NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Former DIA Chief Flynn on Hillary: ‘She Should Never Have a Security Clearance Again’ By Nicholas Ballasy

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

WASHINGTON — Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton should “never” have a security clearance again nor should she receive classified intelligence briefings.

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) wrote a letter to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper requesting that he deny Clinton classified intelligence briefings given her history with using a private email sever to transmit classified information. Clapper denied the request.

“I do not intend to withhold briefings from any officially nominated, eligible candidate,” Clapper wrote back to Ryan.

PJM asked Flynn, who was among Republican nominee Donald Trump’s top choices for vice president and will be speaking at the Republican National Convention, if he thought Clinton should be able to receive classified intelligence briefings.

“I mean, no, look, she was so careless with our national security secrets, c’mon. I mean, no, so I do not think so,” Flynn responded during an interview after a Heritage Foundation event focused on Fields of the Fight, the new book he co-authored with Michael Ledeen.

“She should never have a security clearance again. I would not approve that. If it were me, I would not have given that permission,” he added.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

SecState Kerry reduced to near incoherence when Jake Tapper challenges his claim ‘ISIS is on the run’ By Thomas Lifson

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

Did John Kerry assume that nobody would challenge him on the Obama administration’s stubborn claim that it is winning the fight against ISIS? In the face of bloodshed at home from ISIS, the claim deserves questioning. But somehow, John Kerry appeared to flounder when Jake Tapper of CNN presented an obvious critique to him. Via Tim Hains of RCP:

In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper Sunday morning, Secretary of State John Kerry gave an assessment of how the war against ISIS is going.

“Daesh,” Kerry said, referencing an alternative name for the group, “is under great, great pressure… They are shrinking. We’ve taken back 40 percent and 45 percent of the territory they held in Iraq and we’re squeezing town after town.”

“With all due respect, sir,” Tapper interjected. “I’m not sure it looks that way to the public that ISIS is on the run… In the last few weeks we have seen a series of ISIS inspired attacks and 49 killed in Orlando and 45 killed in Istanbul and more than 200 killed in Baghdad and 84 in Nice.”

“It depends on where you mean ISIS,” Kerry responded. “If you’re saying that one person standing up one day and killing people is a reflection of ISIS moving in Iraq and Syria, I think you’re dead wrong.”

“It depends on where you mean ISIS” is not quite as bad as “It depends on what the meaning of is is,” but it is too close for comfort.

The babble from Kerry offers no response, much less comfort, to Americans worried about being mowed down by a truck at a beach, shopping mall, or other location not yet imagined. Of course, the basic facts do not offer Kerry a lot of material to work with. Obama pulled troops out of Iraq, allowing ISIS to rise, and now, instead of ending the war, Obama has succeeded in bringing the war to the Western countries.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

The scourge of Islam By Richard Butrick

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

The article in the Atlantic last year, which argued that ISIS is not just Islamic but very Islamic, predictably created an uproar of indignation and accusations of fomenting Islamophobia from the usual suspects from the NYT to the Huffington Post. By contrast very little has been heard from the same quarters about the treatment of Yazidis, Christians, and other religious minorities in Iraq — mustn’t criticize Muslims for fear of offending Muslim sensibilities or — that ultimate crime against humanity — fomenting Islamophobia.

But let me leave aside these obvious bases for criticizing Islamic practice and even leave aside terrorist acts — from 9/11 to the Boston Bomber to Charlie Hebdo and now Nice. Instead, the case here will be argued just on the basis of the prevailing behavior and mindset of the young males of Europe’s new “immigrants.”

In one day alone there were 1,200+ sexual assaults on German women by approximately 2k Muslim “immigrants.” Angela Merkel’s reaction? To cut a deal with Facebook and Twitter so that next time Muslims commit thousands of sexual assaults, it will be much harder for the populace to get the news out through the digital curtain of dot com censorship and propaganda. And those fewer than 1% who do get “prosecuted”? The poor dears have just been miseducated and need courses in deportment and a gentle nudging into accepting the astounding concept that infidel women have feelings, sensibilities, and rights.

Miseducated?

There is no shortage of apologists for Islam that will insist that the mass rape and sexual abuse of European women by Muslim men in Cologne and elsewhere does not fit Koranic doctrine which basically only permits rape of captive women taken in battle (Ar-Rahim) but, as Raymond Ibrahim points out, other interrelated Islamic doctrines command Muslim men to hate all non-Muslims and to see women — especially infidel women — as little more than sex objects (or, in the words of a Muslim who recently murdered a Christian girl in Pakistan for refusing him sex, “Christian girls are only meant for one thing: the [sexual] pleasure of Muslim men.”

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Walter Starck :Global Warming’s Grand Inquisitors

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

If Hillary Clinton wins the White House, her party’s platform makes no bones about what is in store for those who dare to dispute the “settled science” of assorted computer modellers, grant-grabbers, propagandists and professional alarmists: a visit by the authorities
On news just in, the drafting committee for the party platform of the Democratic Party in the US has unanimously adopted a provision for the Justice Department to investigate businesses that question the threat of dangerous global warming. This comes on top of recent efforts by various climate alarmist academics, politicians, NGOs and a consortium of state attorneys general to pursue criminal charges of fraud and/or racketeering against those who dispute the threat of climate change.

Such prosecution is predicated on a conviction that the threat of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change is a self-evident truth backed by irrefutable scientific evidence and affirmed by a virtually unanimous majority of expert opinion. Such a belief then leads to the conclusion that any expression of doubt can only be evidence of some mental disorder or a deliberate attempt to defraud the public.

However, and despite the absolute certainty and trembling righteousness being displayed on this issue, the best available evidence simply does not support such conviction and the threat remains only an unproven hypothetical. It is still based primarily on projections from un-validated computer modelling which have increasingly departed from the real world record of climate itself.

Of a hundred different climate models constructed by various researchers all but one projected temperatures increasingly higher than the actual record has in fact shown. The sole exception is an obscure Russian model which has been effectively ignored by the alarmists.

Beyond the failed modelling there are four aspects of the alleged climate peril, all of which are said to be increasing to dangerous levels at unprecedented rates:

Global temperatures
Sea levels
Ocean acidification
Extreme weather events

Contrary to all the hype, careful examination of the actual evidence indicates that all of these things remain well within the natural range of variability over the past millennium.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Attacker in Nice Showed Online Fascination With Islamic State French prosecutors say Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel rehearsed parts of the truck attack that killed 84 people By William Horobin and Stacy Meichtry

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

PARIS—The man who killed 84 people in Nice was a violent drinker and drug taker with an “unbridled sex life” who developed a fascination with Islamist State and other terrorist propaganda, prosecutors said as they deepened their probe into whether a broader network fostered his radicalization.

François Molins, the chief Paris prosecutor overseeing the investigation into the Bastille Day attack, said Monday that police haven’t found any evidence that Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel explicitly pledged allegiance to Islamic State or had links to any people associated with the Sunni Muslim militant group.

However, the prosecutor painted a picture of a man who underwent a rapid transformation in the weeks leading up the massacre and became suddenly enthralled with extremist messages and ultra-violent images.

Data recovered from Lahouaiej Bouhlel’s computer included pictures of militants draped in Islamic State flags and corpses as well as photos of Osama bin Laden and Mokhtar Belmokhtar, the head of an al Qaeda-aligned group called Murabitun. His computer also turned up searches for “horrible car accidents” and “shock videos,” Mr. Molins said.
“What we pulled from his computer shows a certain recent interest for the radical jihadist movement,” he said.

The speed of Lahouaiej Bouhlel’s radicalization, French authorities say, raises the specter that France is up against a new breed of terrorist that intelligence agencies can do little to detect. Recent attacks in Paris and Brussels were carried out by Islamic State militants who spent time in the terror group’s stronghold in northern Syria.

Lahouaiej Bouhlel, a Tunisian who moved to France after marrying his cousin, a French national, wasn’t on any watch lists and wasn’t known to have made any trips to Islamic State territory.

The attacker’s family, however, had recently grown concerned after Lahouaiej Bouhlel befriended an Algerian man who was known for subscribing to an ultra-orthodox strain of Islam known as salafism, said Sadek Bouhlel, an uncle of the attacker who lives in his Tunisian hometown of Msaken. CONTINUE T SITE

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Afghan Train Attacker Had Self-Drawn Islamic State Flag, Say German Police Investigators make discovery while searching the room of 17-year-old asylum seeker after attack in southern Germany By Ulrike Dauer

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

German investigators found a “self-drawn IS flag” in the belongings of an Afghan man who attacked passengers on a German train on Monday, Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann said Tuesday.

Police found the Islamic State flag while searching the room of the 17-year-old Afghan asylum seeker who wounded four people on a train in southern Germany with a hatchet and knife and another after he fled the scene, shortly before being shot dead by police late Monday.

Police said two of the wounded—members of a Chinese family from Hong Kong visiting Germany—were in a critical condition.

Police are still investigating whether the attacker was part of an Islamist network or radicalized himself individually, Mr. Herrmann said on German television, citing witness reports that the attacker shouted a religious statement.

“At least on the train he acted alone,” Mr. Herrmann said. “It still needs to be verified whether he had contact to others with an Islamist background.”

Speaking just after the attack, Mr. Herrmann had said one witness reported hearing the attacker shout “Allahu akbar,” or “God is great.” However, other passengers on the train, he said, didn’t recognize “any particular Islamist motive” to the attack.

If the motive is confirmed, the incident would represent the most significant such attack in Germany since a Kosovar gunman killed two U.S. servicemen in 2011.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

The Case for Donald Trump The alternative is President Hillary Rodham Clinton.By William McGurn

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

What’s the best case for Donald Trump?

The question comes in the week Republicans here will formally nominate him for president, and the answer is not complicated. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence gave it as his reason for signing on as Mr. Trump’s VP: The alternative is President Hillary Clinton.

This is the reality of choice in a two-party democracy. Still, many have a hard time accepting it. So even as Mr. Trump handily dispatched 16 more-experienced rivals, his shortcomings and unfitness for office have become a staple of conservative fare.

Yes, Mr. Trump elevates insult over argument. Yes, he is vague and contradictory about the details of his own proposals. And yes, he often speaks aloud before thinking things through. It’s all fair game.

Even so, in this election Mr. Trump is not running against himself. Though you might not know it from much of the commentary and coverage, he is running against Mrs. Clinton.

On so many issues—free trade, the claim that Mexico will pay for a border wall, his suspiciously recent embrace of the pro-life cause—Mr. Trump gives reasons for pause. But he still isn’t Mrs. Clinton. That’s crucial, because much of the argument for keeping Mr. Trump out of the Oval Office at all costs requires glossing over the damage a second Clinton presidency would do.

Start with the economy. There is zero reason to believe a Clinton administration would be any improvement over the past eight years, from taxes and spending and regulation to ObamaCare. If elected, moreover, Mrs. Clinton would be working with a Democratic Party that has been pulled sharply left by Bernie Sanders.

Mrs. Clinton’s flip-flop on the Trans-Pacific Partnership is illuminating. As President Obama’s secretary of state, she waxed enthusiastic. But when it came time to take her stand as a presidential candidate, she folded. Mr. Trump has made his own protectionist noises, but if this same trade agreement had been negotiated by a Trump White House, who doubts that he would be telling us what a great deal it was for American workers?

Or what about social issues? Mrs. Clinton has loudly repudiated the moderating language her husband ran on in 1992, notably on abortion. In sharp contrast, she is the candidate who touts the Planned Parenthood view of human life, who sees nothing wrong with forcing nuns to provide employees with contraceptives, and who supports the Obama administration’s bid to compel K-through-12 public schools to open girls’ bathrooms to males who identify as female.

In short, Mrs. Clinton is the culture war on steroids. CONTINUE AT SITE

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

The Better Angels of Our Nature What’s at stake in Cleveland is the identity of the GOP, not the next president. Bret Stephens see note please

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

Bret Stephens endorsed Hillary Clinton, a corrupt and mendacious candidate who has no better angels…so really…rsk

Hillary: The Conservative Hope The right can survive liberal presidents. Trump will kill its best ideas for a generation.http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-the-conservative-hope-1462833870

The Republican Party came to presidential life under the leadership of a man who concluded his first inaugural address as follows:

“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”

This week, the same party will nominate as its presidential candidate a man who on Saturday introduced his running mate as follows:

“The turnaround and the strength of Indiana has been incredible, and I learned that when I campaigned there. And I learned that when I won that state in a landslide. And I learned that when Gov. Pence, under tremendous pressure from establishment people, endorsed somebody else, but it was more of an endorsement for me, if you remember. He talked about Trump, then he talked about Ted—who’s a good guy, by the way, who’s going to be speaking at the convention, Ted Cruz, good guy—but he talked about Trump, Ted, then he went back to Trump. I said, ‘who did he endorse?’ ”

I cite these two passages to discuss two subjects that once were dear to conservative hearts: national decline and personal character. Many conservatives believe the subjects are one and the same.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

The Road To War By Herbert London

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

The road to the future is filled with potholes. This metaphorical sentence speaks to a world war already in process. Despite denials from the present U.S. administration, the war is organized, promoted and managed by radical Islamists. Driven by an ideology, these religious fanatics want to undermine the West so that a global caliphate can be established. The war is in its twenty-fifth year, but the U.S. and its allies still do not understand the magnitude of the struggle.

On July 14th, a day celebrating French freedom, Bastille Day, at least eighty-four people were wantonly killed, including ten children, by a suspected terrorist who slammed his truck into unwary revelers watching the annual fireworks display. The symbolism was palpable. It is precisely the French liberty, equality and fraternity that the Islamists detest. Theirs is fraternity of barbarism.

If there were ever a moment for an appropriate response, this is it. Paris, Orlando, Istanbul, San Bernardino, Brussels, stand as stark reminders of the international reach of Islamic terror. And there isn’t an end in sight. Moreover, the murderer who killed innocents on the Promenade des Anglais had a history of aggressive views known to French authorities, just as the Orlando killer was investigated by the FBI before his murderous spree. It is not as if clues aren’t provided by savage extremists.

A strategy for dealing with this matter is available to us. It is the template for confronting an ideologically driven foe like Communism. For decades the U.S. fought on the battlefield when the global status quo was challenged. Whether successful or not, and in many instances we were not successful, the willingness to counter aggression mattered. More significantly, the U.S. fought a non-kinetic war in the culture and the political arena. Intelligence operatives penetrated communist cells, ridiculed Marxism-Leninism and caused confusion among leaders. Despite moments of conciliation and fatigue, the national opposition to Communism held. The U.S. had a powerful anti-communist method: fear, a fear that if pushed beyond a certain well understood limit, the U.S. would explode with the full fury of its military might.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Anti-Cop Rhetoric Has Deadly Consequences Administration’s attacks on police character have emboldened murderers by Michael W. Cutler

Posted By on July 19th, 2016

Once again police officers have been ambushed — this time the venue is Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Seven officers were shot, three of them fatally.

It must be presumed that this attack was premeditated.

Where are the fines for the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement who have organized riots, and stoked violence against police?

This comes on the heels of the shooting of police officers in Dallas, Texas, in which 11 police officers were shot; five died.

It is too early to know for sure, but this attack bears all the markings of a lethal cop-targeted ambush inspired by anti-police rhetoric and sentiment.

Over the course of the last several months, Black Lives Matter demonstrators have marched in cities around the United States calling for the killing of police officers. Traditionally, in describing our First Amendment, it is said that freedom of speech does not include yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Yet nothing was done in those cities where those demonstrators called for the killing of police officers.

Words have impact and, in fact, inciting to riot is a violation of law.

Here are the elements of this felony under federal law:

Title 18 U.S. Code § 2101 — Riots begins with the following:

“Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent —

to incite a riot; or
to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or
to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or
to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph— [1]

Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”