Details are trickling out regarding the shooter of the two soldiers yesterday in Arkansas.  Carlos Bledsoe, at only 24 years old, recently converted to Islam possibly on a trip to Yemen.  He changed his name upon his conversion to Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad.  Abdul will be charged with 15 counts of terrorism and capital murder.

Little Rock Police Chief Stuart Thomas says Muhammad intentionally targeted military personnel.

23-year-old Private William Long, of Conway, died as a result of his injuries.

18-year-old Private Second Class Quinton Ezeagwula, of Jacksonville, was also shot.  Chief Thomas says he is in stable condition and will recover.

Police say Muhammad opened fire because of his religious beliefs.  He was a recent convert to Islam.

“We have no indication that the suspect did act alone and of his own accord, and it’s our belief he acted with a specific intent to target military personnel and did so unilaterally and did so with intent today and today only,” Thomas said.

Police say Muhammad had never met his victims.

The following was also learned of the man in custody:

I have learned from a well-placed source that Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who killed one soldier and wounded another at a a Little Rock military recruiting center today, and who faces charges of terrorism as well as first-degree murder, has recently returned from Yemen, where he studied jihad with an Islamic scholar there.

Apparently the Islamic scholar under whom this American convert to Islam studied was yet another misunderstander of Islam’s true, peaceful teachings.

Jihad terror on American soil: Muslim kills soldier, wounds another at Arkansas military recruiting center:  Jihadwatch

Another interesting point to note regarding the name of the criminal is his chosen middle name, Mujahid.  Mujahid means ‘One who fights the Jihad’ or ‘Holy Fighter.’  The plural is Mujahadin and the translation is basically the one who kills and fights in the name of religion.

I wonder when Obama will come out with a statement of outrage condemning this deadly, violent act as he did with the Dr. Tiller murder… 14 hrs. later and still counting… crickets*

The fact that, in Janet Napolitano’s (JaNo) words, we had a home grown man-made disaster, of all places, in the south, that should raise some major alarms and Americans should be made aware of it.  We hadn’t been attacked for 7.5 years and within the past couple weeks we had a terrorist plot intercepted in NYC and a failed interception of this young man who murdered a U.S. soldier and injured another.   I hope the military personnel takes note of how much Obama really cares about them!

The liberally biased media should be ashamed of itself for covering this story up from the public!

Share on Facebook

One person is dead, another seriously injured, and a third is in custody following a double shooting in west Little Rock Monday morning.

Authorities say the incident occurred around 10:00 a.m. at the U.S. Army Navy Career Center inside the Ashley Square Shopping Center at 9112 North Rodney Parham Road. According to Lt. Terry Hastings with the Little Rock Police Department, two recruiting officers standing outside the office were hit when the unidentified suspect drove up in a black SUV and began shooting.

The suspect led police on a brief pursuit towards downtown Little Rock before being taken into custody in the area of the Interstate 30/630 interchange.

According to the Little Rock Fire Department, a bomb squad is currently on the scene, checking out a suspicious package inside the suspect’s vehicle.

[...]

According to Army Lt. Col. Thomas F. Artis, the two victims were not recruiters, but part of a recruiting program called “Hometown Recruiting Assistance.” Artis says recruiters use soldiers to tell their stories and talk to potential recruits while they are visiting or based back in their home region.

The young men were technically not recruiters, they were just out of basic training…

So, as I just posted on the Dr. Tiller killer, should we blame this drive-by as a random crime by some malevolent individual or could we trump this up to being the entire, war-hating left?  The same scenario here… Oh the irony!

I wonder how the MSM will report this – equal time to both stories and equal investigation as to the motives?  That was a rhetorical question – don’t believe me while reading this?  Then I implore you to note this story as well as the story from Sunday and let me know how the main stream media reports on each one.

Share on Facebook

Or Should more aptly be called The Worrisome Educator…

Penn State University’s “Department of Counseling and Psychological Services” has a video presentation that should leave any decent American shocked, saddened, and yes, even enraged.  Credit David French of National Review Online for posting what might be the most definitive four minute expose on the tragedy of higher education in America.  Indeed, Penn State’s shameful video production of “The Worrisome Veteran” can provide all Americans some priceless insights into the kind of surreal institutions liberals create when left unchecked.
“The Worrisome Veteran” is part of Penn State’s “Worrisome Student Behaviors” video series which is designed to provide faculty and students the ability to “minimize risk” when encountering problematic students on campus.  Each video presents actors reenacting possible confrontations that may occur in various environments and suggests appropriate responses. The subtitle of the “Worrisome Veteran” presentation is: “I deserve a better grade or else . . .” In other words, to the progressive staff at Penn State, students who are veterans returning from the war in Iraq are simply potential criminals who’ve forgotten how to reason politely.

I will break this disturbing portrayal down into several sections:

1.  PSU and other institutions for higher education are singling out veterans and young military white males, specifically, returning home from war to receive an education.  The fact that veterans are being segregated is horrendous and discriminatory as should be clear to any clear-thinking human being.

2.  The female professor talks about feeling uneasy and uncomfortable with the veteran and why would that be?  It would seem like she is making the assumption that all military vets are aggressors and women-beaters on the brink of snapping at any moment.  This may be something portrayed in Hollywood or by the media who may harp on one individual to classify the entire group as such, but this happens to all people and more so for the average non-military type.

3.  The video uses the argument of the ex-officer having and using bad grammar as a reason to give a low grade.  What struck me was that they make an assumption that men and women in uniform are uneducated hill-billy’s another misconception that was echoed by the likes of the traitor, himself, John Kerry, when he said that only uneducated men and women join the military. 

4.  Why is the professor only telling him what he is doing wrong and making it very vague?  She should be giving him specifics should she not?  I would expect that a professor or any teacher would sit down with me during office hours to take the time and point out to me what areas of my english need improvement – do I have too many run-on sentences?  Am I incorrectly using prepositions?  Is my punctuation off?  One would think that an English Professor would be able to do this more so than, let’s say a Math Professor!

5.  The mere fact that this video has to bring up the fact that the student is feeling singled out and discriminated against due to the professor’s views on the war and political leanings, tell me more about the educators at this university than anything else.  They are basically saying that these views are held by a vast majority of the faculty at PSU and this could be a reason why students get upset.   Why would any English Professor espouse their views in such a class?  It’s not like this is a foreign diplomacy class or some type of political science class. 

6.  Why does the teacher feel that it is acceptable to diagnose the student by telling him he needs counseling or help?  This is something the student must come to grips with if he or she in fact asks for help or discloses they are having issues.  The assumption made by the teacher is incredibly condescending and yet again discriminatory.  Many men and women coming home from war have been getting diagnosed with PTSD lately, but that does not mean that the majority of these cases are military folks.  In fact most PTSD cases are those who are not associated with the military at all since PTSD is incredibly common and can occur due to any type of traumatic experience!  PTSD also does not mean that someone will snap… another common misconception.

6.  PSU is a PUBLIC school and has land grants this means that the PEOPLE own this land and there shouldn’t be political bias allowed in such institutions.  If the faculty would like to discuss their views and opinions behind closed doors among one another or at happy hour then so be it, but inside the classroom and in front of children that are not their own should be banned. 

7.  Could there be any coincidence with the latest DHS report and this university creating this video?  DHS did tell us that veterans returning home are more susceptible to right-wing extremism!

This is becoming insane!

Share on Facebook

I guess she should consider herself an extremist with that gun – anyone who practices or believes in the 2nd amendment was placed in that 9 page report from the DHS a couple of days ago.  Conveniently, this all came out right before the nationwide Tea Party protests.

Napolitano is now getting a lot of flak for the reprehensible language in the report with regard to veterans returning home from war, who have fought to keep us free and safe from further terrorist attacks.  Instead of focusing all that energy on veterans and stating that they may be susceptible to right-wing extremism and domestic/homegrown terrorism, maybe she should focus on those who really do practice this type of violence against the United States and the West in general.  I think focus should be kept on Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela; who all seem to be acting together these days.

However, Cuba will now become the new vacation hot-spot under this administration; North Korea will receive a strongly worded letter from the U.N., more money, and food supplies for their patterned behavior; Iran will get a visit without preconditions, continue it’s collection of uranium, and production of a nuclear facility; Russia and China will continue to work behind the scenes, tap our grids, buy defense materials and missiles, and dump our dollar; while Hugo Chavez will continue to espouse tons of hot air and pontificate upon his hatred of the evil U.S. empire.  But then again, we are talking about the woman who could not refer to the real and very simple term “terrorism,” rather calling it a “man-made disaster;” and the war on terror is the “Overseas Contingency Operation.”

Republicans and officials associated with Veteran Affairs and Groups have blasted the Homeland Security Head and rightly so.

“To characterize men and women returning home after defending our country as potential terrorists is offensive and unacceptable,” said Boehner, R-Ohio.

[...]

David Rehbein, wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano expressing concern with the assessment, which made its way into the mainstream press after conservative bloggers got wind of the analysis.

Rehbein called the assessment incomplete and said it lacked statistical evidence. He said the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by military veteran Timothy McVeigh, cited in the report, was one instance of a veteran becoming a domestic terrorist.

“To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical ‘disgruntled military veteran’ is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam,” Rehbein said in the April 13 letter.

[...]

“The department is engaging in political and ideological profiling of people who fought to keep our country safe from terrorism, uphold our nation’s immigration laws, and protect our constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” said Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla.,

[...]

Texas Rep. Lamar Smith accused the department of painting “law-abiding Americans, including war veterans, as ‘extremists.’”

[...]

Indiana Rep. Steve Buyer, the ranking Republican on the House Veterans’ Affairs committee, said it was “inconceivable” that the administration would consider military veterans a potential terrorist threat.

Upon hearing of the backlash, Napolitano did not initially apologize and she defended the assessment issued by the agency earlier this week:

“Let me be very clear — we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States,” Napolitano said in a statement. “We don’t have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence.”

But she seemed to change her tune and become more apologetic a day later when the outcry reached its climax:

“To the extent veterans read it as an accusation … an apology is owed,” she said during an on-air interview on FOX News Thursday, a day after veterans’ groups and members of Congress blasted her for the report, which they said libeled members of the armed forces.

“This was an assessment, not an accusation,” Napolitano continued. “It was limited to extremists those who seek to commit violence within the United States. And all this was meant to do was to give law enforcement what we call ‘situational awareness.’”

“The last thing I want to do is offend or castigate all veterans. To the contrary, let’s meet and clear the air,” she said.

“I’m not running away from it, but I will say it was an assessment. It was not an accusation, and quite frankly, these are products that are produced and shared with law enforcement on a routine basis.”

Unfortunately, she still used language that did not completely denounce the assessment or the statements outright.

To make matters worse and to really grasp the partisanship, hypocrisy, and double standards that make up this administration of ideologues, we found out that earlier today on Morning Joe, Napolitano and her spokespeople would only allow the interviewer to ask one question in regard to the veteran issue within the DHS report.

Interview today on “Morning Joe” with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, under this subject line: “Administration Permits Only One Question, No Follow-Ups About Extremism Report.”

Today the Secretary went on Morning Joe but they were only allowed to ask one question.

“Apparently, when the Democrats promise an open administration, they really only mean open as long as you ask the questions they want asked and no follow-ups on controversial topics that everyone is reporting on,” staffer Joe Pounder wrote in an email.

My sentiments exactly Joe!  For the life of me, I can’t understand why Democrats and Liberals cannot witness their own hypocrisy.  They sat there and complained about Bush for 8 years stating that he was “hiding” things, was the least transparent president, and that he was violating our rights by being big brother and tapping wires.  However, Obama is continuing those policies and even expanding them.  He doesn’t allow the press into certain events, picks out the questions that the press is allowed to ask him, yells at and demeans reporters who ask something outside of the box, and his administration apparently can only be asked certain questions – meaning you don’t get the whole entire truth and you don’t have all the freedoms and liberties associated with knowing what is going on…”Change we can believe in.”/Sarc.

Share on Facebook

Now, this has occurred before with Bill Clinton, and it quite possibly could have been the same with Bush – the issue is how the MSM spins this and how it will report one way if you are affiliated with one party versus the other way when you have the “scarlet” R next to your name.

From Flopping Aces:

“Cheered wildly by U.S. troops,” begins Jennifer Democratic Operative Loven’s AP report on Obama’s surprise visit to Iraq on Tuesday.

Quite a contrast to the silent treatment Marines gave Obama at his Camp LeJeune speech in late February. Just how did Obama manage to fix that little problem?

According to a sergeant in Iraq :

We were pre-screened, asked by officials “Who voted for Obama?”, and then those who raised their hands were shuffled to the front of the receiving line. They even handed out digital cameras and asked them to hold them up. [Via Macsmind.]

As supporting evidence for the digital-cameras part of the story, the sergeant (or Mac, can’t tell which), suggests that the identical cameras can be verified in the AP photos. Looks right:

Now Compare that to a story on Bush:

FLASHBACK: How the press treated the merest impression of a staged troop response under President Bush, even when there was no actual manipulation

Remember this headline from 2005:

Bush Teleconference With Soldiers Staged

It dominated the headlines and the television news-analysis for days, and the fabricated scandal was utterly dishonest. The so-called “staging” involved no manipulation whatsoever. A group of soldiers who were scheduled for a televised chat with President Bush were “caught on tape” discussing ahead of time who would answer questions on what subjects. There was NO discussion of WHAT should be said.

And just to provide several sources for how the troops polled before the elections:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1581284591.html and http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/mccain-garners-68-percent-of-us-troop-vote-obama-has-23-percent_100110214.html and http://www.andhranews.net/Intl/2008/October/22/McCain-garners-70356.asp .

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/10/military_poll_100508w/ or here http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/10/military_poll_100508w/

http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:wxq6tFQFVHcJ:rawstory.com/news/afp/Veteran_McCain_can_t_bank_on_US_mil_11012008.html+military+percent+vote+McCain&cd=31&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=opera and here is that poll ; http://www.gallup.com/poll/109654/Veterans-Solidly-Back-McCain.aspx

Share on Facebook

Will the White House make up another excuse as to why this happened just like Obama’s DVD gaffe to Gordon Brown, or his bow to the Saudi King?  This honestly has to be a joke – unfortunately, CNN is reporting on this and since they never report anything these days, it certainly is true…

The White House Press Office accidentally e-mailed a draft version of President Obama’s Thursday schedule on Wednesday night that included the back-and-forth between White House staffers.

The e-mail, sent on a daily basis to inform the media of the next day’s events, at first appeared to be like any other press schedule. But at the bottom of the e-mail, there was a series of exchanges from the press team, as well as a draft of the schedule.

The first section of the schedule noted that in the morning, Obama planned to talk with homeowners who have refinanced their homes and benefited from lower mortgage payments.

One staffer, recommending changes to that line, wrote to “put more emphasis on the real people aspect of this.”

It’s not like the administration really cares about the people – they just want to sound like they do.  And who are these REAL people? I think there are plenty of people who, if you mean have a heartbeat and weren’t part of the made-up electorate that voted for Obama; ie.,  Mickey Mouse, would find that statement a bit offensive.

The draft schedule also showed the president hosting Seder to celebrate Passover. The dinner was marked “closed press,” meaning no reporters allowed.

One staffer asked, “Can we remove the dinner at the end of the day?”

“We put it on yesterday’s deal — so folks already know that it’s happening. They’ll wonder why it’s not listed if we don’t include it on there,” another staffer replied.

The staffer who asked to remove the dinner from the schedule replied, “Apparently Jewish here and in neighboring states are now calling wondering why they have not been invited.”

The dinner was not listed on the final schedule.

Can’t have Jewish constituents wondering if the administration is having a dinner – they may still think they are invited…

And the worst aspect of this email gaffe?  Obama’s use and abuse of our veterans for political expediency.  I love meeting with veterans no matter what!  I have never heard better stories in my entire life.  They are kind people with a ton of knowledge and experience.  Some of my favorite conversations were with veterans.

In another exchange, one staffer recommended nixing a line about Obama meeting with leaders from the Veterans Service Organizations and Military Service Organizations since the president was now meeting with them before his remarks in an event closed to the media.

“Can we keep it and just change it to say before. Its good for us to say we are meeting with them,” another replied.

I’m appalled – but what’s new?  Could you imagine if this happened to President Bush?  The MSM would be playing this over and over again until everyone in the nation knew how inept his administration was.  However, this has just been buried along with the rest of the articles on CNN’s website; so far.

Share on Facebook

Obama visited U.S. troops in Iraq on a surprise trip yesterday.  I’m glad that he made the visit. Below is some raw footage from his visit:

But we cannot forget what both he and Joe Biden have said on the war in Iraq and the surge.

The surge is a bad idea?

A Civil War with NO Military Solution…?

Share on Facebook

The launch and test flight of N Korea’s newest long range missile was not a success, but it was not a failure either. To date this is the farthest any missile launch has traveled. However, still, they can not range the US mainland.

“Militarily and politically, it’s not a failure” because “North Korea demonstrated a greatly enhanced range,” Kim Tae-woo, an analyst at Seoul’s state-run Korea Institute for Defense Analyses said. “North Korea is playing a game of trying to manipulate the U.S. by getting it within range, which is the so-called pressure card.”

North Koreas neighbors and nations around the globe, have spoken out against this latest action by the North. The U.S. and allies have pushed for punishment of some sort at a  UN Security Council emergency meeting on Sunday.

President Barack Obama, faced with his first global security crisis, called for an international response and condemned North Korea for threatening the peace and stability of nations “near and far” with what Pyongyang claimed was a satellite launch and its neighbors suspect was a test of a long-range missile technology.

This underscores the Presidents notion of  nuclear draw down and military cutbacks and why America needs to remain strong and ready to deter aggression in the world.  Rouge nations such as North Korea (and Iran) can not be allowed to aquire weapons of mass destruction, because the chance they will use them are significantly higher than the other nuclear nations.

Council members met for three hours Sunday but failed to even to release even a customary preliminary statement of condemnation — evidence of the challenges in agreeing on some kind of punishment. China, the North’s closest ally, and Russia hold veto power and could water down any response.

Again, this just goes to show the U.N. is an irrelevant debating society, with no real power to enforce any sanctions or resolutions. Without the support of its members (and the entire Security Council), anything the UN agrees on is just a peice of paper in a binder collecting dust.

North Korea, one of the world’s poorest countries, is in desperate need of outside aid, particularly since the help that flowed in unconditionally from neighboring South Korea for a decade has dried up since Lee took office in Seoul in 2008.

Pyongyang routinely uses its nuclear weapons program as its trump card, promising to abandon its atomic ambitions in exchange for aid and then exercising the nuclear threat when it doesn’t get its way. The North also has reportedly been selling missile parts and technology to whoever has the cash to pay for it.

Read More Here

Share on Facebook

President Obama has just laid out his new war strategy. And he’s made it clear that the fight is both in Afghanistan and Pakistan. So I asked Dennis McDonough, with the National Security Council: Does that mean U.S. ground forces in Pakistan? Or more drone attacks? “I’m not going to comment on the notions you laid out there,” he answered, during a White House conference call with bloggers.

But during a separate press conference, Bruce Reidel, who recently completed a strategy review of the region for the White House, offered some hints. “Thus far, our policy sees Afghanistan and Pakistan as two countries, but one theater of operations for our diplomacy, and one challenge for our overall policy,” he said. “We have very concrete proposals for increasing economic assistance to Pakistan, proposals that have already been put forward by the Congress. We’re also looking at what we can do on the military side.”

Michele Flournoy, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, added, “I certainly believe we are going to be increasing our intelligence focus in this theater, and as opportunities arise that may increase the pace of operations, as well.”

Richard Holbrooke, the administration special enoy to the region said of Pakistan: “of all the dilemmas, problems and challenges we face, that’s going to be the most daunting, because it’s a sovereign country and there is a red line. And the red line is unambiguous and stated publicly by the Pakistani government over and over again: No foreign troops on our soil.” Yet I haven’t seen anyone in the administration state unambiguously yet that U.S. troops won’t go to Pakistan. If anything, they’ve side-stepped the question.

Draw your own conclusions. But to me, they’re saying: Yes, there will be more troops (both human and robotic). We’d just rather not talk about them.

I hope all those people with Endless War stickers, Coexist Stickers and Peace Now stickers protest this… I’ll be waiting.  I would just like to see someone for once, stand on principle and not be hypocritical.

I do not have the military background to know whether or not this is a good idea, but I do have major concerns with instigating something in another country, especially one such as Pakistan that has many miliary capabilities one of which is nuclear.

Pakistan is not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty either. Pakistan covertly developed nuclear weapons over many decades, beginning in the late 1970s. Pakistan first delved into nuclear power after the establishment of its first nuclear power plant near Karachi with equipment and materials supplied mainly by western nations in the early 1970s. Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto promised in 1965 that if India built nuclear weapons Pakistan would too, “even if we have to eat grass.” It is nearly certain that China only supplied (sold) 5000^[50] critical ring magnets to Pakistan in the early 1980s, and enabled Pakistan to have a rudimentary nuclear weapons capability by the end of the 1980s. The United States continued to certify that Pakistan did not possess nuclear weapons until 1990, when sanctions were imposed under the Pressler Amendment, requiring a cutoff of U.S. economic and military assistance to Pakistan.^[51] In 1998, Pakistan conducted its first nuclear tests at the Chagai Hills, in response to the tests conducted by India a few weeks before.

Share on Facebook

If you have not seen Team America, please do!  Sense of humor a must!  (This movie even makes fun of the U.N. and how ineffective they are when it comes to dealing with the “evil axis of power”).

At any rate – North Korea may become Obama’s first big international challenge.  I sure hope he doesn’t send a video to Kim Jong Il asking him for forgiveness and apologizing for the past 30 yrs. exclaiming our poor relations with them are the fault of the United States – as he did with Iran.

Here is the latest excerpt from Reuters:

North Korea said on Thursday that if the international community punishes it for next month’s planned missile launch it will restart a nuclear plant that makes weapons grade plutonium.

The secretive state this week put a long-range missile in place for a launch the United States warned would violate U.N. sanctions imposed on Pyongyang for past weapons tests.

The planned launch, seen by some countries as a disguised military exercise, is the first big test for U.S. President Barack Obama in dealing with the prickly North, whose efforts to build a nuclear arsenal have long plagued ties with Washington.

North Korea warned that any action by the U.N. Security Council to punish it would be a “hostile act.”

” … All the processes for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula … will be brought back to what used to be before their start and necessary strong measures will be taken,” the North’s foreign ministry spokesman said in comments carried by the official KCNA news agency.

Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has since made a statement in regards to the instigation by the North Koreans:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday warned North Korea that firing a missile for any purpose would be a “provocative act” that would have consequences.

North Korea is loading a rocket on a launch pad in anticipation of the launch of a communications satellite between April 4 and 8, U.S. counterproliferation and intelligence officials said. North Korea announced its intention to launch the satellite in February, but regional powers worry the claim is a cover for the launch of a long-range missile capable of reaching Alaska.

Clinton told reporters during a visit to Mexico City that the U.S. believes the North Korean plan to fire a missile for any purpose would violate a U.N. Security Council resolution barring the country from ballistic activity. She linked a missile launch to the future of talks between the U.S., North Korea and four other nations aimed at ending North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

“We have made it very clear that the North Koreans pursue this pathway at a cost and with consequences to the six-party talks, which we would like to see revived,” Clinton said.

“We intend to raise this violation of the Security Council resolution, if it goes forward, in the U.N.,” she said. “This provocative action in violation of the U.N. mandate will not go unnoticed and there will be consequences.”

I’m sure the U.N. will be most effective as stated above… They will most likely write a strongly worded letter to Mr. Il and ask for him to disarm – being scared of those strong words and the assertively typed letters, Mr. Il will have no choice but to stand down!

In the meantime, the United States has at least deployed two warships:

The US has deployed two warships with anti-missile capabilities in the waters off Japan as tensions mount over North Korea’s plans to test-fire a long-range ballistic missile capable of striking Alaska.

You know what’s sick, and in the back of my mind?  I’m sure that there are some liberals out there, so incredibly hateful, they would love nothing more than to see a missile attack on Alaskan soil… for obvious reasons – I can see the comments on the articles now – Society is so sick these days!

Share on Facebook