 percent Medicare payroll tax. An extra 3.8 percent Medicare tax also is assessed on unearned income, such as investment dividends, rental income and capital gains.
In a rare, candid moment at Obama’s pre-Christmas press conference, the president summarized not only his health-care fiasco, but his entire administration, writes WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah.
“Since I’m in charge,” Obama said, obviously, we screwed it up.”
2. THE PURGING OF TOP MILITARY LEADERS
An in-depth series of WND reports found that as many as 200 senior officers have been dismissed since Obama became president.
Several former high-ranking military officers have told WND they believe the firings, while often citing real offenses, are politically motivated.
Military analyst Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness told WND that officers have gotten the Obama administration’s message of political correctness – “and most have been virtually silent ever since.”
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely said Obama is “intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, a recipient of the U.S. military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor, told WND he believed Obama had fired a number of generals to mask his “serial scandals, all prefaced by lies – Fast and Furious, Benghazi, NSA, IRS.”
Brady said Obama needs to apply the same standards to his political appointees as he does to the military.
“Just when you thought the leadership of this government could not get any worse, it does,” Brady said. “Never in history has an administration spawned another scandal to cover the current one.”
WND reported that three of the nine firings of generals and flag officers by Obama this year were linked to the controversy surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the CIA special mission in Benghazi, Libya.
In one case, U.S. Army Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded U.S. African Command when the consulate was attacked and four Americans were killed, was highly critical of the decision by the State Department not to send in reinforcements.
Obama has insisted there were no reinforcements available that night.
But Ham contends reinforcements could have been sent in time, and he said he never was given a stand-down order. However, others contend that he was given the order but defied it. He ultimately was relieved of his command and retired.
Another flag officer involved in the Benghazi matter – which remains under congressional investigation – was Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, commander of the Carrier Strike Group.
After he contended that aircraft could have been sent to Libya in time to help the Americans under fire, he was removed from his post for alleged profanity and making “racially insensitive comments.”
Army Major Gen. Ralph Baker was the commander of the Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa at Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, Africa. Baker contended that attack helicopters could have reached the consulate in time on the night of the attack.
Military personnel still on duty have told WND on condition of anonymity that the large number of senior military officials being relieved of duty under the Obama administration is part of the creation of a “compliant officer class.”
A veteran Army intelligence officials told WND that in creating a compliant officer class, the Obama administration has made it harder to find “senior officers with a pair of balls in there (the military) now that would say no to anything.
“Maybe at the rank of major or below, and possibly there are some in SOF (Special Operations Forces), but to make colonel and higher is all politics,” he said.
Brady added that Obama’s agenda is decimating the morale of the U.S. ranks to the point that members no longer feel prepared to fight or have the desire to win.
“There is no doubt (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him” over such issues as “homosexuals, women in foxholes, the Obama sequester,” Brady said.
In addition, colonels – who are lined up in rank to replace outgoing generals – are quietly taking their careers in other directions.
3. CONCENTRATION OF EXECUTIVE POWER TO BYPASS CONGRESS
At a House Judiciary subcommittee meeting in December, liberal Georgetown law professor Jonathan Turley warned America that the concentration of executive branch powers is approaching a crisis under Obama.
“The problem with what the president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system,” Turley said. “He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid.”
Turley, who has said he voted for Obama, explained that the Founders’ system of checks and balances is “now being put to the test as many members remain silent in the face of open executive encroachment by the executive branch.”
Nicholas Rosenkranz, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown also affiliated with the libertarian Cato Institute, pointed to Obama’s suspension of the “employer mandate” in Obamacare via presidential decree. He also cited Obama’s enactment of the DREAM Act, which repeatedly had failed to pass Congress.
A third example was the IRS discrimination against and punishment of conservative political opponents.
Rosenkranz argued the Constitution does not allow the president to suspend the laws altogether.
“He cannot favor unenacted bills over duly enacted laws. And he cannot discriminate on the basis of politics in his execution of the laws,” he said.
“The president has crossed all three of these lines.”
Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, noting he supported Obama’s social policies regarding women, minorities and homosexuals, nevertheless was critical of the president’s numerous unilateral actions.
One was Obama’s effort to retool Obamacare, which he said was, in effect, making law.
WND columnist Diana West noted that establishment media either yawned at the hearing, or, in the case of Dana Milbank in the Washington Post, misreported it as a meeting of impeachment-obsessed Republicans.
Cannon stated dramatically that if the government does not respect the restraints that the Constitution places on it, there is a constitutional solution.
“Abraham Lincoln talked about our right to alter our government or our revolutionary right to overthrow it. That is certainly something that no one wants to contemplate,” he said. “If the people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the laws, then they will conclude that neither are they.”
Meanwhile, Obama’s hiring in December of former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta as a top adviser appeared to underscore Obama’s intent to increase executive powers.
Podesta, founder of the progressive Center for American Progress, specializes in the use of executive authority to bypass Congress.
The New York Times reported Podesta will help the White House on “matters related to the health care law, administration organization and executive actions,” with particular focus on so-called climate change issues, according to a person familiar with the plans.
In November 2010, Podesta co-authored a 48-page Center for American Progress paper titled “The Power of the President: Recommendations to Advance Progressive Change.”
“The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy,” wrote Podesta in the paper’s introduction.
“These authorities can be used to ensure positive progress on many of the key issues facing the country through executive orders, rulemaking, agency management, convening and creating public-private partnerships, commanding the armed forces… diplomacy.”
Podesta stressed: “The ability of President Obama to accomplish important change through these powers should not be underestimated.”
In a conference call to reporters after the release of the paper on executive authority, Podesta recalled that after Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994, President Clinton utilized his executive privileges to enact progressive change without the help of Congress.
Podesta’s paper details how Obama can push executive change on a host of issues.
4. PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS AROUND THE WORLD
A survey in 2010 concluded that at least 75 percent of religious persecution reported over the previous two years worldwide targeted Christians.
In the 20th century, atheistic states such as the Soviet Union, China and North Korea were among the most common perpetrators. Today, as communist countries fall by the wayside or ease their restrictions on religious believers, the greatest threat to Christians is in Muslim-majority countries
On Christmas Day, Jihad bombers murdered 34 people as Christians left a church building in Baghdad while, worldwide, Muslims threatened and protested against Christmas celebrations.
Earlier this month, as WND reported, a Syrian city overrun by Muslim Brotherhood jihadists fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad was the scene of the execution of three Christian men who refused to convert to Islam.
“There’s a Christian cleansing going on over the entire Middle East. Unless we really connect the entire picture together, the full cleansing situation cannot be understood,” Joseph Hakim, president of International Christian Union, told WND.
Hakim said that the U.S. government is wrong to call the Christian victims of the Middle East conflicts simply “casualties.”
“They would never say people killed in violence in Arizona or in New York are casualties of war,” he said, “so why do they say Christians are simply casualties of war?”
Iranian-born pastor Saeed Abedini, a former Muslim who converted to Christianity in 2000 and became an American citizen, has become a casualty of Iran’s Islamic Republic, led by Muslim clerics who follow Islam’s dictate that “apostates” – those who abandon Islam – must be punished, ultimately by death.
Abedini was sentenced in January to eight years in prison, reportedly on charges of undermining national security. His advocates say his arrest was due to his conversion and missionary efforts.
He planted about 100 house churches in 30 Iranian cities with more than 2,000 members. When Mahmoud Ahmedinejad came to power in 2005, Iranian authorities cracked down on the movement and the Abedinis moved back to the U.S. In July 2012, he was arrested on a missionary trip to Iran.
Along with the Middle East and Asia, Africa has been the scene of a bloody encroachment by Islam from the north.
In November, about 70 Christians were murdered in Nigeria in attacks by Boko Haram, a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government has labeled a “Foreign Terrorist Organization.” Boko Haram means “Western education is forbidden.”
Nigerian Christian Adamu Habila testified before a congressional committee that he was shot in the face and left for dead by Boko Haram because he refused to renounce Jesus Christ and become a Muslim.
Ahead of Christmas, as WND reported, establishment media filed misleading and, in some cases, outright false reports about the state of Christianity and life in Bethlehem.
Ignoring the influence of Muslim intimidation, media suggested Israeli policies are responsible for the city’s economic downturn and that the Jewish state’s security measures have prompted the massive flight of Christians from Bethlehem.
Christian leaders and residents told WND they face an atmosphere of regular hostility. They said Palestinian armed groups stir tension by holding militant demonstrations and marches in the streets. They spokes of instances in which Christian shopkeepers’ stores were ransacked and Christian homes attacked.
Many reports blamed the “wall” that protects Israel from terrorist attacks.
Simple demographic facts disprove the contention entirely. Israel built the barrier 11 years ago. But Bethlehem’s Christian population started to drastically decline in 1995, the very year Arafat’s Palestinian Authority took over the holy Christian city in line with the U.S.-backed Oslo Accords.
Meanwhile, in the U.S., the controversy over “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson’s politically incorrect view of homosexuality has many American “waking up to the fact that homosexual rights are trumping religious rights,” said Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver, who has battled “gay” marriage all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Robertson’s paraphrase of a passage in the biblical book of 1 Corinthians set off a firestorm in December that led to A&E’s decision to suspend him from the show. The backlash against Robertson’s statements escalated a couple of days later when a video was unearthed of a 2010 sermon in which he cited the Apostle Paul’s condemnation of homosexual behavior in the first chapter of Romans.
In September, a Christian who owned a bakery shop in Oregon was forced to shut down operations after refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.
In a similar case, earlier this month, a judge ordered a Colorado cake baker to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding.
A Washington state florist in April was sued by both the American Civil Liberties Union and the state attorney general for refusing to provide service to a “gay” couple planning their wedding.
The Ohio Supreme Court in November ruled a school district justifiably dismissed a science teacher on grounds of insubordination who kept a Bible on his desk and taught his religious beliefs in class.
5. THE IRS TARGETING OF CONSERVATIVE NON-PROFITS
Matt Drudge, creator of the highly influential Drudge Report, summarized the establishment media’s response this year to the IRS targeting of conservative and Christian organizations.
“Journos ‘scared sh**less’ to mention IRS scandal,” Drudge wrote in a Twitter message Dec. 30.
While leading IRS officials called to testify before Congress pleaded the Fifth Amendment, some have confirmed the charges of conservative groups who say their requests for tax-exempt status were delayed, limiting the effectiveness of nearly 500 activist organizations as Barack Obama and his liberal agenda rolled to victory in 2012.
One group was told, for example, it had to reveal the content of members’ prayers or make promises about what they would or would not say.
Numerous lawsuits allege the Obama administration violated the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act along with various rules and regulations.
The American Center for Law and Justice filed a case against the government in May on behalf of dozens of conservative organizations that claim they had their applications delayed or denied because of their beliefs.
ACLJ contends the evidence shows there was a “politically motivated attack on conservative organizations by the IRS – a secret and illegal targeting campaign – aimed at the organizations because of their political beliefs.”
Jay Sekulow, ACLJ chief counsel, said “the intimidation campaign conducted by the IRS is much more politically motivated and coordinated than previously thought.”
The lawsuit is believed to be the largest of its kind against the IRS, representing 41 different organizations that claim biased treatment.
WND reported earlier this month that the IRS remains on the attack, proposing new regulations that would silence the president’s critics.
6. TRUE LEVEL OF DECEPTION AND UNTRUTHFULNESS IN OBAMA ADMINISTRATION
On the first full day of his presidency in 2008, Barack Obama declared: “Let me say it as simply as I can, transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”
Nearly five years later, polls find a majority of Americans don’t trust him.
One of his most recent untruths was uttered at his last press conference of the year.
Obama declared he and his party are attempting to pull off a “historic deficit reduction” campaign, claiming Democrats had reduced the deficit by 50 percent and that Republicans are trying to thwart their effort.
Noting the budget this year is an estimated $759 billion, that would mean the higher number was $1.5 trillion. But the highest deficit ever recorded in American history was $1.4 trillion under a Democrat-controlled Congress in 2009 that spent $800 billion in government “stimulus” money.
Previously, the largest deficit ever recorded in American history was $459 billion in 2008, which means that Obama nearly tripled the size of the deficit in his first year in office and now wants to take credit for bringing it down 50 percent.
He has presided over the five largest deficits in history.
Obama’s deceptions as a national figure began from his first appearance, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, when he endeared many to his story of parents from two continents who “shared not only an improbable love” but “an abiding faith in the possibilities of this nation.” But evidence reported first by WND now shows his parents never lived together.
Pushing his health-care plan, Obama said his mother spent “the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.” But CIGNA never denied Obama’s mother coverage for her disease.
At a candidate forum at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in 2008, Obama stated he believed that “marriage is the union between a man and a woman.” He said that “as a Christian, it’s also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”
Despite evoking the unchanging Creator, he said in 2012 that he had “evolved” on the issue and now favored allowing homosexual couples to marry.
Obama stated regarding the ongoing “Fast and Furious” scandal that it was a “field-initiated program begun under the previous administration.”
But even ABC News headlined a story “President Obama falsely claims fast and furious program ‘begun under the previous administration.’”
He promised as a 2008 candidate that when his health plan was in Congress, the parties would not negotiate behind closed doors but would come together and have the proceeding broadcast on C-SPAN.”
“When the chips are down I have Israel’s back,” said at a press conference before signing away Israel’s security with the Iranian nuke deal.
In August 2012, Obama declared: “We have been very clear to the Assad regime” and “a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” Two weeks later, Obama said, “First of all, I didn’t set a red line.”
In one of the many lies that likely helped him get reelected, Obama stated at the second debate with Mitt Romney in 2012: “The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we were going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror, and I also said we are going to hunt down those who committed this crime.”
Romney replied: “You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you are saying?”
At that point, CNN’s Candy Crowley infamously came to the rescue after Obama said off camera, “Get the transcript.”
Waving a piece of paper, Crowley said to Romney: “He did in fact, sir, call, so let me call it an act of terror.”
“Can you say that a little louder, Candy,” said Obama.
“He did call it an act of terror,” lied Crowley.
As Jack Cashill wrote: “So saying, she consummated the most egregious act of real-time media malpractice in recent memory and likely saved Obama’s presidency. In the age of Obama, that is how the media rolled.”
In a CNN panel after the debate, Crowley admitted that Romney was “right in the main.”
“Right after that I did turn around and say, but you’re totally correct that they spent two weeks telling us this was about a tape and that that there was this riot outside the Benghazi consulate which there wasn’t,” Crowley said.
“He was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word,” she concluded.
Her instinct, she explained, forced her to correct Romney even though his “thrust” was correct.
7. COVER-UP OF THE BENGHAZI ATTACK AND FALSE TESTIMONY BY HILLARY CLINTON
The key to understanding the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attack is rooted in WND’s exclusive reporting that the U.S. mission in Benghazi and nearby CIA annex was an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels in the Middle East, particularly those fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND said the aid included weapons shipments and was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Days after the Benghazi attack, WND broke the news that Ambassador Christopher Stevens played a central role in recruiting the jihadists.
There was no official acknowledgement of such activity until Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., stated in interview with Fox News in March that Stevens was in Benghazi to keep weapons caches from falling into the hands of terrorists.
There was no official acknowledgement of such activity until Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., stated in interview with Fox News in March that Stevens was in Benghazi to keep weapons caches from falling into the hands of terrorists.
WND also was first to report the U.S. was training Syrian rebels in Jordan.
Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she had no knowledge of the weapons transfers, but panel member Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said he doubts she was telling the truth.
Paul cited a New York Times story stating Clinton “was the big cheerleader for arming Syria when there [were] two factions within the Obama administration arguing this.”
“She was the hardliner that wanted to get involved in the war in Syria, and yet in the hearing she says, oh, she never heard of this,” Paul said. “I find that hard to believe.”
Over the weekend, an extensive New York Times investigation into the Benghazi attack contradicted information from the U.S. government, Benghazi victims and numerous other previous news reports.
One of the main contentions of the Times piece is that “contrary to claims by some members of Congress,” the Benghazi attack “was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”
The Times article seeks to link the Benghazi attack to protests planned outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. However, the Cairo protest on Sept. 11 was announced days in advance as part of a movement to free the so-called “blind sheik,” Omar Abdel-Rahman, held in the U.S. over the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Another main contention of the Times article on Benghazi is there was “no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.”
However, the Times’ next statement in effect contradicts that claim. The Times said the attack “was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi.”
Scores of news media reports documented that the “fighters” included al-Qaida groups among their ranks. Many were widely quoted in news media reports as fighting under the al-Qaida banner.
The Times further claims Benghazi “was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests.”
The contention is contradicted by the U.S. government, as WND was first to report.
A Library of Congress report detailed that, one month before the attack, al-Qaida established a major base of operations in Libya in the aftermath of the U.S.-NATO campaign that deposed Muammar Gadhafi and his secular regime.
The report documented al-Qaida and affiliated organizations were establishing terrorist training camps and pushing Taliban-style Islamic law in Libya while the new, Western-backed Libyan government incorporated jihadists into its militias.
The document named Benghazi as a new central headquarters for al-Qaida activities.
CIA agents on the ground in Benghazi have testified to lawmakers they were loaded into vehicles and ready to aid the besieged U.S. special mission on Sept. 11, 2012, but were told by superiors to “wait,” a congressman privy to the testimony revealed.
Unreported is that the new accounts seemed to contradict claims made by the State Department’s Accountability Review Board, or ARB, which stated that the response team one mile away in the CIA annex was “not delayed by orders from superiors.”
8. THE “KNOCKOUT GAME” AND OTHER BLACK ATTACKS ON WHITES
Colin Flaherty has done more reporting than any other journalist on a nationwide trend of skyrocketing black-on-white crime, violence and abuse.
Finally, after scores of reports by WND about the problem, Fox News launched a full-frontal assault in November on the shocking phenomenon its own analysts said is intentionally suppressed by national news media.
At least three of the top-rated cable network’s prime-time broadcasts focused on the issue, with the common conclusion that it’s a racist crime trend of black individuals pummeling white victims.
“It’s savagery. It’s very difficult to watch those tapes,” former CBS News correspondent Bernard Goldberg told Bill O’Reilly on “The O’Reilly Factor.”
WND has featured the reports to counterbalance the virtual blackout by the rest of the media due to their concerns that reporting such incidents would be inflammatory or even racist. WND has considered it racist not to report racial abuse solely because of the skin color of the perpetrators or victims.
In the racially charged and sometimes deadly crime, one or more assailants, usually black, target a randomly selected white person and, for amusement, try to knock out the unsuspecting victim with a single punch.
Despite the documented violence caused by the Knockout Game, including six deaths nationwide since 2009, some on the left are downplaying the violence.
Numerous liberal commentators and news outlets have disparaged those who report factually on the Knockout Game. A Los Angeles Times columnist called the game a “faux trend.” A Slate writer claimed that those concerned about the Knockout Game have “concoct[ed] weird trends and games out of thin air.”
The New York Times believes there is a question as to whether the Knockout Game is “a spreading menace or a myth.”
However, Peter Vallone Jr., head of New York City’s Public Safety Committee with oversight over the police department, insists there’s no question.
“People who don’t believe that it exists in NYC right now remind me of people who used to say the Internet is just a fad,” he said.
9. THE RACIAL DIVISION CREATED BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION
Within hours of the February 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin, the Obama administration helped shape the media narrative that turned American Latino George Zimmerman, who was acquitted by a jury in July, into a white man bent on killing innocent blacks out of racially inspired hatred.
Eric Holder’s Department of Justice was even caught aiding anti-Zimmerman activists with funds and personnel, which, along with the activism of the discredited Al Sharpton and others, helped force a trial after the evidence indicated Zimmerman was acting in self-defense.
Already known for accusing white Cambridge, Mass., police officers of “acting stupidly,” Obama jumped into the fray, declaring: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”
Journalist and author Jack Cashill, who followed the Zimmerman case closely and wrote about it in his new book, “If I Had a Son: Race, Guns, and the Railroading of George Zimmerman,” said that the case provides ammunition for Holder’s racial agenda and boosts support for an agenda targeting the Democratic Party base.
“What’s he doing, and I don’t think it’s coincidental that he said it on an election day when Virginia was still in play, is to rally the base. Saying we’re going to protect and the other guys won’t,” Cashill told WND.
Cashill said Holder has had an unusually high focus on racial issues since be became attorney general and has not even tried to hide his agenda from the American public.
“It’s been about race since he took over – one of the first things he did was that he killed the suit, which had already been won, against the [New] Black Panthers in Philadelphia who were involved in voter intimidation. That’s the amazing thing about it is that he is so transparent and that he has gotten away with so much, and no one calls him on it,” Cashill stated.
He believes that a large portion of the conservative media has not been willing to go after Holder on the issue for fear of being labeled a racist.
“Even the respectable conservative media is afraid of tackling the racial issue for the fear of being called racists themselves; it’s the great neutralizer in this debate,” Cashill commented.
According to Cashill, the victims of the agenda are people like Zimmerman who serve as unwitting scapegoats for the efforts of Holder and the Department of Justice.
“Yet, poor George Zimmerman – how much of a scapegoat can you make out of one individual?” Cashill wondered.
Just last month, Holder declared that his department has not given up on its investigation into Zimmerman.
Meanwhile, Obama ally Oprah Winfrey recently stated that white opposition to Obama was rooted in racism and that older whites “just have to die” for racism to diminish.
Cashill notes that Zimmerman’s acquittal settled nothing, with death threats amplifying, Holder continuing to hound him despite full clearance by the FBI more than a year prior and the media crying “Injustice!”
10. ADVANCEMENT OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY OF ORGANIZED CRISIS
Frances Fox Piven, co-architect of a strategy to overload the U.S. welfare system to precipitate a transformative economic crisis, was an early builder of the socialist-leaning New Party, which, according to reliable evidence, once had Barack Obama as a member.
Piven, together with her late husband, activist and fellow Columbia professor Richard Cloward, developed the Cloward-Piven strategy, which called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system.
The duo’s stated goal was to agitate a financial crisis that would collapse the U.S economy and replace it with a national system with “a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.”
Conservatives believe this is Obama’s playbook, while liberals dismiss it as right-wing paranoia.
But the agenda of the Cloward-Piven strategy and Obama’s relationship with the corrupt community organizing group ACORN seems to provide the best explanation for many of Obama’s actions.
It even explains why his promotion of a national health-care strategy seems to have been designed to fail, writes WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah in a column.
Farah said most Americans “still can’t conceive of the notion that a president of the United States would actually want to promote policies that could never work in the conventional understanding of the word ‘work.’”
However, he continued, “if your ultimate goal is greater and greater state control of the population and the economy, which Obama’s ultimate goal surely is, then it all begins to make sense.”
The strategy also can be seen in Obama’s foreign policy, Farah said.
He noted the Washington elite, including the Republican elite, favor internationalism.
What’s the goal of international interventionism? It is to promote a global one-world order – or New World Order, as George H.W. Bush candidly explained a long time ago,” Farah wrote.
But something has changed recently, he said, pointing out Obama faced serious opposition domestically to attacking Syria at the behest of the Saudis and changed directions.
He also did a 180-degree turn on Iran. Now he’s talking to Iran, proposing a cutback on sanctions that has come as a major shock to the Saudis, which are now turning to Russia and others.
Why is Obama apparently turning away from Saudi Arabia after bowing and scraping to its leaders since he entered office?
“It’s because Obama doesn’t have what we would call a coherent foreign policy at all,” Farah said. “It’s simply about fostering crises that only international authorities can resolve.”
Click HERE For Rest Of Story