Area 51: Black Helicopters Or Little Green Men?

Two weeks ago, the CIA revealed one of its worse kept government secrets in a 355-page document. It admitted that Area 51, located on a vast track of government land 80 miles northwest of Las Vegas, really does exist.

Never mind that Area 51 has been part of the American lexicon and pop culture for half a century. Only now does our government have the good grace to tell us. Better late than never, right?

Area-51-mapOf course, the CIA’s release, full of redactions, is probably less than 1 percent of the real truth of what is really going on when it comes to the government’s black operations.

We are left to guess at what secrets are hidden at Area 51, a site surrounded by mountains that has immense parts of it buried deep beneath the Nevada desert.

Most certainly it is a cache for super-secret black military projects that we can only hope are not under development for domestic operations.

Are they all human, or is it possible they are of extraterrestrial origin? I don’t see a definitive answer coming out about this in my lifetime.

After all, Washington or those really pulling the puppet-strings in Washington have billed U.S. taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars to build, fund and keep secret what goes on in and around Area 51.

In her book Area 51: An Uncensored History of America’s Top Secret Military Base, Annie Jacobsen delves into the labyrinth that is Area 51. It sits inside the largest government-controlled land parcel in the United States, some 4,700 square miles on Groom Lake, a dry lake bed. It is an area twice the size of Delaware.

The Jacobsen book is based on interviews with dozens of former Area 51 employees, all now old men who went to work there in the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s. They include detailed information from technicians, test pilots and scientists, but only on projects that are now declassified. That means the secrets in the book date back before the 1980s.

According to Jacobsen, the most bizarre and dangerous events outside of actual war have happened at Area 51. The scientists there worked a blueprint for a manned mission to Mars with a 250-foot-tall rocket that was to have been fueled by 2,000 nuclear bombs, which hopefully had controlled detonations. The laundry list for Area 51 includes top-secret spy planes like the U-2 and later the SR-71 (known as the Oxcart when it was first flown secretly by the CIA in the 1960s). Area 51 was also the testing site for nuclear weapons, including the neutron bomb, a thermonuclear device designed to release most of its energy as radiation (a great instrument if your goal is to just kill people and not destroy infrastructure).

As for extraterrestrials in giant test tubes and captured flying saucers, Jacobsen is skeptical. Yet she admits she doesn’t know for sure.

One thing we do know: Our government (or who is really running our government) wouldn’t tell us of extraterrestrial existence unless it served a purpose for the government.

One thing I am certain of is that just because there may not be alien UFOs in the sky doesn’t mean other aircraft are not flying over us right now. I might sleep better at night knowing it was ET flying over me rather than government omnipotence.

My UFO Story

I’ve been plagued by insomnia for years. Such was the case in Spokane, Wash., a decade ago. We lived past the southern edge of Spokane, so there was no light pollution — just a lot of tall pines in an open meadow. It was about 2 a.m. on a warm August night, and I was on our back deck looking at the stars. I felt this rush of air moving toward me. It was definitely not wind. I looked up and something soundless and blacker than coal flew just over the treetops blocking out the stars. The air rushed directly over me for a moment and the black object flew fast and low to the west. I never heard a sound, just an alien gust of air. As quickly as it came, it was gone. I stood up, stunned. Eventually, I went into the master bedroom.

“Angela! Angela! A UFO just flew over our house!”

“Oh you’re crazy,” said my wife. “Come to bed.”

Sleep was the last thing I could manage. I went back out on the deck. I half expected another flying vehicle overhead or (who knew?) maybe a fleet of them. Instead, there was stony silence.

It’s funny how the mind works when it faces a conundrum. By that time in life, I had pretty much accepted that I had forgotten everything I was taught in school. Yet one of the lessons came back to me from many years before when I was taking a philosophy class. (Who says philosophy never comes in handy?)

I thought back to a lecture about a 14th century friar, William of Ockham, who said that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. According to Ockham, when facing a riddle, the answer should be simpler than the riddle, not more complicated.

So I thought about what I knew. I knew something had flown over me and that the air felt like it came from a helicopter. It didn’t look or sound like a helicopter, but that didn’t mean for certain it wasn’t. I also know that as the crow flies, our backyard was 8 miles from Fairchild Air Force Base. I also knew that the U.S. Air Force was using stealth airplanes. Why not stealth helicopters? I had not yet heard of black helicopters, but this thing that flew overhead seemed to be just that.

Who Would You Trust More: ET Or Uncle Sam?

Of course, I could have believed it was aliens outside our solar system scoping out Spokane. But, frankly, I couldn’t see why they would be all that interested.

Ten years later, when my wife and I went to see the movie “Zero Dark Thirty,” I believed Ockham would have agreed with my helicopter conclusion. In the movie, which is the dramatization of the tracking and killing of Osama bin Laden, SEAL Team 6 was transported to the compound aboard top-secret helicopters. A general shows the SEALs the helicopters they will be on and states, “Technically, these don’t exist.”

When it comes to our government (or even who really is our government), there are technically a great many things that don’t exist.

Two weeks ago, we were allowed to know that Area 51 exists 70 years after it was created. But we still don’t have a clue as to what goes on at Area 51, how much black ops funding it receives and, foremost, whether it is friendly or hostile to our liberties and the American way of life.

Right now, it is all we need to know. And nobody responsible for the spending or the ultimate mission that exists in the creation and continuation of Area 51 believes that Americans have no need to know. Maybe that was a national security necessity during the Cold War. But the bastard government — in Washington or a secret cabal — is keeping too many secrets from us, the people. That is not what the framers of the U.S. Constitution envisioned.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Egypt Proves Obama To Be An Idiot Or An Islamist

“It was not a religion that attacked us that September day. It was al-Qaida.” — Barack Obama

While on vacation in Martha’s Vineyard last week, President Barack Obama condemned the bloodshed in Egypt. He demonstrated his anger over the recent violence that has left more than 1,000 people dead in the past week by declaring that America’s armed forces will not participate in this year’s war games with Egypt.

That’s right; Obama is canceling Bright Star, a biennial war exercise Washington and Cairo have organized since 1981.

The President must think this will bring Egyptian protestors and the military to their knees. To me, it’s like catching your teenage sons in a fistfight and yelling: “No baseball!”

If that doesn’t fix the crisis, the President just might double-dog dare Egypt. I expect the Egyptian army, which is now in control, and the Muslim Brotherhood, which is fighting for control, to say: “So what?”

Obama has made it obvious that he has no desire to suspend nearly $2 billion in annual aid to Egypt — a fortune when you consider that America owes $18 trillion — even as reports surfaced (later claimed false by the Administration) that aid payments had been stopped.

The good news is that Obama appears to not want to put American boots on the ground in Egypt. (Take that, Senator John McCain!) Instead, Obama is going to keep his fingers crossed and hope that Egypt and the rest of the Mideast doesn’t explode. If that happens, it could mean Obama will have to develop fossil fuels in North America. I can already picture the outrage from the greens. As for the neocons who never met a war they didn’t like, it will be heresy.

But events are spinning out of control in the Mideast, and Obama seems clueless when it comes to shaping them. That is either because he is weak or because he understands all too well what sustains Islam: a perpetually tribal and backward region that seems to require Sharia law or a ruthless dictator like Gamal Abdel Nasser, who seized power in Egypt in 1954.

For 65 years, Mideast nations have been ruled either by a dictator or Islamic sectarianism. Dictators like Nasser, Anwar Sadat in Egypt, Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran. More recently, we now have the Muslim Brotherhood battling for control of Egypt and the still-unrepentant Taliban in Afghanistan.

Author Lawrence Wright wrote about “Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, he was the former leader of the Egyptian terrorist group al-Jihad, and known to those in the underground mainly as Dr Fadl” in a story for The Guardian:

The Essential Guide for Preparation appeared in 1988, as the Afghan jihad was winding down. It quickly became one of the most important texts in the jihadis’ training.

The guide begins with the premise that jihad is the natural state of Islam. Muslims must always be in conflict with non-believers, Fadl asserts, resorting to peace only in moments of abject weakness.

The Compendium of the Pursuit of Divine Knowledge, which is more than 1,000 pages long, starts with the assertion that salvation is available only to the perfect Muslim. Even an exemplary believer can wander off the path to paradise with a single misstep. Fadl contends that the rulers of Egypt and other Arab countries are apostates of Islam. ‘The infidel’s rule, his prayers, and the prayers of those who pray behind him are invalid,’ Fadl decrees. ‘His blood is legal.’ He declares that Muslims have a duty to wage jihad against such leaders; those who submit to an infidel ruler are themselves infidels, and doomed to damnation. The same punishment awaits those who participate in democratic elections. ‘I say to Muslims in all candour that secular, nationalist democracy opposes your religion and your doctrine, and in submitting to it you leave God’s book behind,’ he writes. Those who labour in government, the police and the courts are infidels, as is anyone who works for peaceful change; religious war, not political reform, is the sole mandate. Even devout believers walk a tightrope over the abyss. ‘A man may enter the faith in many ways, yet be expelled from it by just one deed,’ Fadl cautions. Anyone who believes otherwise is a heretic and deserves to be slaughtered.

Of course, Obama will never ever speak of this inconvenient truth. But that does not make it untrue.

Humpty Dumpty Sat On A Wall

To believe Islam can be reformed would mean we have to swallow all that garbage that was sold by the George W. Bush Administration and his triad: Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz — or, as I call them, The Three Stooges.

Dubya neocons believed that they could engineer Venice on the Euphrates. More than a decade later, we can see how that turned out.

Yet the neocons remain undeterred. Just as McCain still believes America should and could have won the war in Vietnam, Cheney proclaims he has nothing to apologize about after a political career that dates back to the Richard Nixon Administration. To this day he maintains that the Bush Administration’s policies in Iraq were correct.

Cheney really believes the $1 trillion spent on Iraq was money wisely spent. He ignores that the Mideast may erupt into one big Iraq.

American blood and money was wasted to secure Mideast oil. A dividend was those fat military contracts. Now, 12 years after 9/11, our fortunes remain tied to the fortunes of the Mideast. If the region blows apart, it will have a huge economic impact on America. Before it is over, all of Obama’s horses and all of Obama’s men will not put America back together again.

The prospect of the Mideast burning should shake Democrats to their very core. Obama may have to embrace natural gas. He may have to accept the Keystone Pipeline from Canada.

And if Obama refuses to double down in the Mideast, the neocons won’t know what to do with themselves. There are three aircraft carrier battle groups that are on permanent station in the Mideast. Obama may have to put them up for sale on eBay — especially if he continues to give billions of dollars in U.S. aid to repressive Islamic regimes.

Islam-Aid Is A Sinister Tax Upon America

The most prominent Muslim next to the Prophet Muhammad was a professor, philosopher and mystic: Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali. He lived 900 years ago, which makes him postmodern in the Muslim world. Ask the Huffington Post, which ran this headline two years ago: “Al Ghazali: 900 Years Later and Still Relevant.” (It’s just another example of the liberal media’s burning need to placate Islam. If you think I am wrong, find a secular publication that claims Thomas Aquinas is still relevant.)

Farah Jassat, who wrote the story, had much to say about al-Ghazali and how “[h]e underwent a traumatic spiritual crisis riddled with doubt and confusion.”

What happened to al-Ghazali? He walked out on his students. He sold all of his possessions and moved about in the wilderness in search of wisdom and truth. If this seems familiar, it is probably because you watched the 1970s TV series “Kung Fu.”

In later life, al-Ghazali’s most important teachings were on taxation — not the taxation of Muslims, of course, but the taxation of Christians, Jews and Sabians. How else was a deadbeat professor going to make himself and Islam rich?

To do just that al-Ghazali laid out his taxation plans for the dhimmi, or non-Muslims. He declared that they were obligated to never mention “Allah” and that all must pay the jizya.

Jizya was a poll tax that non-Muslims had to pay their Muslim superiors. Al-Ghazali determined that non-Muslims were an inferior people. This came from one of the greatest Muslim minds ever, a man whose teachings are still celebrated today.

Yet what jizya really boiled down to was a protection racket no different from what the Mafia ran in America. Non-Muslims paid off Muslims or they faced reprisals.

According to Mark Steyn, author of America Alone: The End of the World as we Know It, this is the prime reason why the Prophet accepted non-Muslims in the Holy Lands. They were heavily taxed by their Muslim masters, and it provided a constant revenue stream.

Steyn writes:

[E]ventually almost all Muslim societies tend toward the economically moribund, if only because an ever-shrinking infidel base eventually wises up…

But the Muslim word has effortlessly extended the concept of the jizya worldwide. If you’re on the receiving end, it’s possible to see the American, European, and Israeli subsidies of the Palestinian Authority as a form of jizya. Or even the billions of dollars Washington has lavished on Egypt, to such little effect (other than Mohammed Atta coming through the window). Not to mention every twenty bucks you put in the gas tank.

When it comes to 21st century jizya, Obama is all in. Each year, the United States spends $25 billion on Persian Gulf oil. In addition to the $2 billion set aside for Egypt this year, the United States will give nearly $4 billion to Afghanistan and more than $3 billion to Pakistan. This is amazing because reportedly, when it comes to support in the United Nations, Egypt votes against the United States 79 percent of the time and Pakistan votes against the U.S. 75 percent of the time.

The neocons in the Bush Administration may have believed that Iraq was bought and paid for, thus giving the United States the right to conduct social engineering.

That is not the case for Obama, who is ever so willing to continue the largest transfer of wealth in human history. Billions of our tax dollars go to Islam each year in the hope that everything works out. It is either the dream of an idiot or the ambition of an Islamist.

As for Obama’s claim that we were not attacked by a religion but by an organization, imagine if in 1942 President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had declared that America was not at war with Germany but with the National Socialist Party. It’s outrageous and it is frightening.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Obama, Oprah And Inouye: One An American Hero, The Other Two From Chicago

“During her speech at the Holocaust Memorial Museum, she (Oprah) talked about the devastations of concentration camps and then inexplicably segued into how hard it was to be famous and go to the bathroom in public.” – Kitty Kelly’s Oprah, A Biography.

President Barack Obama announced last week a list of Americans who would receive the Medal of Freedom, the highest honor bestowed to a civilian. The group included the late Democratic Senator from Hawaii, Daniel Inouye and Oprah Winfrey.

inouyeObama

Inouye was awarded the Medal of Honor for his combat heroism in World War II. A few years ago he spoke of how he sniped a German officer who was “moving his bowels.” Inouye remembered with regret what he told his men before he took the fatal shot: “This one is mine!” And while we may not like Inouye’s record in the Senate, I believe he should get a pass because of what he did in combat and because of the racism he overcame as a Japanese-American.

Then there is Oprah; the Oprah that despises public washrooms, the Oprah who in 2008 proclaimed Barack Obama to be the “chosen one.” “The Oprah,” who launched Obama’s two-term Presidency.

And when it comes to Oprah it seems to me the President is paying off an old debt. And what do you give a woman worth $3 billion? Perhaps the President asked the first lady what to get Oprah. She may have opined: “The Medal of Freedom would be nice.”

Inouye Lost An Arm… “Oprah Doesn’t Do Stairs!”

Inouye’s posthumous Medal of Freedom was more difficult to earn than Oprah’s, whose biggest contribution to America is a daytime TV show.

More than a decade ago I got a glimpse of the real Oprah. I came home from work early one day and watched her talk show. She was interviewing actor Matt Damon and director Billy Bob Thornton about their then new movie, “All the Pretty Horses.”

Oprah bragged to her worshipping audience in front of her guests, “I don’t even have a cell phone.” To which Thornton replied neither did he, but all three of them had two or three assistants following them around with cell phones. If looks could kill Thornton would have been a dead man.

To be fair, it’s necessary to measure up the life achievements between Inouye— a  Japanese-American who was vanguard for the Democrats in the Senate for half a century—and Oprah— a liberal Chicago celebrity and a onetime confidant to the President.

Inouye’s lifetime of achievement began in 1943 when he volunteered for 442nd Regimental Combat Team. He did that as Japanese-Americans were being interned by the Federal government. Within his first year he achieved the rank of sergeant. While fighting the Germans in World War II he was promoted to second lieutenant.

In 1945, Inouye led his platoon against a heavily-defended ridge near San Terenzo in Tuscany, Italy. He ordered his men to take cover. He proceeded to attack three German gun positions. After he was shot through the stomach, he pressed on with nothing more than his Thompson submachine gun and a sack of hand grenades. After his right arm was blown to shreds by a German grenade rifle, he led a charge past the enemy’s last position.

His actions in World War II gave Inouye a shout-out on one website as, “Badass of the Week.” 

Inouye is remembered as a badass, not as a fat-ass. With regards to the latter, Kitty Kelly does point to a terrible day Oprah had at an exclusive art gallery.

In the book, Oprah on page 340, Kelly quotes renowned Washington, D.C., art dealer Peter A. Colasante who had the misfortune of trying to do business with Ms. Winfrey:

“Hey. You’ve kept me waiting for over thirty minutes.” Her security guards moved in.

“C’mon I need to show you your paintings so I can get to my own appointment.”

“Oprah does not walk,” she said.

“Aw, c’mon. It’s only a few yards,” I said with my hand on her shoulder, steering her across the street. She started screaming at her secretary.

I said, “Your people made appointments for you, insisted on absolute times, and said that we all had to be ready for your arrival and let nothing interfere, so I’m doing exactly what your people told me to do.

The secretary was so frightened she couldn’t speak and she started shaking so hard her notebook bobbed up and down. This only incensed Oprah more. I thought she was going to swat the secretary and then decapitate me. Just as this was happening, a busload of kids passed by. They immediately recognized Oprah and started screaming. Then the most amazing thing happened: Oprah stopped hissing and spitting, and her serpent eyes softened as she waved and beamed. “Hi, y’all.”…. She actually turned from screeching harridan to sweet goddess in less time than it takes to blink. I swear I thought I was in the middle of an alien attack… Then I marched her into my gallery, trailed by her pilot, her secretary, her hairdresser, her makeup man and two big security guards. She walked through the front door and started waving her hands over head like she was doing a very slow St. Vitus’ dance.

“I just don’t feel it,” she said, shaking her head. “I just don’t feel it. The vibrations aren’t right… they’re not speaking to me….”

“You’ll feel ‘em once you see the paintings we’ve assembled for you,” I said, pointing up the stairs where the Court oils had been hung.

“Oprah does not do stairs!”

And so it goes, as Obama embraces the achievements of Inouye and Oprah. One was an American war hero. The other sells soap to desperate housewives. One is dead. The other now encouraged to continue the good work of building the Obama legacy.

And let us not discount how tough Oprah has had it either. She has said she was sexually abused as a child, something denied by her family. And when her ratings were poor she said how she had once done cocaine, too.

As Frank Sinatra so famously sang:

That’s life, that’s what people say.

You’re riding high in April,

Shot down in May.

Life imitated lyrics for Oprah. She was told she would receive the highest civilian honor a President can bestow. The announcement came a couple of weeks after she was subjected to wicked racism by a Swiss shopkeeper.

The First Lady of TV wanted to look at a $38,000 handbag while on a recent trip to Switzerland.  She told Entertainment Tonight: “I was in Zurich the other day at a store whose name I will not mention. I didn’t have my eyelashes on, but I was in full Oprah Winfrey gear. I had my little Donna Karan skirt and sandals, but obviously The Oprah Winfrey Show is not shown in Zurich.

“I go into a store and say to the woman, ‘Excuse me, may I see that bag over your head?’ and she says to me ‘No, it’s too expensive.'”

It seems Oprah likes crocodile bags. (Ouch! Oprah is not an environmentalist!). Yet this Swiss shopkeeper dared to say no to Oprah!

According to Oprah, the woman said: “No no no, you don’t want to see that one, you want to see this one, because that one will cost too much and you will not be able to afford that.”

Cost too much? Too much for Oprah? That is like telling the Pope he isn’t Catholic. If seeing is believing you can watch how Oprah described her Rosa Parks experience, no doubt while on her way back from her Swiss bank. 

I tell you it is an outrage. It is also a coincidence, because the new movie about racism, The Butler, starring Oprah hits theaters Friday.

Obama may feel that what happened to Oprah was so despicable that it influenced his decision to bestow upon the Queen of daytime TV the identical honor he bestowed on the late Senator Inouye.

Just one difference: one saved his platoon and went on to serve in the U.S. Senate for 50 years. The other never does stairs and no longer does handbags in Switzerland.

Yours in good times and bad,

-John Myers

Obama: An Obedient Saudi Servant To The End

“(Saudi Arabia is) one of the worst, most draconian regimes in the world.” — M. Zudhi Jasser, author of A Battle for the Soul of Islam: An American Muslim Patriot’s Fight to Save His Faith

The news seemed shocking last week when the U.S. State Department announced that 19 embassies and consulates in the Mideast and Africa will be closed through this week.

The State Department said closures were out of an “abundance of caution” and “not an indication of a new threat.” This is an abundance of caution? That is like saying you might not want to drive your car this week because it would be more cautious to stay home.

The truth is that if this Mideast mess keeps getting worse, you might not be able to drive your car because you might not have any fuel to fill it. One of the embassies that closed, just to be safe, is in Saudi Arabia — home to the largest conventional oil reserves in the world and the oil kingpin that has been dictating world oil prices since the Richard Nixon Administration.

And let us not forget the warning by our government to U.S. citizens that al-Qaida and extremist groups (who all just happen to be Muslim) may be planning terrorist attacks in the Mideast and North Africa.

Representative C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md., told ABC’s “This Week” that the threat intercepted from “high-level people in al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula” was about a “major attack.”

To date, there is not a mention by Washington of that evil empire to the north — the one that mines oil from oil sands, which, in turn, kills ducks. Apparently, the embassy in Ottawa, Ontario, is going to remain open. There are no travel warnings to Americans coming to Canada about blue-eyed sheiks.

Despite all this Mideast angst, President Barack Obama is dead set on supporting Arab oil exporters like Saudi Arabia while criticizing Canada’s oil industry. It seems to the Obama Administration and his liberal green backers that it is worse to spew carbon into the atmosphere than it is to butcher Americans.

Obama is the worst to both worlds: a liberal and a neocon.

The United States continues to spend billions of dollars in Muslim kingdoms that, in turn, spend money to buy off al-Qaida. Better to pump up Islamic extremists than to trust Canadians, whom we fought in 1812.

It’s not as though Obama is ignorant of the Mideast and Africa. He understands the region better than any President. For Pete’s — I mean Muhammad’s — sake, Obama had a Kenyan father who by all accounts was a die-hard Muslim.

The President addressed American policy on the Mideast two years ago:

Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind.  Moreover, failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that has festered for years that the United States pursues our interests at their expense.  Given that this mistrust runs both ways –- as Americans have been seared by hostage-taking and violent rhetoric and terrorist attacks that have killed thousands of our citizens -– a failure to change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and the Arab world.

Speak whose mind, Mr. President? Not the people of Saudi Arabia, unless they want to be tied to the stake and lashed. No kidding, folks, the Saudis still embrace Middle Ages law and order. They proved it a couple of weeks ago when Raif Badawi, founder of the Free Saudi Liberals website, was sentenced to 600 lashes and seven years in prison.

No doubt, the king and royal princes think he had it coming. After all, he was convicted of insulting Islam, speaking ill of Saudi Arabia’s religious police and, even worse, “parental disobedience.”

It turns out Badawi is a brat that doesn’t listen to dad. Keep in mind he is a 30-year-old man. When I was 30, I wasn’t always making the choices in life my dad wanted; but he didn’t have the religious police round me up and deliver the lash. In fact, the old man gave me my last spanking at age 11.

Hopefully, the lashes will be spread out over time; because if memory serves me from my days in history class, 100 of them delivered in one “sitting” will kill a person. Oh, well. That would be one less person to object to King Abdullah, the 80-year-old monarch, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and a friend of Obama’s.

Last month, King Abdullah and Obama met to discuss progress in the Mideast. What progress means to King Abdullah might be allowing women to ride a bicycle without being arrested and beaten. I am more interested in what Mideast progress means to Obama. I suspect it has something to do with locking in more oil from the region so he won’t have to deal with those obnoxious Canadians and their obsession with beer and hockey.

Last week, CNNMoney ran this headline: “If Wall Street’s right, Obama may nix Keystone.”  The story, which is based on a Wall Street Journal article, reported that Obama is still on the fence regarding the passage of the Keystone oil sands pipeline and that he may turn it down because scientists have informed him that Canada’s oil sands are thought to be some 17 percent more carbon intense than regular crude oil.

Seventeen percent! That is going to be the difference between getting oil from a dependable and civilized nation next door and getting it from the Mideast, which is imploding?

Note from the Editor: Hyperinflation is becoming more visible every day—just notice the next time you shop for groceries. All signs say America’s economic recovery is expected to take a nose dive and before it gets any worse you should read The Uncensored Survivalist. This book contains sensible advice on how to avoid total financial devastation and how to survive on your own if necessary. Click here for your free copy.

The same month he meet with King Abdullah, Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency said the pipeline was bound to have an impact on climate change.

At the end of July, the President gave an interview to The New York Times in which he pooh-poohed the number of long-term jobs that would be created by Keystone and said that if approved Keystone might actually cause gasoline prices to go up.

Obama said, “(O)il is going to be piped down to the Gulf to be sold on the world oil markets, so it does not bring down gas prices here in the United States. In fact, it might actually cause some gas prices in the Midwest to go up where currently they can’t ship some of that oil to world markets.”

That’s a prime example of Marxist economic theory.

The Economist wrote that the President’s comments amounted to a “kick in the teeth.” A member of the government of Canada put it differently, saying that if Obama turns down Keystone it will be like a “kick in the balls.”

It is starting to look like Obama will turn it down. It will create a deep divide between the United States and Canada, but perhaps Obama just wants to keep the greens happy and add to his liberal legacy. Another reason could be that he wants to stay on good terms with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the homeland of Masjid al-Haram (The Sacred Mosque) in the city of Mecca. It seems what happens in Mecca stays in Mecca.

It also seems that Obama will remain an obedient Saudi servant to the bitter end. We’ll have to see whether it is just to the end of his Presidency or if it’s until the end of America.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Sum Ting Wong?

In the wake of the crash of Asiana Airlines Flight 214, San Francisco TV station KTVU erroneously reported the names of the pilots:

wong0723

I was watching golf on Saturday, July 6, when I started channel surfing and went to CNN. I saw Asiana Airlines Flight 214 burning after an attempted landing in San Francisco. We learned pretty quickly that two of the passengers were dead. In the days since, we have learned that another passenger died. Scores remain in serious condition.

The four pilots are being treated for psychological trauma caused by the accident.

No doubt, they feel guilty. Reports are surfacing that the pilots were incompetent and approached the runway too low and too slowly, causing the tail section to strike the sea bed wall before the runway.

Bloomberg reported last week that the four pilots “lacked manual flying skills.” That is like a heart surgeon with the shakes.

The financial cost to the National Transportation Board, the Federal Aviation Administration and the San Francisco International Airport will be millions of dollars.

The victims in this crash are not just the passengers and their families. Asiana claimed harm had been done to them and their pilots because of racist remarks by KTVU, for which the TV station immediately apologized and accepted blame.

For a week, Asiana Airlines was taking the spotlight off their bad pilots, who killed and maimed passengers. They were putting the focus of the crash on KTVU. Cable news outlets like CNN and MSNBC were happy to cover that story, rather than the crash itself and the incompetence of the pilots.

Asiana announced that it was suing KTVU because of a broadcast that used bogus and racially offensive names for four pilots on the plane.

An intern at the NTSB confirmed the names to KTVU, whose producers broadcast them without thinking.

I first read the names on the CNN ticker. The scrolling words read: “San Francisco TV station apologizes for its mistake in naming flight crew 214 as Captain Sum Ting Wong, Wi Tu Lo, Ho Lee Fuk and Bang Ding Ow.”

I didn’t even understand what I was reading until I saw the third name roll by. I started laughing — not because I am a racist, but because the people at the TV station who ran those names are idiots who should not have jobs in broadcasting. I also laughed at the names because, as my wife maintains, I still have a sophomoric sense of humor. (My wife calls it childish.)

According to MSNBC, I am supposed to feel guilty that I laughed. Clearly, I am a racist. It is Asiana — not the people killed and maimed — that should feel righteous indignation.

Doesn’t anyone have a sense of humor anymore?

If you ever saw the 1979 Monty Python movie “Life of Brian,” you will get my point. Monty Python makes fun of everyone, especially the Romans. Names for Roman leaders occupying the Holy Land are: “Naughtius Maximus” and “Biggus Dickus,” whose wife is “Incontinentia Buttocks.”

It’s a good thing the Romans are gone. If not, they would be certain to have sued Monty Python and George Harrison, who financed the movie. And they would be getting plenty of support from CNN and MSNBC. And President Barack Obama might even give a news conference like he did last Friday and say he is outraged, that just as he could be Trayvon Martin he could also be Biggus Dickus.

Mission accomplished for Asiana. For a week, that story was in the news — not the crash. (Also in the news that week was the story about how those six female jurors — five creepy-ass crackers and a Hispanic — conspired to give George Zimmerman a not guilty verdict despite the fact the media and the liberals were convinced Zimmerman cold-bloodedly executed that sweet innocent “child,” Trayvon Martin.)

Last Wednesday, Asiana announced that a lawsuit against KTVU will not be pursued. The reason is probably that its legal team is going to be too busy defending the airline against wrongful death and injury lawsuits.

The first lawsuit has already been launched. Plaintiff attorney Michael Verna said: “The conduct of Asiana’s flight crew was egregiously reckless and negligent. These pilots were unable to do the most basic task — land on a runway in the middle of a clear day with no wind.”

That is really the something wrong.

North Dakota Reporter Is Outraged Over A Mistake I Made

Last week, I got a phone call from a reporter from The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead in North Dakota. I called back, thinking the paper might want a quote from me on the oil industry. I was wrong.

Instead, the reporter told me the attorney general of North Dakota had come across an old newsletter of mine about oil opportunities in North Dakota. Embedded in the article was a photograph of Mount Rushmore.

Reporter TJ Jerke got straight to it. Did I not know my basic geography? Did I not know that Mount Rushmore is in South Dakota, not in North Dakota? Jerke wanted to know these facts because his newspaper was considering running a story on my mistake.

I told Jerke that I don’t put the printed page together, that my editor does that and that he either didn’t know his geography or perhaps he did and just wanted to put a recognizable photo that subscribers would associate with the Dakotas.

You might have thought that would be the end of it. But, no, there was no stopping this newshound.

“Didn’t I have to sign off on that page after it was designed?” he asked. I said that sometimes I am out of town, so not always.

“Is that any kind of way to run a publication?” he asked.

I had heard enough.

I asked how old he was. He told me 23. I told him how the world worked when I was 23, that newspapers didn’t act as PR firms for the government. I told him that back then we did stories on the politicians themselves. I also told him that he should get off his behind and do some investigative reporting, that government would be a good place to start.

Maybe that young man will grow to be a good reporter. Then again, he may already be fast-tracked toward a great career. In the wake of the Zimmerman verdict, it seems many people in the media work at the behest of President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder.

It seems to me that these days, there really is something wrong.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers 

Happy Ramadan!

“Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is their destination.” –Quran 9:73

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 1, 1960: President Dwight D. Eisenhower announced Mayday greetings to communists around the world. The President stated: “On this sacred day for communists, Mamie and I want to extend our best wishes. For the world’s 1.5 billion communists I want them to know they play a significant part in shaping the world’s future, that May Day is a time for thoughtful reflection.”

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 8, 2013: President Barack Obama announced Happy Ramadan to the world, saying: “With the start of the sacred month of Ramadan, Michelle and I extend our best wishes to Muslim communities here in the United States and around the world. For the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims, Ramadan is a time for thoughtful reflection, fasting and devotion. It is also an opportunity for family and friends to come together and celebrate the principles that bind people of different faiths — a commitment to peace, justice, equality and compassion towards our fellow human beings. These bonds are far stronger than the differences that too often drive us apart.”

Obama concluded: “I wish Muslims across America and around the world a month blessed with the joys of family, peace and understanding. Ramadan Kareem.”

The President didn’t mention ritual rape, mass murder and the killing of infidels; you know; folks like us.

As for Ramadan Kareem, that sounds like the name of an NBA player who recently converted to Islam.

When I first read the President’s message, I didn’t have a clue what Kareem meant; but it bothered me that he did.

It also bothers me that Obama just doesn’t get it about Islam, or does he? He is displaying either a total ignorance about the War on Terror (here is a hint, Mr. President: Islam is involved) or, worse, he has sympathetic views toward Islam, its goals and the murderous means it will use to achieve them.

The dateline at the top is my ridiculous invention written for effect. The truth is that on May 1, 1960, Eisenhower gave his personal approval for Francis Gary Powers’ infamous U-2 flight across the Soviet Union. After Powers was shot down and with proof in hand, Nikita Khrushchev, the First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, was furious. He felt Ike was openly taunting the Soviet Union during the most important communist day of the year.

What did Obama do? He told Muslims of every ilk to enjoy this joyous holiday and ended up sounding like the pope on Easter.

Of course, Obama apologists will argue that 99 percent of Islamic believers hold no harm in their hearts against the United States. That number is not accurate, as I will show in a moment; but let’s be generous for the time being and say OK to the Obamaites.

Even if we go along with the 1 percent number, that means 15 million Muslims in the world want to see grievous harm done to the United States. I am sorry that so many American liberals don’t realize that they are on the same hit list.

For the President or any reasonable person to declare that somehow Islam is not at the epicenter of terrorism is to argue that Spain wasn’t involved in the Spanish Inquisition.

Are there elements in Islam that are parallel to Communism 50 years ago? You bet, argues Mark Steyn in his book America Alone: The End Of The World As We Know It.

According to Steyn, the goal of millions of Muslims across the world is the takeover of Western cultures; but our politicians are so politically correct that that they are either apologists or appeasers to Islam.

“Nobody wants to be unpleasant, or judgmental, do they? What was it they said in the Cold War? Better dead than Red. We’re not like that anymore. Better screwed than rude,” wrote Steyn adding:

… [T]he political class prostrates itself before an insatiable force that barely acknowledges the latest surrender before moving on to the next invented grievance. Indeed, a formal enemy is all but superfluous to requirements. Bomb us, and we agonize over the “root causes.” Decapitate us, and our politicians rush to the nearest mosque to declare that “Islam is a religion of peace.” Issue blood-curdling calls at Friday prayers to kill all the Jews and infidels, and we fret that it may cause a backlash against Muslims. Behead sodomites and mutilate female genitalia, and gay groups and feminist groups can’t wait to march alongside you…

One Poll Liberals Won’t Like

Obama supporters often pick and choose the polls that make their President look favorable. Here is a poll they can chew on, a WorldPublicOpinion.org poll from 2009:

  • 24 percent of Palestinians approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 30 percent of Palestinians approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 11 percent of Jordanians approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 15 percent of Jordanians approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 9 percent of Pakistanis approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 12 percent of Pakistanis approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 8 percent of Egyptians approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 7 percent of Egyptians approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 8 percent of Turks approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 10 percent of Turks approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 7 percent of Moroccans approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 7 percent of Moroccans approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 5 percent of Indonesians approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 6 percent of Indonesians approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.
  • 4 percent of Azerbaijanis approve of attacks on American civilians in the U.S., and 7 percent of Azerbaijanis approve of attacks on U.S. civilians working in Islamic countries.

I am pretty sure the numbers haven’t got better in the past four years. They are probably worse. That means there is zero truth to the 1 percent number that is so often bandied about by liberals.

Add up the numbers above; throw in places like Yemen, Chechnya and God knows where else; and we are talking about tens of millions, even hundreds of millions, of Muslims who approve of attacks against America. In total, I suspect a greater number of Islamists want to blow up the United States now than the number of Soviets who were in favor of doing it during the Cold War.

Muslims And Cowboys

This year, I took my wife out to the Calgary Stampede for her birthday along with our daughter and her boyfriend. Calgary is a city of 1 million people, and 1 million people go through the turnstiles each year to see what is called “The Greatest Outdoor Show on Earth.” It is mostly a giant state fair along with the best rodeo cowboys in the world competing for 10 days.

This year, parking was especially difficult in part because the city is getting over a horrific flood and because the city of Calgary erected a giant tent mosque so that Muslim cab drivers can pray during Ramadan. Forty percent of all taxi drivers in Calgary are Muslim. (No word as of yet if customers are left inside the cab with the meter running while their cabbie is inside on his knees facing Mecca.)

This might seem strange if you are from Birmingham, Ala., or Reno, Nev.; but it is what you would expect in Calgary, home to Baitun Nur mosque complex, a 48,000 square foot building erected by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Calgary. It is the largest mosque in North America. The good news is that if you visit Calgary, Baitun Nur’s website welcomes you to come in and pray.

Now imagine anything close to this happening in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Each year, that city hosts the Janadriyah National Culture and Heritage Festival at a huge “desert-encircled fairground” that attracts 600,000 visitors over two weeks.

You won’t find any Christian tents at that festival. In fact, you won’t find any Christian churches anywhere in Saudi Arabia. Justice Minister Mohammed al-Issa said in April that Saudi Arabia, “does not allow the establishment of non-Muslim places of worship.”

Is it just me or does this not look like a two-way friendship? I may be wrong, but I do not recall King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia ever wishing Christians a Merry Christmas. Yet President Barack seemed effusive in talking about Ramadan. That strikes me as odd.

I am hardly the only one. Brigitte Gabriel is a Christian who escaped Islamic terror in her homeland of Lebanon. She told The Daily Caller she is afraid she will lose her liberties twice in one lifetime because of the Obama Presidency.

“President Obama is transforming the country right before our own eyes. He is sending a message to our enemies that America is weak, America is a paper tiger,” Gabriel said. “He is apologizing for America at any opportunity he can, and that is unacceptable.”

Gabriel added: “I think that if America is that bad in his eyes maybe he needs to step aside and appoint somebody where we can have a commander in chief who is proud of the United States and everything the United States has done.”

I could not agree more. But, then again, what do we Christians know? Infidels like us don’t fast and pray during the Holy Month of Ramadan. I can only hope it stays that way for my children and my grandchildren.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers 

Obama: Superman Or Superego

It’s a bird! It’s a plane! It’s Superman. No, it’s Super President!

Yes, friends, things are looking up for President Barack Obama. He has saved America from an economic depression; he has mandated universal healthcare; and he has arrested most of our fears over his spy network. Now it is time for him to save planet Earth.

This is the headline from The Telegraph: “Barack Obama to cut emissions in vow to save planet.”

“We don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society,” Obama said as he outlined his climate-change plan while speaking to students at Georgetown University. He told them he will direct the Environmental Protection Agency to limit greenhouse-gas emissions from power plants and change the country’s infrastructure to protect against extreme weather. His plan means spending Federal money to increase renewable energy.

All this change must happen soon, declared the President, before there is too much Kryptonite… I mean carbon, which will choke the life from us. The President even went on to blame recent national disasters like Superstorm Sandy, terrible wildfires and droughts on global warming. Specifically, he said, one long-running drought has “forced a town to truck in water from the outside.”

Saving the planet is a long-held promise by the President. We are supposed to be happy that he is marshaling all of his knowledge from that Ivy League scholarship plus his time as a community organizer. Yet I wager the President has less understanding of hard science than I do, which is saying a lot considering I studied economics in college.

Then again how dare we question him? He knows what is best for us, right? He knows we need to be spied on for our own good. He knows we need to spend taxpayer dollars to save ourselves from… well ourselves. It’s all there in carbon and white.

On a frightfully frigid January day during his inauguration, the President warned that failing to cut emissions “would betray our children.”

This Looks Like A Job For Superman!

“Good golly,” Superman’s friend Jimmy Olsen might say.

It may seem to us mere mortals that Obama has some explaining to do. After all, Egypt and Syria are in chaos, oil prices have rocketed above $100 per barrel, the stock market is gyrating wildly and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke doesn’t seem to have a handle on what to do. All this is happening at a time when the greatest arch criminal since Lex Luthor — National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden — is on the run and ready to sell America’s most important secrets to any and all evildoers. All of this is happening, yet the President is fighting climate change. Never mind such inconvenient truths as the fact that global temperatures have not increased in 16 years.

Please excuse this old country boy and the fact that, where I live, we have experienced one of the coldest springs and worst flooding on record, but I have to ask: What is Obama selling? I don’t believe for one second it is our salvation. I believe it could be our damnation.

In the 2006 movie “Superman Returns,” the hero’s motto was left out. The Man of Steel used to say that he fought for, “truth, justice and the American way.”

Power Africa

I am willing to bet that the last thing Obama is fighting for is the American way.

“Power Africa” (it has a ring to it, doesn’t it?) is Obama’s commitment to provide $7 billion in aid to sub-Saharan Africa.

“A light where currently there is darkness — to provide energy to lift people out of poverty — that’s what opportunity looks like,” Obama recently told students at Cape Town University.

“So this is America’s vision,” the President added: “a partnership with Africa for growth and the potential for every citizen, not just a few at the top.”

This comes at a time when America’s Federal debt tops $18 trillion and at a time when thousands of Americans live with an economy so bad that they cannot get a job to pay for their own power.

There is a reason Africa is called the Dark Continent and why it is going to remain the Dark Continent. It doesn’t have anything to do with the skin color of the people. It has everything to do with corrupt and dangerous dictators and their delusions of grandeur.

And this is something Obama shares with African leaders. You don’t have to take it from me. Instead, read this from the recently published book The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House, by Edward Klein, New York Times writer and bestselling author:

One morning in the spring of 1991, a telephone rang in Gannett House… The caller was Douglas Baird, dean of the University of Chicago Law School. He was looking for Barack Obama, who had gained national fame as the first black president of the Review.

Actually, Obama was not the first person of color to be president of the Review. That distinction belonged to Raj Marphatia, who was born and raised in Bombay (now known as Mumbai), India, and who had become the Review’s president four years earlier. But while Marphatia’s presidency went largely unnoticed, Obama’s attracted a great deal of attention in the liberal mainstream media.

That publicity, in turn, led to a publishing contract for a book on race relations and several offers of prestigious clerkships and lucrative jobs. The liberal world was already beating a path to Barack Obama’s door. I made a cold call to the Harvard Law Review and spoke to Barack, recalled Baird, who is no longer the dean of the Chicago Law School but is still a member of its faculty. I asked him, “Do you have an interest in teaching law?” and he said, “No. My plan is to write a book on voting rights.” And I said, “Why don’t you write that book here at the University of Chicago. I can give you an office and a word processor and make you a Visiting Law and Government Fellow.

“He accepted,” Baird continued, “and several months after he arrived, he came to my office and said, ‘Boss’–he called me boss–‘that book I told you about–well, it’s taken a slightly different direction. It’s my autobiography.’ I was astonished. He was all of thirty years old and he was writing his autobiography!”

What were you doing at age 30? I had a wife, a newborn and two toddlers. I was still wondering if after eight years as a published writer if I was good enough at it to make a living from it.

Not so for Obama. Even though he was a lowly teaching assistant and by all accounts broke, he decided to tell the world his life story.

Winston Churchill wrote My Early Life: A Roving Commission, at 56. That was after he had been First Lord of the Admiralty, a commander in World War I and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. At 52, Mohandas Gandhi wrote his first autobiography, The Story of My Experiments with Truth, mostly because he was urged to by his friends.

But at 30, Obama wrote Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.

I can’t comment on the book other than the title does seem strange considering he hardly knew his biological father. I haven’t read it, and I don’t intend to.

What we do know is that after his successful entry into politics the book sold like sunscreen in the Sudan. Overnight, Obama had money in the bank.

How would Sigmund Freud interpret Obama’s book with regard to his theory of the psychic apparatus: id, ego and superego? My guess is that Freud would say Obama has an abundance of superego.

I don’t like to judge another person’s state of mind unless that person is our President. Yet any criticism of Obama may not mean much. To his loyal Liberal supporters it will always be: Up, up and away!

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Obama Condemns Slavery, Then Celebrates The Life Of Terrorist Nelson Mandela

“I saw the inconceivable mystery of a soul that knew no restraint, no faith, and no fear…” ― Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness

As his popularity plunged in the United States, President Barack Obama and the first lady went on an African excursion that included a somber visit to South Africa. There, Obama spoke emotionally about the man who so inspired him, fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner and former South African President Nelson Mandela.

Obama has always said that he is walking in the footsteps of greatness, in the footsteps of men like Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi. But the truth is that Mandela is far more like Obama’s other mentor, Bill Ayers, than he is like Gandhi.

Then again, the truth is not something Obama seems to focus on. He mostly concerns himself with three things:

  • The promotion of his African-American agenda.
  • The shifting of America to the far left.
  • His future legacy.

The ‘Door of No Return’

Part of that legacy for the President and the first lady begins with America’s collective guilt over slavery. Little wonder the first stop on the Obama African Express was Senegal.

The New York Daily News captured the story in its headline: “President Obama pays emotional visit to slavery museum.”

Never one to miss a photo opportunity, the President and first lady stood grim-faced at the “Door of No Return” as they visited the Maison des Ecslaves, the point where African slaves were shipped west until the mid-19th century.

No sooner did we learn about the President’s pilgrimage to the African slave house than we learned something new about the President. Yes, folks, he too has slave forefathers.

International Business Times reported:

Until recently, it was thought that Obama did not have any slavery roots — unlike most African-Americans — as his father was born in Kenya and his Caucasian mother was a Kansas native.

Last year, however, website Ancestry.com revealed the existence of a blood line connecting the President’s mother to the first African documented slave in the U.S., John Punch.

The President’s mother! This white lady has roots to slavery. The truth is that if we go back far enough in time, Obama’s father had roots to slave selling. (More blacks are culpable for selling African slaves, but that is an “inconvenient truth” and something liberals will not discuss.)

If we go back far enough, we all have roots to slavery. Each of us has ancestors back to the dawn of time. No doubt some of your and my ancestors were owned, perhaps by those damned Romans. Of course, that is all ancient history — nothing at all like what ended in the 1860s.

Obama’s Selective Memory

While our President can’t forget slave times from 150 years ago, he has amnesia regarding his hero, Mandela, and the atrocities committed by Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) from the 1960s into the 1990s.

I don’t have roots in Africa, but I spent a month in South Africa in 1990 with my uncle, Dick Myers. At that time, the country was in the grips of racial and tribal violence. (A great read on the atrocities being committed in 1990 is The Bangbang Club: Snapshots from a Hidden War, written by photojournalists who covered it, Greg Marinovich and Joao Silva.)

The focus of my trip was to report on the political climate and whether subscribers should hold or sell their South African gold mining stocks.

While in Johannesburg, we had fancy accommodations that were incredibly cheap. (I think our suite cost $60 an evening because tourism ceased during this time of Western sanctions against the Pieter Willem Botha apartheid government.)

One night, Dick and I decided to take a late-night walk. A few blocks from the hotel, we were intercepted by two white South African soldiers, each packing submachine guns and wearing combat gear.

They told us that some supporters of the ANC, Mandela’s political party, wouldn’t hesitate to execute us on the spot. They escorted us back to our hotel lobby and left us with this: “Don’t be idiots!”

I also remember many South Africans, especially black South Africans, who despised Mandela. Scores of South Africans were convinced that Mandela was a dangerous man, and there was a lot of angst about his upcoming release from prison. Even more hated was his then-wife Winnie Mandela, because she would order executions of political opponents by having them “necklaced” by her gangsters. (“Necklacing” is a method of execution in which a gasoline-filled tire is placed around someone’s chest and arms and ignited.)

Back then, Mandela was seen by people of all races as a man who had not hesitated to use terror to promote the Marxist ideals of the ANC.

Madiba, The Terrorist

Beginning in the 1960s, South Africa was plagued by terrorism. Much of it was committed by the ANC’s guerrilla organization, the MK, which translated to “Spear of the Nation.” That organization was founded in 1961 by Mandela. The next year, Mandela was arrested, convicted of sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government, and sentenced to life imprisonment.

But in 1985, the Botha government offered to release Mandela if he would repudiate terrorism. Not a chance. South African History Online states: “Mandela communicates his refusal of the offer through his daughter, Zinzi Mandela, who reads his statement to this effect at a rally in Soweto on 10 February 1985. He states that the ANC’s [sic] only adopted violence as a means of protest ‘when other forms of resistance were no longer open to us.’”

It seems South African whites and other black groups were responsible for the terror being carried out by the ANC, including the Church Street car bombing in May 1983 that killed 19 people and injured 217 others.

This attack 30 years ago is ancient history to Obama. But it is not so easily forgotten by the people of South Africa, some of whom still have to stand up to the intimidation of Mandela’s political party. Last month, the Mail & Guardian reported that the ANC had lashed out at AfriForum’s youth wing for observing a minute of silence for civilians killed in ANC terror attacks:

On Tuesday, the ANC called AfriForum Youth “irrelevant” and “isolated”, following Monday’s event.

AfriForum Youth said the event celebrated the lives of 19 people killed in the 1983 Church Street bombings. AfriForum Youth’s national president Charl Oberholzer said the ANC tried to rewrite history by portraying its leaders as heroes.

“Thousands of innocent civilians, black and white, paid a terrible price during these violent attacks by the ANC. The event is not only a protest against the ANC’s biased rewriting of history in which ANC leaders are portrayed as blameless heroes, but also an opportunity to celebrate the lives of those who died in terror attacks,” Oberholzer said.

He said the ANC’s “dark history” was often “glossed over.”

“But the reality is that many families are still struggling to cope with the brutal way in which their families were murdered,” said Oberholzer.

“More than 500 people were killed by means of necklacing since 1984, hundreds were set alight while still alive and 250 were killed in bomb or landmine attacks by the ANC. Even though the ANC did sign the Geneva Convention in 1980 and undertook not to target ordinary South Africans, 80% of terror attacks by the ANC targeted innocent civilians,” he added.

ANC spokesperson, Keith Khoza, said AfriForum’s views were “unfortunate”, and said the ANC was not aware of the event.

He said it was necessary for the ANC to rewrite it’s history to some extent, because it had been distorted during apartheid.

But, he said, history had to be factual and based in reality. Khoza added the party encouraged people – “even white people” – to start documenting their own history, whether it occurred pre- or post-1994.

Even white people! How gracious of the ANC. How good of South Africa’s ruling party and Obama’s hosts to allow that “even white” people deserve some consideration.

Obama: An African Or American Leader?

Obama described Mandela, whom he refers to by his clan nickname Madiba, as a “hero for the world” as well as a “personal hero,” adding that Mandela’s legacy “will linger on throughout the ages.”

South African President and ANC leader Jacob Zuma was quick to add that Obama and Mandela “both carry the dreams of millions of people in Africa and in the diaspora who were previously oppressed.”

Silly me, I thought that Obama was supposed to carry the dreams of millions of Americans.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

P.S. The quote at the beginning of this article is from Heart of Darkness. The reference is about the character Kurtz, but I think it could apply to Obama or Mandela.

P.P.S. Have a happy Fourth of July!

Stock Shock: Why Barack Obama Is The King Kong Of Drug Dealers

“Lesson No. 1: Don’t underestimate the other guy’s greed. Lesson No. 2: Don’t get high on your own supply.” — From the 1983 movie Scarface

President Barack Obama is worse than the corner crack dealer who tells kids, “The first hit is free.” Instead of getting a neighborhood addicted to cocaine, he has the Nation hooked on cheap money.

It all worked out perfectly well — for Obama, that is. He won his Nobel Peace Prize, gave the economy its “fix,” was re-elected President and is assured of having inner city-schools named after him for the next century. Mission accomplished for the egomaniacal President.

For you and me, the nightmare is just beginning. And we will look back and say it began on June 19, when Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke suggested he is going to wean the economy off cheap cash.

Currently, the Fed is spending $85 billion every month to buy debt that Uncle Sam can’t sell to anyone else. Bernanke had the audacity to suggest the Fed may start winding down its stimulus program because the markets are strong enough to stand on their own.

Wall Street financiers are savvy. When they heard those words, they felt the way Charlie Sheen feels when walking into the doors of a rehab clinic.

The market understands that the days of high times are over. Its sudden awakening erased 500 points from the Dow Jones industrial average, which in one fell swoop reduced wealth by a couple of hundred billion dollars.

Our Stock Market Nightmare

Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, pioneered the understanding of dreams.  He also had a cocaine addiction. He found that cocaine helped cure depression.

In an article for CNN, Howard Markel, M.D., Ph.D., author of An Anatomy of Addiction, wrote: “Like so many others, Freud suffered from the most maddening symptom of addiction: the stealthy process by which the addict’s mind conspires to convince that nothing, nothing at all, is askew or dangerous about something that most decidedly is.”

Millions of people went on to find the ecstasy and short-term cure of cocaine. I suspect that many people (perhaps even Obama during his college days) discovered that it worked wonders until they were flat broke and even more depressed then when they started. Perhaps cocaine was Obama’s inspiration to get America hooked to an even stronger substance: cheap money.

The Independent reported in 2009:

Money works like a drug on the human brain – and even just the thought of earning a higher salary gives us a physical buzz, a study has found.

Scientists have discovered that thinking about cash stimulates the reward centres involved in pleasure and the higher the salary – even if it is just imagined – the greater the pleasure generated in the brain.

The results of the study suggest that the human brain is innately susceptible to the illusion of wealth that money can bring. This is known in economics as “money illusion” – when people get fixated on the nominal value of money, rather than on its actual purchasing power. Some economists have proposed that people behave irrationally when it comes to wages by being happier with higher salary increases in times of high inflation than they are with lower salary rises in times of low inflation.

For instance, studies have shown that people report being happier when they receive a 5 per cent increase in their salaries at a time of 4 per cent inflation, compared to a 2 per cent increase in salary at a time of low inflation.

That explains Obama-economics 101 and the basis for the feel-good economic programs he and special adviser Valerie Jarrett came up with during his Presidential campaign in 2008.

And it certainly has worked. The moneyed elite in America are richer.

But given the headline below, we should have known we were at a market top:

usatoday

I always heard there is no such thing as a free lunch, and it is true. Michael Lombardi wrote in Profit Confidential:

By creating trillions of dollars in newly printed money, the Federal Reserve inadvertently created a bubble in the bond market and spurred a big rally in the stock market.

By the end of this year, the Federal Reserve will have printed just under $1.0 trillion in new money—roughly equal to the U.S. government’s budget deficit for the year. What a coincidence.

So if the Federal Reserve stops buying U.S. Treasuries, who will step in and buy them?

It’s a rhetorical question. Nobody is going to buy Treasury debt — certainly not Russia, who is at odds with Obama over Syria, and not China, who is at odds with Obama over North Korea. That leaves the PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain). These bankrupt European Union nations are desperate to sell off their own debt.

As for Obama, he is probably reviewing his blueprints to his Presidential library and his soon-to-be-purchased Hawaiian plantation, along with his bedecked Chicago mansion. The rest of us are left to deal with the financial catastrophe that he dealt us.

Don’t sweat it (pun intended). If you are starting to feel anxious and depressed and you really are sweating, it is just typical withdrawal.

In withdrawal the first reaction is loss. The second reaction is rage. And rage it will be when borrowing rates rise fourfold in the next two years.

Reagan Just Said No

The days of wine, roses and excess money took off during the Jimmy Carter Presidency. We got lucky because two things happened that saved the Nation. Paul Volcker, a fiscal-tough-love economist, was appointed Fed Chairman and Ronald Reagan was elected President.

America was weaned off of cheap money. It meant tough times for a spell, because the cure seemed worse than the disease. The Nation had to endure a rolling recession that cut deep into America’s agriculture and the resource sectors. Yet Reagan risked his political career because he knew it was the right thing to do.

If you are in your 50s or older, you will recall the early 1980s when interest rates shot through the roof.  We can look back on it and know it saved the U.S. dollar, but it was painful.

Consider what happened to the 30-year mortgage rate. It stood at 10 percent during the last year of the Carter Administration. Because the Fed squeezed the excesses from that economy, the 30-year mortgage rate reached 18.5 percent by 1981.

Reagan and Volcker understood that too much money and too much debt would kill the dollar over the long term. Kill the dollar, and in time you kill America.

Quantum Killer

Fast-forward three decades. Obama and his Fed Chairman did the exact opposite of Reagan and Volcker. Instead of pulling easy money out of the economy, they injected trillions of dollars more through three series of quantum easing. Obama and Bernanke didn’t care what America needed. (Of course, the claim is that the Fed acts independent of the White House. If you believe that, you probably believe that the National Security Agency isn’t spying on us).

The President and Fed Chairman have given the Nation copious amounts of ever cheaper money. And for five years, the Nation has believed it was doing better because the President and the Fed were injecting greater amounts of cash into our veins.

I have been looking at charts for more than 30 years, and I probably find them just as boring as most of you do. Yet the chart below really is worth looking at. It shows that Obama has been running the printing presses faster than a Latin dictator hopped-up on his own supply.

chart0625

Whatever previous Presidents have done regarding the printing of greenbacks doesn’t compare to what Obama has done. And stopping that tidal wave of money that the markets have become addicted to is going to cause a sickening withdrawal.

Prediction: Interest rates began to take off last week. The rates on three-month Treasury bills are rising. This is just the first indicator that, across the board, rates on mortgages, car loans, student loans and such are climbing. That is bad news for Big Board stocks, which have been soaring because bonds have been paying such a paltry return. Bad news for stocks means a falling stock market, and this market could easily lose half its value in the next 24 to 36 months.

Action to take: Lock in any loans you need for as long as you can. Sell all bonds and all stocks with the exception of special resource plays. Retain your physical gold and silver, but let’s see where prices go these next couple of weeks before adding to your position. Meanwhile, move money into cash — I mean cold, hard currency stored in a dry, safe place. Guns, ammo, canned foods and water should always be fully stocked, especially now.

Obama has written a huge check for us all, and the tab has come due.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Tipping Toward Tyranny

“We know better than what they tell us, yet hope otherwise.” — Thomas Pynchon, in a 2003 introduction to George Orwell’s reprinted classic, 1984

After the past few months, nothing President Barack Obama and his Chicago troika (first lady Michelle Obama, senior adviser Valerie Jarrett and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder) says shocks me. Their ideology is based on their African-American heritage and their Islamic sympathies. What should shock us is that we are allowing the Obama Administration to do what it wants with nary an objection — not from the people, not from the press and not even from our Republican representatives in Congress.

Our latest engagement in Syria will only make that nation a breeding ground for future terrorists. The consequences of that will be arguments by the Obama Administration for even greater authority. That will mean Americans will have fewer liberties.  Don’t count on public outrage.

In a recent poll from the Pew Research Center and The Washington Post, 56 percent of those surveyed said the National Security Agency’s (NSA) program to track phone records is acceptable. Only 41 percent said it was unacceptable. When asked about anti-terrorism efforts, 62 percent of respondents said it was more important for the government to investigate possible terror threats, even if the price was personal privacy.

I cannot comprehend how almost two out of every three Americans are perfectly willing to let Obama shred the 4th Amendment. It gets worse. Some Republicans in Congress are suggesting that journalists should be subject to arrest if their articles put the Nation at risk. Risk is how the Obama Administration defines it. If this happens, there goes the 1st Amendment. All of this begs the question: If we are willing to give up these Constitutional rights, are we willing to give up everything in the Constitution? Will America sacrifice the right to bear arms and even the 22nd Amendment, the only instrument that limits the President to two terms?

I try not to be too pessimistic, but it seems that we are at a tipping point — something Malcolm Gladwell studied and wrote about in his acclaimed book The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. In it, he states, “Change happens not gradually but at one dramatic moment.”

Flying Blind And Blind Trust

My own personal experiences have demonstrated that Gladwell is correct. I almost had a life-ending moment, and I wasn’t aware of it until it was upon me.

It was 20 years ago when my uncle, Dick Myers, flew me to Billings, Mont., in his Cessna 172. We took the trip to see Little Bighorn Battlefield, the site of Gen. George Custer’s last stand.

Dick had let me handle the controls from the co-pilots seat many times before in mid-flight, but only on perfectly clear days. Dick had flown for decades, with 2,000 hours as first in command. When he asked me if I wanted to take control over the middle of Montana, I said, “You bet.”

We were cruising at 120 mph at an altitude of 8,000 feet. Dick was taking a rest in the left seat, eyes closed.

A cloudbank overcame us with me at the controls. I understood only two gauges: the altimeter and the airspeed indicator. In pilot jargon, I was flying VFR, or visual flight rules. Given my inexperience, it was necessary for me to be able to see the horizon just to keep the plane flying straight and level. But I was blissfully ignorant as the clouds came upon us. Everything seemed fine when Dick became startled, saying, “I have the controls!”

I didn’t know what all the excitement was about, but certainly Dick was plenty excited. He grabbed the yoke and rammed the throttle forward. The small Cessna’s single engine roared. We momentarily broke through the clouds. It was then that I was able to see I had not been flying straight. Our plane was listing to the right, and the nose of the plane was pointed toward the prairie below.

It couldn’t have been much more than a minute; but in that time, I had lost all ability to tell up from down. It is called spatial disorientation. It is what happened to John F. Kennedy Jr. when he crashed his Piper Saratoga into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., in 1999. All Dick had to do was give the instruments a quick check to stabilize the plane as we flew back into cloud cover.

“That was close,” Dick exclaimed. I could tell he was angry at himself for not being alert as I flew into the clouds. He had trusted the weather report before we departed which said there would be an unlimited ceiling. After we landed (and over a much-needed beverage), he told me that when flying, things can go bad in the blink of an eye. As Gladwell explained in his book, a great many things reach a tipping point.

It is easy to blame the loss of liberties on Obama because of his disregard for the Constitution. Yet millions of Americans implicitly trust Obama to do the right thing — even after the Benghazi, Libya, cover-up; abuses by the Internal Revenue Service; the seizure of telephone records of reporters; and the all-encompassing NSA spy program.

How can you blindly trust someone you have never met and don’t know? Even the people who have written about Obama and support his policies admit that nobody — with the exception of his wife, Michelle — knows who Obama is.

Let me tell you about trust. That same summer I was flying the airplane, there was a front-page story in our hometown newspaper. Our family doctor of 15 years was arrested (he was later convicted) for having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male patient. The news was crushing because he was a good doctor and, I thought, a sensible man. He delivered our babies and even made house-calls if anyone in the family was ill. He had a wife and child. He was the kind of man that women wanted to be with and men wanted to be like. He had a thriving practice. And I thought I knew him well.

All these years later, I still ask: How could I have been so wrong? Who do we really know?

I have known my wife for 40 years. I believe I know what is in her heart, and she knows what is in mine. But beyond my wife, I really can’t make blanket statements about anyone. And I certainly wouldn’t make one about someone I have never met who is also a politician.

When millions of Americans feel they can trust Obama, we are near a tipping point. I just hope that America can save itself before it’s too late.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers   

Warning: Obama’s Secret Police Know You Are Reading This

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” — Edmund Burke

Do you feel safer knowing President Barack Obama’s Secret Police — whoops, I mean his National Security Agency (NSA) — are monitoring your communications and everything you read on the Internet, including these very words? Certainly, you are supposed to feel safer. Just ask almost anyone in the mainstream media, as well as most Democrats and even Republicans in Congress (the very members we trust to protect our liberties). They are busy acquiescing to Obama’s tyranny all in the name of national security.

It seems the Obama-media and members of Congress have not read a word of history. They seem to have never heard of a democratically elected leader who enslaved Europe and started a war that killed 60 million people while his government, police and justice system turned a blind eye to every excess. All they have to do is a Google search for “Adolf Hitler.” Maybe they don’t do that because it would be a record of subversive inquiries.

James Bamford writes in The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America: “There is now the capacity to make tyranny total in America.”

Yet hardly anybody seems to care, other than Libertarians like former Congressman Ron Paul, who said the NSA revelations are “a predictable result of a government that continues to erode our liberties while promising some glimmering hope of security.”

I was naïve enough to believe that others, like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), would be outraged by the Obama Administration’s attack on the 1st and 4th Amendments. Graham says he is not sure who is entitled to 1st Amendment rights. It could be that Personal Liberty Digest and the people who comment on the columns and stories don’t have guaranteed protection.

“Who is a journalist is a question we need to ask ourselves,” Graham said. “Is any blogger out there saying anything — do they deserve 1st Amendment protection? These are the issues of our times.”

The French Trusted Hitler

Graham said last week he is unconcerned that the Obama Administration has his Verizon phone records because he’s not “talking to terrorists.”

Graham told FOX News: “I am glad the NSA is trying to find out what terrorists are up to overseas and inside the country.”

The host said he was a Verizon subscriber and was, therefore, being tracked by the federal government. Graham weighed:

“I’m a Verizon customer. I don’t mind Verizon turning over records to the government if the government is going to make sure that they try to match up a known terrorist phone with somebody in the United States,” he said.

“I don’t think you’re talking to terrorists, I know you’re not, I know I’m not, so we don’t have anything to worry about,” Graham said. “I’m glad the activity’s going on, but it is limited to tracking people who are suspected to be terrorists and who they may be talking to.”

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjTcs5T1jpQ&w=420&h=315]
 
Graham also admitted that it wasn’t until the news broke about the NSA the day before that he knew anything about what the top secret agency was doing. I am glad Graham is sure they aren’t doing anything bad. And I am really glad Graham has looked into his crystal ball and can predict that the Obama Administration will never abuse power.

It is amazing that our elected representatives will allow Obama to operate his spy network without objection or restraint. As for me, I wouldn’t have trusted Mother Teresa with that much authority. One thing is certain, Germans embraced Hitler in part because he was so damn charismatic. They also embraced him because they feared people like the French, who in the 1930s were the bugaboo for millions of Germans. It turned out that Germany had a lot more to fear from the likes of Hitler, Heinrich Himmler and the Gestapo than it did from the French.

The insiders really knew from the very start who Hitler was. A man good with words was German Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, who wrote:

In 1933, a French premier ought to have said (and if I had been the French premier, I would have said it): “The new Reich Chancellor is the man who wrote Mein Kampf, which says this and that. This man cannot be tolerated in our vicinity. Either he disappears or we march!” But they didn’t do it.

Obama’s Power-Play Based On Fear

But idiots abound on the left. On “Real Time,” Bill Maher said he doesn’t mind that the NSA has these powers because he trusts Obama. He then added that he wouldn’t want to see such powers in the hands of a Republican President. Maher added we have to accept sweeping powers by Obama or a future President because terrorists want to use “nukes.” Yes, friends, the nuke argument! Maher seems to believe if we don’t allow Obama these dictatorial powers an American city is going to be incinerated next week.

Most in Congress, including all our trusted Republicans, are espousing what Maher is saying. It is simple: If we resist the government, all hell will break loose. Or as Dr. Peter Venkman (Bill Murray) declares in the movie “Ghostbusters”: “Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!”

There’s all this fear over Muslim fanatics whose most advanced weapon is an AK-47 and whose typical mode of transportation is a horse or camel.

The liberals are terrible oddsmakers. There is a greater chance of getting struck by lightning than of getting maimed or killed by a terrorist. And what are the chances that the Federal government will not abuse its secret spy apparatus? Perhaps the odds are 10-to-1. If you are an optimist, you might place them at 100-to-1. That is a pretty big gamble.

All Must Be OK, Because Obama Tell Us So

I am convinced that Obama is not interested in protecting America from terrorists. Glenn Greenwald, the reporter for The Guardian who broke the NSA story, thinks the same. He told Piers Morgan on CNN:

“There is a massive apparatus within the United States government that with complete secrecy has been building this enormous structure that has only one goal, and that is to destroy privacy and anonymity, not just in the United States but around the world.

“It’s well past time that we have a debate about whether that’s the kind of country and world in which we want to live. We haven’t had that debate because it’s all done in secrecy and the Obama Administration has been very aggressive about bullying and threatening anybody who thinks about exposing it or writing about it or even doing journalism about it. It’s well past time that that come to an end.”

[cnnvideo url=’http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/06/07/pmt-guardian-greenwald-nsa-prism-program.cnn’ inline=’true’][cnnvideo url=’http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/06/07/pmt-guardian-greenwald-nsa-prism-program.cnn’ inline=’true’][cnnvideo url=’http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/06/07/pmt-guardian-greenwald-nsa-prism-program.cnn’ inline=’true’][cnnvideo url=’http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/06/07/pmt-guardian-greenwald-nsa-prism-program.cnn’ inline=’true’][cnnvideo url=’http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/06/07/pmt-guardian-greenwald-nsa-prism-program.cnn’ inline=’true’]
 
Greenwald claims that terrorists who represent a threat to Americans have known for years that electronic traffic is being monitored. That is why they use couriers.

On Friday, Obama explained that there is no need to worry or fuss and that our freedoms are being protected because his heart is in the right place.

“[My] observation is, is that the people who are involved in America’s national security, they take this work very seriously,” Obama said. “They cherish our Constitution. The last thing they’d be doing is taking programs like this to listen to people’s phone calls.”

I don’t know about you, but somehow Obama’s rhetoric didn’t comfort me, especially when he added: “[I]n the abstract, you can complain about Big Brother and how this is a potential, you know — you know, program run amok. But when you actually look at the details, I think we’ve struck the right balance.”

 
Isn’t the devil in the details? And didn’t Obama say he is a Christian and went to Columbia University? And in 2003, he declared that the Patriot Act was “shoddy and dangerous” and something he would help dispose of if he was elected to the U.S Senate.

We can always cross our fingers and really hope that this time Obama is telling the truth. Or we can face the grim reality that William Pitt, the British prime minster of the late 18th century, understood:  “Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it.”

Obama doesn’t have unlimited power yet, but he is working on it.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

The Sinister Truth About Obama And Islam

“Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation…” -Barack Obama

Who is President Barack Obama and what does he want? That he is an enigma is indisputable.

The ultra-Left continues to see him as a transformative figure that will remake America. His critics agree that Obama wants to change America, but not for the better. I decided to find out by reading half a dozen books and taking notes over the past few months.

The three books that are most compelling in their explanations of Obama are:

• Richard Minter, Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide For Him.

• Edward Klein, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House.

• Bob Woodward, Obama Wars.

Minter’s credits include writing for The Wall Street Journal, Forbes and even the left-leaning Newsweek. Klein was a former editor for Newsweek. And the venerable Woodward was a key player that revealed Watergate when he was famously reporting for The Washington Post and has been considered to be the political assassin of President Richard Nixon.

These books contend Obama is a loner with few or no friends, has a messiah complex and an unequalled ego. They state that beyond his troika – wife and First Lady Michelle Obama, Senior Advisor to the President Valarie Jarrett and Attorney General Eric H. Holder – Obama listens to nobody. More damning is both Minter and Klein contend that the President and his gang of three are sympatico; that their African-American heritage has made them and all blacks victims of the white establishment and that they must change the United States with the redistribution of wealth, the Constitution be damned.

In Leading From Behind, Minter writes:

(In college Obama had) a passion for civil rights, social justice, and radical politics… (He) was developing a radical resume. He audited a class at Columbia University taught by famed writer and Palestinian activist Edward Said, spoke at protests at Harvard Law School, attended a church where the radical Israel sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright echoed off the walls.

Is Obama a Muslim in Christian Clothing?
No one can forget the Reverend Wright and his “Goddamn the United States!” outburst from the pulpit. But according to Klein, it wasn’t Wright who corrupted young Obama. It was Obama who used Wright by cultivating a relationship for his own political gain, namely to cover his Islamic beliefs.

I can already see a wave of hate comments from of our liberal readers so I am going to fully cite my reference from his book where Klein interviewed almost 200 people that have personally known the President, including Rev. Wright.*

Below and verbatim is from page 40 of The Amateur. It is Klein’s interview with Wright, the man Obama once said was, “like my father”:

“After Barack and I got to know each other, it got to the point where we would just drop by my church to talk,” Wright said. “And the talk gradually moved away from his community-organizing concerns — street cleaning, housing, child care, and those kinds of needs — to larger things, more personal things. Like trying to make sense of the world. Like trying to make sense out of the diverse racial and religious background from which he came. He was confused. He wanted to know who he was.

“And I told him, ‘Well, you already know the Muslim piece of your background.’” Wright continued. “You studied Islam, didn’t you? And Barack said, ‘Yeah, Rev, I studied Islam. But it helped me understand Christianity, because I already know Islam.’ And I said, ‘Well, let’s start from the beginning. Who do you say Jesus is? Let’s boil it down to the basics.”

“Did you convert Obama from Islam to Christianity?” I asked Wright. “That’s hard to tell,” Wright replied. “I think I convinced him that it is okay for him to make a choice in terms of who he believed Jesus is. And I told him it was really okay and not a putdown of the Muslim part of his family or his Muslim friends.”

This interview was not conducted by a conservative. These are not the words from a book by Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin or the soon-to-be-a-retired-Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. Klein is a seasoned newsman who freely admits that, like most of his colleagues in the media, he was first blinded by the celebrity aura that is the substance of Barack Obama. Nevertheless, linking the President to Islam is a serious charge. Yet others see some truth in it.

It was reported last week that Virginia Republican nominee for Lieutenant Governor E.W. Jackson wrote in a 2010 blog that Obama has “Muslim sensibilities” and a “Muslim perspective” to view the world. He added that Obama has taken an anti-Semitic approach to the White House that he “picked up from the black community.”

What exactly are the President’s thoughts on Islam? In his own words:

• “We will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities.”

• “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.” (This must be a different Islam than the one that blows people up in Boston and cuts off soldier’s heads in London.)

• “As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.” (Again, a different Islam, because in the past 20 years I have seen little evidence that the Muslim faith cares about non-believers dignity or wants peace.)

Trust me Mr. President, few care about what you did for Islam when you were a young man. What we do care a great deal about — especially given we have been fighting a decades long war against Islamic extremists — is what your plans are now. What now appears certain is that you do not want to hurt Muslim sensitivities regardless of what terror they unleash on Christian Americans.

Obama refuses to use the words “extremist Muslims” or “Muslim Jihadists.” In 2009, Obama said it was “workplace violence” (I thought that was when you kicked over the water-cooler at the office) when Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter and follower of al-Qaida, shot and killed 13 military personnel while screaming “allahu akbar” (god is great).

It is ridiculous, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer told Fox News in April, that the President refuses to use the words “jihadist” and “Islamist” to describe the threat.

Krauthammer added: “I say I don’t know what he’s thinking, but I sure know what he’s saying and doing. The lengths to which he will go to avoid telling us the truth about the enemy is becoming comical and certainly embarrassing… (Obama) refuses to use any words that might imply a connection between radical Islam and terrorism, which anybody who is over the age of 9 knows is the single greatest cause of terror in the world today.”

Every Hitler Needs A Himmler
Maybe you want the President to be politically correct. That is your business. What you should not want, and what you should fear, is that Obama has a pro-Muslim agenda before his term ends and is instructing Attorney General Eric Holder and his lieutenants to illegally enforce it… praise be to Allah!

United States attorney in Tennessee Bill Killian has promised to use Federal civil rights statutes to stop offensive and inflammatory speech about Islam.

Last week the Tullahoma News quoted Killian: “We need to educate people about Muslims and their civil rights, and as long as we’re here, they’re going to be protected,” Killian told the newspaper.

Killian, along with the FBI special agent that runs the Knoxville office, is meeting with the local Muslim community to inform them about their rights under Obama law.

Excuse me, but what the hell? What about our rights as Americans? What about the First Amendment? This gets to the core of why Obama can hopefully be impeached and why Holder should be fired immediately. If not, writers for Personal Liberty Digest™ and readers like you who write comments will have to watch what we say about the poor Muslims in our country; members of a religion that the President seems hell-bent on protecting.

Yours in good times and bad,

-John Myers

*Klein, Edward (2012) The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House. New York, NY: Regency Publishing, Inc.

Obama’s Minority Report

“When the chips are down, when the pressure is on, every creature on the face of the Earth is interested in one thing and one thing only. Its own survival.” — Dr. Iris Hineman as played by Lois Smith in the 2002 blockbuster movie “Minority Report

Like every creature, President Barack Obama wants to survive his grand Presidency, the first for a minority. Yet in the wake of the hell storm that had landed upon him these past few weeks, he is more than ever a cornered animal. I expect the President to be ruthless and reckless in defeating any and all enemies.

Obama’s fangs are extended, and he and his supporters will fight tooth and nail to preserve his minority presidency, regardless of the cost to the Nation.

Case in point: Attorney General Eric Holder wrote a chilling letter to Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) two months ago. In part it read:

It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.

Seriously, do you trust Holder with a missile? If you do, then ask The Associated Press just how far it trusts Holder and his boss, Obama? These two men have criminal ambitions that President Richard Nixon never imagined.

Holder’s reasoning for spying on the Fourth Estate explains the whole affair as if he were consigliere dismissing bad acts as a noble endeavor: “This was a very serious leak and a very, very serious leak.”

The key word is “serious.”

Of course, Holder and Obama thought it a serious leak. All leaks that implicate a President in wrongdoing are serious. Ask John Dean, White House counsel to Nixon during Watergate, if Deep Throat was a serious leak. That is what leaks are. This is why our Constitution provides the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech, to people like you, me and the press.

Listen up, Obama-maniacs; it is possible this soon-to-be ex-President will utter words of your arch nemesis, Nixon: “I’m not a crook!”

Obama Drones On

If you are one of the millions of loyal Obama supporters, the worst you might have to fear — besides tyranny — is listening to another one of the President’s boring speeches and his feigned ignorance on events like Benghazi, Libya.

If you are a political opponent, such as a member of the Tea Party or a writer for The AP, you can expect Obama to implement Gestapo tactics using his Internal Revenue Service or Justice Department on the basis of preserving America’s national security.

And if Obama thinks you are a clear and present danger, there just might be a missile in your future.

Last Wednesday, Bob Livingston penned a great column for Personal Liberty Digest™, Obama The Obtuse. It spoke to the willful blindness or purposeful ignorance of Obama on crucial matters that affect our liberty: guns in Mexico, the IRS, The AP and Benghazi.

After I read it, I thought: “Damn, I wish I had written that.” I didn’t, but I want to share these 23 words from it:

“He [Obama] didn’t know. He didn’t know. He didn’t know. He didn’t know. He’s the smartest man in the world, and he didn’t know.”

This is what we know about Obama and his weapon of choice: drones.

Holder said we need to worry about them only in case of “extraordinary circumstance.” Our definition of what is extraordinary and Holder’s definition may be quite different.

Dead Muslims… So Far

I wrote last week about the killing of two Muslim American-born citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and his 17-year-old son Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, which was carried out by drones using Hellfire missiles. That would seem extraordinary given the absence of habeas corpus. However, the father did have ties to Islamic terrorist groups, while his son’s execution seems to have been an errant shot (like when you shoot the family dog instead of the coyote).

No big deal, right? Both of “those” Americans were Muslim. Both of “those” Americans were killed in the Mideast.

What if next time there is a “suspected enemy combatant” in Jackson, Miss., or Fargo, N.D.? What if next time they are not Muslims but Christians? What if they happen to have the misfortune of living next to someone who is Muslim — someone whom Obama, with his Allah-given wisdom, decides are his enemies. We can be sure that the President and his supporters will chalk it up to collateral damage. These things happen in war.

The last time I checked, America had not been invaded and occupied. No doubt, terrorists like the Boston bombers are still roaming about; but is that an excuse for Obama to operate his drone program with impunity against the very Americans who elected him?

Yet Obama’s drone air force has taken flight, killing bad guys and innocents over Islamic lands; and it is now constantly prowling over America. Drones have become Obama’s weapon of choice the way the Tommy gun was Al Capone’s.

Peter Bergen, CNN’s national security analyst, reported in September that Obama had by then authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan alone, four times more than the number during President George W. Bush’s eight years in office.

Most chilling about Obama’s use of drones against perceived enemies is what New York Times writer Jeremy Scahill, the author of Dirty Wars, “calls a form of ‘pre-crime’ justice where individuals are considered fair game if they met certain life patterns of suspected terrorists,” as reported by The Guardian.

“One of the enduring legacies of Obama’s presidency is how he has normalised assassination as a central component of what is called America’s national security policy,” Scahill told The Guardian.

It is eerily reminiscent of Steven Spielberg’s movie “Minority Report,” starring Tom Cruise. In that science fiction film, set in the not-too-distant future, the government believes it can predict future crimes and “capture or kill” the culprit before they have even committed a crime. It sounds frighteningly similar to what the Obama Administration is doing.

Imagine the audacity of the Obama White House to believe it can predict — based on actions and movements rather than actual crimes — an individual’s intention. These autocratic executions are ordered by the President who doesn’t know much, yet is all-knowing.

With the exception of the American al-Awlakis, Obama has used his omnipotence against real or just perceived foreign combatants. Could we see a time when the Obama Administration will target Americans? I would have thought it impossible two weeks ago. But two weeks ago, we had not learned about the President’s other predators — not his drones, but his IRS and his Justice Department. He appears to have wielded his influence over those agencies without regret, and it seems to be naïve that he won’t do the same with his air robots.

Fatal Fallout If Obama Is Impeached

I share some excitement in knowing that Obama is ruining his Administration and his legacy. But I remember a saying my mother had: “Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it.”

If Obama is a President worthy of impeachment, if he is forced from office, there will be hell to pay for the Nation. His supporters by the millions will say he was politically lynched because of his color. Think back to the widespread rioting after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968. Take the number of those events and multiply that by a big number, and you will know what I am talking about.

It will be deadly serious for Obama to keep the Presidency. It will be deadly dangerous if he loses it.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Obama’s Secret Army And Why We Should Fear It

“The people on the list might be me.” — Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), speaking during his March 6 filibuster about the “kill list” maintained by the Administration of President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama has big plans to change the United States. Most frightening is that he can back up his Machiavellian plan with a personal army that targets any real or perceived enemies, even if it means killing American citizens without trial or arrest.

It is nothing new. Tyrants have employed personal armies for 2,000 years, beginning with Julius Caesar’s Praetorian Guard. Joseph Stalin wielded his Peoples Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD) and Adolph Hitler had the infamous Schutzstaffel (SS). Obama commands the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

While the President didn’t create this hybrid of the military and CIA, it operates under his command. JSOC is made up of the most elite soldiers in the world, and they follow Obama’s orders. The funding, which is in the billions of dollars, comes from taxpayers (the actual amount is classified); and there is zero Congressional oversight.

The commandos who make up JSOC were born from the ashes of Operation Eagle Claw, President Jimmy Carter’s failed rescue of American hostage held in Iran in 1980.

Headquartered at Pope Field and Fort Bragg in North Carolina, JSOC has already been woven into myth by the Obama Administration and popular media for the operations of one of its components: Navy SEAL Team 6, which killed Osama bin Laden.

The potential for even a good President to abuse force became apparent under the Ronald Reagan Administration, when JSOC was subsequently put on a tighter leash. But it was slipping under the radar even then. In 1993, one of JSOC’s most secretive missions was the disastrous raid against the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas, which led to the deaths of 75 people, including 20 children and two pregnant women.

Nixon Had His Enemies List, Obama Has A ‘Hit List’

After 9/11, the neocons in the George W. Bush Administration decided America needed a sleek fighting force to combat enemy Islamic terrorists rather than the standardized armies that the Pentagon had established during the Cold War.

The military machinery of the past needed Congressional approval to wage war. As for the CIA, it, too, was constrained in 1975 when President Gerald Ford issued Executive Order 11905 banning the United States from undertaking “political assassinations.” Presidents who followed worked around this rule. After the Twin Towers fell, the Bush Administration followed through on the famous words of Vice President Dick Cheney: “If you want to fight the bad guys, you have to take the gloves off.”

For the most part, Cheney got his way, although he argues to this day that there was too much interference by Congress. Obama doesn’t make that claim and for good reason: He is free to execute his enemies, including American citizens, as he sees fit.

No doubt, the United States has a great deal of enemies; and those who are actively planning to murder and maim Americans need to be killed or captured. (If you have read my previous writings for Bob Livingston, you know I am no fan of Islam or Muslims who retain their religious roots while living in, and profiting from, the American way of life.)

But nothing gives Obama the right to be judge, jury and executioner against Americans he sees as his enemy.

By hook or by crook, the President has the perfect environment to press ahead with his tyranny. The Republican Party is so tied to its neoconservative ideals that Republicans actually complain that the President isn’t tough enough. At the same time, the Democratic Party, backed by the full weight of popular media, refuses to criticize anything Obama does. When it comes to murder, the President is beyond reproach (rather amazing when you consider Nixon was almost impeached for lying).

In his new book Dirty Wars: The World is a Battlefield, New York Times bestselling author Jeremy Scahill writes that Democrats would not tolerate such Presidential action from John McCain had he won the 2008 election. According to Scahill, Obama has been granted a blank check to vastly expand drone strikes while blatantly ignoring the Constitution by denying habeas corpus.

Before you dismiss my words as a right-wing rant, consider this warning from an influential Democrat. Michael Boyle, a professor at LaSalle University and former adviser to the Obama Campaign, wrote:

The creation of this “kill list” — as well as the dramatic escalation in drone strikes, which have now killed at least 2,400 people in Pakistan alone, since 2004 — represents a betrayal of President Obama’s promise to make counterterrorism policies consistent with the US constitution. …

[T]he president has routinized and normalized extrajudicial killing from the Oval Office, taking advantage of America’s temporary advantage in drone technology to wage a series of shadow wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Without the scrutiny of the legislature and the courts, and outside the public eye, Obama is authorizing murder on a weekly basis, with a discussion of the guilt or innocence of candidates for the “kill list” being resolved in secret on “Terror Tuesday” teleconferences with administration officials and intelligence officials.

Obama: Why Criminals Shouldn’t Have Guns

So how does the President get away with murder? As far as we know, he has authorized the execution of only two American citizens so far. (Apparently, the former Constitutional law professor believes arrests and trials are messy and time-consuming.)

Under Obama law, you don’t have to be innocent until proven guilty; you just need to be dead before being arrested. Such was the case for Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in 1971 in New Mexico to parents who had recently emigrated from Yemen.

By all accounts, al-Awlaki seems to have grown up like a typical American boy. The last 10 years of his life are much disputed between radicals — both those in the Obama Administration who ordered his “hit” and the Muslims who denounced it.

What everyone agrees upon is that al-Awlaki became more and more radicalized because of what he considered a criminal occupation of Iraq by the United States. He seems to have been an opportunist with a magnetic personality and, for a time, he was a celebrity to his supporters (strangely enough that sounds like the President).

That al-Awlaki was mixed up with some bad characters or was a casual acquaintance with them is beyond dispute. (He was an imam to two of the 9/11 hijackers in San Diego, and he knew Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, who executed 13 people during the Fort Hood shootings in November 2009.)

But some in U.S. intelligence believe that al-Awlaki was more of a wannabe jihadist than a real threat.  Of course, we will never know because in 2011, while he was in Yemen, two Predator drones fired Hellfire missiles, killing him and three other suspected al-Qaida members.

Just weeks later, his 17-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was born in Denver, was killed by a drone along with nine others. According to Scahill, Obama was “upset” when he learned of the teenager’s death, which a former White House official called “a mistake.”

Oh well, these things happen.

Here is the rub: These things are not supposed to happen if you are an American citizen — not even for the elder al-Awlaki, who may have been inciting terror. When you stop denying one subset of Americans due process, you are on a slippery slope toward eliminating other Americans whom the President and his secret cabal classify as enemies. If you think I am making a huge leap in logic, consider what we learned last week: Obama’s Internal Revenue Service was targeting Tea Party groups before the 2012 election.

We should fear the blatant abuse of power by Obama and the unwillingness of Congress or anyone in the mainstream media to call him out on it.

It is possible that in the not too distant future we may find the President will find libertarians like us to also be the enemy. The Constitution protects us only if the President abides by it or if Congress and the people force him to abide by it. So far, Obama seems intent only on protecting his grand ambitions with nary an objection.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Four Years, Four Reasons Why I Loathe Obama

When President Barack Obama left for Mexico and Costa Rica last week, I felt a sense of relief, the feeling you get when the crazy uncle no longer shows up for Thanksgiving dinner.

The official line from the White House was that the President went to reinforce the deep cultural, familial and economic ties that so many Americans share with Mexico and Central America.

I do not doubt for one moment that Obama has a lot in common with those Latin dictators who have bled their countries dry through overspending.

And there is always that lingering hope that you get when you buy a Super Lotto ticket: Obama may like it so well that he will set up another dictatorship south of our border. Either that or — like Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who recently moved back to the Vatican — our President will leave the Oval Office, become President emeritus and move into the basement of the White House.

You may think it’s an impossible dream. But the President recently joked he should “just pack up and go home” if Congress is going to continue resisting his policies. My reaction is: “Congress, keep up the good work.”

If I sound bitter, it is because I am. In my own defense I’ve been married for 33 years, and even my wife doesn’t think I am any more bitter than the average guy. I respect the office of the Presidency. While I haven’t liked some Presidents, I did not hold them in disdain. But I’ve been writing about Barack Hussein Obama for more than four years, and it has been like covering a train wreck — something I know about because when I was in my 20s, I was one of the first reporters at the Hinton, Alberta, train collision that killed 23 people. Not only is a train wreck something you can’t look away from; but when your job is to cover it, you damn well have to look at it.

I see no difference in my responsibility three decades later, because I believe that it is my job as a writer for Personal Liberty Digest™ to report on the Obama train wreck that has methodically been killing our liberties.

Below I have listed the top four reasons why I loathe Obama.

4. Obama is an elitist.

In case you haven’t been reminded enough, Obama not only graduated Harvard Law School, but he was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review and was a student at Columbia University. If any American were to ever doubt Obama’s intelligence, all his supporters have to do his point out his college pedigree.

The President’s own words only make it worse. In April 2008, Obama described small-town voters to rich backers in San Francisco: “[I]t’s not surprising, then, that they get bitter, and they cling to guns or religion, or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.” Later, when speaking to wealthy donors in Massachusetts, Obama said his opponents were “playing on fear” and that “we’re hard-wired not to always think clearly when we’re scared.”

Obama may or may not be the smartest guy in the room, but he certainly thinks he is. He reminds me of a friend who couldn’t stop reminding everybody every two hours that he graduated Yale University. That was always his trump card if he was losing an argument.

3. Obama is a self-centered, egotistical celebrity.

Given the international acclaim Obama has had for the past five years, he is Oprah Winfrey on steroids. (Picture that and tell me you’re not afraid.)

Everything that happens in America is about Obama. If times are fortuitous, like the killing of Osama bin Laden, Obama wants all the credit; yet he stands at the ready to blame others in his Administration if things go wrong. (This is pointed out in startling detail by bestselling author Richard Minter in his book Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him.)

When Neil Armstrong passed away, Obama celebrated that hero’s life by having himself photographed while looking at the full moon. (We never heard whether that experience made him grow hair, teeth and claws.)

And on April 26 in an opinion piece for POLITICO, Keith Koffler wrote:

Tuesday morning, a peculiar announcement trickled out of the White House press office: President Barack Obama would be holding a moment of silence for the victims of the Boston bombings. At the White House. By himself. No press or other intruders allowed.

Except the White House photographer.

That Obama assumed Americans would want an iconic photo of him privately mourning the victims of the bombings was emblematic of a kind of hubris that has enveloped the president and his White House as the president commences his second term.

After the death of Trayvon Martin, the President said during a press conference that Trayvon could be his son. Unless Obama knows something about the Martin family that we don’t, he should just shut the heck up.

2. He is a righteous environmentalist.

You name it, when it comes to fossil fuels, Obama is against it. He has obstructed U.S. offshore oil exploration, and the things he fancies the most are electric cars and windmills. And like any messiah, he is going to deliver his green prophecy to the world.

The Obama Administration has announced it will spend up to $400 million on green projects around the world. (He also wants to survey the satellite television viewing habits of Africans — which is funny because when I was in Africa, they didn’t have televisions.)

More delusions of grandeur, not only does our President want to reduce carbon in America, he also wants to limit that dirty oil mined and exported by those filthy Canadians. And now he wants to improve the “regulation and governance of Africa’s energy sectors” so they can make “low carbon development” a critical priority for themselves. I think Africans are probably more worried about having clean water, good crops and a reprieve from genocidal dictators.

1. He rejects the U.S. Constitution.

It should not surprise anyone that Obama once taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago. It seems to have only nurtured his hatred for the U.S. Constitution, and it was a launching point for his malicious attempts to undermine it. That would explain his all-out attack against American’s rights on everything from free speech to individual privacy to, most recently, our fundamental right to bear arms.

Last week, Missouri State Representative Casey Guernsey, a Republican lawmaker, said it best to Daily RFT regarding gun control: “Just because President Obama has declared that something is constitutional doesn’t make it so… I don’t think you can put a dollar amount on the value of constitutional rights.”

We need to be thankful for people who are willing to stand up to the President, like Guernsey and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) who spoke last week at the National Rifle Association annual convention.

Cruz said: “For some reason Obama liberals want to disregard the First Amendment and take away our right to speak and political speech. For some reason they want to disregard the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. And, for some reason the Obama liberals want to disregard the Tenth Amendment and implement Obamacare and take away our liberties.”

Obama Is The Lincoln Lawyer

The easy part in writing to you this week was putting down the words. The hard part was in narrowing it down to four primary reasons why I loathe Obama and why, after four years, you should as well. I could have written 44 reasons why I loathe him and still not said my peace. But these are my top four, and they reveal a fundamentally flawed President — a man who may envision himself to be a black Abraham Lincoln. His ego seems to have no limits, and his reckless disregard for individual liberties may yet make him the tyrant that his hero Lincoln was.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers

Paving The Road To Ruin With Islamists

“We will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people.” Those are the words from President Barack Obama. He also warned that if the regime in Syria is using chemical weapons, it will have “crossed a red line” creating a “game changer” for his Administration. Sorry, but this is no game changer.

A decade before the opening of his new Presidential library, President George W. Bush invaded and then occupied Iraq. It was the neoconservatives’ dream to turn the Mideast into a 16th century Venice, a renaissance for an entire region. The seeds of Western democracy were expected to flower and spread. Instead, we have been left with an Arab Spring that looks more like the great American Dust Bowl.

Yet American politicians keep pushing for greater intervention in the Mideast.

Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), a man who never met a war he didn’t like (amazing given his experiences as a prisoner of war in Vietnam), is again blowing on the cavalry bugles. Last week, the aging warrior said he believes the Obama Administration is being overly cautious in analyzing intelligence about the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria.

McCain said it was clear in his view that the Syrian regime had crossed the red line and that this required immediate military intervention from the United States.

“In my view it was crossed,” McCain said. “Not only have our intelligence people concluded that, but as importantly, the Israelis, the British and the French have as well. Obviously we know Bashar al-Assad will do whatever is necessary to stay in power, [including] massacres of his own people.”

McCain has support from other Republicans, which may make the next war the only thing the President and Republicans can agree upon.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told CNN: “If [the Syrian civil] war doesn’t end soon, the king of Jordan is going to be a casualty.”

The reasoning goes in Washington that America must stop Islamic religious and tribal factions from killing each other. Yet three thoughts come to mind:

  1. Does America not have bigger national security problems, namely North Korea and its long-range missiles, which may already carry nuclear warheads?
  2. If Muslims are killing each other, the Muslim extremists may be too busy to kill us.
  3. How in the world can military intervention in the Mideast do anything other than make things worse?

The Lost Lessons Of History

It’s amazing to watch America go down the road to ruin just like every great power before it. Rome, Spain, France under Napoleon Bonaparte and Britain during Queen Victoria’s reign all made the same irreversible mistakes caused by imperial overstretch.

It is clear to me that Obama and Congress should read Paul Kennedy’s 1987 classic, The Rise and Fall of The Great Powers. Then, they might understand that with military intervention the cost to America in blood, money and stature will lead to inevitable ruin.

The greatest short-term danger is the immeasurable cost resulting from Mideast intervention, which is driving Islamic hatred against the West and was on bloody display in Boston. Osama bin Laden has long been sleeping with the fishes, but the hatred he preached is growing in every nook and cranny around the globe. Washington is determined to be an occupation force in the Mideast, and you can bet Syria is next. That didn’t work out so well for Rome 2,000 years ago, and we can expect the same devastating results — just much more quickly. Technology has compressed time and space. What took 200 years to collapse an ancient power may happen now in 200 days. Thanks, Facebook!

There is no arguing that there are positions of influence to be had and fat profits to be made — for politicians, commodity and stock speculators, and, of course, America’s bread-and-butter businesses in the defense and national security industries. This is but one reason for Washington to prosecute a relentless decade-long war against Islam, a war which can never be won. (There is also a more sinister reason why our government is so reckless in creating Islam as an enemy, which I will get to.)

During the first Gulf War against Iraq, Saddam Hussein’s forces had been driven out of Kuwait and within Iraq’s own borders. Then-President George H.W. Bush considered the absolute conquest of Iraq as well as the consequences of an American occupation.  Colin Powell, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Bush: “You break it, you own it.”

Bush became convinced that Iraq was too expensive of a proposition. Yet his son, George W. Bush, did not take such caution. He launched an invasion against one evil Mideast dictator at the cost of 5,000 dead and $1 trillion spent. The dividend so envisioned by the younger Bush’s advisers — Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Vice President Dick Cheney — never materialized. Yet it certainly added to their vision of an emerging New World Order, and it added to their own personal wealth. 

In 2006, Thom Hartmann of Common Dreams wrote: “… War was good for business, and good for the political power of its advocates, from Rumsfeld to Wolfowitz to Cheney who have all become rich in part because of the arms industry.”

After more than a decade, Islamic extremists bent on jihad might borrow the line from the hit 1990 movie “Home Alone” when young Kevin asks the burglars: “You guys give up, or are you thirsty for more?”

Sadly, and as we will soon find out, the answer is that indeed Washington is thirsty for more. And that brings about a very interesting question: why?

I won’t even speculate on the religious tribalism that thrives in the Mideast or why those nations refuse to adapt to Western democracy. I am clueless as to what drives martyrs to kill Westerners and their own. I understand that I will never fathom the mind of a religious zealot. Perhaps it is that they have been impoverished for so long or perhaps it is their chance to gain world fame. Maybe it is the promise of 72 virgins. It is a conundrum that Western minds will never solve.

Orwell’s Omen

What is more unsettling is why our government is invoking greater retaliation from Islam in a war against us that most of our elected officials know we cannot win.

Perhaps we have been asking the wrong question all along. Perhaps the goal of our government is not to stabilize the Mideast but to destabilize the United States. Sound crazy? George Orwell didn’t think so. From his book 1984:

On the contrary, war hysteria is continuous and universal in all countries, and such acts as raping, looting, the slaughter of children, the reduction of whole populations to slavery, and reprisals against prisoners which extend even to boiling and burying alive, are looked upon as normal, and, when they are committed by one’s own side and not by the enemy, meritorious.  But in a physical sense war involves very small numbers of people, mostly highly trained specialists, and causes comparatively few casualties.

Orwell’s 1984 reads like a mandate for our elected leaders: an infinite period of upheaval with “comparatively few causalities” (at least when measured against the millions of people slaughtered by warfare through the first half of the 20th century).

It is a disturbing endgame being played out by American officials and one that is not serving the Nation.

Prediction: The United States government will put boots on the ground in Syria and any other Islamic country where the outcome will result in further unrest and greater power in the hands of Washington. That means we will not be safer from Islamic extremists that want to kill us or from our government that wishes to enslave us.

Action to take: Intervention in Syria and our continued military and political involvement in the Mideast is an expenditure America cannot afford. However, it will scare us into paying higher taxes and enable the Federal government to take on even greater debts. The inevitable outcrop will be further weakening in the purchasing power of the dollar. The recent correction in gold and silver prices is pure manipulation. It is imperative you hold these instruments in their physical form and, if possible, buy on the current correction. And guns, whiskey and water are even more essential.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers Energy & Gold Report

Islam And Immigration

Who is our enemy? President Barack Obama is convinced it is Americans that simply want to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms. At the same time, the President refuses to condemn Muslims both foreign and domestic — religious fanatics, like the Boston bombers, who are part of a global jihad and have declared America the “Great Satan.”

For all his education, with all of the intelligence services at his fingertips and with nearly 12 years of attacks on American soil, our President remains willfully blind of what must be done to protect America when it comes to Islam and immigration. Instead, his focus is on guns. This was on display when the President railed the Senate for rejecting his gun-control legislation.

“I see this as just round one,” said the President, surrounded by relatives of the Newtown, Conn., victims as well as former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in Tucson, Ariz.

Obama said Senators are fearful that “the gun lobby would spend a lot of money,” accusing them of opposing the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms.

On Friday, shortly after the capture of the surviving Boston Marathon bomber, Obama went on television to tell Americans not to be quick to judge any one group of people. Translation: Don’t blame Muslims.

The President can tell that to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The surviving suspect in the Boston bombings posted links to Islamic websites calling for Chechnya’s independence.

Tsarnaev proclaimed his “world view” as Islam. Other posts from him include: “Salamworld, my religion is Islam” and “There is no God but Allah, let that ring out in our hearts.”

His dead brother, Tamerlan, said once said, “I don’t have a single American friend. I don’t understand them.” He said that despite the fact that he trained almost daily to become a champion amateur boxer while living in Boston.

To this day, some of the best friends I have were people I met at the boxing gym. It seems impossible to me to work so hard for a boxing team with coaches and other fighters and not make friends. Then again, I boxed while in Spokane, Wash., when I was an immigrant from Canada — an immigrant who shared the same Christian and democratic values as my coaches and teammates.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the Boston bombers rejected, rather than embraced, American values so much so that they sought to terrorize the Nation by killing and crippling women and children. I don’t see this type of behavior in immigrants to America or Canada who are Latino, Asian or Western European.

“Islam is not just a religion,” writes Mark Steyn in his book, America Alone: The End of the World as we know It. “Those lefties who bemoan what America is doing to provoke ‘the Muslim world’ would go bananas if any Western politician started referring to ‘the Christian world.’… So it’s not merely that there’s a global jihad lurking within this religion, but that the religion itself is a political project — in a way that modern Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism are not.”

Let me share something that happened at the Calgary airport shortly before my family was boarding a flight. My daughter’s friend is a petite and shy Lebanese young lady. We have known her for more than a decade.

As we headed for the gate, I noticed four women in full Islamic dress walking toward us. As I was lagging behind, I saw our young friend approach them and be rudely rebuffed. I then saw my wife hug her, and I noticed the girl was in tears. I wanted to know why. My wife told me that the women were her aunts and that because she had adopted a Western lifestyle (in part, probably because she was with infidels such as us) she was shunned.

Why Won’t Obama Suspend Islamic Immigration?

It is clear that the President is determined to neither limit nor — Allah forbid — restrict immigration of Muslims into the United States. There is no reason why the United States cannot implement serious restrictions on any or all peoples wanting to reside in America. Switzerland has been doing it for decades.

As Obama continues to respond to the Sandy Hook tragedy with gun legislation, you can bet he will resist any calls for immigration restrictions — especially if Muslims are the target. The only good news is that Obama may have a fight on his hands with the Senate because the Boston bombers came from predominantly Muslim Chechnya, a Russian-occupied nation in the Russian Caucasus.

Senator Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said at a hearing on immigration reform last Friday that it would be prudent to review the process.

Given the events of this week, it’s important for us to understand the gaps and loopholes in our immigration system.

How can individuals evade authority and plan such attacks on our soil?

Other leaders are grasping a fundamental truth about America’s real enemies. Last week, Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.), a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said the Federal government needs to take its blinders off when it comes to immigration:

I do believe that whether it’s Chechnya or whether it’s really any countries from areas where there is fighting going on–particularly terrorist fighting–that we have to be extra careful, extra scrupulous. That would include, to me, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Somalia [and] obviously …. somebody of a Chechnyan background. All of that, to me, we can’t afford to be politically correct and say that somebody coming from a country where there’s a Muslim war going on is the same as somebody … from Switzerland, for instance. There’s a difference.

Islam’s Growing Foothold

Pew Forum reports:

In the United States… population projections show the number of Muslims more than doubling over the next two decades, rising from 2.6 million in 2010 to 6.2 million in 2030, in large part because of immigration and higher-than-average fertility among Muslims.

In 2011, the National Post quoted Tarek Fatah, an outspoken secular Muslim leader living in Canada: “[W]hat is different from other immigrant groups is there is a subgroup among Muslims, I call Islamists, who come [to Canada] with the intention of destroying the social fabric of the country.”

As for the majority of Islamic immigrants, most refuse to become part of America’s melting pot. They cling to their unforgiving religion and medieval traditions. Among them are radicals who preach jihad against America. An even smaller minority will accept this call to arms, people like the alleged killer at Fort Hood, Texas, or the terrorists in Boston.

In Canada on Monday, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police arrested two apparent Islamic terrorists who were allegedly planning to derail a passenger train and kill Canadians.

I can already hear the outcry from liberals who will label me a racist. But, hey, I didn’t start this fight; the followers of Muhammad did that a decade before I was even born when the United States threw its economic and political might behind Israel.

In his best-seller The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11, Pulitzer Prize winner Lawrence Wright traced Islamic hatred of Westerners back to one man, an Egyptian dissident named Sayyid Qutb.

Qutb was an Egyptian author, educator and Islamist theorist who immigrated to the United States in 1948. (He later returned to Egypt.) He has been called “the man who inspired [Osama] bin Laden,” and it is not hard to see why he earned that reputation after you read his philosophy on infidels.

Wright wrote:

He also brought home a new and abiding anger about race. “The white man in Europe or America is our number-one enemy,” he declared. “The white man crushes us underfoot while we teach our children about his civilization…”

It may be that only two in 10,000 Muslims have bad intentions against the United States; but as the suspected Boston-bombing brothers from Chechnya proved last week, that is two too many.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers’ Energy & Gold Report

Obama’s Crude Conundrum

It appears that aging Hollywood movie star Robert Redford did not see the movie “Argo,” which was awarded Best Picture at the 2013 Academy Awards.

Had Redford seen it, he might have noticed that in 1979 Muslim radicals under Ayatollah Khomeini took Americans hostage. The only country to offer assistance was Canada.

Such history seems lost on Redford, an ultra-rich liberal active environmentalist. (His net worth is estimated at $170 million.) Redford is vehemently against the United States’ importing oil sands from Canada. His criticism reached a crescendo in the wake of the Exxon Mobil Corp. pipeline spill in Mayflower, Ark., on March 29.

It is estimated that 36,000 barrels of crude oil leaked from a pipeline, which forced the evacuation of more than 20 families from their homes.

In the aftermath, Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel is asking Exxon Mobil to pay $4 million to help pay for an investigation as to why the pipeline leaked.

The oil spill is only 1,000 miles from Redford’s mansion in Sundance, Utah. (The good news for the actor is that he also has residences further west.)

A post on ecorazzi.com stated:

Actor and environmentalist Robert Redford has been an outspoken opponent of the Keystone XL Pipeline since the beginning. Now that a pipeline in Arkansas has ruptured leaving a residential community with thousands of gallons of tar sands crude right in their yards, Redford is hoping the government will wake up to the dangers of building any new pipeline.

Blogging for Huffington Post, Redford wrote:

(W)hen it comes to the proposed Keystone XL pipeline… the Pegasus rupture in Arkansas is another red flag. We’ve had a lot of these red flags lately that show us what a raw deal tar sands is and we ignore them at our peril.

How many red flags do we need before we realize that the solution is to stop tar sands expansion and say no to tar sands pipelines? I think we’ve seen enough.

Redford wants Americans to contact their Congressmen and demand that they pressure President Barack Obama to pull the plug on the pipeline, a decision the President is expected to make this summer.

Redford and his Green advocates are making a mistake regarding Keystone and oil imported from Canada. This is why:

  1. The Keystone project is expected to create 10,000 new U.S. jobs at a time when the Nation is still in a recession.
  2. America must import more than 10 million barrels of oil per day (mb/d). Currently, Canada delivers the United States almost one-third of that total. Saudi Arabia sells the United States 1.2 mb/d. Imports from both countries have come down as U.S. domestic crude production has increased. However, America is going to be dependent on vast amounts of imported crude for the next decade and beyond unless newly found domestic reserves are quickly developed and/or renewable energies can begin to play a significant role in providing power.
  3. Crude provided from the Mideast, South America and Africa is transported in oil supertankers. In 1980, the Exxon Valdez spilled 750,000 barrels of oil on the shores of Prince William Sound, Alaska, making that spill more than 20 times larger than last month’s pipeline leak in Arkansas. (The U.S. State Department’s environmental impact analysis concluded that there was no evidence that tar sands oil spills are more hazardous to the environment than other forms of crude oil.)
  4. If America doesn’t buy oil sands from Canada (and principally Alberta), the Nation is going to have to buy it from other oil exporters — not one of which shares American ideals, as Canada has done for 200 years.

As the chart above shows, America must meet its energy needs with imported oil. My question: Would you rather deal with Allison Redford, the democratically elected premier of Alberta and a distant relative of Robert Redford, or would you rather buy oil from King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, the anointed leader of the kingdom that was the birthplace for 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers?

Description: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/07/timestopics/king-abdullah.jpg
Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud
Description: http://www.economicclub.ca/images/ecot_speaker/297/AlisonRedford-MedRes.jpg
Alberta Premier Alison Merrilla Redford

Tale Of Two Leaders

I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada. I think who America trusts for its future oil supplies is an important question.

It is reported that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has four wives and dozens of children. The king didn’t allow U.S. forces inside Saudi Arabia during the Iraq war. He has also launched a series of crackdowns including torture and public beheadings.

Ezra Levant wrote what Al Gore might refer to as “an inconvenient truth,” in his book Ethical Oil: The Case for Canada’s Oil Sands:

Saudi women are treated as the property of men, with fewer rights than children and only slightly more rights than animals. They are forbidden from driving cars; they cannot travel abroad without a man’s permission; and they can’t even have elective surgery without their master’s consent.

There is no gay marriage or any talk of it in Saudi Arabia.

Levant wrote:

And, according to Amnesty International, Saudi Arabia executes gays simply for being gay. Amnesty has documented this barbaric punishment, carried out in full medieval style: a beheading and a crucifixion.

Even children are not spared Saudi Arabia’s merciless “justice.” Teenaged “criminals” are beheaded with swords in the public square; children as young as thirteen have been sentenced to more than one thousand lashes.

In Alberta, the Legislature is led by Alison Redford, a Canadian lawyer and a member of Canada’s Queen’s Bench.

Redford does have a few thoughts about her famous and long-lost cousin. Recently, in an interview with the Calgary Herald, she indicated she doesn’t think highly of her namesake or others in Hollywood are knowledgeable on energy issues.

“It’s fine for people who aren’t really impacted by this stuff to talk about why it shouldn’t happen, but these aren’t the people that are out talking to the thousand guys that want jobs — or to returning veterans who want to be able to work on pipeline construction or get trained in new technologies,” Redford said.

Hollywood Hypocrites

Actors like Robert Redford and other activists for the Green movement like actress Daryl Hannah live in a cocoon and don’t see the world as it is and, more importantly, are blind to the contradictions.

In 2006, actor Redford wrote an article for CNN, urging the United States to “kick the oil habit.”

Not long afterward, Redford lent his voice to TV ads for United Airlines. That’s amazing when you consider that in 2011 United Airlines spent about $13 billion on jet fuel and that, according to scientists, aviation accounts for 2 percent of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere each day.

United Airlines may “fly the friendly skies,” but the airline needs a lot of oil to do it. My guess is that, in the long run, those planes will keep flying on Canadian oil.

Over the short term, I would not be surprised to see Obama block the Keystone Pipeline. He is a kindred spirit to celebrities who object to Canadian crude but are strangely silent regarding Islamic sins.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers’ Energy & Gold Report

Nanny Statists Barack, Michelle And Michael

New York City is asking an appeals court judge to reinstate a ban on the sale of “large sugary drinks.” Attorneys are making the argument that the law is crucial to prevent a “serious health crisis.”

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg thinks Coca-Cola venders should be treated like cocaine dealers.

Fortunately, on March 11, the day before the new law was set to take effect, State Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling declared that the new regulation could not pass — not because it was an infringement on a basic freedoms, but because the new law was beset with loopholes. According to Tingling, the soda ban would have still allowed, God forbid, State-regulated convenience stores to sell “large” sodas.

Tingling deserves a modicum of credit: He said Bloomberg and the city’s Board of Health had overstepped their authority by not putting the ban to a vote in the New York City Council.

Attorneys who want to stop Bloomberg and his bureaucrats believe that the City has exceeded its authority.

“It was never about obesity; it was never about soda,” said Matthew Greller last week. He represents plaintiff National Association of Theatre Owners of New York State. “It was always about power. The question, fundamentally, is what is the power of a city agency.”

Gabriel Taussig, the head of the city’s administrative law division, agreed with the plaintiff lawyers, admitting: “There’s a lot at stake in this case beyond the sugary drinks issue.”

Sermons From The Mount

How large a soda people in New York can legally buy is just the tip of the iceberg. The real behemoth below the waterline has been built by President Barack Obama and the first lady.

The President has more power, but one can’t help but believe that he takes his cues from his wife, whose pet peeve is how Americans eat and exercise.

Parents in California are opposed to public schools giving yoga lessons to their children. That didn’t bother Michelle Obama, who announced that the White House determined to keep up the practice of its “Yoga Garden” as a part of its traditional Easter Egg Roll festivities.

More than 30,000 people visited the South Lawn of the White House for the 135th annual Easter Egg Roll celebrations.

Part of the first lady’s efforts to promote health and wellness, “Be Healthy, Be Active, Be You!” was the theme of the Easter Egg Roll. “Come enjoy a session of yoga from professional instructors,” read the announcement regarding the “Yoga Garden.”

This may generate some ill will because yoga is the rage today. I tried yoga when I was young and fit. It certainly wasn’t “me.” And, frankly, it is not an effective exercise.

As some have pointed out, my photo reflects that I am 30 years and 60 pounds past my prime. However, I was once a competitive athlete (albeit not a very good one). But I was coached by and coached with people who were at the top of their profession. My eyes still work fine, and I frequently read about exercise and human physiology.

Healthy Living sums up yoga: “(N)o studies have yet proved that it provides a cardio workout that raises heart rate into your target zone and keeps it there long enough to provide an aerobic conditioning effect.”

There is something else my eyes tell me, and that is that the first lady is borderline obese and ill qualified with her background and education to be providing advice to Americans on what exercises they should do or what they should eat. Not that these facts will slow down the self-appointed “czar of childhood obesity.”

The Fat Lady Sings

Last August, Obama openly criticized Gabby Douglas, who had just won an Olympic Gold Medal in London in one of the most grueling sports in existence: gymnastics.

Douglas appeared on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” hosted by Jay Leno, along with the first lady.

Leno asked Douglas: “You trained your whole life, you win. How did you celebrate?”

Douglas responded: “We didn’t have time to celebrate. It was team finals and had to turn the page all-around finals and event finals after that. But, after the competition, I splurged on an Egg McMuffin at McDonald’s.”

Leno said: “Egg McMuffin”

Obama then interrupted the conversation. “Yeah, Gabby, we don’t, don’t encourage him. I’m sure it was on…”

Douglas said: “A salad.”

Obama said: “A whole wheat McMuffin.”

Leno said: “It was on a whole wheat bun.”

Obama said: “Yeah.”

Leno said: “So an Egg McMuffin. Very good.”

Obama added: “You’re setting me back, Gabby.”

Douglas said: “Sorry.”

Sorry for eating at McDonald’s? I have a pretty good eye for body weight percentages, and I bet Douglas has less than 8 percent body fat and Obama has well more than 35 percent. Sorry, Michelle, but all those yoga classes and fresh vegetables grown at the White House garden simply aren’t cutting it; and your body size bellies your self-proclaimed health expertise.

The President is just as bad. Leading up to this year’s Super Bowl, Barack Obama did an interview with The New Republic. He said he would struggle with the decision to allow his child to play the sport.

“I’m a big football fan, but I have to tell you if I had a son, I’d have to think long and hard before I let him play football…I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence.”

Let me see if I can get this straight: The President wonders if he would let his make-believe son play a sport that he himself has never played or coached, and his full understanding of the game comes down to watching it on his big-screen TV.

I played football for two years, and I coached it for several more. If through some miracle of science my wife and I had more children, I would not direct my sons into football. Yet I would never presume to tell other parents whether their sons should avoid the game. I wouldn’t, as Obama said, “wrestle” with that (which begs the question, when can we expect a presidential pronouncement on wrestling?).

In 2010, POLITICO wrote:

For a president who ran on uplifting themes like change and hope, Barack Obama spends an awful lot of time scolding Americans about how he hopes they’ll change.

He has advised parents to “replace that video game with a book and make sure that homework gets done.” He has urged members of Congress not to read blogs or watch 24-hour cable news. And he’s challenged lobbyists, lawmakers, bankers, journalists, insurance companies and other heads of state to do a better job.

At times, having Obama in the Oval Office is like having a really powerful Dr. Phil around.

The difference is that people can take or leave Dr. Phil. Americans have to live with what the President and first lady proclaim whether they know what they are talking about and whether we want to hear it.

Of greater import is that tens of millions of Americans don’t want to live in a nanny state. Many are looking forward to a time where there is growing liberty for all.

Yet Obama has political blinders on — and not just because he is a Democrat. Former President Jimmy Carter recently said something that I would have expected from a libertarian like the late William F. Buckley Jr.

Last December, Carter was talking about his support for marijuana. It is an old theme for Carter, who said to Congress in August 1977: “I support legislation amending Federal law to eliminate all Federal criminal penalties for the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana.”

Think how far American freedoms have slipped. Thirty-five years ago, we had a President who wanted to decriminalize small amounts of pot. Today, the mayor of America’s largest city wants to ban large quantities of pop.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers’ Energy & Gold Report

Confessions Of An Ex-Stockbroker

The stock market is on a cliff. When it falls, it will not only erase the riches on Wall Street but your hard-earned savings. It is called deflation, and it will impact all of us.

I have a pretty good idea about stock market crashes because I have experienced four of them. The first was in 1987. The second was in 1989. The third was in 2001, and the last was in 2008. The monster crash for stocks is still to come.

The fundamentals both for the banking system and the economy and our dysfunctional Federal government will not allow current record stock prices to persist.

As major stock indexes reach all-time highs, there is the disjoint between the value of equity prices and the economic realities that will eventually have to support prices.

We live in a time Oscar Wilde described more than a century ago: “Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”

Everyone seems to know the price of the Dow Jones industrial average. Friends and family ask me how much higher the stock market will go. Few ask if it will go lower, while many offer their own stock tip.

It’s no different from 1929 when legendary investment guru Bernard Baruch said: “When beggars and shoeshine boys, barbers and beauticians can tell you how to get rich, it is time to remind yourself that there is no more dangerous illusion than the belief that one can get something for nothing.”

When I suggest that the market is heading lower, people wave me off.

What most people seem to understand is that Big Board stocks keep setting records. Both the Dow and the broader-based Standard & Poor’s 500 Index are at all-time highs.

The S&P has gained 10 percent in three months. The Dow is up more than 11 percent. Yet the U.S. unemployment rate is close to 8 percent. America lost 8.9 million jobs in four years and has gained back only half of them.

The economic recovery exists only on paper because of massive cash injections by the Federal Reserve.

Only trillions of dollars’ worth of freshly printed money has prevented the United States from falling into an economic abyss.

But printing new money does not equate to creating new wealth. All the Fed has done is provided a cancer patient with copious amounts of morphine. It is a feel-no-pain regiment for the markets. But the cancer is still there.

Two things dictate investment behavior: greed and fear. For the past year, greed has consumed any fears.

I Wished I Had Sold Used Cars

In the spring of 1996, I was in an office on the eighth floor of the Washington Mutual Building in Spokane, Wash.

I was working for one of the largest brokerage companies in the country.

Each day on my desk there were Securities and Exchange Commission compliance books and stacks of practice exams to help me pass a registered investment adviser exam. Once I passed it, I could dispense investment advice to all.

To get the job, I passed the aptitude test by saying that 2 plus 2 equaled 4. I believe that the brokers who were fast-tracked said 2 plus 2 equaled 16.

Over the next six months, I studied securities laws that dated back to the 1930s. I also spent time in the lunchroom learning from seasoned brokers about ways to get around these laws.

Below sums up my experience as a stockbroker in training:

Question: How many stock brokers does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Correct answer: Two. One to take out the bulb and drop it, another to try to sell it before it crashes (fully knowing that it’s already burned out).

The advanced test for certified investment advisers was this:

Question: How many investment brokers does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Correct answer: Good God! It burned out! Sell every share of GE!

I remember the 6 a.m. Monday meetings in the conference room.

It was there that we received a call from the company’s grand poobah, Ralph Acampora. His name was synonymous with the dot-com bubble.

Acampora’s biography states: “He was an industry leader in technical analysis and a regular on popular weekly TV shows such as Wall Street Week with Louis Rukeyser. His opinions about the market were reported by major national newspapers.”

I had been writing about investments for well more than a decade, so I knew about bullish Acampora and his never-ending expectations for higher stock prices.

The world said Acampora was a genius, which made it all the harder for me to understand his Monday morning call to arms. I suspected Acampora was not really trying to sell value to Prudential customers. But every Monday the sales team was given its orders.

One time, I interrupted the post conference meeting by suggesting resource stock. A group of 15 brokers looked at me like I was a heretic.

After several Mondays of listening to Acampora clairvoyance in picking stock market winners, I went to my manager.

I asked him why Acampora was telling us to pitch such stocks. The manager explained to me that Prudential had an inventory of stocks and that they had to be sold every week.

It hit me. My job was never to give quality investment advice. I was being trained to generate revenue for Prudential. I was a used car salesman. Even worse, I wasn’t even providing anything as useful as a used car.

I passed my exams for Prudential and the SEC. Once I did that, I was registered to attend a two-week sales boot camp in California. If I survived that, then I could push any stock, bond or mutual fund I wanted.

I decided to quit. That was the only time in my 55 years that quitting felt right.

In 2013, nothing has changed. Wall Street is richer than ever, and big analysts have more lives than wrinkled movie stars. They can make the same mistakes over and get richer for it.

Bestselling author Nassim Taleb addresses this absurdity: “People who were driving a school bus blindfolded (and crashed it) should never be given a new school bus.”

Action to take: Sell all Big Board stocks immediately. Move money into physical gold, silver, Treasury bills (despite their low returns) and hold physical cash in a safe dry place. Speculators believe the only game in town is blue chip stocks. Take it from an old ex-stockbroker.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers Energy & Gold Report

Guantanamo Bay: Which Side Is Obama On?

Once more, Barack Obama has shown himself to be a pathetic President. The latest disgrace of the vaulted liberal leader is his failure to stand by his conviction to shut down Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo).

It has been four years since Obama promised to close down the military prison. Now, he wants to provide $196 million in renovations and new construction as requested by his new Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel. Obama has decided keeping enemies of the United States comfortable is more important than meting out justice.

General John F. Kelly, the chief of the U.S. Southern Command, testified before Congress last week that repairs and upgrades are needed at Gitmo, including two new barracks and a new mess hall.

It is ironic that up to 100 “detainees” are on a hunger strike.

Rolling Stone reported: “Eight of the hunger strikers are being force-fed through a tube, a process the United Nations has previously classified as torture. Two hunger strikers have been hospitalized for dehydration.”

I am a libertarian through and through. I say if they want to starve themselves to death, let them — especially if these individuals want to inflict terror against Americans.

What does our President want? He wants to spend money America cannot afford to keep “detainees,” doublespeak for prisoners of war, more comfortable.

Regarding Gitmo, the Obama Administration is dead wrong. It is a classic case of Obama’s wanting his cake and eating it, too.

Obama should either:

  • Choose a speedy trial, a basic right to defendants which would also give closure to the victims of those atrocities.
  • Or deal decisively with Gitmo prisoners if they remain a clear and present danger to the United States.

Last month, The Daily Beast summed up America’s blundering President regarding Gitmo:

The Obama administration insists it’s doing everything possible to fulfill the president’s pledge. “We are absolutely still committed to closing Gitmo,” National Security Council spokesman, Tommy Vietor, said in an interview. He put the blame elsewhere, saying, “The unfortunate reality is that Congress has gone out of its way to prevent us from doing so, but we still believe closing the facility is in our national security interest.”

Yet experts say the chances of Gitmo closing, at least before Obama’s out of office in 2016, are exceptionally slim.

“Guantanamo is not going to close any time soon,” said Thomas Joscelyn, a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a right-leaning think tank. “There are too many problems to solve. There are still Yemenis who can’t be repatriated to their home country, there are detainees too dangerous to transfer anywhere and quite a few prisoners who the administration says they cannot try in an open court.”

There is another irony about the President. Last Friday, the Federal Aviation Administration announced that it will begin closing 149 air traffic control towers starting on April 7. The Transportation Security Administration also claimed sequester-caused airport security delays are on the horizon. That means more time at the airport and compromises safe travel.

Meanwhile, Obama is cutting defense spending as part of his $85 billion in automatic spending reductions.

Obama wants to slash spending on the very mechanisms that would prevent another attack against American civilians. Whose side is the President on?

Kill ’Em Or Clear ’Em

I love World War II history. I am proud of my Canadian roots and my American citizenship. I take extraordinary pride that during World War II, the Black Watch of Canada and the U.S. Airborne dealt decisively with the fanatical SS troops that they fought against — fanatics like the 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend who refused to take Allied prisoners. They executed hundreds of Allied soldiers outright. In some cases, they even crucified them against trees and buildings. That terror was met in kind by our fathers and grandfathers who mostly accepted the surrender of Wehrmacht soldiers but had no dealings with the SS.

In an article in the Daily Mail, Antony Beevor, a noted historian and writer of World War II, summed up the allied actions of Normandy against the Germans:

With revenge on their minds and nerves still taut after the jump, the American paratroopers-blood was up. A trooper in the 82nd remembered his instructions only too clearly: ‘Take no prisoners because they will slow you down.’

Stories about German soldiers mutilating paratroopers inflamed the Americans still further. A soldier in the 101st recounted how after they had come across two dead paratroopers ‘with their privates cut off and stuck into their mouths’, the captain with them gave the order: ‘Don’t you guys dare take any prisoners! Shoot the bastards!’

Fast-forward six decades and we have Obama who not only wants to hold terrorists but also wants to save them from self-starvation and provide them better living conditions.

Are we at war or are we not? If we are, Obama needs to find some resolve and deal with our enemies. If not, he needs to send these Gitmo prisoners to trial.

Of course, Obama won’t do either. He lacks the gumption to take a stand on Gitmo, just as he lacks it with regard to almost everything else.

Love their politics or hate them, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his top World War II commander in Europe and future President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, dealt with America’s enemies expeditiously. Obama refuses to stand against them. He stands for higher taxes and greater entitlements. That makes him not only an ineffective leader but also a dangerous one.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Myers’ Energy & Gold Report