BOOKS Comments turned off

How US Taxpayers Funded the Murder of an Iraq Vet in Israel It’s time for the US to stop funding Islamic terrorists. Daniel Greenfield

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

Taylor Force had been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, he had served at Fort Hood in the year of the infamous Islamic terrorist attack on the base, but a Jihadist finally caught up to the veteran, whose father and grandfather had also served their country, in civilian life during a visit to Israel.

Bashar Masalha, the Islamic terrorist who murdered Force, was shot dead by Israeli police around the time that Biden was hanging out a mile away at the Peres Center for Peace. But Biden and his boss signed the checks to Iran and the Palestinian Authority that motivated and rewarded Force’s killer.

Masalha came from Qalqilya which is under the civil control of the Palestinian Authority. Its mayor, Othman Dawood, is a member of Fatah, the core political organization behind the PLO and the Palestinian Authority. Fatah celebrated the murder of Taylor Force and other victims of the attack, praising Masalha as a “heroic martyr”. It named him and two other terrorist attackers as “the pride of all of the young Palestinians” and urged future terrorists to go on killing in their name.

Palestinian Authority television called the terrorist who murdered an American, a Shaheed, a martyr for Islam. And the Palestinian Authority’s support for the murder of Taylor Force doesn’t just end there.

The Palestinian Authority pays terrorists based on the amount of harm they caused and the resulting jail sentence. Had Masalha survived his attack on Taylor Force and the other victims, he would have likely been paid $2,000 a month for his act of terror. That’s pretty good money in a place where $2,000 is more like an annual income. It’s so good that that there’s no shortage of terrorists eager to kill for cash.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

AG Lynch testifies DoJ ‘discussed’ prosecuting ‘climate deniers’ By Thomas Lifson

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

Do you remember when we had a First Amendment? It seems to have vanished in the view of the attorney general of the United States, Loretta Lynch, who testified yesterday to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Jon Street reports at TheBlaze:

During Lynch’s testimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said that he believes there are similarities between the tobacco industry denying scientific studies showing the dangers of using tobacco and companies within the fossil fuel industry denying studies allegedly showing the threat of carbon emissions.

He went on to point out that under President Bill Clinton, the Justice Department brought and won a civil case against the tobacco industry, while the Obama administration has “done nothing” so far with regard to the fossil fuel industry.

Whitehouse concluded his comments by posing a question to the country’s top law enforcement officer.

“My question to you is, other than civil forfeitures and matters attendant to a criminal case, are there other circumstances in which a civil matter under the authority of the Department of Justice has been referred to the FBI?” he asked.

“This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch answered. “I’m not aware of a civil referral at this time.”

As a matter of fact, Lynch and Whitehouse understate the degree of persecution of dissent underway. Over a week ago, it was disclosed that the DoJ has made a criminal referral for views on a scientific dispute. David Hasemyer reported for Inside Climate News last week:

The U.S. Justice Department has forwarded a request from two congressmen seeking a federal probe of ExxonMobil to the FBI’s criminal division.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION, POLITICS Comments turned off

Is Public Anger at the Republican Establishment Justified? By Gideon Isaac

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

A frequent accusation that has been leveled at Republican politicians is that they did nothing to fight the Obama agenda, even though they had a majority in both houses of Congress. Supposedly the rank and file now see them as useless or unprincipled, and so are going with Donald Trump, or possibly Ted Cruz.

One reason for inaction is that when the Republicans did take a stand, in 2013, under the initiative of Ted Cruz and others, the public blamed them for the results. A confrontation with Obama led to a partial shutdown of the government. Polls showed Republicans were blamed by 53% of the public. This echoed the experience of 1995, when led by Newt Gingrich the Republicans shut down President Clinton’s government to halt excessive spending. Gingrich felt the brunt of the blame then also.

The resulting cautious thinking was demonstrated by Republican Lindsey Graham who said in 2015: “…You want to lose in 2016? Let it be seen that the Republicans in the House and Senate can’t govern, then that’s the end of our 2016 hopes.”

In his book A Time for Truth, Ted Cruz describes the events in 2013 that led to the shutdown. He says that he and Senator Mike Lee had asked their Republican colleagues “What are you going to do to stop Obamacare from kicking in?” and the answer was always nothing, since a fight was risky, and could imperil re-election. Cruz ‘s idea was that Congress should fund everything except for ObamaCare. This is within the power of Congress, and is known as “the power of the purse.” The big obstacle was Obama’s veto power, but Cruz hoped that if he got enough Republicans, plus Democrats from “red” (conservative) states, he might put enough pressure on Obama to reach some sort of compromise. Ted’s colleagues responded “Absolutely not!” and advised “Wait until the debt ceiling”, which did come along, but they did nothing then either.

Cruz and Lee traveled the country to get support, and more than two million Americans signed a petition to stop ObamaCare, and also phoned Capitol Hill. The Senate Republican leadership directed their fire — not at ObamaCare, but at Cruz. Twenty senators went on every TV channel, and “carpet-bombed” the House Republicans for the initiative.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Enough with the Double Standards for Muslims By Eileen F. Toplansky

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

If alleged Islamophobia causes Muslims to pillage, rape, and slaughter, then how come centuries of anti-Semitism have not produced a raging Jewish population hell-bent on murder? Or if cartoons about Muhammad can cause homicidal riots, how come the daily anti-Semitic cartoons emanating out of the Middle East and other parts of the globe do not result in Jews going on a rampage?

Because civilized people don’t behave this way.

For that matter, how come when people step on the American flag and rip it to shreds, Americans don’t go on assassination raids?

I am absolutely sick and tired of talking heads using a double standard for those Muslims who act like barbarians against their own women and against other people who refuse to accede to their demands.

If you don’t want to eat bacon, then don’t eat bacon.

If you don’t want to drink alcohol, then don’t drink alcohol.

If you don’t want to wear pig costumes, then don’t.

But we will not surrender to your demands.

When people begin to self-censor their ideas, their activities, their food, and their entertainment, we might as well put “RIP” over our heads, because we are triggering our own suicide.

I, for one, opt out of that thinking. If you cannot abide by the American Constitution, and despise what the Stars and Stripes symbolizes, you are certainly free to leave this country. If you cannot use the same toilet as a non-Muslim child, then please do not use the facilities. We are not going backward to a segregation of Muslims vs. non-Muslims.

If you want to pray, you will not take over public space of a taxpayer-funded university and demand a key to lock out anyone else who wants to use the room.

Engaging in female genital mutilation has no place in this country; it is heinous and a form of child abuse.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION, POLITICS Comments turned off

Rubio Slams Climate Hysteria: Can’t Pass Law to Change the Weather By Stephen Kruiser VIDEO

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/03/11/rubio-slams-climate-hysteria-cant-pass-law-to-change-the-weather/

Every Republican should utter the “climate has always been changing” line when asked climate change questions. One of the more ridiculous lies that Democrats get away with is saying Republicans are “climate change deniers” or, even more ridiculous, “climate deniers”.

I have yet to meet any Republican who denies that climate exists.

And none believe that climate change doesn’t exist. The Democrats use climate change hysteria to line the pockets of Big Green donors (corporate welfare is just fine for them here) and introduce even more federal control into our lives. Rubio handles this inane question from Jake Tapper (why do so many conservatives like him again?) very well.

POLITICS Comments turned off

AG Loretta Lynch Dodges Questions About Hillary Clinton Email Investigation By Debra Heine

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

Attorney General Loretta Lynch suggested Wednesday that the Justice Department would not be obligated to pursue charges against Hillary Clinton for her email infractions even if the FBI recommends criminal charges.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) brought up the topic during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday:

“If the FBI were to make a referral to the Department of Justice to pursue a case by way of indictment and to convene a grand jury for that purpose, the Department of Justice is not required by law to do so, are they — are you?” Cornyn asked.

Lynch didn’t answer directly, but seemed to indicate the department has some wiggle room, and can consult with officials before deciding what to do.

“It would not be an operation of law, it would be an operation of procedures,” Lynch said in reply. She added that the decision to pursue a criminal case would be “done in conjunction with the agents” involved in the investigation. “It’s not something that we would want to cut them out of the process.”

Lynch declined to answer Cornyn’s questions about the decision to grant immunity to Bryan Pagliano, the former Clinton aide who set up the private “homebrew” server at her home in Chappaqua, NY. Asked Cornyn:

If in fact this was immunity granted by a court, that had to be done under the auspices and with the approval of the Department of Justice, which you head.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Four of Mother Teresa’s Nuns Among 16 People Massacred in Yemen By Debra Heine

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

Unidentified gunmen stormed a Catholic-run retirement home in southern Yemen last Friday, killing 16 people, including four Catholic nuns. A priest was taken captive and is still missing. The retirement home, run by the Missionaries of Charity — an organization established by Mother Teresa of Calcutta — houses 80 elderly people in the jihadist-infested port city of Aden. The four gunmen reportedly entered the the home on the pretext that they wanted to visit their mothers at the facility.

Via the Guardian:

The gunmen moved from room to room, handcuffing the victims before shooting them in the head. A nun who survived and was rescued by local residents said she hid inside a fridge in a storeroom after hearing a Yemeni guard shouting “run, run”.

Khaled Haidar said that he counted 16 bodies, including that of his brother, Radwan. All had been shot in the head and were handcuffed. He said one Yemeni cook and Yemeni guards were among those killed.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

We May Starve, but at Least We’ll Be GMO-Free Unlike the Europeans we copied, Zimbabwe can’t afford such an unscientific ideological luxury. By Nyasha Mudukuti

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

Chikombedzi, Zimbabwe

My country’s government would rather see people starve than let them eat genetically modified food.

That’s the only conclusion to draw from the announcement in February that Zimbabwe will reject any food aid that includes a genetically-modified-organism ingredient—such as grains, corn and other crops made more vigorous or fruitful through GMO breeding. The ban comes just as Zimbabweans are suffering from our worst drought in two decades and up to three million people need emergency relief.

“The position of the government is very clear,” said Joseph Made, the minister of agriculture. “We do not accept GMO as we are protecting the environment from the grain point of view.”

In other words, my country—which can’t feed itself—will refuse what millions around the world eat safely every day in their breakfasts, lunches and dinners as a conventional source of calories. It doesn’t matter whether the aid arrives as food for people or feed for animals. Our customs inspectors will make sure that no food with GMOs reaches a single hungry mouth.The drought has devastated my family’s farm, which will produce almost no sorghum or corn this year. We’re short on money and the drought has caused prices to soar, even for the simplest goods. In the markets, cabbages the size of tennis balls sell for $1.

People are desperate for work. Last week I watched a man the age of my grandfather carry a hoe from house to house, trying to trade whatever labor he could offer for a meal. He wound up performing backyard chores for a cup of tea. The rejection of GMO food aid is a humanitarian outrage—a man-made disaster built on top of a natural disaster. Yet something even worse lies behind it: a denial of science. GMOs pose no threat to human health, as virtually every scientific and regulatory agency that has studied them knows.

They are also positively good for the environment, allowing farmers to fight soil erosion by planting high-yield crops that need less water, reduce greenhouse gases—and, most important, grow more food on less land. CONTINUE AT SITE

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Germany Says It Has Files on Islamic State Members Interior minister says documents will be useful in criminal prosecutions By Ruth Bender

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

BERLIN—Germany’s federal police agency said that it had obtained files from Islamic State containing names and personal data of members of the extremist group that officials believe could help prosecute suspected militants.

The Federal Criminal Police, or BKA, believes the documents are authentic and would serve in prosecutions and in evaluating security measures, an agency spokeswoman said Thursday. She declined to say how the agency obtained the files or to disclose any details of the information in them.

German Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière stressed the significance of the documents, saying they offered an opportunity to prove the participation of Germans in the terror activities of Islamic State. The records could help lead to speedier investigations and stricter prison sentences for any Germans who have participated in the Sunni Muslim extremist group’s activities, he said.
Confirmation that German authorities had a trove of Islamic State documents came after Sky News reported late Wednesday that it had obtained tens of thousands of similar documents containing 22,000 names, addresses, telephone numbers and family contacts of Islamic State members. It wasn’t clear whether the documents acquired by the German authorities were identical to those obtained by Sky News. CONTINUE AT SITE

POLITICS Comments turned off

Hillary’s Other Server Scandal The focus is on state secrets in her email—but what personal favors lay within? Kimberley Strassel

Posted By on March 11th, 2016

Bernie Sanders keeps refusing to hit Hillary Clinton over her email. Or so it seems. But maybe the Vermont senator’s relentless assault on Mrs. Clinton’s corporate ties is about her email after all. Maybe Mr. Sanders is betting that Hillary has a bigger problem than classified information.

The question hanging over the Clinton campaign is whether she will be indicted for mishandling state secrets. Under the heroic grilling of Jorge Ramos at the Univision Democratic debate Wednesday, Mrs. Clinton was again forced to roll out a trail of misdirection, to insist (with astonishing brazenness) that an indictment is “not going to happen.”

Classified information matters, and Mrs. Clinton stands accused of sloppy handling. Yet the former secretary of state didn’t set up a home-brew server with the express purpose of exposing national secrets—that was incidental. Mrs. Clinton went to elaborate lengths to build a secret, private system for some other reason. She says it was for “convenience.” Others speculate she did it out of the Clintons’ longtime paranoia over paper trails.
Mr. Sanders is likely hitting closer to the truth. Lost in the classified kerfuffle is the other, lately ignored but still potent, scandal: the Clinton Foundation, and the unethical mixing of Mrs. Clinton’s public work and her personal fundraising/speech-giving/favor-doing. The more evidence that comes out, the more it looks as if that server was set up to provide an off-the-grid means for those two worlds to interact. CONTINUE AT SITE