Tag: overmanwarrior

What I Love About Christmas: Guns, Guns, and more Guns–Smith and Wesson stock is rising!

It’s a wonderful time that we live in, regardless of the challenges posed by poorly constructed philosophies and destructive politics—it is truly a wonderful life.  In spite of the terrorists that want to kill us in America because of our use of capitalism, or the domestic insurgents who want to blast the United States back into the Stone Age regarding religious and hierarchical structure—life is beautiful.  It is Christmas time, time with family is wonderful, and we have guns—lots of guns—so all is well.  I love guns, and so do many Americans.  I also love my iPhone, so it gave me great pleasure to get a stock notification while I was having a nice lunch that Smith & Wesson stock was up, way up.  Given the recent attempts by the left-leaning political class to propose stricter gun laws, the American public responded by purchasing large numbers of personal firearms.  That of course drove up the stock offering from Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger—two of my favorite firearm manufacturers, both examples of great American companies—that can emphatically declare—Made in America.  Here is the news that came over my stock app which made my lunch taste so much better.

Smith & Wesson Hits 8-Year High On Gun Control Push

BY JAMES DETAR, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

12/07/2015 05:04 PM ET
Shares of Smith & Wesson (NASDAQ:SWHC) and Sturm Ruger (NYSE:RGR) gapped up sharply Monday amid new gun control calls by President Obama and the New York Times as well as a Supreme Court ruling.

Obama’s Oval Office address Sunday night and an unusual New York Times editorial came in the wake of the mass shootings in San Bernardino, Calif., on Dec. 2 in which 14 died and 21 were wounded. Shares of firearms makers often rise after mass shootings and other violent incidents, and fall during lull periods.

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider an appeal of a Chicago area law banning semiautomatic guns such as the AK-47 and Uzi, and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

Two justices, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, said in a statement that they would have allowed consideration of the case “because noncompliance with our Second Amendment precedents warrants this court’s attention as much as any of our precedents.”

Smith & Wesson shares gapped up 7.6% to 20.44 to an eight-year high in Monday afternoon trading on the stock market today.

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/business/120715-784076-smith-wesson-sturm-ruger-rise-on-gun-control-talk.htm#ixzz3tjtPLTmp

I remember when stock prices used to be checked by reading the Wall Street Journal and the closing value from the previous day.  The information was at best 24 hours old by the time you could effectively use it to make a trading decision.  Now with the mobile devices that are so easily available, stock pricing changes are instant.  I’ve come to enjoy my iPhone because the apps are so interactive and run well on the Apple operating system.  I have my preset favorites and one of them is (NASDAQ:SWHC) but that’s really just for fun.  You aren’t going to get rich on that kind of stock; you’d have to buy it in large quantities when it’s very low and sell it off on a bounce-back.  But watching it climb to such lofty heights as it has after Obama’s speech has more value to me than just money.

Smith & Wesson are and Ruger are companies that I cheer for, because everyone knows the political pressure against them to shut down, the threats of lawsuits that they’ve had to endure from every pandering politician to ever hit the scene—the gun companies have been easy targets for many years.  So I watch the stock of gun companies to monitor their health—because that is important to me.  I want to see them succeed, because if they do, I succeed also.  It’s good to see Smith & Wesson stock climbing because that means that mainstreamers are buying guns and are wanting to own a piece of the company.

I would suggest Smith & Wesson stock for a Christmas present to a person in your life who values such things.  At the current prices, they won’t be retiring any time soon, but it is ownership into something that is distinctly, and unapologetically American.  I know I feel every time I buy one of their firearms pride in owning a piece of American craftsmanship.  I have a long history with fine machining products—and even today it’s a part of my life.  I have great respect for products made on lathes and milling machines.  So I never tire of rubbing my fingers over a fine firearm that was built to contain controlled explosions and deliver a projectile to a target radius many yards away.  It is a similar appreciation as I feel when holding a fine set of golf clubs, or shooting a basketball into a well constructed hoop.  Its science melded with human invention out of necessity—and they are things to behold with appreciation.  Machining measurements on firearms are understandably very tight, so it takes a lot of responsibility, and craftsmanship to be a firearms manufacturer.  The liability alone makes it nearly prohibitive, which has been politically motivated to sink those companies with compliance costs.  There are much more profitable ventures to be involved in, so I greatly respect companies like Smith & Wesson, who have their headquarters in a liberal part of the country and are holding their own against a tide of progressive sentimentality.  They could do other things to make a buck, but they work each day to stay in business for the few of us out there who greatly appreciate their efforts.  Those are the things I think of when I rub my fingers over the contours of a finely built gun.  They are objects of great love and care—and they go perfectly with a bold American flag flying on the Fourth of July.

Watching the stock price rise on my iPhone indicated to me that the attempts of the gun grabbers were failing.  If they were trying to use fear instigated by terrorism to drive society into their warm embrace—they have failed in their task.  Instead, what they are getting is a society that is rejecting their extended arms knowing that the cost of that embrace is a loss of freedom and personal sanctity.  What the government is doing is essentially perverted, like a teenage boy trying to sneak a kiss from an innocent girl by taking her to a scary movie so that she wants to tuck herself into his arms as an invitation to a first base advancement of sexual exploration.  Government wants America disarmed for the same reasons—and the public isn’t falling for it. Instead, they were going in the other direction and that is good for firearms manufacturers like Smith & Wesson who have been making guns for a long time—yet have done so without the glamour and glitz of the great success story that they are, because guns have been given an undeserved stigma.   Yet Smith & Wesson made them anyway.  So it’s nice to see good things happening to good people and the owners of Smith & Wesson are.  Those who aren’t owners yet desired to be, so they bought some stock, which is the best way to tell such a company—Thank You.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

New York Times Shares Guilt in Promoting Terrorism Activity: Syed Farook was a very liberal government employee Muslim

Actually, The New York Times is correct when they said on their front page editorial against gun ownership—“no right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.” That is why I propose in the wake of the gross mismanagement of the events that led up to the San Bernardino shootings that we possibly reword the American Constitution to clarify the meaning of the Second Amendment for all. The New York Times showed why they are losing readership and nearing bankruptcy, because they don’t understand the world outside of their little building in New York City. They certainly don’t understand the necessity of guns in American culture. Read part of their much talked about and misguided editorial for further gun control below.   My terminology for the rewording would be to clarify that guns are needed in American culture because government often does fail, and that gun owners must possess at least equal armaments for their own protection in the event of such administrative failures as those on full display in the terrorist acts leading up to the San Bernardino massacre—which was clearly the fault of the Obama administration and the Homeland Security under his management from the executive office. Americans can’t be limited by clip counts and weapons types by legislation that puts more powerful weapons in the hands of government than what the citizen employers of those organizations possess themselves. What the New York Times proposes below is just stupid. They have the situation backwards. We need more guns with fewer restrictions, not fewer guns with more restrictions. Here is what they said:

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

 It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

 http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/05/us/new-york-times-gun-control-san-bernardino/index.html

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/end-the-gun-epidemic-in-america.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-top-region&region=opinion-c-col-top-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-top-region&_r=0

Let me clarify a “moral outrage” for The New York Times—a president who failed to acknowledge that ISIS (Not ISIL) is a major threat in spreading a global caliphate, which he had a hand in creating through his actions—then not communicating that failure properly to the American people. What is outrageous is the decision to allow the media to completely contaminate the crime scene of the San Bernardino terrorists just two days after they were shot and killed. Astonishingly the media was allowed to enter the apartment the two lived in and put their fingerprints all over the possessions contained therein. The apartment had not even been dusted for prints so this was an obvious move by the FBI and the Obama administration in coordination with local law enforcement to allow for the destruction of evidence so that connections to other terrorist suspects could be eliminated. The White House needed to maintain the story that the two acted alone, instead of being part of a more extensive group. This was highly corrupt, and if the highest law enforcement in America is prone to making these kinds of terrible judgment calls, they are not capable to make decisions on civilian’s behalf in regards to armament. Forget restrictions of full automatic weapons or ammunition types, like the .223. Those restrictions need to be removed because you never know when some government employee, like one of the terrorists in this California case was—might lose their mind, destroy evidence, abuse their authority, or allow themselves to be pawns from a corrupt executive branch in the future—and assault the innocent with the most aggressive weapons invented. American civilians need to be able to protect themselves from anything, enemies foreign and domestic.

But let me declare to The New York Times the greatest outrage—the cover-up—or the attempted cover-up of the nature of the terrorist couple themselves, the family lawyer who immediately tried to pacify the situation and media outlets like The New York Times from jumping all over guns instead of the actions of one of their own. In his online dating “Arab Lounge” profile where he met Tashfeen Malik, Syed Farook described himself as a devoted Muslim who was “very liberal,” politically. Farook was a creation of government. It took two full days before a picture of Tashfeen was produced essentially because she was always seen in a hijab marking her clearly as a Muslim and the government didn’t want the American people to start blaming all Muslims for being potential terrorists. When the FBI and White House realized they couldn’t contain the story they did the opposite, they allowed the media to contaminate the crime scene. They took away all references that they could find to other terrorist groups within the United States then let the media destroy all the rest of the evidence with over saturation of exposure instead of trying to limit access.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/12/04/online-dating-profile-provides-closer-look-at-calif-killer-and-lists-his-political-identification/

These are the types of people who want to demand that Americans give up their guns and trust government exclusively. Every level of this San Bernardino terrorist act was provoked by a government employee—from the shooter himself down to the investigators on the ground. The New York Times has the same radicalized liberal beliefs as Syed Farook and they are seeking to deflect the argument of potential terrorism away from liberal issues onto guns at the expense of freedom. There is nothing reasonable about gun control proposals when all the guilty in this case were the type of government employees we all need to protect ourselves from. The situation is just appalling. Our government cannot be trusted, and America needs guns to protect themselves from their employees as well as common thugs and miscreants in general. What would be best is just to lift all restrictions on ammo and explosive devices and let the free market take care of this encroaching problem. Liberals built this mess—these terrorist networks and the people who make them up. They don’t get to disarm us from the ramifications of their failure as well. That’s not how it works. The New York Times even for a very liberal publication should at least have known that much. They certainly shouldn’t have put that editorial on their front page because gun ownership was not the cause of the problem. It was the lack of a defense from the victims and the nurturing of domestic terrorism that all liberals helped create through their actions that is most to blame—and the clear attempt to cover up the evidence from the highest office of the White House to the cops on the scene. They knew the names, they saw their appearance once the terrorist couple had been gunned down in the street—appropriately—but they attempted to contain the story from the outset and when they realized how deep it went, they looked to isolate them from the connections to others which undoubtedly extended to more terrorist cells around the United States. And these same idiots think it appropriate to lecture America about gun rights? It is because of these types of people that we have a Second Amendment to begin with. So perhaps its time to take any vagueness out of the Constitution to clarify the real intention of civilian gun ownership—it is for protection from the employees of those civilians in attempting an insurrection—as they have been caught red-handed in hiding terrorism in America and their part in fostering it. The New York Times is as guilty as anybody on the liberal side of the political spectrum, and its time they apologize for their part in creating terrorism in America instead of camouflaging their error behind calls for more gun control.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Ruger’s Plan to Help the NRA: Using Second Call Defense to help stop Jihad at American borders

Fortunately, most Americans understand the situation, on Black Friday 2015 a record was shattered as there were 185,000 background checks from people buying firearms. That averages out to roughly 2 checks every second. And those Americans weren’t buying guns to hunt deer. Hopefully, many of those guns were from Ruger who is donating $2 for every Ruger sold between 2015 and 2016 intending to raise $4 million dollars for the NRA. I did my part and bought a new Ruger, and I’m very proud of it. In spite of the government insisting every couple of minutes that more gun control is needed to slow down the violent mass shootings erupting all over the country, the only real solution to the mismanagement of the social affairs that have contributed to the violence is more guns carried by responsible people, not less.

After the San Bernardino shooting on December 2nd 2015 Obama went straight to the airwaves to proclaim the need for more gun control and made a point to declare that other countries don’t have the problem of gun violence that America has. He failed to say why. Most of the rest of the world has terrible poverty and severe gun control restrictions and their people are mass migrating from those places trying to get into the United States. They aren’t immigrating to America because they like their homes. All is not well in the world, so Obama’s comparison is out-of-touch and extremely naive. He could only make such a global comparison by ignoring many facts, dangerously to his own detriment in judgment—which is obviously extremely flawed. America is a superior place to live, and guns help make it that way. Obama clearly doesn’t connect the dots. Because there are two things that are common to many of these mass shootings over the last couple of years—most of the shootings involve young people fresh out of their progressive educations. Second many of them are related to radical Islamic behavior. Fewer guns empowers these demographic groups toward terrorism—it doesn’t deter them.

The husband and wife shooter in San Bernardino recently were clearly Islamic radicals stoked into a froth of terrorism by fellow Jihadist activists. The situation was so embarrassing to the government that the wife had been permitted into the country on a work visa passing the Homeland Security check, then marrying a U.S. citizen whom she likely instigated into a Jihadist conversion. It was astonishing as of this writing that there was not yet a picture of the wife produced anywhere on the Internet. Surely there were some, but the authorities avoided putting her picture up because she represents a new level to the prospect of terror, the conversion of devout Muslims to Jihad through the power of sex. Without question, she is not alone working now with the United States. Obama cannot deny it— or anybody else. They propose gun control for one of two reasons; they have either promoted these extremists to come into the United States hoping to spread a Middle Eastern caliphate, or to cover the follies of their own terrible mismanagement as government officials. It is either deliberate promotion of these terrorist attacks or the result of gross incompetence. Given Obama’s social position against Israel, his reluctance to name Islamic terrorism by name, and his tendency as a foreign raised child to view America as an imperialist empire—that speculation as to his loyalty has reasonable traction to consider insurgency. His insistence on Syrian refugees entering the United States points to possibly thousands of additional terrorists raising more home-grown radicals just like this husband and wife team. These insurgents plan long and patiently. They fully intend the death of America like a long time family pet being taken to the vet to be euthanized. They say nice things to our ears, but their intentions are to woe us to sleep before the injection takes place.

Given all those raw facts it is clear that in either case, our government has been grossly incompetent. The terrorist husband in San Bernardino was a government worker, the investigators were government employees, the Homeland Security that allowed all this radical behavior to foster were government employees. All the freedoms we gave up, Constitutionally guaranteed, did not prevent the attack from occurring, so what was the point of it all? What’s the point of the HSA, the TSA, the FBI, the CIA or any of them if they couldn’t keep an online dating service from sending a girl from Saudi Arabia to an American born Muslim to ruin his mind with sex and radicalism until he was ready to shoot up an office building while maintaining a bomb factory at his home in full view of his neighbors—who were shushed into silence for fear of being labeled “prejudice.” Government incompetence is at the heart of every issue, so the obvious conclusion is that they cannot be trusted.

That is why gun sales are up, because normal Americans see the writing on the wall and they know they need to protect themselves. If an active civil war between factions of political ideology must break out, then the fault is on the government for failing to protect our private property from potential terrorists. We have the Second Amendment as a back-up–the way it was always designed, to take matters into our own hands if government proves itself to be so grossly inadequate. It is good and highly encouraged that all Americans obtain a concealed carry permit and began making themselves active resistance to this impending terrorism within our borders. Ruger is doing their part in offering to boost the power of the NRA with a donation for every firearm sold during this upcoming year, so if you’re planning to buy one, make it a Ruger.

One of the most exciting things about a possible Donald Trump presidency is that he is very pro Second Amendment and has a plan to make concealed carry permits viable in all 50 states. So if you get a concealed carry permit in Ohio, it would be good in California and Hawaii—which would be wonderful. If there had been armed people in that government building, those two terrorists could not have emptied so many rounds into innocent people. Some gun carrying protectors could have shot back ending the dispute right then and there. There may have still been some killed or injured, but the number would be far less. The response to these terrorist threats cannot be passivity, and gun restrictions. It has to be the opposite, more guns and expanded conditions for which private people carry them.

Of course this all points back to why I am now a recruiter for Second Call Defense. If you are going to carry a firearm and you find yourself in a self-defense shooting—say some Jihadist nut job came into your place of business or a fine restaurant you were taking your wife to for a nice dinner and these scum bags come in to spread their intentions of a global caliphate—and you shoot them—you will have to defend yourself from the same government that let those idiots roam free—that same government that refused to publish the picture of a young Saudi woman who used sex to convert the mind of a peaceful Muslim into a radical Jihadist. So you have to protect yourself from that government—because they will be looking for a straw man for their incompetence. Second Call Defense takes that ability away from them. First you shoot the terrorist saving as many people as you can, then you call Second Call Defense and let them handle the government investigation into the matter protecting you and your property from further incursions of blame. Just as Barack Obama took the side of Trayvon Martin in the George Zimmerman case in Florida putting the shooter at a severe legal disadvantage in the process, you don’t want the same thing to happen to you if you put down a terrorist Jihadist that the government let into the country to fulfill some political goal they have at our expense. If that happens, be sure to let Second Call Defense handle the case. Just use my name in the redemption code when you sign up and you will get the first month free. I wouldn’t put my name on something like this if I didn’t think it would help people and help spread the use of firearms in these types of cases.

Ruger specifically is one of my favorite firearms manufactures. I absolutely love my Vaquero; it is machined to perfection and is just an astonishingly wonderful product. I have shot it nearly a thousand times over the last couple of months and it gives me great pleasure to stand at my workbench in the garage and clean it back to its original finish after each shooting session. It is a wonderfully American thing to do as I listen to talk radio and listen to conservative discussions free of liberal sentimentality while cleaning a very nice firearm after a hard day of shooting, carefully, with great craftsmanship—to use an array of tools to care for something that is fun recreationally, but can also defend your property from the fools of the world—which are numerous. As I clean that gun I think of how special we are in the United States to have those privileges—we are probably the only place that has such an ability—free speech, free access to the finest firearms in the world, free from unreasonable searches and seizer—but it is all those rights that these terrorists are attacking. Their military objective is to erode our freedoms with terrorism, to force America to overreact into accepting gradually bigger government and much more restriction—like what terrorists achieved after 9/11. But we have to stop that game in its tracks right now. We have to give them the opposite. We need gun sales to spike; we need more people openly carrying them, and we need to make it easier for them to carry guns in more places. That is the only solution to the gross government mismanagement to the current Jihadist threats. And toward that aim, Ruger is a good place to begin fighting back. Second Call Defense is the next.

Now, CLICK HERE to learn about my plan to defeat ISIS and global terrorism, once and for all. 

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

The Movie ‘Selma’ Was Terrible: Mark Zuckerberg’s wasted $45 billion dollars

I read in USA Today that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife who just gave birth to their first child, planned to give away approximately 45 billion dollars during their lifetimes toward the next generation in achieving equality and other lofty goals. While that sounded very “stylish” I couldn’t help but think that the actuality of their intentions would only lead to more degradation and progressive political erosion of core traditional values—such as strong families, hard work, and personal ethics. It is a proven fact that you can’t throw good money at bad people, so a valueless society even propped up with billions or trillions of dollars cannot flourish. There are many examples of this but let me give a more contemporary comparison that everyone can relate to, like a review of the recent movie Selma about Martin Luther King’s march across the famous bridge toward Montgomery, Alabama for a civil rights demonstration that made history. I personally think a lot of Martin Luther King, or at least I did until I saw Selma because the movie wasn’t very good. It had the feel of a made for television movie, not an Academy Award type of film. It clearly received high praise because of its message about progressive concerns—not for the actual quality of the film itself. Under the direction of Ava DuVernay, I think she went a long way to destroying what was best about Martin Luther King. But the purpose of this article is to show how good money spent poorly can give terrible results, and that is what Selma most represents. With all the great talent involved, and money—they couldn’t buy a successful outcome.

Selma is a 2014 American historical drama film directed by Ava DuVernay and written by Paul Webb. It is based on the 1965 Selma to Montgomery voting rights marches led by James Bevel,[3][4] Hosea Williams, Martin Luther King, Jr., and John Lewis. The film stars actors David Oyelowo as King, Tom Wilkinson as President Lyndon B. Johnson, Tim Roth as George Wallace, Carmen Ejogo as Coretta Scott King, and rapper and actor Common as Bevel.

Selma premiered at the American Film Institute Festival on November 11, 2014, began a limited US release on December 25, and expanded into wide theatrical release on January 9, 2015, two months before the 50th anniversary of the march. The film got a re-release on March 20, 2015 in the honor of the 50th anniversary of the historical march.

Selma had four Golden Globe Award nominations, including Best Motion Picture – Drama, Best Director, and Best Actor, and won for Best Original Song.[5] It was also nominated for Best Picture and won Best Original Song at the 87th Academy Awards.

The story goes like this, in 1964, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) accepted his Nobel Peace Prize. Four African-American girls walking down stairs in the Birmingham, Alabama 16th Street Baptist Church were killed by a bomb set by the Ku Klux Klan. Annie Lee Cooper attempted to register to vote in Selma, Alabama but was prevented by the white registrar. King met with President Lyndon B. Johnson and asked for federal legislation to allow black citizens to register to vote unencumbered. Johnson said he had more important projects at the time, like his War on Poverty initiative.

King traveled to Selma with Ralph Abernathy, Andrew Young, James Orange, and Diane Nash. James Bevel greeted them, and other SCLC activists showed up to help. FBI director J. Edgar Hoover told Johnson that King was a problem, and suggested they disrupt his marriage. Coretta Scott King has concerns about her husband’s upcoming work in Selma. King calls singer Mahalia Jackson to inspire him with a song. King, other SCLC leaders, and black Selma residents march to the registration office to register. After a confrontation in front of the courthouse a shoving match occurs as the police go into the crowd. Cooper fights back, knocking Sheriff Jim Clark to the ground, leading to the arrest of Cooper, King, and others.

Alabama Governor George Wallace speaks out against the movement. Coretta meets with Malcolm X, who says he will drive whites to ally with King by advocating a more extreme position. Wallace and Al Lingo decide to use force at an upcoming night march in Marion, Alabama, using state troopers to assault the marchers. A group of protesters runs into a restaurant to hide, but troopers rush in, beat and shoot Jimmie Lee Jackson. King and Bevel meet with Cager Lee, Jackson’s grandfather, at the morgue. King speaks to ask people to continue to fight for their rights. King receives harassing phone calls with a recording of sexual activity implied to be him and another woman leading to an argument with Coretta. King is criticized by members of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC).

As the Selma to Montgomery march is about to begin, King talks to Young about cancelling it, but Young convinces King to persevere. The marchers, including John Lewis of SNCC, Hosea Williams of SCLC, and Selma activist Amelia Boynton, cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge and approach a line of state troopers who put on gas masks. The troopers order the marchers to turn back, and when they hold their ground the troopers attack with clubs, horses, tear gas, and other weapons. Lewis and Boynton are among those badly injured. The attack was shown on national television as the wounded are treated at Brown Chapel, the movement’s headquarter church.

Movement attorney Fred Gray asks federal Judge Frank Minis Johnson to let the march go forward. President Johnson demands that King and Wallace stop their actions, and sends John Doar to convince King to postpone the next march. White Americans, including Viola Liuzzo and James Reeb, arrived to join the second march. Marchers cross the bridge again and see the state troopers lined up, but the troopers turn aside to let them pass. King, after praying, turns around and leads the group away, and again comes under sharp criticism from SNCC activists. That evening, Reeb was beaten to death by white racists on a street in Selma.

Judge Johnson allows the march. President Johnson speaks before a Joint Session of Congress to ask for quick passage of a bill to eliminate restrictions on voting, praising the courage of the activists; he states “We shall overcome.” The march on the highway to Montgomery takes place, and when the marchers reach Montgomery King delivers a speech on the steps of the State Capitol. As King speaks of coming victory, footage of him and his supporters were displayed on screen, and that was the end of the movie. That should save you from having to watch it.

DuVernay directed Selma, with a $20 million budget produced by Plan B Entertainment. The movie was released on December 25, 2014.[27] There was significant controversy about Selma and its depiction of Lyndon Johnson‘s actions as portrayed in the film.[28][29] Former Johnson domestic policy aide Joseph A. Califano, Jr. criticized DuVernay for ignoring and falsifying history, and particularly for suggesting that Johnson reluctantly supported King’s efforts and that he set the FBI to investigate King.[30] For the film she did uncredited re-writes of most of the original screenwriter Paul Webb’s script with an increased emphasis on King and the people of Selma as central figures.[31][32] In response to the criticisms of historians and media sources that accused her of irresponsibly rewriting history to portray her own agenda, DuVernay pointed out that the film is “not a documentary. I’m not a historian. I’m a storyteller”.[33] However, most people watching the film without question will accept the film as historical record.

The film was nominated for Best Picture and Best Song, but not Best Director, by the Academy Awards. While the lack of diversity of the Oscar nominations for 2014 was the subject of much press,[34] especially on Twitter,[35] the film of the only person of color that was nominated for the 87th Academy Awards, Mexican director Alejandro González Iñárritu, ended up taking top honors in three categories at the February 2015 87th Academy Awards – Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay. The award for Best Original Song went to “Glory” from Selma.[36][37] DuVernay stated that she had not expected to be nominated so the omission didn’t really bother her; rather she was hurt by actor David Oyelowo not being nominated. As to the question of racial diversity of awards, she stated that the obstacles to people of color being represented in the Academy Awards were systemic.[35] She failed to mention that in order to be considered for such a nomination that she should have shown herself to be a director of the highest order. For instance, I disagree tremendously with the politics of the movie Argo and its director Ben Afleck. But, Ben did a great job with that picture and deserved his rewards as a fabulous director. It had nothing to do with him being white, or a male—he just made a great movie—even though I disagreed with most of the premise—favoring the communists of Iran with a haze of respect instead of a more conservative position.

Ava Marie DuVernay (born August 24, 1972) is an American director, screenwriter, film marketer, and film distributor. At the 2012 Sundance Film Festival, DuVernay won the Best Director Prize for her second feature film Middle of Nowhere,[1][2][3][4] becoming the first African-American woman to win the award.[5][6] For her work in Selma, DuVernay is the first black woman director to be nominated for a Golden Globe Award.[7][8] With Selma, she is also the first black woman director to have their film nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selma_(film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ava_DuVernay

Ava DuVernay obviously needed more time behind the camera directing because there were a lot of sloppy mistakes, most notably involving Malcolm X. It was obvious that the producers, specifically Oprah and Brad Pitt wanted an African-American woman to direct the film instead of the best possible candidate, so their hiring desires directed the foundation of the film which came across as a music video painted with a PBS documentary. I don’t think it was DuVernay’s fault the movie wasn’t good; it was that the lack of understanding and emphasis by the producers that made the film bad from the start. They made a movie about a popular black man and the civil rights movement then expected to show up at the Academy Awards to pick up their nomination for advancing a progressive cause. The movie suffered because of it. The story of Selma is actually a good one, but it deserved a much better effort instead of the politically charged tripe that was provided.

The film cost $20 million to make and brought in just over $68 million so financially it wasn’t a failure, but culturally it did little to advance the story of Martin Luther King. Instead, it took him down several pegs in the eyes of history I suppose to show that he was a more “human” man. Obviously the real hero of Selma to my eyes appeared to be King’s wife—the battered wife who stood by her man even after his death—which contradicted the UN flying flag that the protestors were carrying into Montgomery at the end of the film. What did the United Nations have to do with American civil rights? If the intention of the filmmakers was to tell a powerful story about Martin Luther King and how Malcolm X made peace with him before his own assassination, the film failed. Instead they gave us an insider’s gaze into the political activism that still goes on behind the scenes of a civil rights movement that isn’t so much rooted in fairness for all people, but a global government led by the United Nations—which had Brad Pitt’s fingerprints all over it, even the cowboy riding a horse running down innocent blacks with a bullwhip in slow motion. The progressive imagery was obvious. I certainly didn’t miss it, which made me wonder who they thought they were making the movie for. I don’t think the producers knew.

Given the history and success of people like Oprah and Brad Pitt, you’d think they’d know better. They are rich people, but all their wealth hasn’t done much to make them better people. You could give them all the money in the world and they would just waste it. They couldn’t even make a good movie when given a free hand at producing anything they wanted with money not even being an option. With all their resources, Selma is all they could come up with. It is for that reason that with all the intelligence Mark Zuckerberg showed in developing Facebook, it’s clear he was a one shot wonder who stumbled across something that people wanted to pay him a lot of money for. But he doesn’t understand the value of what he obtained and neither will the recipients of his 45 billion dollars. It’s a nice gesture but will share with the movie Selma—made by his good friends—a lackluster outcome that falls well short of its good intentions. The path to hell of course is paved with good intentions. But you’d think that smart people would have learned that by now and not funded the concrete trucks that helped pave the way. Without personal value, no amount of money can’t fix anything; money can only delay the inevitable just a while longer. Money doesn’t give value—it only represents it. If you throw $20 million dollars at a slam dunk movie set for the academy awards, but the people involved are not up to the task and aren’t making the movie with real value at the heart of it—but just eyeing a sure-fire Academy Award for exploiting blacks and the civil rights history—then the attempt will likely be a failure. And if $45 billion dollars are poured into a global society without putting value into the people receiving it, then all that money will just be wasted, because the value of money cannot stick to anything. The effort may be noble, but the result will be less than fulfilling, because the essence of value was ignored, and confused with fiscal measurements.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Proof That American Muslims Celebrated During 9/11: The selective amnesia of mainstream media

It is truly astonishing the level of collective hypnosis that is occurring on the topic of radicalized Muslims within the United States. Exchanges like the one below on the Morning Joe with Donald Trump continue, where they berate him for his assertion that there were cheering Muslims in New Jersey who were having block parties in celebration as the World Trade Center buildings came down on 9/11 2001. I saw it, my family saw it, and obviously Donald Trump saw it. I know it was a long time ago and YouTube had not been invented yet. I also understand that many of today’s reporters were probably just learning to read in grade school so they probably don’t remember. They think the world and its history started once YouTube came to life in 2005 where video was suddenly readily available anytime to anyone. However, I’m sure there is video of the occurrences, we know what some of those Islamic groups were called—so it shouldn’t be too hard to dig up the video proving correct what Donald Trump is now saying—because we all saw it that were alive and cognoscente back then. I think many people are just choosing to forget about it because the implication is so scary that people would rather not know of it. One of the groups cheering was an organization that became Revolution Islam. Before we get into that, have a look and listen to the extreme denial displayed on that Morning Joe program. It really is astonishing. There is evidence to the contrary of what they are saying in the very next video.

Revolution Islam was known as recently as 2009 to protest outside of mosques in New York City trying to recruit peaceful Muslims into their radical agenda. They openly celebrated 9/11, the Fort Hood shootings, and every act of terror catalogued by Islamic radicals anywhere in the world. As they say, the Quran commands them to terrorize non believers. They would gather in the streets of New York and shout down all passers-by right in the light of day. They made no attempt to hide their behavior and the media reported on it. CNN did as well as others. There may have been an attempt to re-edit history to favor a pro-Palestinian vantage point, or perhaps the oil barons threw money at news organizations to erase their past financing of terrorist activity, but something happened to hide the videos from 2001 showing groups like Revolution Islam cheering in the streets after 9/11. But you can bet on it, those videos are out there, the news organizations just need to dig them out. Revolution Islam is part of a fringe group within the United States of radical Islamic fundamentalists who want a global caliphate and they will stop at nothing to get it. They openly worshipped Osama Bin Laden with great love—even saying that they cared more about him than themselves. Don’t believe me; well watch the video below from Anderson Cooper’s show 360 on CNN. He’s a credible source and did a story on this group with a sit down interview in 2009. I have no question CNN could dig up in their files the video of the cheering Muslims as the 9/11 towers were falling down. I know what I saw. If they need help searching their data bases just look under this group’s name, Revolution Islam. Likely the FBI, CIA, and every other news organization have the same video. Even if they don’t, or have destroyed them, this video at least shows the remnants of their behavior before they went into hiding after the terrorist attacks. These radicals were still operating out in the open.

If you haven’t already, make sure to copy this video on a private file so that you’ll have it later. If you are reading this story a week or so after I have written it and the video is gone, it’s because it was pulled from YouTube. As of this writing over a million people have seen the video, but if it gets out in the open it will likely be removed. It’s hard to say where Google’s loyalties are in regard to this global desire to help radical Muslims establish a global caliphate rooted in Dark Ages mentality. I wouldn’t think that Google or other forward leaning organizations would support this kind of censorship, but you never know. I am surprised that the collective media is so adamant about creating a separation between Muslim behavior and radical Islamists because the proof has been quite evident for a number of years. CNN’s report shown above is all the proof you need to comprehend the scope of the problem.

There really are only two explanations—we are talking about an Alex Jones massive conspiracy theory involving globalists who are using Islamic fundamentalists to perpetuate war and anxiety so that Americans will give up their Constitutional rights in favor of a global government which they control—or Americans endured such a trauma on 9/11 that they have eliminated the facts from their minds to deal with the terrible tragedy. After all, we all know Muslim people and want to think of them as nice and peaceful. Nobody wants to think that the person they know could be one of these nut-case terrorists so perhaps we have blocked out the unpleasant thought in favor of a national dialogue that preserves our sanity. Such bad news isn’t good for television ratings, and maybe that is the reason for the mass elimination of video from that period. But one thing is very clear—there were American Muslims very happy about 9/11 and they were celebrating.

Living in New York Donald Trump surely saw the CNN story and reflected back to the 9/11 period eight years prior. As much as Donald Trump had been interviewed and pays attention to the news—I have no doubt that he saw such reports in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. I remember such things too. I certainly remember the celebrations overseas, and I remember having discussions with people about homegrown Muslims sympathizing with the World Trade Center attackers—that were generated by what we saw on TV. After 9/11 a lot of Muslims felt they had to go underground so they hid their religion for a time. There were lots of reports from the media who felt sorry for these people as the established order of things took on the Muslim cause almost as a civil rights issue. Much of the bad behavior that we feared about radical Islam was being ignored so that innocent people wouldn’t be caught in the crossfire. Without question that is why so many young reporters today are reluctant to criticism of Islam in any way—even if the evidence points right into the doors of a mosque.

Over time it became so unfashionable to criticize radical Islamic behavior that the media had decided to ignore it. They put them in the same class as other minorities in America propping them up as a civil rights issue and threw their support behind massive America collection programs like the NSA hoping that Homeland Security would protect them from further attacks. When those attacks did come the blame was placed everywhere but the obvious. Fort Hood became a situation of “workplace violence” while the Boston Marathon Bombing became a couple of misunderstood children—not focusing on their radical Islamic exposure as the cause of the violence. For the same reasons that many people can’t remember much of the events during a violent automobile accident—because the brain shuts down as a survival mechanism—Islamic terror is undergoing the same type of process across American society, and the media certainly has a huge case of that selective amnesia. Whatever the cause of it, whether conspiracy, or psychological—it is a factor that shows up glaringly in these Donald Trump interviews with the media. They chose not to remember, yet the presidential candidate does—just as many do and the evidence is there for everyone to see.

Even if there is never any evidence of video from 2001, it cannot be denied that there weren’t American Muslims who were just as crazy as the typical ISIS terrorist now. CNN interviewed them with a credible journalist who was mainstream—and gay. Anderson Cooper is as harmless toward advocating false conspiracies as it gets. He interviewed members of Revolution Islam to get the facts and they weren’t hard to get. Those people were standing in front of a mosque advertising to fellow Muslims why they should become radicalized. What Donald Trump is saying isn’t conspiracy, or even politically incorrect. It’s a fact, as clear as the daytime sun on a cloudless day. The only difference is Trump hasn’t decided to ignore the facts he’s observed through history—while the general public and the media have. Yet that doesn’t change the threat level, and that is something we all need to take very seriously. Not every Muslim is a radical. But it only takes one or two, and given the recent history of treacherous acts, terrorists aren’t coming out of Christianity, Buddhism, or Hinduism—they are coming out of the Islamic religion. All that anybody needs to do is pay attention to the obvious.

Sorry to say it to the people who don’t support Trump, but he’s right again. He has a good reason to double down on the issue. Because he’s not wrong.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

How to Peacefully Destroy ISIS: Why America created the terrorist group and what to do about it

Just for clarification, the United States created ISIS. While Russia and Iran supported Bashar al-Assad’s regime of terror in Syria, the West, Turkey, and the Gulf States supported removing him. So America essentially supplied the weapons of war to the rebels against Assad to defeat him. What occurred in the aftermath was ISIS. That is why to this very day America cannot join Russia in teaming up with Assad to fight ISIS, because that would be far too embarrassing. The Obama Administration made a serious blunder and there is no going back now. For proof that the U.S. Government wanted ISIS to emerge in Syria watch this Reality Check from Ben Swann, who has a new job at CBS 46.

Good job Ben Swann, now watch a video he did two years ago predicting the creation of ISIS. Pay very close attention to the little boy singing approximately 6 minutes in. There are thousands of kids like him and there will be absolutely no way to reason with that child poisoned with extremism. That is the fight that is before us, created by Barack Obama’s horrible mismanagement of the stand-off with Syria—remember when he drew a line in the sand, Assad crossed it, then Obama walked back and drew a new line—which Assad crossed again. So Obama along with Republican Senator John McCain sought to supply weapons to the Free Syrian Army to overthrow Assad. But what that army did instead was attack outlying villages and begin to purge Syria and Iraq of Christians, Jews, and invalidate a peaceful exchange by Muslims toward the rest of the world.   Watch closely—this is what the “media” is supposed to be doing—reporting the facts.

Now, there is no way the United States could possibly work with Russia to help Syria against ISIS, because America created ISIS to destroy the current Syrian regime backed by Russia. Do you see the problem dear reader? That is the very definition of the path to hell is paved with good intentions, and hell is quite hot these days. Obama drove us here because he couldn’t read his GPS system, even though it was beeping with alarms the entire time. We now have a severe mess that there is no easy way out of. There is no solution which takes everyone back to peace. The Middle East will never again return to a glory day of Arabs practicing peacefully in the arts and sciences of Aristotle’s brand of Islamic faith. Communism and radicalism are now centerpieces of the Middle East and factions of more severe terrorists are breeding at an extraordinary rate. Little children like the kid in the Ben Swann video are going to grow up and bomb Europe and the United States with increased frequency. War has been declared whether or not we open the mail to read it. They are coming, and we empowered them to do so. If you were smart dear reader you would fire every government official connected to this failure at the very next election. The situation is catastrophically epic.

So here’s what has to happen to rectify the situation. America needs to unleash its oil potential. Currently we are sitting on 285 years of oil and Bill Gates has agreed to pour tens of millions, perhaps billions of R&D dollars into renewable energy yet to be discovered. We should be able to achieve that within 285 years. We could probably do it in 20. So the plan should be to completely cut off the Middle East of oil sales to the U.S.. Saudi Arabia sponsors too much terrorism, and there is really no good way to defeat radicalism in the Middle East so long as good and bad Arabs are plotting against the United States using our dependency on their oil as the leverage mechanism to deal with us. That means we have to cut them off, starve them out, and force them to peaceful negotiations on our terms. They have to want our money otherwise they are unmotivated to deal. Instead, they will continue to use our money and our weapons to fight us. So they need to be choked off—all of them, the entire Middle East. If they are mad at us for our participation in Sykes-Picto, then let them have their land and all the worthless oil on it.

But opening up the oil reserves in America to the point where oil prices would be under $1 a gallon would jump-start our economy again and bring down the global price per barrel everywhere. This would take the wind out of the sails of the only thing the Middle East has by way of economic sustenance. Because of their flirtations with communism, they would not be able to develop any other economical means, and would be forced to face their failed ideology. Their fights would turn on themselves instead of outwardly being united against America and Europe. By completely withdrawing from the region, the United States could take itself out of the debate and leave the red meat to the wolves to fight over. In just a few short decades kids like the one singing in the Ben Swann video would snuff themselves out fighting for the same piece of bread. Oil funds the Dark Ages mentality of ISIS with the belief that they are equal to the developed world outside of their attempted caliphate. But they’re not. Without the United States, they would become like an island of head hunters in New Guinea, isolated and primitive—like they truly are.

I don’t propose letting Israel plunge into possession by the barbarians. We should still support them—they have other economic engines to keep them going, and should be a lesson to Jordan, Syria, and Iran on how to conduct a proper economy. Eventually when the money runs out—which it will, the oil barons in Saudi Arabia and at the UAE would be forced to eat out of the hand of America for basic income. Within a few decades those dust pits in the Middle East could be like modern-day Puerto Rico, one category under statehood, and be forced to adopt American policy and capitalism just to survive. That would be good for everyone.

We are at war, forget about the environment. Global warming is a false prophecy advocated by the political left with a religious like fervor. It has no grounding, or basis in reality—it’s just another communist inspired scheme by old hippies to cripple all forms of capitalism in worship to a deity called Mother Earth. Screw mother earth, drill for oil, choke off our enemies from the easy money, and advance civilization off this planet for destinations yet unknown traveling among the stars. It’s stupid to stay on earth. The rest of the planet needs to learn from the United States. China needs to give up on communism. Russia needs to expand its economy and come out of the Soviet era economic beliefs also centered on state controlled economies. Europe needs to give up on socialism including Sweden and Norway. It doesn’t work as well as they prop it up to appear. In a few years their youth will show signs of complete complacency and those are not the type of people who will voyage to Mars resettle that red planet from what will prove to be a history that we share. We are already in World War III. So we need to pull together and do what it takes to win that war, and unlike the weapons of the past, this current one is financial. The best way to defeat the Islamic caliphate is not with troops on the ground, but with opening up American oil reserves to choke off the world with our isolation so they can’t mooch off our wealth any longer—then get mad at us for giving them that help.   Cut them off and live happily ever after.

The kid shown in the video above won’t be reasoned with. He won’t be won over with flowers, or even a show of power. Those Arabs are filled with hate and stupidity and there is no way to deal with them rationally now. Forget the deals with OPEC, forget the meetings with the World Bank to keep oil prices at a certain place to secure the economy of the Middle East. End all those deals and cut off those terrorists so they can’t buy a bag of beans from Russia and Iran let alone nuclear weapons. Take away their oil not through theft or possession. Do it through currency devaluation of the price of oil. If you love mother earth so much, then leave her to her home while we as a human race move out into our own homes. We can come back and visit on Holidays, but as a species, we need to think bigger. We need to advance to space; we need to use up our 285 years worth of dirty oil to destroy those who hate America forcing them to unite with our freedom and style of republic democracy so that when we do move into space, we can all get along for a change. But before we do any of that, we have to understand that we created much of this mess, so now we have to commit to fixing it for everyone’s sake. And we should not listen to the idiots who caused all this in the first place—people like John McCain and Barack Obama. Open up the Keystone Pipeline and drill for oil in New York. If Andrew Cuomo doesn’t like it, send him to Iraq to trade in beads—while the rest of the world moves on under American leadership and a dollar valued by capitalist countries.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Rodizio at Liberty Center: Review after the first full month of opening — a vacation in our own back yards

To be completely honest, when I travel it is usually the restaurants that I remember most and what I look forward to experiencing before hand. Maybe it’s just the primal need for food and its connection to our daily life that does it, but restaurants reflect most about whatever culture I’m visiting. For instance, when traveling to my favorite amusement park, the Epcot Center in Florida it isn’t the rides that I think of most afterwards, it’s the chance to eat at all the various restaurants representing the different countries. It’s like traveling the world without the pain of all the border crossings and language barriers. Usually when I’m planning a trip, whether it’s to another country or another city within the United States, I scout ahead to the dinning options available and look forward to concluding whatever business I have in those places, so that I can enjoy a unique restaurant experience.

Given that little prequel it should be obvious then why I have taken such a liking to the Rodizio Grill at Liberty Center. It’s an exotic joy that is just as authentic, if not more so, than if I visited a steakhouse in Brazil, but it’s just down the road from me saving the plane fees to get there. After a hard day, or week I can visit the Rodizio at Liberty Center and feel like I took a vacation—which I consider invaluable to stress management—so I feel grateful to have one of these Rodizio restaurants so close now in southern Ohio. There are only two in all of Ohio, one in Columbus and now the one at Liberty Center. There are a few in Colorado, a few in Florida, one in Louisiana, one in Minnesota, Nebraska and New Jersey. So there are a respectable number of them in the United States—but for most of the country it is a journey to get to one of the locations. The Rodizio at Liberty Center is literally down the road for me so given that convenience and my love of a vacation experience even if it’s just for a few hours, it shouldn’t be a surprise that I have been there several times in just the first month of its opening. My wife and I were fortunate enough to be invited to a VIP opening on October 27 2015 and we enjoyed it so much that we took our daughter there for her 25th birthday exactly one month later.

I had been there other times in between, most of them professionally based, but this last time was different—it was my family, so out of all the nice places around the city of Cincinnati, I wanted my little girl to have the best opportunity. I have eaten at most places around the city of Cincinnati. I am very familiar with the various restaurants along the Fields Ertle exit just outside of nearby Mason. But there is nothing like this Brazilian steakhouse outside of downtown Cincinnati. However I prefer the suburbs to downtown mainly because of parking, so it was a no brainer on the decision. I wanted to take her to the Rodizio for a unique, “worldly” experience that I think she deserves—because she’s a good kid who deserves to be pampered on her birthday.

My measure of steakhouses is of course Jags in West Chester which I consider to be the best in the area. Jeff Ruby’s Steak House on Fountain Square is a close second. But these are very expensive establishments. The food is very good, of course, but it’s more a place to be seen, or to raise an impression with a client then the actual functionality of those places. I put the Rodizio at Liberty Center above those steakhouses for one simple reason. The food is on par with those upper crest establishments—but the atmosphere is much more ambitious at Rodizio, and the food supply is limitless. The full Rodizio experience is essentially an all you can eat buffet—an endless supply of fresh vegetables, fruits and salads with some of the best cuts of meat that you can find anywhere—such as the Maminha which is a tri-tip sirloin steak with a moderate marbled-to-lean cut presented medium to medium rare right at your table. The Gauchos bring the meats to your table and present a slice to your plate directly. They will keep coming until you turn your table indicator to red letting them know to either give you a break, or to bring your check. The Picanha is a slice of top sirloin that rivals the best of what any steakhouse anywhere can provide and it’s presented in whatever quantities you can hold as the customer. At the birthday lunch for my daughter they were circulating roughly 7 different types of meat and a standout was the Miolo Da Paleta and the Garlic Beef. Lunch is $19.95 for the full Rodizio experience which I think is an absolute bargain. At dinner the selections increase to well over 10 items including lamb. Dinner is just shy of $33 dollars per person. I’ve now been to Rodizio enough to begin knowing the various cuts of meat on sight which seemed very exotic upon my first visit. They still are, but now they are like familiar friends.

My concern after the VIP dinner was that the management at Rodizio was putting their best foot forward to win over community leaders, but that the food quality would subside after a few weeks of a hard open to the general public. As of this writing Rodizio at Liberty Center has been open for only a month, but their food quality is as good as it was on that first special night. Each time I have been to Rodizio since, which has been at least once a week, Captain Hook, the head chef has personally come to my table to make sure the food quality is up to par. He welcomes criticism because he is aiming at perfection—which impresses me in any endeavor. I continue to be impressed with Captain Hook and the management at Rodizio purely from a business standpoint. It is a real challenge to offer so much fresh food to an unpredictable public. Dinners at Rodizio are busy, so make sure to make reservations. Lunches are something that local residents haven’t yet discovered so the rushes have been sporadic. Yet Captain Hook prepares large quantities of food to accommodate without putting the restaurant in an obvious strain. The kitchen might feel the pressure, but it doesn’t show on the floor where the customers are. Pricing wise, and by function Rodizio is like a hot rod healthy version of the Golden Corral, or a Frisch’s breakfast bar. In those places the food is prepared in mass quantities and sits under hot plates for hours. The food can be good, but you know you’re at a smorgasbord so you don’t expect high quality food. Rodizio has the same challenges, but they’re competing with the best of the steakhouses in the city so the food quality challenge by Captain Hook and the management is to balance out need with supply. I’ve been to Rodizio on really busy nights and during sporadic lunches and the food quality under all those conditions has been very high. They maintain items ranging from Ovo de Codorna (marinated quail eggs) to Salada de Cogumelo (mushroom salad)—fairly complex arrangements all presented very fresh—and I have yet to see the food quality drop.

The 27th of November happened to be Black Friday at Liberty Center and it was good to see the place  bulging with business. People have discovered the place and at just after 6 PM, there wasn’t a parking space to be found except in the very back of the complex. After the first thirty days of opening my family has been there at least 20 times—so Liberty Center has become very important to our social life. We’ve now eaten in most of the establishments—both the premier restaurants of which Rodizio is but one, and the offerings around the food court, and we have had pretty much positive experiences at all of them. I prefer the Rodizio because it is the most unusual of the dining options—it is the one that most feels like something you’d have while on vacation as opposed to just a night out on the town. Rodizio reminds me of something I’d have at the Epcot Center instead of at a local eatery—so I love it. But it’s not just that place, but all of Liberty Center which contributes to that vacation destination feel. If I were from out-of-town, I’d look forward most to visiting Liberty Center and restaurants like the Rodizio as the takeaway of my traveling experience. It’s that kind of place. I can’t help but think of how lucky some of the people who are leasing apartments and office space in the yet to be opened buildings where work, living, and pleasure will be offered in a one stop experience. When those places do open restaurants like Rodizio will be wonderful options for them. You can eat healthy and affordably at the Rodizio, and load up your food for the day instead of leaving hungry. A group of eight like we had at Rodizio would have cost about $700 to feed at Jags. That same group at Rodizio was just shy of $200 and we didn’t hold back on anything—we spent very loosely, deserts, drinks, and tips. And we were stuffed. I didn’t need to eat the next day. The food was so good that you just don’t want to stop eating it. But at some point you are on the verge of busting so you put your table indicator on its side and they bring your check. If I were a young millennial living at one of the Liberty Center apartments, I’d eat at Rodizio every day for lunch at only $19.95 and get all the fruits and veggies a body needs. For business travelers staying at the Marriott at the other end of the complex, Rodizio will solve jet lag and replenish you after a long day of boring business meetings. It’s a bargain, and a luxury. As good as the other restaurants are—and so far they all are, it’s the all you can eat option at Rodizio mixed with the exotic style of the food that put it on top for me.

After our lunch we walked around Liberty Center and enjoyed the Holiday lights. It was a warm evening, so it was a pleasure to stroll around and people watch. Liberty Center is a special place and in just a very short time my family has used it for what it was intended. It’s a vacation destination that we have in our own backyards. As I write this we are making plans for a complex trip overseas to very exotic locations, but I can’t say that I am looking forward to any of them the way I do when going to Liberty Center and dinning at the Rodizio Grill. I appreciate what all the ambition that made Liberty Center possible was committed to so that places like Rodizio could be an entertainment option. But it’s still nice to see people enjoying it. If there was anything that really jumped out at me about the Thanksgiving Holiday for which we just experienced, it was that I’m thankful for the wonders of capitalism—because it’s on full display at Liberty Center. It shows what unlocked human potential can generate if provided with the opportunity. Among the best of these examples is the Rodizio Grill. It’s a real treasure in southern Ohio and a perfect getaway for a spirit needing to recover from the stresses of living—without the worry of spending yourself into oblivion to get there. It’s a vacation experience every time you go—and for me, that’s a cache worth more than money.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Advice for Donald Trump in Ohio: Sheriff Jones is key to winning on Kasich’s turf–where to speak and how before the primary

So who hasn’t been threatened to be killed? Listening to Sheriff Jones talk about it, he makes it sound like it’s an exclusive thing. It’s not. Anyone who tells some faction of the collective society—whether its drug dealers, organized crime trying to dominate a specific region, or just a bunch of thugs trying to impose their will, being threatened to be killed is a common occurrence. Just because someone desires something, doesn’t mean they get it. As far as I’m concerned it’s as common as breathing air, but when you talk about it like some sissy, it diminishes the value of standing against the tide of collectivism. A real man doesn’t babble about it—because it demeans the bravery it takes to stand against such villainy. When bad guys come knocking, you just take care of it. That’s pretty much the end of the story. However, that is just one of the topics Jones talked about in the short piece on Channel 5 highlighting the Butler County Sheriff as a video bookend to a pretty decent career as a cop and sheriff willing to tackle tough national issues.  Most notably the recent attempts of the Donald Trump campaign to bring Jones to New York to encourage a partnership in the fight against illegal immigration. It is on that point that I am writing this—mainly for Trump and his handlers so they can understand the strategic importance of Sheriff Jones and why Butler County, Ohio is a key area to win over—so that they can take the steps to do so.

Sheriff Jones and I think alike on a lot of issues, particularly illegal immigration and drugs. I also like it when he wears his cowboy hat. He and I had very different opinions over the Issue 2 debate—he was completely pro union whereas I was all for the collective bargaining reforms offered by the much debated Senate Bill 5. I was with Kasich on that issue while Jones was speaking against it. Jones and I even debated publicly together on it—but we tried to keep it friendly even though I saw his position as a large contributor to the problem regarding public employee pay and compensation. We were also at odds over the last Lakota levy passage—the large public school that we both share a property tax obligation to. I was against the tax increase, he was for it. Even though we live only a few miles apart in Liberty Township, Ohio we don’t cross paths much these days. He’s been pro establishment Republican supporting Judy Shelton’s Central Committee domination while I lean much more toward Tea Party reforms. But there is a lot I do like about him. We both like John Wayne and we are both a bit extraverted when we need to be. We’ve both been frequent guests on WLW radio in the past so there is more to like than not to. Although my wife thinks he should be personally much tougher on drug busts than he is, her position on drugs is even harsher than mine—so in Jones’ defense, she is extremely hard to please on the matter.

I wasn’t going to rub it in. It’s not a coincidence that Judy Shelton decided to resign on September 14th 2015. Just a few weeks later John Boehner, the third most powerful person in the world also from Butler County who lives right across the street in West Chester, just another few miles from where Jones and I live—stepped down as Speaker of the House. The writing was on the wall, Judy had been protecting Boehner from challengers within the party and now that protection was stripped away. Everyone who knows politics knows that the way to win endorsements and therefore party support comes from the Central Committee—so Boehner had no choice as opposition toward the status queue mounted within those ranks of behind the scenes politics.

Now with Todd Hall running the GOP and the incredibly weak showing by John Kasich during his last trip to Butler County—there is a real hunger for strong candidates to support in what is likely the most conservative area of Ohio—let alone the country. Butler County isn’t just a red area within a purple state—it glows red even when the lights are turned off. It’s undeniably conservative and is currently undergoing a shift even further to the right—politically. Shelton, Boehner, and Kasich have proven not nearly conservative enough for our tastes. Sheriff Jones has taken notice and is following the trend. He has come out against Boehner’s performance—which he can do now that there is a leadership change within the Central Committee and our mutual friend Roger Reynolds is running for Boehner’s old seat. That would be an improvement particularly under a Paul Ryan led congress. Without a Paul Ryan type of House Speaker, Reynolds would be too quiet to be effective in such a boisterous town such as Washington D.C. But with Ryan and the Freedom Caucus, Roger would find friends there. Then he could use that big financial brain of his for good.

Donald Trump recognizing that Sheriff Jones is a friend who could offer testimony in favor of aggressive border control issues wanted the sheriff to come to New York to lend some credibility to the billionaires’ presidential platform. But Jones smartly declined. Trump however should not let the story die there. Rather, one way to win Ohio during the upcoming primary would be to win southern Ohio and to do that, Trump would have to get good numbers out of Butler County. So Trump’s people were sniffing in the right direction—they likely didn’t know how hot they were on the key to securing the nomination in Ohio—which is why I’m writing this. Trump needs to listen to Jones, don’t try to take the sheriff to New York, but bring the presidential campaign to Butler County and put the sheriff on the stage before Trump speaks. Then secure the nomination with Jones rowing the boat. Todd Hall is dealing with a leadership change within the party. I know him personally and think he’s a person who can be friendly to a Trump campaign. He’s a fellow developer so there is plenty of common ground with Trump. I don’t think it would take much for those two to become good friends—and I don’t mean just political friends—I mean real friends which would be useful in the future for Trump. There are plenty of people in the mix behind the scenes now in Butler County who could get behind a Donald Trump/Ted Cruz ticket. I mention Ted because he’s at least enough of an insider within the Senate to know how to dig up the needed bodies to assist Trump in getting bills through the legislative process when the going gets tough in 2018 and 2019. So if Trump wants to be president, he needs to come to Butler County several times—and he needs to make friends with Sheriff Jones. Trump needs to stick hard on the immigration issue plugging into the policy and image of the popular Butler County sheriff—who is currently the senior leadership within the Republican Party that is getting much younger and more conservative by the week.

I knew changes were amiss when I was invited to the GOP Christmas Party in Columbus, which is tempting. But I’m not sure I want to swap spit in the shower with a lot of those people just yet. For me it depends on Trump. If my local GOP could get behind Trump, I could get behind them more openly. But if they are going to support losers like Kasich, Bush or Marco Rubio, then forget it. Todd knows how I feel about things. I want a much more aggressive GOP, one that isn’t afraid to shake things up a bit and won’t dance around the press. So with that said let me name the right places for the Trump campaign to speak at, so that his people can plan accordingly knowing that their contact in Butler County needs to be Sheriff Jones.

The best place for Trump to speak would be the Ronald Reagan lodge at Voice of America Park. It’s not big enough to hold Trump’s typical crowds, but it could really show a contrast to Kasich’s latest speech there last year. It’s right in the heart of Butler County and the affluence of the area where donors are looking to bet on a winner. I would also suggest the newly developed Liberty Center. Given the cold conditions that campaigning in Ohio will entail in February and March there are some structures there that could probably do the job of hosting a Trump event. Both of those venues are indoor facilities that could hold hundreds of people not thousands. But, they would look great on television and would be strategically in the back pocket of John Kasich’s money base and support. Kasich couldn’t fill either one of those locations right now if he wanted to. So Trump could exploit that quite dramatically before the election in March.

Then of course there’s a place that would hold the largest crowd and that’s the Marriott North in West Chester, just down the street from Liberty Center. They have 15 event rooms totaling 14,905sf of event space, the largest holding 960 people by itself. If Trump wanted to come to West Chester the government there would like him—enthusiastically. Trump would be in very friendly waters. Then down the road from the Marriott is the wonderful Savannah Center, which has 11 separate event rooms that can hold easily 1700 guests with more that could spill over into other rooms. Trump could land by helicopter at the Butler County Regional Airport just a few miles to the west of the Savannah Center and arrive by motorcade with a very direct path. However, permits to land directly at the point of destination may be an option in West Chester, which is where the Ronald Reagan Lodge, the Marriott, and the Savannah Center all reside.

Trump was right to contact Jones, and the Sheriff is more politically aligned with the New York billionaire than most any other candidate. Nobody else is capable of doing what Jones wants to do with immigration, so there isn’t any downside to the arrangement. The only thing left to do is to come to Butler County and put Jones to work for Trump—and also get the rest of the Republican Party behind him. I’ll say this much. Even though Sheriff Jones is too liberal for me, I would be happy to attend a Trump event with him. And if the Butler County GOP got behind Trump, I might even go to the Christmas Party. I may even support Roger Reynolds for congress. But we are living in times that require vast amounts of courage and the best that we all bring to the table. So let’s give it our best and let the chips fall where they may. I’m ready for a good fight and maybe its time that we stop fighting each other and put a cap on the ass of all these damn Democrats—particularly, Hillary Clinton. Who else is going to beat that lunatic?

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

What Hillary Clinton has in Common with Adolf Hitler: Salon.com reaches deep for a way to smooth reality

To be fair I even took the below Hitler quote from the very progressive online source, Salon.com so that the readers here can reference it to understand how the other side of these diabolical menaces actually think. Salon even went so far to use a University of Chicago professor to attempt to create doubt about the credibility of Adolf Hitler’s desire to control firearms in German society—which of course led to the tyranny of one of the most vile killers of the 20th century. Salon through their source laughably refers to the much stricter gun control legislation of the Weimar Republic, which preceded Hitler’s rise—which was imposed after WWI. What they failed to mention is that because of the bad economy and the crushing impositions by the allied nations against Germany, the path for Hitler’s rise to power was ushered in because of the extreme oppression which preceded him. Additionally, asking a University of Chicago professor to provide accurate history without muddying it with progressive tripe is like ask a sex addict to speak out against pornography. Salon and the University of Chicago are hopelessly liberal; they may even be politically left of Hillary Clinton who agreed with ruthless dictators that societies should ban firearms and confiscate them for the safety of their nations. Here is what Hitler supposedly said–which is consistent with every ruthless human being to ever face down the masses with a desire to control them with heavy-handed legislation and individual tyranny.

This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!

Adolf Hitler (1935)

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and almost every other Democrat, socialist, vile progressive and old pot smoking, Pink Floyd loving hippie thinks the same way as Hitler. Isn’t that nice to know that the leaders of the Democratic Party are essentially in line with the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, and Mussolini who all favored gun control of their citizens. Guess what happened to the people in those countries. Let me put it this way; they didn’t get to spend their leisure time watching Monday Night Football at Hooters. Their style of life was barely above that of a dog, sort of like the poor people in North Korea and China—who should be liberated, not admired. Yet the same polices that oppress those people are the same ones that Barack Obama and his assistant Hillary Clinton are so enthusiastic about. Of course Obama has connections to the University of Chicago—where many of his Marxist ideas have evolved from student ranting to community organizing.

Hillary Clinton can’t even be trusted with email, let alone the lives of innocent Americans. We need guns in our lives within America to protect our society from insurgents, like these would-be dictators who rule through executive order and lawyerly manipulation of the placement of words within legal phrases. People who will lie to our faces like Nancy Pelosi did in regard to Obamacare right before Christmas—“we have to sign the law to know what’s inside it.” Or Lois Lerner pleading the fifth over the IRS scandal, and its White House origins. Or Benghazi. Or Fast and Furious. Or the Black Panthers harassing voters at polling places. Or the arming of Syrian rebels. Or the attack on Gaddafi to destabilize the Middle East into an Islamic caliphate. Or the criminal spending into oblivion more debt than all the previous presidents in American history put together—all hidden behind the efforts of racism. Everyone is afraid to criticize these criminal actions because they are activated by a man of color—paralyzing white America from judgment. It’s not criminal to point at these people and declare them to be criminals, insurgents, and hostiles to the American Constitution. The evidence is overwhelming—which is why they seek to destroy the evidence, legislate through executive orders, and coercion of the media—just like what Hillary Clinton’s campaign is doing to the Laugh Factory. Take away the guns of Americans and those people will be completely in charge of your safety—and we know they can’t be trusted. So why would we surrender our guns to them. The Second Amendment isn’t there to allow us to hunt rabbits, or even shoot a Turkey for Thanksgiving. It’s there to keep these government types from getting in their corrupt heads the notion that they can rule through force, because their track record indicates that they are very inclined to the type of tyranny that was evident in the worst of the dictators and emperors of history.

Don’t kid yourself. These are bad people and they want you to surrender. A quick look at all the mass gun shootings around the country up until 2015 including the recent one over the last weekend in Louisiana, and the villains were all young people and Islamic inspired despots—clearly victims of the kind of progressive idiocy that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton support through public education indoctrination. Yet the intentions always were to ruin those minds to fester the induced violence so that American support for more gun control would be demanded as a natural reaction to curb the incidence of violence. Clinton has often pointed to the Australian gun confiscations as a justification for the path of gun control in the United States. Every tragedy will be exploited with torturous rigor until the Second Amendment is surrendered—which is their game plan. Part of that game plan is to carry us all into a type of Weimar Republic where an overloaded debt destroys the value of our money so that the world can reestablish itself to a new standard of currency. By their time-table a new type of Hitler would have room to emerge from such devastation, and they hope that their Party leader is the one who controls the wheel of power.

Is this saying too much? No, the evidence dictates that honesty be used to approach these matters. We are dealing with ideological zealots who want to destroy the American concept of capitalism and replace it with global socialism. Just look at the donors to the Clinton Foundation. What do those foreign governments want in exchange for that money? They want a seat at the table and a disabled America so that they can compete for a change from the vantage point of socialism. They are like the classic villain who purposely sabotages a superior opponent so that they can have a chance of winning. They must lie, cheat, and steal to survive and to make it easier for them to do these things they have started to disarm America.

Salon of course is in on the scam, they want to “progress” beyond traditional America just as the University of Chicago has desired for several decades now. There are many collective villains and you can easily spot them because they want to do like Hitler has done in the past—support gun control so to enable them to rise to power—because that’s all they really care about anyway—power for power’s sake. Any real student of history knows about the Weimar Republic and how it was established. The same path is being placed before America by the same allies who supported that action against Germany in 1919. Their hope is that they can bring America into the global union and put all nations on an equal footing economically. But before they can do that they have to take our guns, and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama—along with most of the Democratic Party want exactly what Hitler wanted—gun control so that they could work their deeds without the fear of insurrection. And they’ll play every dirty trick to bring down the United States if that’s what it takes. They are what we term in Constitutional reference as a “domestic enemy” for which we are required to protect our Constitution from—particularly the anti-Federalist Bill of Rights.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

“Everyone Wants to Rule the World”: Terrorist assassins Hasna Ait Boulahcen and the Bond girl Fatima Blush

Have you ever listened to the words to the old song by Tears for Fears titled “Everyone Wants to Rule the World?” It points straight to a distinctly human problem—no matter how advanced we become as a species, there will always be among us an inclination to rule over others. From the local boss at your day-to-day job, to the heavily Agenda 21 trained zoning administrators who crack down on some businesses over others for the pure thrill of ruling over the powerful with rules and regulations—to the maniacal religious fanatics who are always looking to unite the masses behind the banner of their terrorism.
Hasna Ait Boulahcen comes to mind, the 26 year-old party girl of French nightlife who recently died next to a suicide bomber when French authorities raided her cousin who happened to be the mastermind behind the Paris terrorist attacks in November of 2015.   If you strip away all the decorations of contemporary life, it really comes down to a primal need for control over others that drives much of the terror humans inflict on each other just for the thrill of being considered a form of king over the masses for just a flash of time spent living within the confines of human flesh during an earthly lifetime.

Speaking of Hasna Ait Boulahcen she reminded me actually of the assassin from one of my favorite James Bond films, Never Say Never Again. I was able to watch that film recently as it replayed on the Epix cable channel along with all the other Bond films over the long week leading up to the Thanksgiving Holiday. Like the Tears for Fears song there was an inherit truth to all those fun thrillers that point toward essential faults in the way the human race interacts with each other. I was actually amazed how accurate the 1982 Sean Connery classic Bond film was in showing how the organization Spectre was actively promoting terror in the Middle East while hiding their desire to have world domination behind a façade of philanthropy. As much as Never Say Never Again seemed like the adolescent fantasy of every 12-year-old boy—in the world—it was remarkably accurate in predicting the future. The villains in that Bond film were stunningly similar to George Soros types of today—actively spending a lot of money to promote splinter groups into attacking each other so that he could achieve objectives important only to him because “everyone wants to rule the world.”

So that brings us to the obvious objective behind President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s open support of Syrian refugees coming to America and their position in destroying the Second Amendment with increased gun control.   We know where all this activity leads, because we have seen it before. What’s been happening in Paris and London is now happening in the United States. Young people like Hasna Ait Boulahcen living wild nights of reckless activity-finding easy access to drugs and sexual impropriety breaking down her basic value system is seduced away into evil becoming the soldiers of radicalism while the originators of all the sins, the drug smuggling, the sex trade, the night clubs and money generated from the taxes on alcohol, the radical Islamic attempt to spread Middle Eastern collectivism to the far corners of the world helped by gun confiscations so that private citizens are forced to rely on government workers to protect them from threats, are created by the same people banging wine glasses together at charity events. Spectre isn’t such a radical notion as proposed in the James Bond movies ranging from this latest one to the early days of Sean Connery. The complexity is easy to see in our human art, but not so easy to see when it’s happening right in front of us.

Hasna Ait Boulahcen led authorities to her cousin Abdelhamid Abaaoud, the suspected ringleader of the Paris bombings because she was under investigation for drug trafficking and her bank movements were being traced. That’s how authorities found her after the Paris attacks. Like the Bond girl Fatima Blush Boulahcen was flamboyant and a little crazed who had lost her identity completely to the service those wine glass banging philanthropists who had silently organized those Paris attacks behind the veil of Paris, London and New York social life. The characters at all levels are easy to see for anyone who cares to look. Open border advocates promote refugee influx from regions where their money has fed the flames of insurrection to “cause” the mass migrations. Wearing down society with loose drug laws and permissive societies that are ridiculed for judging others, the foundations of terrorism were set. Hasna Ait Boulahcen came from a broken family, which is another aspect of progressive politically funded groups—destroy individual families and the structure of a secure home life so that young people like Boulahcen will do their work on the streets of Paris, trafficking drugs, weakening society gradually, and ultimately becoming carriers of terrorism. For every girl like Hasna Ait Boulachcen who finds themselves dead as a result of her extremist views there are thousands just like her ready to be used for the progressive causes that the masterminds of terrorism wish to advocate.

Following logic it would appear that Obama supports Islamic terror as he refuses to name it as an evil menace, which it clearly is. By advocating more Syrian immigration from the war-torn region that he largely caused through his inaction, there are likely countless Hasna Ait Boulahcen girls in the making coming with parents stuck between radical Islam and the more passive Koran reading fundamentalists who just want to live their lives in peace. So they are being encouraged to come to America. Once they get here the temptations of seduction will tear some of those families apart leaving the government schools to finish raising the children. Then they’ll get access to drugs and lower their personal resistance to mass coercion. Like Hasna Ait Boulahcen they may go from dressing like a western girl, complete with the cowboy hat she was known to sport in night clubs as she slept with countless people lowering her chances of finding a good husband to build a family with, they take the steps toward radicalism for redemption as a last resort.

Compound that with the drugs they start taking as part of that lifestyle and hopelessness ridicules their consciousness making them run toward extremist religions to rectify their bad behavior—which was fanned within them the moment their families left their homeland. That’s when they put on the niqab and start cheering on ISIS—as a last act of hopeful redemption after all their honor had been previously stripped away from them. That is when they become a terrorist, and why many of them are so young. But their lives were shaped by those philanthropy driven despots who want to rule the world. Their money buys many things, it feeds rebels in war-torn regions, it feeds progressive groups that want to destroy traditional family structure in every way possible, and it buys politicians who need their money to run their campaigns. Trace the money to people who have given donations to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and you will discover much of that money is also pouring into Paris politics, London immigration promotion, open borders, drug legalization, and finally destabilization of the Middle East. And why doesn’t the media cover this issue, because that same money buys ads in their newspapers and television stations, and if reporters pry into that secret world, the money dries up. Look what happened to Glenn Beck at Fox.

You might wonder dear reader how I figured all this out. Well, it’s not very hard. It’s in every James Bond film ever made. The villains are all very powerful cardboard characters obsessed with world domination. But you know what—most of the villains in real life are just as shallow when you break them down and get to know them personally. Fiction is not so far off from reality.   If the human mind can conceive of something in a fictional sense, then an actual villain with access to billions of dollars can also think of it, and when they have the tools, they use them. Because deep down inside most of us—not all—but most of us is this silly desire to do just as Tear for Fears suggested—“Everyone Wants to Rule the World. And when they have the money to do it—they do.

Hasna Ait Boulahcen like the Bond girl Fatima Blush was a creation of the imagination. One was in a fictional movie. The other was created by progressive avocation groups-but both were the same—creations made to tell a story. In the case of Boulahcen’s case, that story allowed Paris investigators to make their society feel relatively safe. Once she and her two partners were killed Paris was able to go back to sleep. Sure, they will say the are looking for more radicals in the future—and there are likely hundreds of them around Paris, London, and now within the United States who are just as prone to terrorist activity as Boulahcen was—but killing them made people feel “safe” again. It was a nice bookend to a terrible story. But like a Hollywood movie, the story will be told over and over again and nothing will change, because the philanthropists still want to rule the world, and there are many thousands of others who want their money and will blow themselves up to get a taste of the drugs, sex, and momentary rapture of a life following some defined course—even if its evil. Because within human beings is the immature notion that Tears for Fears so many years ago captured in a seemingly simple song. And until that changes the story will always point in the same predictable direction. Just like a Bond film the same essential story told in the 2015 film Spectre was told before in 1982’s Never Say Never Again. But nobody did anything to stop that story from taking place, so the ending always repeats itself. And Hasna Ait Boulahcen won’t be the last.

Watch all the videos in the order I presented them and you’ll see how the story connects.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.