RUTHFULLY YOURS

Lightning and relentless attacks marked the German Nazi blitzkrieg, which overwhelmed European nations during the onset of World War Two.

Just as each nation fell under successive bouts of German aggression, so too America has been reeling under one scandal after another – coming so fast from the White House and in such a lightning and unrelenting manner that we have barely had time to absorb and understand the latest scandal before another one has enveloped us. Consider some of what we have endured:

As the American President knowingly smiled, while listening in the White House Rose Garden to the father of the American deserter, Bowe Bergdahl, invoking in Arabic the opening words of the Koranic phrase claiming land for Islam – in this instance, claiming the very White House itself – the Taliban warlord, Mullah Omar, gloated over the release of the five top Taliban commanders. He called it a “big victory for the entire Afghan Muslim nation.”

In the Muslim dominated Middle East, respect is only reserved for the strong. Obama is happily projecting America as weak while he abases the U.S. at the feet of the assorted mullahs, emirs, kings, imams, thugs and tyrants whose Islamic “ideology wrapped in a religion,” as Sir Winston Churchill once described it, pronounce repeatedly that, “They love death more than we love life!”

Senator John McCain, no true conservative, nevertheless correctly called the five Muslim Afghan terrorists, “the worst of the worst,” as outrage set in throughout the United States of America. McCain added: “There will be a price to pay for this exchange.”

Yes, it will inevitably be a high price in the shedding of yet more American blood and treasure and a re-energized Islamic war against Judeo-Christian civilization.

Meanwhile Obama, during his recent visit to Brussels, rejected any apology for releasing the five top Taliban terrorists from Gitmo. But then why should he? Let us not forget that on the second day in office during his first term, Obama signed an executive order directing that the Guantanamo Bay detention facility be closed. This is all part of his “transformation of America,” or rather the destruction of this wonderful country.

Three years before Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki would be forced out of his job because of the veterans who had died under him, he visited the Massachusetts National Cemetery. He wasn’t there to see the men and women who had died because of him.

While vets were dying, Obama and Shinseki had turned their attention to something truly important; seeing to it that all the cemeteries where they were being buried had wind or solar power.

The Massachusetts National Cemetery was getting a wind turbine so that the dead veterans would have all the sustainable energy they needed.

A VA press release about the cemetery turbine boasted that “under the leadership of Secretary Eric K. Shinseki… VA is transitioning into a 21st century organization that better serves America’s Veterans.”

Shinseki arrived in person at the dedication ceremony to flip the switch on the cemetery wind turbine.

“Nationally, VA continues to expand its investment in renewable sources of energy to promote our Nation’s energy independence, save taxpayer dollars, and improve care for our Veterans and their families,” he said.

The cemetery turbine had cost $533,000. Veterans were dying to save the VA a few hundred dollars. Shinseki had made his order of priorities clear. Green energy boondoggles came first. Improving veteran care came last.

Acting Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs Steve Muro told the crowd, “With one of VA’s first wind turbine projects, the Massachusetts National Cemetery is leading the way in the use of renewable energy while providing the burial benefits that New England Veterans and their families have earned.”

Muro had made the entire macabre spectacle worthy of a Joseph Heller novel. Obama’s people had not only killed veterans, they had killed satire.

When the VA wasn’t installing a wind turbine at a cemetery, it was installing solar panels at cemeteries to better serve the dead veterans that it was killing.

FROM THE COMMITTEE FOR A CONSTRUCTIVE TOMORROW- C-FACT

TO DONATE: http://www.cfact.org/about/

Did you hear about President Obama’s rude and outrageous graduation speech this past weekend at the University of California, Irvine?

While most people expect commencement addresses to be upbeat and inspiring, Obama used the special day to treat the proud graduates and their families to a toxic dose of global warming indoctrination.

Unbelievably, he urged the students to close their minds – to become like PC robots and not entertain any skepticism of alarmist claims.

He even ridiculed those who would dare question his global warming orthodoxy as believing the moon is made of “cheese.”

Obama’s attention to climate is politically shrewd. After all, what better way to shift attention from the President’s myriad controversies and failures at home and abroad (Iraq, Obamacare, etc.) then to try and build a legacy based on the slippery notion of “climate change?”

But this shameless sort of propagandizing cannot be allowed to stand — particularly when its aim is to indoctrinate the young.

The real lesson President Obama taught on Saturday was just how dangerously out of touch with reality his administration is and how solidly he is captive to the ideological Left.

I have no interest in sports. Never had any. I don’t care who wins the world soccer championship, or comes out on top during the football, hockey or baseball seasons, or which team wins the pennant or trophy. It’s not that I’m anti-sports. I am consummately indifferent. I guess I was born without a “sports” organ. When work colleagues asked me if I’d watched “the game” last night, my traditional response was: “When they schedule the Pittsburgh Pirates versus the Green Bay Packers, then I’ll take an interest.” That friendly retort usually drove home the idea that they shouldn’t invite me to join a football pool. I’m not likely, either, to go wild in the streets, trashing shops and burning cars and being maced by riot police, if the Lakers lose to the Chicago Cubs, the Oshkosh Bears, or the Winnipeg Penguins.

However, the recent decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to de-register the name of the Washington Redskins is a serious matter, fraught with dangers not only to trademarks and trademark owners, but to patents and patent holders, in addition to copyrights and copyright owners, as well. Theresa Vargas in her June 18th Washington Post article, “Federal Agency cancels Redskins trademark registration, says name is disparaging,” reported:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the Washington Redskins trademark registration, calling the football team’s name “disparaging to Native Americans.”

The landmark case, which appeared before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, was filed on behalf of five Native Americans. It was the second time such a case was filed….

Federal trademark law does not permit registration of trademarks that “may disparage” individuals or groups or “bring them into contempt or disrepute.” The ruling pertains to six different trademarks associated with the team, each containing the word “Redskin.”

Commercially, what the ruling means is that while the team’s owners won’t be forced to change the team’s name to something more saccharine (or politically correct, e.g., “The Big Hulking Guys Who Chase Obloids”), it has lost the right to control the usage of the team’s name in its logos and merchandising endeavors. That is, the name is up for grabs to whoever wants to sell T-shirts, mugs, glasses and apparel under that name. The team’s owners would not be able to even license the team name to other parties.

So they’ve been dancing and handing out candy in the Palestinian Arab territories in celebration of the three Taken Israelis. Good to know.

It’s always good to know your friends from your enemies and it appears that the IDF has been taking names of these brothers for terror.

So already the sweets may start tasting bitter.

Israel – an entire nation holds its breath and remains on stand-by for any word about the three kidnapped Israeli teens: Naftali Frankel, 16, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Eyal Yifrach, 19. On this, on the pain, on the tears, on the prayers for their safe return Israel stands together undivided.

Something else. This time Israel is positively outraged. We do not witness this too often from a people that have been conditioned to retreat and concede.

They’ll do anything for the sake of peace, even if it means swallowing false promises from false politicians – but this, trifling with their sons in broad daylight?

This is too much.

T
This would not be a good time for Shimon Peres to revisit the Vatican arms linked with Mahmoud Abbas as a fellow partner in peace. Even then it was lunacy.
ake it from someone who knows. You can mess with the Jews over and over again until something snaps.

You do not want to be there when the Israelis get really ticked off. I saw them in action.

“The challenges are in terms of giving evidence, particularly where the perpetrators may be those who are close to them i.e. family members, and the coercion and pressure that they may be subjected to in terms of withdrawing [the complaint].” — Aisha Gill, University of Roehampton.

The number of children who called ChildLine (free, 24-hour phone counselling for young people) over concerns that they could be forced into marriage nearly tripled in 2013. About one-quarter of those who contacted ChildLine were aged 12 to 15.

“Families pay bounty hunters [to track down the victims of forced marriage who try to run away]. We have cases where the family paid more than £100,000 [€125,000; $170,000] to track someone down and kill them.” — Diana Nammi, Director of the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organization (representing women from the Middle East, North Africa and south Asia).

A new law has come into effect in England and Wales that makes it a crime to force people into an unwanted marriage.

Advocates of the law say it represents a benchmark shift in thinking because—after decades of kowtowing to multicultural sensitivities—British policymakers now view forced marriage as a gross violation of human rights rather than a socially acceptable cultural difference. They also say the law will create a deterrent effect because many perpetrators will fear criminal prosecution.

Skeptics counter that the new law is retrograde and will drive victims underground due to fears that family members will be criminalized and sent to prison.

The new law, which entered into effect on June 16, makes forced marriage a self-standing criminal offense in England and Wales (the law does not extend to Northern Ireland and will be introduced in Scotland at a later date) and is punishable by up to seven years in prison.

The law also makes it a crime to breach a so-called Forced Marriage Protection Order (issued by courts to prevent people from being married against their will) in England and Wales, in line with Scotland where this is already the case. This crime now carries a penalty of up to five years in prison.

These crises have fostered on the part of the Muslim Brotherhood and its followers a reluctance to examine any internal causes for their malaise, and has created a culture of denial that by now is part of the Muslim culture and history. It makes us Muslims refuse to take responsibility for our role in history, leading to a pathological proclivity to blame others — especially the Jews — for misfortunes that are really of our own making.

The idea that the sins of one generation, or one individual, might be visited upon another is explicitly rejected in the Quran by the following words: “And no bearer of burdens shall be made to bear another’s burdens.” [35:18] Muslims who accept the idea of abrogation use this for their own narrow, or bigoted, interests that neither their own logic not the universal message of the Quran warrants.

Just as a few drops of lemon juice curdle a bowl of milk, so Judeophobia sanctioned by the Quran and the Prophet would mean that Islam as a religion of mercy is a falsehood. Mercy is, in fact, the most important of the many attributes of Allah (God) referred to by Muslims. That Islamists have proven to be most unmerciful illustrates just how far they have strayed from God’s message as revealed in the Quran.

Islamists have shredded their “thin veneer of Islam” and displayed their “jihad” as a neo-pagan belief in a capricious tribal god governing a cult of violence. It was from such a pagan belief that Muhammad sought to lift the Arabs of the desert by having Islam bear the universal message of belief in one God, merciful and compassionate; but it is precisely this pagan cult of tribal violence that Islamists have resurrected or which , it might be said, they never really renounced.

“In Islamic society hostility to the Jew is non-theological.” — Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam.

As Caroline Glick and others have reported, scant media attention is paid to the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers. In fact The New York Times blames the poor kids. There is nothing new here.

Many years ago an elderly man in Jerusalem was stabbed by an Arab “youth.” While the man was rushed to a hospital, a group of enraged Israelis gave chase, caught the criminal and delivered a few hard punches before he was taken by the police. I don’t remember for sure which tele journalist (I think it was Peter Jennnings- a blackbelt Israel hater) reported it thus:

“Angry Israeli mob in Jerusalem chases and beats an Arab teenager.”

Congressional investigators are fuming over revelations that the Internal Revenue Service has lost a trove of emails to and from a central figure in the agency’s tea-party controversy.”

That’s the opening sentence of the Associated Press story on the IRS’s claim that it lost an unknown number of e-mails over two years relating to the agency’s alleged targeting of political groups hostile to the president.

But note how the AP casts the story: The investigators — Republican lawmakers — are outraged.

Is it really so hard to imagine that if this were a Republican administration, the story wouldn’t be the frustration of partisan critics of the president? It would be all about that administration’s behavior. With the exception of National Journal’s Ron Fournier, who called for a special prosecutor to bypass the White House’s “stonewalling,” and former CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson, it’s hard to find a non-conservative journalist who thinks this is a big deal.

Let’s back up for a moment. In 2013, IRS official Lois Lerner planted a question from an audience member at an American Bar Association meeting. She used her answer to apologize for — and favorably spin — the agency’s actions, and then later claimed that the apology came as an unprompted response to a question.

Lerner laid the blame for the inappropriate targeting of tea-party and other groups on a few low-level bureaucrats in Cincinnati. That was a lie. Senior officials in the IRS knew and helped to coordinate the effort. She said she only heard about the problem when tea-party groups protested. The targeting, in fact, had already been under internal and external investigation.

HILLARY’S MUSH-She Speaks at Length Without Saying Much. By Jim Geraghty
One of the first, and perhaps most stinging, critiques of Hillary Clinton’s book tour came from Game Change co-authors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, with Halperin lamenting, “I don’t understand writing a book of that length without a message,” and Heilemann calling the book “mush.”

We shouldn’t expect much more than mush from Hillary Clinton between now and November 2016. If she’s truly pressed for a theme, expect nothing meatier than “It’s time for a woman.”

For one of the most controversial figures in American politics for the past two decades, Hillary Clinton offers strikingly bland rhetoric and proposals, making her memoir title Hard Choices ironic.

For better or worse, Hillary Clinton will not be pledging, several days before Election Day, to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.” Whatever instinct she had to overturn the applecart burned away in the backlash to Hillarycare in 1994. From her husband’s 1996 reelection campaign to her 2000 Senate campaign to her 2008 presidential campaign, her hard edges were sanded off, and almost every one of her words and proposals has been carefully chosen to maximize appeal to as broad an audience as possible.

No doubt the woman is a progressive liberal and would push American policy in a leftward direction. And from time to time, her temper shows, and a glimpse of the old claws can be seen. But she’s undoubtedly a comfortable creature of the establishment now. She speaks at $200,000 a pop to Goldman Sachs and scoffs at Occupy Wall Street. She is the Democratic party’s establishment, queen of the Acela class, perfectly at home with corporate executives as long as they’ve donated to the right party. She will not seek the presidency to change the way Washington operates because the way Washington operates has been quite good to her.

Her town hall on CNN last Thursday, hosted by Christiane Amanpour, was a master class on speaking extemporaneously for an hour and appearing to answer questions about the toughest issues of the day without actually saying anything someone could disagree with.

Amanpour and the questions from the audience began with the worsening chaos in Iraq. Hillary responded, “I think it’s imperative that the government of Iraq, currently led by Maliki, be much more inclusive, much more willing to share power, involve all the different segments of Iraq.”

Indeed, it would be great if Maliki were that kind of leader or there was any indication he wanted to govern in that way. But at this point, there’s not much reason to think he’s capable of that.