Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Youtube RSS

Archive for Category : News: Military & Defense

thumb

Turkey promises ‘Decisive’ Action After Syria Shoots Down Its Fighter Jet

Original Article - Turkey promises ‘Decisive’ Action After Syria Shoots Down Its Fighter Jet

The loss of one of the Turkish Air Force’s F-4 Phantom marked the most dangerous development yet in Syria‘s 15-month uprising and left Western powers scrambling over how to respond.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, flew home from Brazil to hold an emergency briefing with his intelligence and military chiefs after radio and radar contact was lost with the aircraft as it conducted a mission close to the Syrian coast.

“Following the evaluation of data provided by our related institutions and the findings of the joint search and reduce efforts with Syria, it is understood that our plane was downed by Syria,” his office said in a statement.

Mr Erdogan promised that Turkey’s response would be both “decisive” and carried out with “determination”. Although he did not divulge what steps he was contemplating, a senior member of his ruling party had earlier declared that if the aircraft was shown to have been shot down by Syria it would amount to a “declaration of war”.

Syria confirmed that it had brought down the aircraft, saying in a statement: “Our air defences confronted a target that penetrated our air space over our territorial waters pre-afternoon on Friday and shot it down. It turned out to be a Turkish military plane.”

In a sign that it was aware of the gravity of the situation, Syria seemed to be trying to repair the damage, deploying vessels to join a search and rescue operation to locate the aircraft’s two pilots in the waters off its coast.

The incident represented the fulfilment of one of the international community’s greatest fears after months of predictions that the Syrian conflict could easily burst its borders.

Western powers, and particularly the United States, are likely to come under pressure to support Turkey should it choose to retaliate with military force. Mr Erdogan’s government has long warned that it would not tolerate any Syrian challenge to its security.

As a member of Nato, Turkey could potentially invoke Chapter V of the alliance’s treaty which states that an attack on one state would be viewed as an attack on all signatories of the alliance.

But because the clause dictates that such an attack must be carried out on European or American soil, Mr Erdogan is unlikely to make such demands of his Western allies.

But he could well invoke Chapter IV of the treaty, which allows a member state to convene an emergency summit of the whole alliance if “the security of any of the parties is threatened”.

Turkey came close to doing so in April after Syrian forces opened fire into its territory, wounding two Turkish nationals and two Syrians at a refugee camp close to the borders.

It was persuaded not to do so by the United States, but is likely to be less malleable now. In return for agreeing to allowing Saudi and Qatari funnel weapons to the rebels through its territory, Mr Erdogan sought and received assurances that America would protect Turkey from any Syrian backlash, according to Western officials.

Turkey, which has been at the forefront of regional efforts to oust Mr Assad and has given sanctuary to rebels seeking his overthrow, could also try to revive previous efforts to win international support for a buffer zone in Syria’s border regions.The jet incident came as the Syrian government accused its rebel foes of carrying out a “massacre” of Mr Assad’s supporters after the emergence of grisly video footage showing more than a dozen bloodied and mutilated corpses.

A pro-opposition human rights group confirmed that rebels were behind the killings, but said that the victims were members of the pro-Assad Shabiha, the feared Alawite militia accused of murdering hundreds of Sunni civilians.Meanwhile, government troops killed at least ten people in the city of Aleppo, according to activists.

thumb

Obama Orders Military ‘Gay Pride’ Celebrations

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 21, 2012

Original Article - Obama Orders Military ‘Gay Pride’ Celebrations

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indespensible supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness — these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. … [L]et us with caution indulge the opposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” –George Washington (1796)

2012-06-21-alexander-1

Just when you thought the Left’s campaign of cultural degradation couldn’t become any worse, Barack Hussein Obama, ostensibly the Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, sent down a decree that the Service Branches must celebrate “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.” The purpose of this mandate is to affirm the minuscule number of homosexuals (2-3 percent) serving in the military ranks — mostly in rear echelon positions.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta dutifully carried out the order, saying, “During Pride Month, and every month, let us celebrate our rich diversity and renew our enduring commitment to equality for all.”

Obama’s declaration came during the same week the DoD announced it would comply with atheist group demands that all military editions of the Bible be removed from Base Exchange centers. The complainant had prepped a lawsuit based on the errant notion that “separation of church and state” is enshrined in our Constitution. Naturally, the Obama administration accepted their objection without a fight, based upon the Left’s adherence to a so-called “living constitution.”

Apparently, Panetta’s “enduring commitment to equality for all” applies to sexual preference but not faith. Oh, wait … maybe it doesn’t even apply to sexual preference. After all, when was the last time any Leftist celebrated “Heterosexual Pride Month”?

Make no mistake, Obama’s Gay Political Play is a keystone in the Left’s macro agenda to undermine the most critical pillar of Liberty, the family. However, there’s nothing “gay” about Gender-Disorientation Pathology, and “affirming homosexuals” in any context not only poses a threat to natural families and good military order, but disregards the welfare of millions who manifest this destructive pathology — merely using them as political pawns.

Rather than provide one lone opinion about Obama’s military “Gay Pride Month” mandate, I asked 20 career military officers, five from each of the service branches, to give me their opinions about this mandate. While I value the opinions of many young friends who are among the enlisted ranks, I chose to ask officers, in order to provide a more strategic perspective on this issue.

The responses I received came from those who ranked from O-2 to O-9. Each reported that their sentiments were echoed by virtually all of their colleagues. Each agreed to provide their “personal perspective” without attribution, because the military PC police (Lefty lawyers in the JAG and IG offices) are very persistent at prosecuting Obama dissenters, and these respondents expressed an interest in completing their military careers, abiding by their oaths as military officers, and endeavoring to maintain history’s best fighting force in defense of Liberty — despite assaults from the CinC to the contrary.

What follows are representative amalgamations of comments from members in each service branch, all of whom are combat veterans.

USA:

Clinton accelerated the practice of using the military as a political test platform for social policy, pandering to its electoral constituencies. The Obama regime put it in warp speed. … I will retire soon, and it pains me to see this political crap manifest itself in the ranks of fine young men and women. … Military service requires a solid foundation in moral virtue because war destroys the societal safeguards that aid civilized society and civilized people in staying grounded. When we remove morality from military service, such as the moral imperatives behind the UCMJ regulations against homosexual behavior and adultery, we risk dislodging the moral compass from its true north bearing. … This has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with political expedience. … The requirement for even more “sensitivity training,” which we already endure for Equal Opportunity (EO) and Sexual Harassment, Assault, and Rape Prevention (SHARP), and resulting UCMJ changes, all detract from the real aim and purpose of training our soldiers to fight and win, wasting his most precious resource, time. … This mandate is irresponsible and rains down from politicos who are not even remotely acquainted with the reality of ground combat.

USN:

I have had to do few things more distasteful in my 36 years than train (read “indoctrinate”) my unit members on the new post-Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell (DADT) rules. … Those of us who have been brought up with legitimate, closely held religious convictions have to bite our tongues and accept the unacceptable. … We all know it’s a load of horse dung, and are just holding our breath for a real CinC to replace the phony one now at the head of the table. … If being a Christian makes me a bigot, as our Commander-in-Chief indicated (in his reference to people “clinging to their guns and Bibles”,) then I willingly wear that title. … Next up will no doubt be affirmative action for homosexuals to increase their numbers in our ranks. … When one group, for whatever reason, is given preferential treatment over another, it is ultimately destructive to the command, or the service, or the military writ large. … Yet to meet one in the fighter community! … When you consider that the average junior sailor (E6 and below) lives separated from family and friends for months at a time and in worse conditions than the majority of our federal prisoners in order to serve and protect our nation, you’d think that they would be the last people who would have these political mandates imposed upon them by our civilian “leaders.” … Typical of an administration that can’t differentiate between equality and Liberty!

USAF:

There is no evidence that decisively links genetics to homosexuality — and this lack of a genetic link totally separates this issue from race and gender … except for political expedience. … When will the pandering politicians please get their social agenda out of my way so we can do the job we came here to do? … Everyone who has candidly spoken to me about the issue thinks the DoD’s policy towards homosexual conduct is wrong, period, and contributes to a degradation of unit cohesion and effectiveness. The fact that the DoD would then not only allow the conduct, but now endorse it is absolute anathema to anyone with a moral compass. … Now that we’ve opened Pandora’s box by legalizing homosexual behavior, we are now challenged to figure out exactly what kind of status and rights we are going to bestow on it. As a commander, I would be content if we could simply acknowledge it as a permissible lifestyle and not celebrate it as some kind of panacea that will give our military a tipping-point advantage that will allow us to defeat our enemies. … Despite the “re-education classes,” I will likely continue to hear humorous comments loaded with gay innuendo, all followed by the standard disclaimer, “not that there’s anything wrong with that!”

USMC:

I read Panetta’s order … and it sickened me. Panetta is not part of the “military ranks.” Unfortunately his “leadership” of the DoD defines, in part, where the military ranks are, and where we will go. … I’m not a fan of Hispanic Heritage Month, African-American Whatever, Women’s History Month, etc. The posters produced, ceremonies, seminars and luncheons held, and messages that are promulgated are presented under the guise of bringing us all together when, in fact, they mostly define and divide by differences. … Celebrating one’s heritage or behavior is fine as long as it’s your celebration, not the DoD’s, or the Nation’s. … Lord, please send us a real CinC! … In my opinion DADT was a very workable solution. If folks did their job and kept their homosexual behavior a private matter, I was OK with that. … I knew fellow Marines who cheated on their wives, who lied and who stole, but I was never required to celebrate those sins. I could still voice my rejection of those behaviors, and get my fellow Marines to straighten up and fly right. But now I would be dishonorably discharged for such action. … Numerous studies/surveys of our Marines conclude that the youngsters, who almost exclusively make up front-line combat troops, don’t fight for God or country or freedom. They fight for the guys on their left and right. By dividing along the lines of our differences, we erode the foundation of military success. … Contrary to Panetta’s statement, the military doesn’t exist to provide opportunities or make people feel good.

2012-06-21-alexander-2

Two comments really sum up the thousands of words I received in response to the Obama “GLBT” mandate.

The first is from Col. Ron Crews, USA retired (emphasis added), who is now director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty: “By openly affirming bisexual and homosexual behavior, military leadership is coming into direct conflict with the morals and standards held almost universally by chaplains and service members of virtually every major faith group in the military. This blatant attempt to ‘celebrate’ a minority view of political correctness will not endear military families to the military. I want the American public to see just where the current administration is leading our military. They have turned our Armed Forces into a social experiment at the cost of military readiness.”

The second is from a Marine: “When I volunteered for the Marine Corps, the military expelled homosexuals. A decade later, Bill Clinton ordered that we ignore homosexuals as long as they kept their sexual preferences a private matter (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell). That was OK because few if any of them were in combat units. Last year, Obama and his Leftist congressional cadres obliged the military to endorse open homosexuality (Do Ask, Do Tell). This decision had nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with political pandering to a loud special interest group. This week, Barack Obama decreed that my Marine Corps would officially ‘celebrate Gay Pride Month.’ The next step will be to set quotas for homosexuals in the ranks, and to offer marriages and same-sex benefits. I’m preparing for retirement after more than 30 years of service to my country, and more than a few scars to prove it. It grieves me to leave my beloved Corps in such a state, being used as a political crap pot for Obama and his socialist administrators. I have honored my oath. They have deserted theirs. Do citizens give a s–t anymore? Time to wake up. God Bless America! S/F.”

When Obama repealed DADT in December 2010, he said, “We are not a nation that says, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says, ‘Out of many, we are one.’” But Obama’s invocation of “E Pluribus Unum,” the national motto proposed by Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in 1776, as the basis for his social agenda to normalize homosexual deviance, is anathema to its definition. That is because Obama’s objective is not to unite, but to divide (and conquer) under the pretense of uniting.

George Washington once called on the nation to determine whether we would be united or divided: “We are either a United people, or we are not. If the former, let us, in all matters of general concern act as a nation, which have national objects to promote, and a national character to support. If we are not, let us no longer act a farce by pretending to it.”

Indeed, Obama in his capacity as President and CinC, is a monumental farce.

(For more on this issue, read Gender Identity, The Homosexual Agenda and The Christian Response and 10 Reasons Homosexual Behavior Is Unfit for the American Armed Forces.)

thumb

GOP Lawmaker Says Gays in Military Issue Settled (GOP Homosex Caves?)

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 21, 2012

Original Article - GOP Lawmaker Says Gays in Military Issue Settled (GOP Homosex Caves?)

The Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said Thursday that allowing gays to serve openly in the military is a settled issue that he won’t try to reverse even if Mitt Romney wins the presidency in November and the GOP captures the Senate.

Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon of California said his focus is on restoring money for the military after the latest round of defense cuts – a planned reduction of $487 billion over 10 years that could nearly double if Congress fails to avert automatic, across-the-board cuts that begin in January. Pressed on the divisive issue of gay rights that roiled Congress two years ago, McKeon said he wouldn’t revisit it.

“We fought that fight,” McKeon told defense reporters at an hourlong breakfast interview. He said his goal is to “get the things that our war-fighters need.”

The committee chairman said other GOP lawmakers might try to reinstate the “don’t ask, don’t tell policy” that was in effect for nearly two decades. “That’s not something that I would personally bring up,” he said.

He recalled that in 1994, when Republicans took control of the House after 40 years, there were high expectations for ambitious changes. “They expected us to pull off miracles. That’s not how things work. I’d rather focus on money for defense,” McKeon said.

Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed legislation in December 2010 repealing the policy. The change took effect last year, and military leaders have concluded that it has not affected morale or readiness. In fact, this month, the Pentagon is marking gay pride month with an official salute.

Addressing a range of issues from the automatic cuts to intelligence leaks, McKeon recommended that Congress look for a short-term solution to delay the automatic cuts and do it now rather than wait for a lame-duck congressional session after the election. He said the November elections have the potential to be the nastiest ever, especially with heavy spending by outside political groups, and that it was ridiculous to expect all sides – the president, Republicans and Democrats – to “come together in a ‘Kumbaya’ moment.”

As he said earlier this year, McKeon is willing to consider increasing revenue through taxes to avert the defense cuts, making him one of few Republicans open to that possibility. “I’m willing to look at anything,” he said.

Congress is scrambling to come up with a way to avoid automatic, $1.2 trillion cuts in domestic and military programs over a decade. The failure of a bipartisan congressional supercommittee last year to come up with a deficit-cutting plan will trigger the cuts, scheduled to begin Jan. 2.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has warned about the meat ax approach of the automatic cuts, arguing it would hollow out the force. The $492 billion, decade-long reduction would come on top of the $487 billion cut over 10 years that President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans agreed to last summer.

McKeon was one of those Republicans. He said Thursday it was a mistake, putting lawmakers in a difficult position.

Separately, the Senate voted for a measure calling on the Pentagon to release a report by Aug. 15 on the impact of the automatic cuts. The measure, backed by voice vote, also calls on the White House budget office to release a report within 30 days and the president to produce a report within 60 days on the impact on defense and domestic spending. The measure was added to the farm bill that cleared the Senate Thursday.

Calling the automatic cuts a “a terrible way to cut spending,” Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said that while Congress tries to come up with a deal to avert the cuts, “we should know exactly how the administration would enact sequestration if we don’t get a deal.”

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also backed the measure.

The recent leaks of classified information, including reports of a cyberwar against Iran and U.S. counterterrorism actions, has prompted an outcry in Congress, especially from Republicans who argue that they were intentional to enhance Obama’s national security reputation in an election year.

McKeon said his committee, like the one on the Senate side, will hold a hearing on the issue. At the same time, he said he had no quarrel with some of the steps taken by the Democratic administration.

“Frankly, I’m glad to hear we’re doing some of these things,” he said.

thumb

Donnelly: Military Will Kick Out Anti-Gay Soldiers For Being Anti-Gay

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 20, 2012

Original Article - Donnelly: Military Will Kick Out Anti-Gay Soldiers For Being Anti-Gay

Post image for Donnelly: Military Will Kick Out Anti-Gay Soldiers For Being Anti-Gay

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center For Military Readiness (CMR), is claiming that the U.S. military has a “zero tolerance” policy and will kick out military personnel who are anti-gay for being anti-gay. Consider that for a moment. After decades — centuries, even — of the U.S. Military discharging gay men and lesbian women merely for even being suspected of being homosexual, Donnelly is now lamenting her false claim that the military has done a 180 and is now discharging soldiers and other “people of faith” for not liking gay people.

In a World Net Daily article that begins:

There’s the story about the Marine veteran who said, “I joined the Marines and homosexual behavior was illegal. Then they made it optional. I’m getting out before they make it mandatory.”

Donnelly — not the source of the above quote — tells WND, “I think this is an open-ended welcome of ‘gay’ culture in the military.”

“Zero tolerance,” Donnelly said. ” … If you don’t agree, you can end your military career. A Coast Guard [member] initially lost his job for merely inquiring about privacy. Military LGBT law works to stifle and end careers of those who disagree.”

She also pointed out that a lack of an exodus from the military is no indicator that things under the LGBT law are working for everyone.

“Military culture has always been one of obeying orders, and soldiers have been ordered to abide by LGBT law,” Donnelly explained. “Also, many troops who would have ordinarily left under such pretenses remain at their posts because of the declining economy and a lack of jobs out there.”

Donnelly also stated that chaplains are having their hands tied more and more with LGBT law and same-sex “marriage” legislation.

The CMR leader went on to note that there are many negative factors behind the new LGBT law that the media is simply not reporting.

“There is no constitutional right to serve in the military,” the CMR president explained, emphasizing that segregation based on sexuality has always been rational and customary. “They blur the issue with irrational segregation, such as racial segregation, which has no reasonable basis. Sexual privacy is necessary for troops to function properly in our military, but this is no longer respected as it has been in the past.”

President Obama signs into law the bill that provided fro the path to the repeal of DADT. December 22, 2010.Donnelly amusingly lies, and says, “The people who need to be held accountable are the U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and the Commander in Chief Barack Obama, who didn’t even know what they were signing in 2010.”

Yes, clearly President Barack Obama, who for years has campaigned against Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and DOMA, and even called for the repeal of DADT in a State of the Union address, had no idea what he was signing on December 22, 2010, surrounded by a dozen government officials and in front of hundreds of military personnel including a fair number of gay people.

Donnelly also continued her offensive suggestion that a rise in reported military rape — certainly a concern, and one The New Civil Rights Movement has written about several times — is due to the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and a supposed influx of gays in the military.

Donnelly points to the CMR Policy Analysis called “Chilling Trend of Sexual Assault in the Military,” which reports that “sexual assault in all branches of the services have increased by 22 percent since 2007.” It also states that violent attacks and rapes in the Army have nearly doubled since 2006 to 1,313 last year, with 5 percent of the assaults on men. Furthermore, it reported that in “all branches of the service, male sexual assault victims have increased significantly, from 10 percent in 2010 to 14 percent in confidential reports.”

Back in April, The New Civil Rights Movement reported that Donnelly was placing the blame for an increase in military sexual assaults on the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell even though her report only covered 10 days.

thumb

British, Argentinian Leaders Clash Over Falklands

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 19, 2012

Original Article - British, Argentinian Leaders Clash Over Falklands

Handout picture released by the Argentine presidency of Argentine President Cristina Kirchner (R) talking with British PM David Cameron during a brief encounter after a G20 summit meeting in Los Cabos, Mexico. Kirchner and Cameron clashed on Tuesday at the G20 summit over the future of the disputed Falkland Islands, officials said. (AFP Photo/)Argentina’s President Cristina Kirchner and Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron clashed on Tuesday at the G20 summit over the future of the disputed Falkland Islands, officials said.

The pair came face to face at the meeting of the world’s major economies in Mexico, at a time when tensions between their countries were already running high just after the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War.

Cameron urged Kirchner to respect the will of the 3,000 residents on the South Atlantic islands, who want to remain British. Kirchner countered him by citing UN resolutions calling for sovereignty negotiations.

“The president had the UN resolutions and she said to Cameron: ‘Let’s respect the United Nations’,” Argentina’s Foreign Minister Hector Timmerman said.

“The prime minister refused to accept the documents, turned his back and walked away without a farewell,” he added, accusing Britain of disrespecting UN resolutions and of retaining a colonialist mindset.

A Downing Street source, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that there had been an exchange, but downplayed the claim that Cameron had refused to accept a packet of documents from Kirchner.

Cameron had sought to urge Kirchner to respect the right of the Falklands’ current residents to decide their own future in a referendum, the source said.

“He took it up to her to make those points. She took that badly and that was basically it,” she said.

“I don’t think it was actually totally clear that she was trying to give him documents…. We’re following up with Argentinian officials here to see if there are any documents they want to give us.”

In 1982 Argentina’s former military regime invaded and occupied the Falkland Islands, which are known as the Malvinas in Spanish.

Britain promptly dispatched a naval task force to the South Atlantic and recaptured the territory after a brief but fierce war which left 255 British soldiers and 650 Argentines dead.

Argentina now has an elected civilian government and Kirchner has called for negotiations with Britain on the islands’ future.

British officials accuse her of stirring nationalist passions for domestic political gain, and Cameron has refused to discuss the issue of sovereignty.

thumb

Israel Moves Tanks Near Egyptian Border Following Attack

Original Article - Israel Moves Tanks Near Egyptian Border Following Attack

The Israel Defense Force has moved tanks closer to Egypt following a cross-border attack into the Jewish state by bomb-laden terrorists who targeted defense contractor crews building a border fence.

Ynet News reported that armored units will supplement existing IDF forces in the region, even though Israeli tank maneuvers so close to Egypt’s border is a violation of the peace treaty with Cairo.

The paper said the last time IDF bolstered its presence in the area was n August 2011, following a terror attack by the Islamic Jihad, which left nine Israelis dead.

The paper’s chief military commentator, Ron Ben Yishai, “noted that several months ago, Israel and Egypt arrived at an agreement by which Cairo would be able to deploy 20 tanks near the border, to ward off attacks by Bedouins on Egyptian forces, despite the fact that such a move contradicts the peace treaty,” Ynet reported.

Israeli commanders say the IDF’s relationship with Egyptian military forces is good.

“The IDF has strong ties with the Egyptians forces, who are working tirelessly to thwart such incidents,” Gaza Division Southern Brigade Commander Col. Tal Harmoni told reporters following Monday’s attack.

thumb

Romney: Obama fears Israeli attack on Iran more than Iran nukes

Original Article - Romney: Obama fears Israeli attack on Iran more than Iran nukes

How would Romney react to a breakthrough on Iran?In hawkish remarks that drew cheers from an audience of religious conservatives, Mitt Romney accused President Obama on Saturday of being more afraid that Israel might attack Iran than that Iran will develop a nuclear weapon.

The Republican presidential candidate, who frequently attacks the administration for failing to back Israel’s government more aggressively, ratcheted up his criticism a notch. He responded with ridicule when asked what he would do, if elected, to strengthen U.S. relations with the Jewish state.

“I think, by and large, you can just look at the things the president has done and do the opposite,” Romney said, to laughter and applause from members of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, an evangelical Christian political organization.

“You look at his policies with regards to Iran,” Romney continued. “He’s almost sounded like he’s more frightened that Israel might take military action than he’s concerned that Iran might become nuclear.”

Those words prompted prolonged applause and cheering from an audience of 250 in the ballroom of a Washington hotel. Romney addressed the group via video hookup from an outdoor site in Pennsylvania, his customized campaign bus parked prominently in the background, during the second day of a six-state swing.

Romney said that, as president, he would “forge a strong working relationship with the leadership in Israel. I would make it very clear that for us, as well as for them, it is unacceptable for Iran to become a nuclear nation and that we’re prepared to take any and all action to keep that from happening,” applause drowning out his next line.

If he were in office now, Romney said he would be encouraging countries in the region, such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, to arm “the insurgents” in Syria’s civil war.

“But perhaps overarching is this: I would not want to show a dime’s worth of distance between ourselves and our allies like Israel. If we have disagreements, you know, we can talk about them behind closed doors. But to the world, you show that we’re locked arm-in-arm,” he said.

Ralph Reed, a former Georgia Republican Party chairman and Christian Coalition head who now directs the Faith and Freedom Coalition, took the stage shortly before Romney spoke. His group is attempting to get millions of evangelical Christians who aren’t registered to vote to sign up and turn out this fall, by making what they describe as the administration’s “war on religion” a central organizing theme.

In his remarks, which avoided hot-button social issues like gay marriage and abortion that are dear to many Christian conservatives, Romney echoed the rallying call.

“The decision by the Obama administration to attack our first freedom, religious freedom, is one which I think a lot of people were shocked to see,” said the former governor, referring to a requirement, since modified, that employers, including those connected to religious organizations like the Catholic Church, provide contraceptive coverage under the new healthcare law.

Romney’s campaign flooded the hotel ballroom with volunteers carrying campaign posters shortly before his son, Josh, appeared in person to introduce the remote hookup, which was beamed onto two large TV screens.

Some evangelical leaders have been openly hostile to Romney because of his Mormon faith. But the Republican presidential candidate made it clear that he badly needs the support of evangelical Christians in November and is working to get it.

“One of the reasons I’m on this broadcast with you,” Romney said in concluding his 20-minute speech, “is that I desperately want to see you working hard, knocking on doors, calling friends, telling them what’s at stake.”

thumb

Obama’s Policy Strategy: Ignore Laws!

Original Article - Obama’s Policy Strategy: Ignore Laws!

President Barack Obama is pictured. | AP Photo

President Obama returned Friday to a trusted tactic — satisfying his political allies by not doing something.

 

Conservatives were angry when Janet Napolitano announced the administration would stop deporting certain undocumented immigrants but they should have seen it coming. On issue after issue – gay rights, drug enforcement, Internet gambling, school achievement standards – the administration has chosen to achieve its goals by a method best described as passive-aggressive.

Rather than pushing new laws through a divided Congress to enact his agenda, Obama is relying on federal agencies to ignore, or at least not defend, laws that some of his important supporters –like Hispanic voters and the gay community — don’t like.

“If the president says we’re not going to enforce the law, there’s really nothing anyone can do about it,” University of Pennsylvania constitutional law professor Kermit Roosevelt said. “It’s clearly a political calculation.”

A White House official said the strategy is the result of a stalemate in Washington.

“We we work to achieve our policy goals in the most effective and appropriate way possible,” the official said. “Often times Congress has blocked efforts (ie [No Child Left Behind] and DREAM) and we look to pursue other appropriate means of achieving our policy goals. Sometimes this makes for less than ideal policy situations – such as the action we took on immigration – but the president isn’t going to be stonewalled by politics, he will pursue whatever means available to do business on behalf of American people.”

For Obama – and future presidents should Washington remain polarized to the point of perpetual inaction —it may be the only way to fulfill a range of campaign promises.

As of Friday, the federal government won’t deport undocumented immigrants under age 30 who came to the United States as children. It is a temporary, de facto implementation of a part of the stalled DREAM Act.

The result: a loud message to Hispanic voters to remember Obama in November.

On gay rights, too, the administration has asked agencies to do less. In February 2011 the Justice Department announced it would not defend DOMA against court challenges — an unusual step for the agency, which typically defends legal challenges to laws on the books. But the 1996 law, which bars the government from recognizing same-sex marriage, appears headed to the U.S. Supreme Court via either the 9th or 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.

In August, Obama’s DHS announced it would no longer deport the non-citizen spouses of gay Americans — a direct contradiction to DOMA as well.

The tactic has its start in the earliest days of the administration. In October 2009, the DOJ announced it would not prosecute medical marijuana users or suppliers in states where it’s legal, despite the state laws contradicting federal law. Federal law generally trumps state law in such matters.

Last September, the DOJ also announced a change of legal interpretation that effectively legalized Internet gambling. Two statutes seem to ban it – the Wire Act of 1961, which bars betting across state lines using the telecommunications devices, and the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which bans American banks from processing payments to online casinos.

On education, too, Obama has made policy by not enforcing the law. By fiat, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan granted waivers to 10 states freeing them from the strict requirements of the 2002 No Child Left Behind Act. In doing so, the president removed the mechanism that would force certain school standards to be improved.

“The president is using executive power to do things Congress has refused to do, and that does fit a disturbing pattern of expansion of executive power under President Obama,” said Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law scholar at George Washington University Law School known for his support of progressive causes as well as his ire at Obama for not prosecuting Bush officials in connection with alleged torture of terror suspects.

“In many ways, President Obama has fulfilled the dream of an imperial presidency that Richard Nixon strived for. On everything from (the Defense of Marriage Act) to the gaming laws, this is a president who is now functioning as a super legislator. He is effectively negating parts of the criminal code because he disagrees with them. That does go beyond the pale.”

That Nixon analogy may be apt, John Eastman, a constitutional law professor known for his support of conservative causes at Chapman University School of Law in Orange, Calif. said. He cited Nixon’s abuse of the traditional presidential power of not spending, or impounding, allocated funds as an earlier example of a president opting not to carry out the will of Congress.

Yet other scholars cited a more recent example: President George W. Bush’s signing statements. The Republican came under fire from Democrats for his frequent decision to attach statements to bills he signed that indicated he found various provisions unconstitutional and, thus, would not enforce or follow them.

“There’s a difference between refusing to enforce a statute (as Obama is doing) and refusing to recognize a statute that binds the executive,” Roosevelt said. “The latter is what the Bush Administration used to do. When Bush issued signing statements that he would construe laws so as not to infringe on his Commander in Chief power, he was saying that he reserved the right to disregard them if he thought it was necessary to protect the country, since that’s what the secret memos said the Commander in Chief power required. … I view that as more extreme.”

Roosevelt, like Eastman and Turley, worries that the Obama approach will give a future president the license “to decide we’re not going to prosecute insider trading or enforce EPA regulations. They could do that.”

And while giddy liberals on Friday marveled at Obama’s brazen craftiness, legal experts say supporters might feel a lot differently if the tactic becomes an enduring precedent.

“Say a Republican were to follow this strategy after regaining the White House in January of 2013 and the Supreme Court upholds the health care bill and Romney can’t repeal it because the Democrats in the Senate filibuster it, he could basically repeal it through non-enforcement,” said Eastman.

They theoretically could but won’t, said former Obama legal adviser Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School constitutional professor and prominent liberal scholar.

“It’s always possible to conjure hypotheticals that test the outer boundaries of the broad principle that the president is generally obligated to enforce laws duly enacted by Congress but has a paramount duty to obey the Constitution,” Tribe wrote POLITICO in an e-mail. “Obviously the rule of law and the importance of orderly and stable governance in a system that relies principally on the judicial branch to ‘say what the law is’ precludes promiscuous presidential exercise of the prerogative of non-compliance. Yet it is also surely true that presidents cannot blindly follow Congressional directives unless and until a court tells them to stop! What if a Congress were to tell the president to shoot all self-proclaimed Mormons on sight, the way the governor of Missouri once did in the 19 th century? Surely no president with a constitutional conscience could comply with such a directive.”

thumb

George Washington Turning Over in his Grave as Pentagon Celebrates Sodomy!

Original Article - George Washington Turning Over in his Grave as Pentagon Celebrates Sodomy!

On March 14, 1778, George Washington, then Commander in Chief of the Continental Army, approved the sentencing of LT Enslin on attempted sodomy of another soldier. General Washington called it an infamous crime to be viewed “with Abhorrence and Detestation”. He ordered Enslin “to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return.”

Morality in the military is changing.

This week, Pentagon officials announced they will participate in June’s Gay Pride month and host a first-ever event honoring gay and lesbian troops. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta feels it is important to recognize the service of gays in the armed forces. Details of the Pentagon event have not been released.

Since the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), homosexual activists have accelerated advances of their homosexual agenda within the Armed Forces, including recognition of gay marriages, performance of marriages in military chapels, and gay pride celebrations at U.S Military academies.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “We will continue our fight to overturn the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and are ready to represent those chaplains who refuse to perform same-sex marriages on religious grounds. This new law will ultimately destroy unit cohesion and morale, reduce the number of heterosexual volunteers, and considerably degrade the ability of the military to defend our nation, their first responsibility.”

Since November 2010, the Thomas More Law Center has submitted 41 Freedom of Information Act requests to all branches of the Armed Forces, including the Inspector General’s Office, to assist in overturning the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

Allowing open homosexuality in the Armed Forces had nothing to do with enhancing the combat effectiveness of our military, and everything to do with pandering to the homosexual lobby. To accomplish this political objective, Pentagon officials utilized rigged public opinion polls, leaks of false information and muzzling of combat commanders who opposed the repeal.

In its findings supporting the 1993 Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law, Congress affirmed:

  • there is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces;
  • military life is fundamentally different from civilian life;
  • the prohibition against homosexual conduct is a long-standing element of military law;
  • the presence of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards or morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.

Concluded Thompson, “Those findings have not changed, but the law has. Our military men and women, our sons and daughters, should not be subjected to an involuntary social experiment which will damage our national security. That’s why we will continue our efforts to oppose this immoral law.”

thumb

Pentagon Plans to Hold “Gay Pride” Month Event (A Whole Month for Sodomy?)

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 14, 2012

Original Article - Pentagon Plans to Hold “Gay Pride” Month Event (A Whole Month for Sodomy?)

The Pentagon is planning to hold an event celebrating Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Pride month.

The move comes less than a year after the Defense Department’s “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy toward gay and lesbian service members was repealed.

Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said the Pentagon is planning its first event for LGBT Pride month, which will be held later in June. Details about the event had yet to be finalized, she said.

The event for Pentagon employees comes after the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, the 1990s policy wherein gay service members could be kicked out of the military if they disclosed their sexual identity, was repealed last year.

The repeal, passed by Congress in the 2010 lame-duck session, has been implemented thus far with few reported issues from the U.S. military.

The repeal of DADT was one of President Obama’s biggest policy victories for the gay-rights community.

Obama issued a presidential proclamation at the start of the month declaring June LGBT Pride month, where he talked about the repeal of DADT.

“Because we repealed ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell,’ gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans can serve their country openly, honestly, and without fear of losing their jobs because of whom they love,” Obama wrote.

thumb

Egypt’s Highest Court Declares Parliament Invalid (Arab Spring Goes South)

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 14, 2012

Original article - Egypt’s Highest Court Declares Parliament Invalid (Arab Spring Goes South)

Egypt’s highest court declared the parliament invalid Thursday, and the country’s interim military rulers promptly declared full legislative authority, triggering a new level of chaos and confusion in the country’s leadership.

The Supreme Constitutional Court also ruled that a former member of President Hosni Mubarak’s regime may run in a presidential election runoff this weekend.

The ruling on parliament means that it must be dissolved, state TV reported.

The court found that all articles making up the law that regulated parliamentary elections are invalid, said Showee Elsayed, a constitutional lawyer.

Parliament had been in session for just over four months. It was dominated by Islamists, a group long viewed with suspicion by the military.

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, in control of the country since Mubarak’s ouster, announced that it now has full legislative power and will announce a 100-person assembly that will write the country’s new constitution. The court’s rulings come a day after Egypt’s military-led government imposed a de facto martial law, extending the arrest powers of security forces.

thumb

Iran ‘designing nuclear submarine’

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 12, 2012

Original Article - Iran ‘designing nuclear submarine’

Iran has begun to design its first nuclear submarine, according to a report in the country's semiofficial Fars news agency.

An Iranian submarine takes part in a naval maneuvers in the Gulf and Sea of Oman Photo: AP Photo/Mehr News, Sajjad Safari

“Initial steps to design and build nuclear submarine propulsion systems have begun,” Admiral Abbas Zamini, the technical deputy navy chief, told the agency.

“All countries have the right to use peaceful nuclear technology, including for the propulsion system of its vessels,” he said.

Iran’s navy “needs the (nuclear-powered) propulsion system to succeed in realising very long-distance operations.”

He did not provide further details.

Iran regularly boasts about advances in military and scientific fields, but in most cases fails to provide proof they were ever carried out. Western military experts regularly cast doubt on its claims.

Just a handful of nations – the United States, Russia, France, Britain and China – have the technology to make their own nuclear-powered submarines. India has a model under development.

The navy official’s announcement comes as the P5+1 group of world powers are preparing for a new round of crunch talks with Iran in Moscow on June 18 and 19 over Tehran’s disputed nuclear activities.

Iran is pushing forward with an ambitious nuclear programme despite UN Security Council resolutions demanding a halt to uranium enrichment.

The nuclear programme is at the heart of a decade-long standoff between a defiant Tehran and Western powers that fear the Islamic regime is covertly conducting research for atomic weapons capability.

thumb

Democrat Caddell Names National Security Advisor Tom Donilon As Source of Security Leaks (Video)

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: June 12, 2012

Original Article - Democrat Caddell Names National Security Advisor Tom Donilon As Source of Security Leaks (Video)

Democratic analyst Pat Caddell told Sean Hannity tonight that he definitively knows former political hack and current National Security Advisor Tom Donilon was the source of the White House security leaks.

Remember this is not any ordinary leak. This is as she (Senator Diane Feinstein) says putting American foreign policy and American lives in jeopardy. The New York Times’ review of Mr. (David) Sanger’s book by Thomas Ricks who is a one of the Pulitzer Prize winners of the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post defense experts. In his review in the New York Times he says, “And throughout Mr. Sanger has clearly enjoyed great access to senior White House officials most notably Tom Donilon. Mr. Donilon is effect the hero of the book in fact the chief commentator and records of events.” It’s all about this stuff. When Gates, when we had the disclosure of SEAL Team 6, Robert Gates went to the White House and told Tom Donilon, “I have a new communication strategy, you know what it is?Keep your effing mouth shut.” Tom Donilon is known for this. He is a political operative.

It looks like Tom Donilon has some explaining to do.

Caddell disclosed this information yesterday on the Victory Sessions.

thumb

Oh No You Didn’t! Mossad Agents Claim Obama Lying About Stuxnet

Original Article - Oh No You Didn’t! Mossad Agents Claim Obama Lying About Stuxnet

Israeli officials who were placed at risk by the Obama administration’s leaks about the Stuxnet virus are disputing American claims that the cyber-weapon was jointly developed by the U.S. and Israel. Rather, they say, Israeli intelligence first started developing cyberspace warfare against Iran, only convincing the U.S.–with some difficulty–to join in. The Israelis allege that President Barack Obama claimed credit for Stuxnet to boost his re-election campaign.

 

The source for the new claim is Yossi Melman, a journalist for Israel’s left-wing Ha’aretz daily (via Israel Matzav):

The Israeli officials actually told me a different version. They said that it was Israeli intelligence that began, a few years earlier, a cyberspace campaign to damage and slow down Iran’s nuclear intentions. And only later they managed to convince the USA to consider a joint operation — which, at the time, was unheard of. Even friendly nations are hesitant to share their technological and intelligence resources against a common enemy…

Yet my Israeli sources understand the sensitivity and the timing of the issue and are not going to be dragged into a battle over taking credit. “We know that it is the presidential election season,” one Israeli added, ”and don’t want to spoil the party for President Obama and his officials, who shared in a twisted and manipulated way some of the behind-the-scenes secrets of the success of cyberwar.”

The Obama administration’s pattern of leaks to mainstream media outlets–of which the Stuxnet virus is only one example–prompted bipartisan outrage from Congress and the appointment of two special prosecutors. While the leaks jeopardized U.S. national security–allegedly for the political purpose of burnishing President Obama’s image as commander-in-chief–they may also have been exaggerated, if the new reports from Israel are accurate.

thumb

McCain: Obama Responsible For Leaks

Original Article - McCain: Obama Responsible For Leaks

Sen. John McCain continued his blitz against the Obama administration Sunday, saying the president was responsible for the recent national security leaks–whether he knew about them or not.”It’s obvious on its face that this information came from individuals who are in the administration,” McCain said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“The president may not have done it himself, but the president certainly is responsible as commander in chief.”His comments came after the president himself forcefully dismissed the idea on Friday that the leaks came as a form of political strategy for the White House – a claim made by some Republicans on Capitol Hill, including McCain.

“The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive, it’s wrong, and people, I think, need to have a better sense of how I approach this office and how the people around me approach this office,” Obama said.A report in The New York Times last week that provided classified details of what it described as a U.S. cyberattack targeting Iran’s nuclear centrifuge program sparked bipartisan outrage.

Other recent possible leaks of classified information included details on the administration’s efforts to expand its drone program and Obama’s involvement in “kill lists” against militants in Yemen and Pakistan.On Friday, Attorney General Eric Holder said he assigned two U.S. attorneys to lead investigations into the possible leaking of state secrets.McCain, however, strongly took issue with the Justice Department overseeing the investigation, arguing the matter at hand required independent counsel and contended that Holder did not have the credentials to manage such a task.

“Mr. Holder’s credibility with Congress is, uh, there is none,” McCain told CNN Chief Political Correspondent Candy Crowley.He pointed to the controversial Operation Fast and Furious, which involved agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allowing illegal sales of guns, believed to be destined for Mexican drug cartels, to “walk” from Phoenix gun stores into Mexico.The failure of the program has prompted a GOP-led congressional investigation, with Holder at the center of the probe.

Switching back to the suspected security leaks, McCain described them as the “most egregious breach of intelligence in anybody’s memory” and insisted Holder be removed from the case.”This needs a special counsel, someone entirely independent of the Justice Department,” McCain said.On the same program Sunday, the senior adviser for Obama’s re-election team, who held a top position in the White House prior to moving to the campaign, countered recent accusations that he had been in political talks with Holder.

“I rarely spoke to him, and I didn’t ever speak to him about issues of policy in the Justice Department,” he said.CNN Wire Staff contributed to this report.

Crush Marxism!
Translate
DanishDutchEnglishFrenchGermanGreekHebrewHindiJapaneseKoreanNorwegianPolishRussianSpanishSwedish
Shop And Support Us!
Join The Fight!
Boycott The Home Depot!


Take The Traditional Marriage Pledge!


Defend Marriage and Stop President Obama's Unconstitutional Power Grab


Join The NRA and Get $10 off a Yearly Membership!
Twitter Feed
Follow @wewintheylose (20223 followers)
Welcome , today is Saturday, June 23, 2012