Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Secretary of State John Kerry’

Obama Admin Officials Urge European Leaders To Take Action Against US For Nixing Iran Deal


disclaimerReported by 

URL of the original posting site: http://www.americanjournalreview.com/obama-admin-officials-urge-european-leaders-to-take-action-against-us-for-nixing-iran-deal/

President Obama with Secretary of State, John Kerry

 
The efforts of former Obama administration members are becoming more and more beyond the pale as they desperately try to undermine the efforts and present policy of the United States and the Trump administration.what do you mean he canceled the deal

Former Secretary of State John Kerry’s spokesperson admitted that he had secret meetings with the Iranians to try to save the Iran Deal. People screamed ‘Logan Act’ but media barely covered it and no one seems to be taking any action against Kerry.

Now two more Obama administration officials are actually advising European leaders who are upset about the U.S. pulling out of the Iran Deal to boot our ambassadors from their country.

How is this not arguing against the United States? Answer: that’s exactly what it is. It’s arguing and advocating on behalf of Iran and the stated policy of the United States. 

The officials argued in an NY Times op-ed that the countries could expel American diplomats to punish Trump.

From Free Beacon:

“Europe Doesn’t Have to Be Trump’s Doormat,” wrote Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson. Simon served as the National Security Council’s senior director for the Middle East and North Africa, while Stevenson served as the regional director for political-military affairs.

“After months of swaggering hesitation, President Trump finally announced the United States’ withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran, to which Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany, and the European Union are also parties,” they wrote. “This action tramples on European leaders, who urged Mr. Trump to exercise restraint in the interest of international security and multilateralism.”words-of-a-leftist-propagandist

The two officials urged the European governments to take concrete actions against the United States.

“The European Union could, for instance, announce the withdrawal of member-states’ ambassadors from the United States,” they suggested. “Isn’t this what states do when diplomatic partners breach solemn agreements, expose them to security risks and threaten to wreak havoc on their economies?”

Simon and Stevenson went on to suggest that, depending on how the United States reacted, “European capitals might even follow up with expulsion of American ambassadors.”

Has there been any prior administration in history who has done so much to undermine their successors?

This is unconscionable.

It isn’t just an attempt to undermine the Trump administration but it is undermining the United States and hurting our position with our allies.

And they don’t even make any attempt to hide it, putting it in the NY Times and the media gives them the platform to attack our own policy. And this is in addition to Democrats paying for the fake dossier and spreading the Russia collusion story to harm the administration.

Time to connect all the dots and for everyone to condemn this coordinated Obama team effort.

please likeand share and leave a comment

 

John Kerry Announces “Solidarity” with the World’s Transgender Community


waving flagAuthored by Josie Rudd, November 21, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://minutemennews.com/27025-2/

kerry_57positionsJohn Kerry wants everyone to know that the United States stands in “solidarity” with the transgender community around the world.

The Washington Examiner reports – Secretary of State John Kerry honored the memory of transgender individuals who lost their lives to “senseless acts of violence” on Sunday and said the U.S. stands in “solidarity” with the community around the world.

“Transgender persons around the world are targeted by rising levels of violence fueled by hatred and bigotry,” Kerry said in a statement recognizing Transgender Day of Remembrance. “This is a global challenge and we all must do more to protect transgender persons on the basis of equality and dignity.”

He said that in the U.S., the Constitution “enshrines freedoms of peaceful assembly, speech and association, and it affirms that everyone has equal protection under the law.” 

“Around the world,” he added, “human rights and fundamental freedoms are recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that every person is born free and equal in dignity and rights. Every person includes transgender women, transgender men, and other individuals who face marginalization on account of their gender expression or gender identity.”more

Isn’t it interesting with which groups the Obama administration has sworn solidarity?  Here are some other examples:  with Intersex individuals, over immigration reform, with Syrian refugees.

  • But, they feel no solidarity with parents of children who do not wish to have them share bathrooms/locker rooms with members of the opposite sex??
  • They feel no solidarity with Americans who are fearful of they myriad of threats posed by undocumented, hastily screened illegals and/or refugees??

    transgender-argument

    Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

To say that this administration is out of touch with the pulse of everyday America is an understatement.  This is not to say that we should tolerate violence, hatred or bigotry.   But, it could be argued that the push for ‘human rights’ for transgenders (as for illegals or for refugees) has degraded human rights for the majority of the population.

The definition of solidarity is  “unity or agreement of feeling or action, especially among individuals with a common interest; mutual support within a group.”  Perhaps John Kerry should pay a little more attention to the definition of the word.  Because, in recent times, the best example of true solidarity was the solidarity displayed by average Americans, when we acted as ‘individuals with a common interest’ to deny the continuation of these insufferable (even unconstitutional) policies and opinions.more-forced

BREAKING: Iran Naval Cmdr. Admits Truth About Captured Sailors… Obama Scrambles


waving flagBy: Addison Riddleberger on February 2, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/iran-cmdr-admits-truth-sailorsObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART

Cong-Sign-600-LIAccording to the Tasnim News Agency, Adm. Ali Fadavi, Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps of Iran, stated that his sailors had withdrawn a considerable amount of intelligence from the United States sailors captured in January.

Suicide-USA-NRD-600“We have extracted extensive information from their (American sailors’) laptops and cellphones,” Fadavi said in a parliamentary session Monday.

By extensive, he meant hundreds and hundreds of pages worth of data and details on who knows what, according to Al-Monitor.

Adm. Fadavi also made it known that the harvested information could be released to the public if the decision were made to do so.

The Obama administration, with Secretary of State John Kerry at the helm, has greatly downplayed Deflated DiplomacyIran’s capture of 10 U.S. sailors. However, unwelcome facts, quotes and speculations continue to surface, revealing that there may be much more to this incident than the general public has been made aware of.

Earlier, U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said that he was “very, very angry” when he saw a live broadcast of sailors being detained by authorities in Iran.

On Jan. 31, supreme Iranian leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei awarded five commanders, including Adm. Fadavi, with the “Medal of Faith (Conquest)” for their “courageous and timely” Iran-ATM-600-LImaneuver in capturing the U.S. vessels and their contents.

Upon receiving the medal at the ceremony in Iran, Fadavi boasted that “nowhere else in the world can someone apprehend an American boat.”

If that’s not a blatant insult to the United States Navy, I’m not sure what is. Who knows what revelation the American people will witness next from the inept officials that oversee U.S. foreign relations and negotiations.

 

IranKerry Non Iran lives matter Obama%20Netanyahu%20Iran%20Nuke%20Deal%20Cartoon Perspective Pitiful-Deal-NRD-600  Picture2 Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

BONUS Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Mission Accomplished

January 18, 2016

Pitiful-Deal-NRD-600 ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART Heart In God We Trust freedom combo 2

BREAKING: Defense Secretary Slips Up, Reveals Obama Admin LED IRAN Straight to Our Sailors


waving flagBy: Wilmot Proviso on January 14, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/defense-secretary-slips-upObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ARTBright-Future-NRD-600

muslim-obamaIt doesn’t matter if “the 3 a.m. phone call” comes in the middle of the day. Not only will the Obama administration not answer it, but they’ll aid our enemies instead.

First came the fact that President Barack Obama refused to address the arrest of 10 of our sailors by the Iranian military after their boats had mechanical trouble at sea. Then came news that the Obama administration had offered the Iranians an apology for the release of the sailors.

Now comes the disturbing revelation, apparently delivered by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, that the Obama administration tipped off the Iranians that our soldiers were lost at sea and requested their aid.

The news came from Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, during an interview on TheBlaze’s Dana Loesch shortly after Iran’s arrest of the sailors had come to light.

“I understand that (Secretary of State) John Kerry has indicated, look, when he got word, he and Ash Carter called the Iranians to help take care of our Navy guys, because they had some mechanical problems,” Gohmert said.

I’ll give you a second to pick your jaw off the floor.

“When our Navy ships have problems, we don’t call Iran. We call the rest of the Navy. We can call the Air Force, the Army, the Marines, Coast Guard. We don’t call Iran,” Gohmert said.

He also took a swipe at Kerry’s closeness with Iranian officials, noting how the former Democrat presidential nominee had the son of Iran’s foreign minister as the best man at his daughter’s wedding.Suicide-USA-NRD-600

“But I guess, you know, if you have relatives that have weddings that involve the people that are in charge in Iran, well, maybe you feel that comfortable,” Gohmert said. “But you know, Dana, there are secrets on every military ship we have … that has no business being in the hands of the Iranians.”Deflated Diplomacy

But, hey — the Obama administration has given the Iranians everything else via the Iran deal, why not give them Navy secrets, as well?

This shows just how derelict the Obama administration was in its duty. Not only did they apologize to the Iranians, they actively delivered our sailors into the clutches of their military.

This rot starts at the top — and if Barack Obama can apologize to Iran, he can also apologize to the American people.

Pitiful-Deal-NRD-600 Missing-Piece-600-LI Iran Collection Cong-Sign-600-LI Bright-Future-NRD-600 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Congress Moves to Label Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group


BY: November 3, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/congress-moves-to-label-muslim-brotherhood-a-terrorist-group

Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Egypt / AP

The legislation outlines the Brotherhood’s long history of sponsoring terrorism and outlines congressional support for it to be designated a global terrorist outfit. The bill also would force Secretary of State John Kerry to explain why the Obama administration has been hesitant to label the Brotherhood a terrorist group.

 

The Brotherhood’s political wing has been banned in Egypt, where affiliates of the organization overthrew the government and then violently cracked down on its opposition, the United States has avoided labeling the organization a sponsor of terrorism.Muslims in the White House Administration

Should the State Department refuse to move forward with the designation, the bill would require it to provide a justification for this policy, according to the bill.

Multiple House lawmakers spearheaded a similar effort last year, but the bill failed to become law.

This time around, Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) is heading the legislation in the Senate, while Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R., Fla.) is handling the House version of the bill, sources said.

“We have to stop pretending that the Brotherhood are not responsible for the terrorism they advocate and finance,” Cruz told the Free Beacon. “We have to see it for what it is: a key international organization dedicated to waging violent jihad.  Since the Obama administration refuses to utter the words’”radical Islamic terrorism,’ and Congress owes it to the American people to tell them the truth about this threat.”

The bill also helps combat the notion that Brotherhood is a peaceful political group, Cruz said.

“This bill puts the lie to the notion that the Muslim Brotherhood is a peaceful political organization that can be a legitimate partner for America,” the lawmaker said. “In 2008 the Justice Department successfully prosecuted the largest terrorism-financing trial in American history arguing that the Muslim Brotherhood directed U.S. affiliates such as the Holy Land Foundation to provide ‘media, money and men’ to Hamas. That support was used for terrorist attacks against Americans and our allies in the Middle East.  When they are capable they will try to do the same thing here.”

The bill, which includes a lengthy history of the Brotherhood’s links to radical terrorist leaders and violent incidents, concludes that “the Muslim Brotherhood meets the criteria for designation as a foreign terrorist organization.”

It would require the State Department and other agencies to determine whether the Brotherhood officially meets the requirements to be designated under U.S. law as a terrorist organization.

However, “if the Secretary of State determines that the Muslim Brotherhood does not meet the criteria,” it must submit to Congress “a detailed justification as to which criteria have not been met,” according to the bill.

Muslim Brotherhood affiliates as well as the group’s members have been listed as sponsors of terrorism in the past by the U.S. government. The terrorist group Hamas, a longtime Brotherhood affiliate, has been sanctioned for some time.Muslims in the White House Administration

The organization garnered international headlines after its rise to power following a coup in Egypt that took down its longtime former leader. While in power, the Brotherhood cracked down on opponents and waged violent campaigns against Christians and others who opposed the group’s radical ideology.

Five countries—Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Russia—already consider the Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Israel, Canada, and the United Kingdom are examining the possibility of designating it a terrorist organization as well.

Lawmakers such as Cruz maintain that the Brotherhood poses a direct threat to U.S. national security, though the Obama administration has held meetings with the organization’s representatives.

A senior member of the Brotherhood was hosted at the White House last year, while other representatives of the group have been granted entrance to the United States. Senior U.S. officials have warned in the past that the Brotherhood both in the United States and overseas have backed terrorist acts. “I can say at the outset that elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism,” said Robert Mueller, the former director of the FBI, during testimony in 2011.

muslim-obamaIntelligence officials have established that elements of the Brotherhood run terrorist financing operations in the United States. Much of this information, however, remains classified.

Other officials have explained that terror groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and al Qaeda can all trace their roots back to the Muslim Brotherhood and its leaders.

Cruz has also led congressional efforts to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps an official state sponsor of terrorism.

That bill, submitted at the end of September, would likely mitigate the impact of sanctions relief provided to Iran under the recently inked nuclear deal.

“Branches of the [Revolutionary Guard Corps] have murdered hundreds of Americans,” Cruz said in a statement at the time. “They have attacked our allies, notably Israel. They have provided material support for other designated terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah and Hamas. Yet for years the United States has sanctioned [Revolutionary Guard Corps] entities while leaving the organization itself untouched.”

Obama Muslim collection Islamapologist against America In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Iran to Sell Enriched Uranium?


ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ARTPitiful-Deal-NRD-600Secretary of State John Kerry must be quite the negotiator. The Foreign Policy Initiative has compiled not U.S. opening positions but rather President Obama and Kerry’s red lines, almost all of which Obama and Kerry collapsed upon.

For example, in December 2013, Kerry spoke about the need for Iran to dismantle its nuclear program, a position in line with six UN Security Council Resolutions, and yet Obama and Kerry ultimately blessed Iran maintaining more P1 centrifuges than Pakistan maintained when that state built its nuclear arsenal.

Then, there was the underground nuclear facility at Fordow. Speaking at the Brookings Institution, PerspectiveObama said, “We know that they don’t need to have an underground, fortified facility like Fordow in order to have a peaceful nuclear program.” He was right, but conceded Iran’s ability to maintain its hardened facility anyway.

When it comes to Iran’s uranium enrichment, Obama and Kerry conceded Iran’s “right to enrich” right out of the gate, the negotiating equivalent of meeting the used car salesman’s first price, and then limiting negotiations to whether or not there would be leather seats. Don’t worry, the deal proponents said. Iran would take its surplus enriched uranium stockpiles and dilute them or convert them into oxide.

Obama%20Netanyahu%20Iran%20Nuke%20Deal%20CartoonWell, it seems now that Iran had other plans. According to Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, Iran may sell its enriched uranium “to a foreign country” in exchange for additional natural uranium.

So, a plan that Obama and team swore would make the Middle East and the world safer and successfully contain proliferation may now actually increase the provision of enriched uranium to countries that may harbor ambitions to proliferate themselves. Araghchi did not mention to which countries Iran might sell enriched uranium, nor has the United States Missing-Piece-600-LIasked. Now, many potential producers of natural uranium the United States need not worry about: It is doubtful, for example, Japan, Australia, or Bulgaria. But, there are other countries — Algeria and Argentina — for example, that could present real problems should they seek to jump-start their nuclear programs. Argentina’s relationship with Iran, in particular, bears closer scrutiny, especially after the assassination of Alberto Nisman, a prosecutor who was pursuing illegal Argentine-Iranian dealings.

Much can be said about the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the so-called Iran deal. That it made the world safer is not a claim that can be Bright-Future-NRD-600substantiated, however, as Iranian declarations and revelations coming seemingly every single week now demonstrate.

Unlock this and every COMMENTARY article, including our entire archive dating back to 1945, and featuring so many classic, epoch-defining articles by some of the very best minds of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Enjoy every new issue—either in print, on our responsive website, or on our beautiful, hand-crafted iPad edition, enriched with multimedia and other web-exclusive content.

 

Disarmed Cong-Sign-600-LI In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Branco Cartoon – Assume the Position

Posted by    Thursday, October 15, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/10/branco-cartoon-assume-the-position/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29

U.S. Foreign Policy

Indenification of Obama ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART Liberals Hate Merchants The Lower you go Demorates B2A_FvyCMAE14px tyrants muslim-obama cause of death freedom Obama Muslim collection Dupe and Chains In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Pentagon weighs using force to protect US-backed Syria rebels targeted by Russia


waving flagPublished October 02, 2015, FoxNews.com

Senior U.S. military leaders and defense officials are debating whether military force should be used to protect Washington-backed Syrian rebels who have come under attack by Russian airstrikes in recent days. The Associated Press reported early Friday that the question was part of a broader debate within the Pentagon about the the broader dilemma of how the administration should respond to what White House press secretary Josh Earnest described as Russia’s “indiscriminate military operations against the Syrian opposition.”

Tensions between the U.S. and Russia are escalating over Russian airstrikes that are serving to strengthen Syrian President Bashar Assad by targeting the so-called “moderate” rebels rather than hitting Islamic State (ISIS) fighters it promised to attack.

Turkey’s Foreign Ministry says Ankara and its allies in the U.S.-led coalition are calling on Russia to immediately cease attacks on the Syrian opposition and to focus on fighting Islamic State militants.

Meanwhile, a joint statement by the United States, France, Germany, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Britain expressed concern over Russia’s military actions, saying they will “only fuel more extremism and radicalization.” The text of the statement was released by the Turkish Foreign Ministry on Friday, and confirmed by the French Foreign Ministry.

The Pentagon on Thursday had its first conversation with Russian officials in an effort to avoid any unintended U.S.-Russian confrontations as the airstrikes continue in the skies over Syria. During the video call, Elissa Slotkin, who represented the U.S. side, expressed America’s concerns that Russia is targeting areas where there are few if any ISIS forces operating. Slotkin is the acting assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs.

A key concern is the prospect of the U.S. and Russia getting drawn into a shooting war in the event that Russian warplanes hit moderate Syrian rebels who have been trained and equipped by the U.S. military.

At U.N. headquarters in New York, Secretary of State John Kerry said: “What is important is Russia has to not be engaged in any activities against anybody but ISIL. That’s clear. We have made that very clear.”Picture1

“We are not yet where we need to be to guarantee the safety and security” of those carrying out the airstrikes, he said.

In an interview late Thursday on CBS’s “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” Kerry described the military consultations as “a way of making sure that planes aren’t going to be shooting at each other and making things worse.”

“What is happening is a catastrophe, a human catastrophe really unparalleled in modern times,” Kerry said of the Syrian crisis, adding that Russia should help the United States “persuade Assad to be the saver of his country, not the killer of his country.”Picture2

U.S. officials made it clear earlier this year that rebels trained by the U.S. would receive air support in the event they are attacked by either IS or Syrian government troops. Currently, only about 80 U.S.-trained Syrian rebels are back in Syria fighting with their units.

The U.S. policy is very specific. It doesn’t address a potential attack by Russian planes and does not include Syrian rebels who have not been through the U.S. military training, even though they may be aligned with the U.S. or fighting Islamic State militants.

So far, the Russian airstrikes have been in western Syria. The Syrians trained and equipped by the U.S. have primarily been operating in the north.

U.S. officials said the issue is one of many being hashed out by top leaders within the department and the military’s Joint Staff. One official said they are weighing the potential fallout.

At worst, if Russia bombs rebels trained by the U.S. and American fighter jets intercede to protect the Syrians, the exchange could trigger an all-out confrontation with Russia — a potential disaster the administration would like to avoid.

Fueling the concerns is the fact that Russia has aircraft in Syria with air-to-air combat capacity, even though ISIS has no air force and the only aircraft in the skies belong to U.S.-led coalition or the Syrian government.

Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook would not provide details of the talks with Russia. But much of the discussion involved proposals for avoiding conflict between U.S. and Russian aircraft flying over Syria.

Backing rebelsKerry said he foresees further consultations with the Russians about air operations. And Cook said the U.S. side proposed using specific international radio frequencies for distress calls by military pilots flying in Syrian airspace, but he was not more specific about that or other proposals.

Russia’s defense ministry said that over the past 24 hours it had damaged or destroyed 12 targets in Syria belonging to the ISIS fighters, including a command center and ammunition depots. A U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, Col. Steve Warren, said he had no indication that the Russians had hit Islamic State targets.

“While there is always danger of conflict, of inadvertent contact” between coalition and Russian warplanes, “we are continuing with our operations,” Warren told reporters at the Pentagon.

SEE THE NEWS BRAODCAST BELOW:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4527007104001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>&#8221; href=”http://http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4527007104001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>”&gt;http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4527007104001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript&gt; aligncenter wp-image-19750″ src=”https://mrb562.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/syria1.jpg&#8221; alt=”syria” width=”827″ height=”597″ />

Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies In God We Trust freedom combo 2

 

‘Tacit’ deal between US, Russia to end Syria war: Assad adviser


waving flagAFP 

Bouthaina Shaaban, a cabinet-level adviser to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, says the US and Russia have reached an unspoken deal to end the Syria war

Damascus (AFP) – Russia and the United States have reached a “tacit agreement” on ending Syria’s bloody crisis, a senior adviser to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has said. “The current US administration wants to find a solution to the crisis in Syria. There is a tacit agreement between the US and Russia to reach this solution,” Bouthaina Shaaban said in an interview with state television late Wednesday.

“The US recognises now that Russia has profound knowledge of this region and a better assessment of the situation,” she said.

“The current international climate is heading towards detente and towards a solution for the crisis in Syria.”

Shaaban said there was a “change in the West’s positions” over Syria’s war, which has killed more than 240,000 people and displaced millions since 2011.

Russia, a decades-long backer of Syria’s regime, has said it would not accept Assad’s departure as a prerequisite for launching any peace process in the war-torn country.

On Wednesday, French President Francois Hollande called for a new Syria peace conference “so that all the countries who want to see peace restored in Syria can contribute.”

While Hollande maintained that there could be “no transition without (Assad’s) departure,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Thursday that the Syrian leader should be involved in the talks.

“We have to speak with many actors, this includes Assad, but others as well,” Merkel told a press conference after an EU summit on the migration crisis sparked by the Syrian war.

The diplomatic flurry came amid concerns about increased Russian military support to Assad, including Moscow’s announcement Thursday that it would hold naval drills in the eastern Mediterranean region in September and October.

On Wednesday, the Syrian military deployed Russian-supplied drones for the first time, a security source in Damascus said.

The army has received new weaponry from Russia for its fight against jihadists, including at least five fighter jets, a senior Syrian military official told AFP.

95b119e45c50cbea1e7a4fbfa33415f3 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Obama Admin Will Not Reveal to Congress Number of Americans Killed By Iran


waving flagBY:  / September 18, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/obama-admin-will-not-reveal-to-congress-number-of-americans-killed-by-iran

John Kerry

John Kerry / AP

muslim-obamaIn a series of on-the-record responses obtained exclusively by the Free Beacon, and provided in written form to Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), Kerry sidestepped the questions on all of the three separate occasions he was asked to provide the figures. The questions come as the United States prepares to unfreeze more than $100 billion in Iranian assets under the terms of the recently inked nuclear deal. Experts fear the Islamic Republic will funnel the cash windfall into its rogue terror operations and proxy groups.

Lawmakers and experts also have expressed concern about portions of the deal that will lift international sanctions on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as well as Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s financial empire.

In the list of questions submitted to Kerry, Rubio asks: “How many U.S. citizens have been killed by Iran, including by Iran’s terrorist proxies, since 1979?”

The secretary of state declined to provide an answer, instead saying that the administration takes the murder of American citizens “very seriously.”Picture1

“The death of any U.S. citizen due to acts of terrorism is a tragedy that we take very seriously,” Kerry writes. “As the President said in his Aug. 5 speech, a nuclear-armed Iran is a danger to Israel, America and the world.”

“The central goal of the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] is to eliminate the imminent threat of a nuclear-armed Iran,” Kerry continued.

When asked a second time by Rubio to specify “How many U.S. troops and soldiers were killed by Iranian-provided weapons or by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Kerry said, again sidestepping the question.

“We are extraordinarily grateful for the service of the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, and we mourn the loss of every service member,” Kerry writes. “The JCPOA is not about a change in the broader U.S. relationship with Iran. It is about eliminating the biggest and most imminent threat—a nuclear-armed Iran.”Lies Lies and More Lies

When separately asked to detail “how many Israelis have been killed by Iran, including by Iran’s terrorist proxies since 1979,” Kerry again declined to respond.

“The central goal of the JCPOA is to eliminate the imminent threat that Iran will acquire a nuclear weapon,” Kerry said. “But the JCPOA cannot erase decades of Iranian anti-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric and actions.”I am from the US Government Israels-Back-590-LI IranIraselNukes Israel-Tied-600-LI

A State Department official told the Free Beacon that no further information on these questions could be provided beyond what Kerry wrote.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R., Texas) told the Free Beacon that the administration’s reluctance to provide information about Iran’s efforts to kill Americans is “unconscionable.” “It is a fact that Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and that they have killed and maimed thousands of upstanding military men and women at the hands of sheer hate,” said Gohmert, who has been a vocal critic of the Iran deal.

“It is unconscionable that the Obama administration is refusing to answer questions on just how many Americans have been killed or maimed by Iran,” the lawmaker said. “One thing we know— Iran says they will continue their efforts to destroy the United States and its people so one hundred billion dollars will allow Iran to kill and maim multiples of the numbers of Americans they already have killed and maimed, making the Obama administration knowing accessories.”ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART

Michael Pregent, director of the advocacy organization Veterans Against the Deal, called it shocking that the administration would not release these figures.

“We find it absurd that the Obama administration and the State Department would deny information on Iran’s direct role in the deaths of Americans in Iraq from sitting U.S. senators,” said Pregent, whose organization has released several ads highlighting Iran’s terror operations against U.S. soldiers.

“For the State Department to protect Iran by keeping information detrimental to Iran’s Quds force and [IRGC Leader] Qasem Soleimani from the American people is an affront to veterans affected by this enemy and service members currently in harms way in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Pregent said.

Recent estimates by U.S. intelligence officials put the number of American soldiers killed by Iran in Iraq and Afghanistan at around 500.

The issue of Iran’s terror funding has emerged as a key concern among critics of the nuclear accord.

A Free Beacon report revealed that Iran has been spending billions of dollars to pay the salaries of terrorists. This includes potentially millions of dollars in monthly payments to pro-government forces in Syria, more than $1 billion in military aid to fighters in Iraq, and about $20 million annually to Hamas terrorists, according to a private report commissioned by Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.).

The report was assembled following a request by Kirk for the Obama administration to disclose its estimates of “Iranian military spending, as well as Iranian assistance to Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq, the Assad government, Hezbollah, and Hamas,” according to a copy of that report.

Kerry additionally discloses in his responses to Rubio that Iran is permitted to test fire ballistic missiles under the nuclear accord.What did you say 07.jpg

“It would not be a violation of the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] if Iran tested a conventional ballistic missile,” Kerry disclosed in the document.

Destroyed for lack of knowledge 95b119e45c50cbea1e7a4fbfa33415f3 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Kerry signs UN arms treaty, senators threaten to block it


       Published September 25, 2013 FoxNews.com

Socialism alert
kerry_un_092413.jpg

kerry_un_092413.jpg Sept. 24, 2013: President Obama walks past Secretary of State John Kerry during a meeting at U.N. headquarters in New York. (AP)

Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday signed a controversial U.N. treaty on arms regulation, riling U.S. lawmakers who vow the Senate will not ratify the agreement.  As he signed the document, Kerry called the treaty a “significant step” in addressing illegal gun sales, while claiming it would also protect gun rights. “This is about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors. This is about reducing the risk of international transfers of conventional arms that will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes. This is about keeping Americans safe and keeping America strong,” he said. “This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes.” Bull

Imperial President ObamaU.S. lawmakers, though, have long claimed the treaty could lead to new gun control measures. They note the U.S. Senate has final say on whether to approve the agreement.  Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., in a letter to President Obama, urged his administration not to take any action to implement the treaty without the consent of the Senate.  He claimed the treaty raises “fundamental issues” concerning “individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.” 

The National Rifle Association blasted the plan, claiming it would impose an “invasive registration scheme” by requiring importing countries to give exporting countries information on “end users.”  “The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “These are blatant attacks on the constitutional rights and liberties of every law-abiding American. The NRA will continue to fight this assault on our fundamental freedom.” Hey Leftist

Gun Control Supporters croppedSen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., one of the most vocal opponents of the treaty, also sent a letter to Kerry declaring the treaty “dead in the water,” since a majority of senators has gone on record against the agreement. “The administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected U.N. bureaucrats,” he wrote.  Kerry, who is in New York attending the U.N. General Assembly session, announced earlier this year that the administration planned to sign the treaty.

The treaty would require countries that ratify it to establish national regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms and components and to regulate arms brokers, but it will not explicitly control the domestic use of weapons in any country.  Still, gun-rights supporters on Capitol Hill warn the treaty could be used as the basis for additional gun regulations inside the U.S. and have threatened not to ratify.

Over the summer, 130 members of Congress signed a letter to President Obama and Kerry urging them to reject the measure for this and other reasons.

The chance of adoption by the U.S. is slim. A two-thirds majority would be needed in the Senate to ratify. Wolf and Lamb

trustWhat impact the treaty will have in curbing the estimated $60 billion global arms trade remains to be seen. The U.N. treaty will take effect after 50 countries ratify it, and a lot will depend on which ones ratify and which ones don’t, and how stringently it is implemented.

The Control Arms Coalition, which includes hundreds of non-governmental organizations in more than 100 countries that promoted an Arms Trade Treaty, has said it expects many of the world’s top arms exporters — including Britain, Germany and France — to sign alongside emerging exporters such as Brazil and Mexico. It said the United States is expected to sign later this year. The coalition notes that more than 500,000 people are killed by armed violence every year and predicted that “history will be made” when many U.N. members sign the treaty, which it says is designed “to protect millions living in daily fear of armed violence and at risk of rape, assault, displacement and death.” Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Second AmendmentMany violence-wracked countries, including Congo and South Sudan, are also expected to sign. The coalition said their signature — and ratification — will make it more difficult for illicit arms to cross borders. The treaty covers battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles and missile launchers, and small arms and light weapons. It prohibits states that ratify it from transferring conventional weapons if they violate arms embargoes or if they promote acts of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes. The treaty also prohibits the export of conventional arms if they could be used in attacks on civilians or civilian buildings such as schools and hospitals.

In addition, the treaty requires countries to take measures to prevent the diversion of conventional weapons to the illicit market. This is among the provisions that gun-rights supporters in Congress are concerned about.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

right who want unarmed citizens Makes sitting ducks Criminals and Dictators burke In God We Trust freedom combo 2

And the Iranian Lunacy continues!


waving flagBy Joe Messina – Aug 24, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://therealside.com/2015/08/and-the-iranian-lunacy-continues/#cgQtc1LqYU8MZBRm.99

The loons on the far Left continue to prove my point showing that they have no grasp ofSuicide-USA-NRD-600 the English language. For example: Illegal Aliens aren’t illegal, they just aren’t documented (even though they came here illegally.) Last I checked, there isn’t documentation for permission to enter into this country illegally. Welfare fraud isn’t fraud if you lie on the paperwork to get more money for you and your family. Apparently, lying also has levels of acceptance.

When it comes to the Obama’s and Clinton’s, well, I think at this point, if they told the truth lighting would strike, REPEATEDLY!

Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Let’s just deal with one of the more recent lies statements from Mr. Obama:stop

“Iran has agreed to the most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regiment ever negotiated for any nuclear programs.” (Shades of Bill Clinton-isms and the North Korean agreement. Look how well that worked?) Let’s break it down, shall we? We’ll start off with some dictionary definitions:

ROBUST: capable of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, or successful or impressive and not likely to fail or weaken.

INTRUSIVE: annoying someone by interfering with their privacy; intruding where you are not wanted or welcome.Pitiful-Deal-NRD-600

TRANSPARENCY: (Do I really need to type this one out?)If his mouth is open he must be lying

Given the fact that Obama was a “professor,” you would think he could easily understand these common English words. Now, keeping those terms in mind, which of the following would make the grade?

  1. We need to give a 24 day notice of inspections for facilities that are NOT on the list. If Iran refuses, they can appeal to the committee that they sit on and have the ability to veto a decision. FAIL!
  2. When requiring a soil sample from around facilities believed to be handling nuclear material, Iran can decide to provide the sample themselves. No inspector involved.FAIL!Iran%20UN_jpg
  3. No Americans are allowed to be part of the inspection teams. FAIL!
  4. Only inspectors approved by the Iranian Guard (secret service) are allowed to be inspectors.
  5. Iran has received, or will receive, over $100 billion in sanction money. Will they or have they taken care of their poor or sick? Will they educate their children, both boys and girls? NO! They went right to the Russians to buy weapons and delivery systems. They have been hanging with the North Koreans at all missile launches and nuclear testing. Another FAIL!
  6. The U.S. wants to require Iran to give a full accounting of its past actions. JUST before the deal was signed, Kerry said the United States already knows with certainty what Iran did in the past and that a full accounting is less important than monitoring what it does in the future. Then why did we ask for it? FAIL!Eye-Prize-600-LI
  7. Iran can’t (or isn’t supposed to) supply weapons to others, yet they have been caught selling arms to many in their region, maybe to help see the fruition of “Death to America” or “Death to Israel.”FAIL!
  8. We were told nothing of side deals. FAIL!
  9. Within 5 years they are allowed to purchase conventional weapons. Hellooo… they’re already purchasing them from Russia! FAIL!
  10. Within 10 years they will be able to purchase ballistic missiles. Newsflash, they’re already making deal with North Korea! FAIL!
  11. And this just in from the AP… Iran will be allowed to use its OWN inspectors to check out a site that is suspected of enriching weapons grade uranium. This has a fox and henhouse feel don’t you think? FAIL!

Can those on the Left really believe that a Deflated Diplomacyregime who hates us, that is breaking the same rules it says it will abide by before the ink is dry, who shouts “death to America,” is buying weapons from Russia, and learning how to make and launch nukes from North Korea can be trusted to do their own inspections? This regime plays in the same sandbox with almost every one of our enemies and openly supports terrorists. We’re trusting them, why?

Would you leave an escaped child rapist to watch your 15-year-old daughter, because heDeath to America promised to not touch her, all the while he has child porn up on his smartphone? REALLY?

As I write this, I received a Facebook message from someone calling me a “war monger” because I am against the Iran deal. Apparently, we only have 2 choices? One, sign a deal that gives Iran all the leverage and the U.S. none, or two, go to war. The Obama-Clinton camp knows how to spin.Constancy

There is a 3rd option. It was working with Iran, as it was with IranKerryRussia… sanctions, tighter sanctions, and even tighter sanctions.

But I guess if I were president and was in my last days I would give as many presents as I could to as many of my family members as possible! Who knew it would be nuclear weapons and the destruction of Israel as well as the United States?IranIraselNukes

America, we are in a world of trouble!

 

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagTrust, But Let Iran Verify

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/08/trust-but-let-iran-verify

Cong-Sign-600-LI
ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART Deal-Vest Death to America Deflated Diplomacy Eye-Prize-600-LI Missing-Piece-600-LI Pitiful-Deal-NRD-600 stop Suicide-USA-NRD-600 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

AP EXCLUSIVE: Top secret Clinton emails include drone talk


waving flagBy BRADLEY KLAPPER and KEN DILANIAN Aug 14, 2015

 

URL of the original posting site: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150814/us-clinton-emails-06f20cb060.html

Teflon

(AP) Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks during a campaign…Full Image


WASHINGTON (AP) — The two emails on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private server that an auditor deemed “top secret” include a discussion of a news article detailing a U.S. drone operation and a separate conversation that could point back to highly classified material in an improper manner or merely reflect information collected independently, U.S. officials who have reviewed the correspondence told The Associated Press.

The sourcing of the information could have significant political implications as the 2016 presidential campaign heats up. Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, agreed this week to turn over to the FBI the private server she used as secretary of state, and Republicans in Congress have seized on the involvement of federal law enforcement as a sign that she was either negligent with the nation’s secrets or worse.

On Monday, the inspector general for the 17 spy agencies that make up what is known as the intelligence community told Congress that two of 40 emails in a random sample of the 30,000 emails Clinton gave the State Department for review contained information deemed “Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information,” one of the government’s highest levels of classification.

The two emails were marked classified after consultations with the CIA, which is where the material originated, officials said.

The officials who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity work in intelligence and other agencies. They wouldn’t detail the contents of the emails because of ongoing questions about classification level. Clinton did not transmit the sensitive information herself, they said, and nothing in the emails she received makes clear reference to communications intercepts, confidential intelligence methods or any other form of sensitive sourcing.

The drone exchange, the officials said, begins with a copy of a news article that discusses the CIA drone program that targets terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere. While a secret program, it is well-known and often reported on. The copy makes reference to classified information, and a Clinton adviser follows up by dancing around a top secret in a way that could possibly be inferred as confirmation, they said. Several officials, however, described this claim as tenuous.

But a second email reviewed by Charles McCullough, the intelligence community inspector general, appears more suspect. Nothing in the message is “lifted” from classified documents, the officials said, though they differed on where the information in it was sourced. Some said it improperly points back to highly classified material, while others countered that it was a classic case of what the government calls “parallel reporting” — different people knowing the same thing through different means.

The emails came to light Tuesday after Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, reported that McCullough found four “highly classified” emails on the unusual homebrew server that Clinton used while she was secretary of State. Two were sent back to the State Department for review, but Grassley said the other two were, in fact, classified at the closely guarded “Top Secret/SCI level.”

In a four-page fact sheet that accompanied a letter to Clinton supporters, Clinton spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri stressed that Clinton was permitted to use her own email account as a government employee and that the same process concerning classification reviews would still be taking place had she used the standard “state.gov” email account used by most department employees. The State Department, meanwhile, stressed that it wasn’t clear if the material at issue ought to be considered classified at all.Like I Said

Still, the developments suggested that the security of Clinton’s email setup and how she guarded the nation’s secrets will remain relevant campaign topics. Even if the emails highlighted by the intelligence community prove innocuous, she will still face questions about whether she set up the private server with the aim of avoiding scrutiny, whether emails she deleted because she said they were personal were actually work-related, and whether she appropriately shielded such emails from possible foreign spies and hackers.

Clinton says she exchanged about 60,000 emails in her four years as secretary of state. She turned over all but what she said were personal emails late last year. The department has been making those public as they are reviewed and scrubbed of any sensitive data.

The State Department advised employees not to use personal email accounts for work, but it wasn’t prohibited. But Clinton’s senior advisers at the State Department would have been briefed upon basic protocol for handling classified information and retaining government records. In Clinton’s time, most officials saved their emails onto a separate file or printed them out when leaving office. Only recently has the department begun automatically archiving the records of dozens of senior officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry.

In the emails, Clinton’s advisers appear cognizant of secrecy protections.

In a series of August 2009 emails, Clinton aide Huma Abedin told Clinton that the U.S. point-man for Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, and another official wanted “to do a secure” conversation to discuss Afghan elections. Clinton said she could talk after she received a fax of a classified Holbrooke memo, also on a secure line. Later, Abedin wrote: “He can talk now. We can send secure fax now. And then connect call.”

But other times, the line was blurred. Among Clinton’s exchanges now censored as classified by the State Department was a brief exchange in October 2009 with Jeffrey Feltman, then the top U.S. diplomat for the Middle East. Both Clinton and Feltman’s emails about an “Egyptian proposal” for a reconciliation ceremony with Hamas are marked B-1.4, classified for national security reasons, and completely blacked out from the email release.

A longer email the same day from Clinton to former Sen. George Mitchell, then Mideast peace envoy, is also censored. Mitchell responds tersely and carefully that “the Egyptian document has been received and is being translated. We’ll review it tonight and tomorrow morning, will consult with the Pals (Palestinians) through our Consul General, and then I’ll talk with Gen. S again. We’ll keep you advised.”Constancy

Associated Press writers Stephen Braun and Eric Tucker contributed to this report.

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

 

Dempsey: I Never Said Choices Were Iran Deal or War


waving flagBy Cathy Burke   |   Wednesday, 29 Jul 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Iran-Deal-GenMartin-Dempsey/2015/07/29/id/659518

Image: Dempsey: I Never Said Choices Were Iran Deal or War
(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

The Army’s top general says it was never his military advice that the United States either make a nuclear deal with Iran or face the prospect of war — a haunting choice President Barack Obama has claimed Congress now faces in its scrutiny of a pact with Tehran. Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate hearing Wednesday on the deal that he never presented Obama with an either-or choice for a nuclear proliferation agreement, the National Review reports“At no time did that come up in our conversation nor did I make that comment,” Dempsey told Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst. “I can tell you that we have a range of options and I always present them.” culture of deciet
“It’s not a choice the president wants to make, but it’s the inevitable consequence of them moving to assert what they believe is their right in the furtherance of their program,” he insisted, the Review reports.

Mississippi Republican Roger Wicker called Dempsey’s brief opening statement a “tepid endorsement” of the accord and “damning disagreement with faint praise,” but Dempsey disagreed, saying he supported the deal, Defense News reports. Instead, Dempsey called his assessment neither “tepid nor enthusiastic, but pragmatic,” adding his input in the deal was sought “episodically,” and that his final recommendation was offered weeks before talks concluded.

Dempsey also told New Hampshire Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte that he advised Obama not to agree to the lifting of sanctions related to Iran’s ballistic missile program and other arms.Eye-Prize-600-LI

“Yes, and I used the phrase ‘as long as possible’ and then that was the point at which the negotiation continued — but yes, that was my military advice,” he said, the Review reports.

Yet he seemed caught off guard when Ayotte pointed out the “plain language” of the bargain requires the United States “to help strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against sabotage of its nuclear program” — even to the point of warning Iran if Israel tries to launch cyberattacks against the program. “I hadn’t thought about that, senator, and I would like to have the opportunity to do so,” he responded, the Review reports.What did you say 07.jpg
Congress, which has begun a 60-day review of the deal, is expected to vote in September. If the Republican-controlled Congress passes a resolution of disapproval for the deal, Obama has said he will veto it.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related Stories:

freedom combo 2

Kerry: We Can’t Reveal Contents of Secret Side Deals to American People


waving flag12:24 PM, Jul 29, 2015 • By DANIEL HALPER

URL of the original posting site: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/kerry-we-cant-reveal-contents-secret-side-deals-american-people_1000761.html

Secretary of State John Kerry testified on Capitol Hill today the U.S. government will not be revealing the contents of secret side deals with Iran to the American people. Senator Tom Cotton wanted to know why it can’t be made public.

Watch the exchange:

kerry

“I’d like to stick with you, Secretary Kerry,” Cotton said. “Why can’t we confirm or deny the content of these agreements in public? Why is this classified? It’s not a sensitive U.S. government document.”

“Because we respect the process of the IAEA and we don’t have their authorization to reveal what is a confidential agreement between them and another country,” said Kerry.

Cotton said, “So the ayatollahs will know what they agreed to but not the American people?”

Kerry said that members of Congress would be able to learn about it in a classified briefing.

kerry2

Eye-Prize-600-LI ObamaIranian-Flag-WORD-ART freedom combo 2

 

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flag“Gullible’s” Travels

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagA Pitiful Deal

‘Sheer insanity’: Iran-deal critics go nuclear on Obama


waving flagPosted By Garth Kant On 07/13/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/source-iran-deal-appears-imminent

Secretary of State John Kerry (far right) negotiates with Iranians
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (far right) negotiates with Iranians

muslim-obamaWASHINGTON – Criticism of President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran has been fast and furious. “I don’t trust Obama on this anymore than I trusted him on ‘if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,’” talk-show host Laura Ingraham told WND. She added, “Elections have consequences—from our health-care system, to the definition of ‘marriage,’ to our military strength, to now our national security, Barack Obama has, indeed, ‘fundamentally transformed’ America.”

Sheer insanity

“This is sheer insanity,” Iran expert Clare Lopez told WND. “This agreement legitimizes Iran’s overt nuclear weapons program and provides both cover and funding for its clandestine nuclear weapons program, with extra financial bonuses for its global terrorist network,” said the vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy.

In a dawn speech from the White House on Tuesday, Obama proclaimed, “[W]e have stopped the spread of nuclear weapons in this region,” but a parade of ferocious critics claimed just the opposite.DO NOT JACKASS

Iranian jackpot

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu feared the worst, saying, “From the initial reports we can already conclude that this agreement is an historic mistake for the world.” He predicted, “Iran is going to receive a sure path to nuclear weapons.”  “Iran will get a jackpot, a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars, which will enable it to continue to pursue its aggression and terror in the region and in the world,” said the prime minister. “One cannot prevent an agreement when the negotiators are willing to make more and more concessions to those who, even during the talks, keep chanting: ‘Death to America,’” Netanyahu concluded.

License to kill

By contrast, Obama said he hoped the deal would cause Iran to choose a “different path, one of tolerance, of peaceful resolution to conflict.” He also predicted a greater chance of war in the Mideast if Congress rejects the deal.More Evidence

Former Israeli military spokeswoman Miri Regev said, instead, it gave Iran a “license to kill.”

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely called it “a historic surrender by the West to the axis of evil headed by Iran.”

Alinsky affectHillary blames Bush

Hillary Clinton didn’t fully endorse the deal in public, but she reportedly did in private, during a meeting with congressional Democrats. During a brief press conference on Capitol Hill, the presidential candidate and former secretary of state merely called the deal “an important step,” one that “puts a lid on Iran’s nuclear programs.” But, behind closed doors, Clinton gave the deal a “full-throated” endorsement, according to Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va.. Rep. Steve Israel, D- N.Y., said Clinton even blamed President George W. Bush for Iran’s nuclear proliferation.

According to the congressman, Clinton said it would hypocritical for Republicans to criticize Obama’s deal because, “[F]or eight years under George Bush, the Iranians built two nuclear facilities and they mastered the nuclear fuel cycle and enhanced the number of centrifuges spinning.”

Red lines become green lights

However, Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said, “The bottom line is: The deal doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear program — it preserves it.”  “I’m concerned the redlines we drew have turned into green-lights; that Iran will be required only to limit rather than eliminate its nuclear program, while the international community will be required to lift the sanctions, and that it doesn’t provide for anytime-any-place inspections of suspected sites,” he said in a statement.

Catastrophic

Leading GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump summed up the deal as, “Iran gets everything and loses nothing.” He predicted, “The inspections will not be followed, and Iran will no longer have any sanctions.” Trump called the agreement very dangerous and ” a horrible and perhaps catastrophic event for Israel.”Why

The busniessman analyzed the deal harshly, stating, “[W]e should have kept the billions of dollars we have agreed to pay them. Any great dealmaker would know this is a perfect example of ‘tapping along’ and because they have been unchecked for so long throughout this extremely lengthy process, I guarantee they are much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than they were at the start of negotiations.”

Trump sized up the Obama administration as “incompetent leaders and even more incompetent negotiators.”

Death sentence for Israel

“A possible death sentence for the nation of Israel” that will “make everything worse” is how Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., described the deal on MSNBC. ‘This is most dangerous, irresponsible step I’ve ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast,’ said the presidential candidate. “With this deal, you’ve ensured that the Arabs will go nuclear. You have put Israel in the worst possible box. This will be a death sentence over time for Israel if they don’t push back. You put our nation at risk….Barack Obama and John Kerry have been dangerously naive about the Mideast in general. They’ve taken it to a new level and any senator who votes for this is voting for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast,” he said in reference to the Corker bill, which requires a vote by two-thirds of Congress to reject the deal. Congress now has 60 days to review the deal and to try to stop it with legislation.

However, Obama, promised to veto any attempt by Congress to stop the deal, saying, “I am confident that this deal will meet the national security interests of the United States and our allies.”Constancy

Betrayal 

Another presidential candidate, Gov. Scott Walker, R-Wisc., bluntly declared, “President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran will be remembered as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures.” Announcing his candidacy on Monday, Walker promised to “terminate” the deal on his first day in office.

Presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, called it a ” staggeringly bad deal” and a “mistake of historic proportion. It is a fundamental betrayal of the security of the United States and of our closest allies, first and foremost Israel.” Cruz added that it seemed “President Obama would concede almost anything to get any deal – even a terrible deal.”B2A_FvyCMAE14px

GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina disputed Obama’s claim the deal will stop a Mideast nuclear arms race, noting, “Our Arab allies have said just the opposite, so has Israel, so there is reason for suspicion here that’s not partisan. Saudi Arabia and Israel, as we know, don’t agree on very much, but they do agree that this is a bad deal,” she said on CBS.

Shame on Obama

Republican presidential hopeful and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said, “Shame on the Obama administration for agreeing to a deal that empowers an evil Iranian regime to carry out its threat to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ and bring ‘death to America.’ John Kerry should have long ago gotten up on his crutches, walked out of the sham talks, and went straight to Jerusalem to stand next to Benjamin Netanyahu and declared that America will stand with Israel and the other sane governments of the Middle East instead of with the terrorist government of Iran,” he added.

Another presidential candidate, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said Obama gave “concession after concession to a regime that has American blood on its hands, holds Americans hostage, and has consistently violated every agreement it ever signed.”Iran Close to a Deal

He predicted Congress will reject the the deal because it “undermines our national security.”

Appeasement, not diplomacy

Another GOP presidential candidate, Jeb Bush, said, “This isn’t diplomacy – it is appeasement.” He labeled the agreement as “dangerous, deeply flawed, and short sighted,” and complained, “A comprehensive agreement should require Iran to verifiably abandon – not simply delay – its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.”

Presidential contender Rick Santorum blasted the deal as “a catastrophic capitulation” that give Iran “legitimacy” in the international community.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, another presidential candidate, said “While Secretary Clinton has been the architect of President Obama’s foreign policy, she can do the right thing and prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and oppose this deal.”

Clinton’s rival for the presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., maintained, “This is a victory for diplomacy over saber-rattling and could keep the United States from being drawn into another never-ending war in the Middle East.”Keys taken

Dangerous game

GOP presidential hopeful, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Obama was “playing a dangerous game with our national security. The deal threatens Israel, it threatens the United States, and it turns 70 years of nuclear policy on its head,” Christie said. “I urge Republicans and Democrats in Congress to put aside politics and act in the national interest. Vote to disapprove this deal in numbers that will override the President’s threatened veto.”

Obama claimed, “This deal is not built on trust” because “it is built on verification,” but a chorus of critics strongly disputed that.If his mouth is open he must be lying

Worse deal than imagined possible

“It’s a deal worse than even we imagined possible,” said Weekly Standard editor William Kristol. “It’s a deal that gives the Iranian regime $140 billion in return for … effectively nothing: no dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, no anytime/anywhere inspections, no curbs on Iran’s ballistic missile program, no maintenance of the arms embargo, no halt to Iran’s sponsorship of terror.”

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said the deal will secure Iran’s pathway to a bomb, and that, “This deal will guarantee Iran the capability to carry out its clear intent.”

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., added, “I don’t know what information the Obama administration possesses that indicates this deal will actually prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon or will cause the mullahs to reduce their support for worldwide terrorism, but it sure isn’t the same intelligence we’re seeing in the Intelligence Committee.”

Threat to civilization

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas warned the deal was “disastrous for the future of the United States,” an “ultimate betrayal of Israel, Egypt and moderate Muslim nations,” and, “a devastating threat to civilization which must not be ratified” by Congress. The congressman observed the agreements reported provisions include “the lifting of the embargo on arms being sold to Iran; Iran will be allowed to keep its military sites off-limits ‘for a time;’ Iran can veto any nuclear inspections that were supposed to be allowed ‘anytime, anywhere;’ no nuclear facilities will actually be dismantled; and Iran will be ever closer to making good on its promise to try to wipe Israel off the map.” Gohmert concluded, “The Obama-Kerry deal agrees to the release of tens of billions of dollars to Iran that unquestionably will include money used to terrorize and kill Americans, Christians, Jews and moderate Muslims the world over.”

Paves path to Iranian nuke

Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security and a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, said, “This Iran deal gives (Iranian Supreme Leader) Ayatollah Khamenei exactly what he wants: billions of dollars in sanctions relief, validation of the Iranian nuclear program, and the ability to stymie inspections. It even lifts sanctions against Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers during the campaign in Iraq,” he added. “The deal will further destabilize the Middle East, allow Iran to foment more terrorism, and aid Iran’s rise as the dominant power in the region. By paving Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon, the deal harms American national security and effectively stabs our close ally Israel, which Iran has threatened to wipe off the map, in the back. Congress needs to move swiftly to block this dangerous deal.”

“This act of appeasement by the Obama Administration now legitimizes both Iran’s path to nuclear weapons and the terrorist regime itself. It endangers the national security interests of the U.S., Israel, and allies across the word,” said former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton. “Not only can Iran continue to pursue its 30-plus year objective of pursuing deliverable nuclear weapons, but the regime, the leading state sponsor of terror for over 35 years, is also free of global financial sanctions. Ultimately, we will see that Obama has capitulated to Iran’s demands, and this agreement is simply a pit stop between one set of negotiations and the other,” he added.

Historic victory for Iran

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C. said, “The nuclear agreement is a historic victory — for Iran. For the last 18 months the Obama Administration made concession after concession to the rogue regime in Tehran, while taking the most basic demands off the table to try to secure a deal. I warned when the framework agreement was released that it relied on blind faith in a notoriously dishonest regime.”Non-Negotiable-600-LI

He added, “The fact that the President came out today and threatened to veto any legislation that could potentially block the deal’s implementation is particularly concerning. If the deal is in fact strong, why is the President worried that Congress may reject it? Could it be the same reason why the Iranian regime is celebrating their victory? This historic deal requires strict scrutiny by Congress and I will not support any deal that puts the safety and security of the American people at risk.”

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, called it “worse than no deal at all” because it “removes sanctions without robust means of ensuring the regime’s disarmament and compliance with its international obligations.”

“Sadly, the Administration just lit the fuse for a nuclear arms race in the Middle East,” said Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb. “We all know Iran’s neighbors will not sit idly as the world’s largest state-sponsor of terror becomes a nuclear-threshold state.”

Strengthens Iran’s ‘constructive’ role

Ordinary Iranians celebrated the deal in the streets and on twitter. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif called it a “win-win solution” that builds a “new chapter of hope.” In a nationwide televised address Tuesday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani claimed, “Iran has never sought to manufacture a nuclear weapon and will never seek to manufacture a nuclear weapon.”

Secretary of State John Kerry called it “the good deal that we sought.”

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said the deal was “a sign of hope for the entire world.”

British Prime Minister, David Cameron, said the agreement “secures our fundamental aim — to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon — and that will help to make our world a safer place.”

“We are certain that the world heaved a sigh of relief today,” said Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Russia will do its utmost to make sure that the Vienna agreement is fully implemented, thus contributing to the international and regional security.”

A Vatican spokesman said the agreement “is viewed in a positive light” by Pope Francis.

A spokesman for Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said the deal would be “a catalyst for regional stability.”

Syria’s President Bashar Assad called it “a historic turning point” which will lead to “strengthening of the constructive role played by Iran in supporting the rights of nations.”

Iran took yes for an answer

The deal is supposed to delay the amount of time required for Iran to assemble a nuclear weapon from a few months to a year, which Western leaders hope would give them enough time to stop Iran from using such a device. But many fear the agreement will just give Iran the cover it needs to complete its work in secrecy, and that the U.S. conceded far too much to the Islamic Republic.

The problem for the Obama administration had been, “Iran won’t take ‘yes’ for an answer,” a Capitol Hill source told WND on Monday. Critics say the reason Iran had refused to take yes for an answer was that the Obama administration had conceded on virtually every key demand, so the Iranians just kept demanding more.

Follow Garth Kant@DCgarth


 freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagClose to a deal

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/close-to-a-deal

Iran
IranKerry Eye-Prize-600-LI Give peace-chance-590-LI hate Huge-Gap-600-LI Iran%20UN_jpg Iran iran-ayatollah-missile-AP-640x480 Iran-Cheat-600-LA Non-Negotiable-600-LI response stop Why freedom combo 2

Imported Muslims arriving now in these U.S. cities


waving flagPosted By Leo Hohmann On 06/17/2015

Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/syrian-muslims-arriving-now-in-these-u-s-cities

Cheering Syrian rebels. The rebel groups are made up of various Sunni factions all vying to replace the Shiite-led government of Bashar al-Assad. The overwhelming majority of "refugees" coming from Syria are also Sunni Muslim.

A few congressmen are fighting to block the planned importation of thousands of Syrian refugees into American cities and towns, arguing that they present a grave security risk because many Syrians have ties to the Sunni rebel groups ISIS and al-Nusra Front.

But the fact is, as President Obama ignores the concerns of U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, and others on the House Homeland Security Committee, the Syrians have already started to arrive stateside.

Since January, more than 70 U.S. cities have been on the receiving end of a Syrian visitation.

WND has compiled a complete list of cities (see chart below) that received Syrian refugees since Jan. 1. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres has as many as 11,000 Syrians in a pipeline waiting for admission into the U.S., which is responsible for screening them for criminal and terrorist activity.

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, wrote President Obama warning that the Syrian refugee program could become a 'back door for jihadists" to enter the U.S.

And therein lies the problem.

McCaul has tried to block the arrival of the Syrians based on testimony from FBI counter-terrorism experts. As chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, he held a hearing on the national security risks of the Syrian refugee program in February and has scheduled a second hearing for June 24. He’s also sent two letters to Obama, urging him not to let the U.N. refugee program become a “jihadist pipeline” into the United States.

The Syrian civil war, now more than four years old, has chased more than 3.8 million Syrians from their homes, according to the U.N., which has about 130,000 it wants to resettle permanently in outside countries. Some of the top destination points in the past few months have been in;

  • Texas, where the cities of Dallas, Fort Worth and Houston have each received more than 20 Syrians since January.
  • Chicago has received 42 Syrians so far this year, more than any other city,
  • while San Diego has taken in 25
  • and Phoenix 20.
  • The troubled city of Baltimore has not been left out. It has received 19 Syrians
  • while Louisville, Kentucky, has taken in 21.

“Baltimore is already suffering with all of the black crime violence (in the wake of the Freddie Gray shooting) and now we’re going to plunk down 19 Syrians,” said Ann Corcoran, who runs the watchdog blog Refugee Resettlement Watch. “It doesn’t make sense.”Picture3 Alinsky affect

WND reported earlier this week that 93 percent of the 922 Syrian refugees resettled into the U.S. since the civil war started in 2011 have been Muslim. The vast majority, 86 percent, have been Sunni Muslims, which means some could have ties to the Sunni rebel groups fighting to bring down the government of President Bashar al-Assad, a Shiite Alowite.

Assad protected the Christian minorities who have now come under brutal attack from ISIS and al-Nusra. Yet, only 4.9 percent of the 922 Syrians brought to the U.S. so far as refugees have been Christians.Why

Syria is home to one of the world’s oldest Christian communities. It was in Antioch, Syria, where followers of Jesus Christ were first called “Christians,” yet their churches have been destroyed and their families decimated by ISIS and al-Nusra terrorists. Many have watched family members beheaded or shot in front of their eyes. “Syria represents the single largest convergence of Islamic terrorists in history,” McCaul wrote in his June 11 letter to Obama. It also represents the largest refugee crisis.

The United States takes in more U.N.-designated refugees than the rest of the world combined. Of the 130,000 Syrians the U.N wants to permanently resettle, the U.S. is being asked to take half, or about 65,000, by the end of Obama’s term in office. The State Department insists they are “intensely screened” even as the FBI has admitted they are impossible to screen because the U.S. has no “boots on the ground in Syria” and Syria is a “failed state” with no reliable law-enforcement data, said Michael Steinbach, deputy director of the FBI’s counter-terrorism unit, in his Feb. 11 testimony before McCaul’s committee.

Growing ‘pockets of resistance’

The State Department, working through nine private contractors and 350 subcontractors, resettles U.N.-certified refugees into more than 190 cities and towns across America. The refugee program has operated in its current form since Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980.

Some cities in recent years have begun to push back against the arrival of refugees in their communities, saying they have become a burden on social services and aren’t finding jobs that will support themselves without government assistance. Elected leaders in Clarkston, Georgia, for instance, complained in 2011 to Gov. Nathan Deal, who was able to strike a deal in which no new refugees would be sent to the town other than family members of existing refugees.

The mayors of Lynn and Springfield, Massachusetts, as well as Manchester, New Hampshire, and Athens, Georgia, have also questioned why they can’t have more information and influence over how many refugees get sent to their towns. These have been dubbed “pockets of resistance” by the resettlement agencies working for the federal government. A manual was written by one contractor on how to deal with local grassroots activists who push back against the arrival of refugees.

WND last month uncovered a document authored by one of the federal government’s main resettlement contractors that detailed plans to counter the growing “backlash” that is occurring in many cities that would like to shut the refugee spigot off, or at least slow it down. The report recommended monitoring blogs by activists and turning in some to the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center which could then brand them as “anti-Muslim” or guilty of “Islamophobia.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

The most recent uprising has been in Spartanburg, South Carolina, in the district of Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

Gowdy has tried to gather facts on exactly how the program works so he can answer the questions being asked of him by an organized resistance to World Relief’s plans to resettle 60 refugees from Congo, Syria and other countries over the next year.

So far, no Syrians have arrived in Spartanburg, but they have arrived and will continue to arrive in ever larger numbers in many other cities and towns. The chart below logs the numbers who have arrived just in the past five months.

Some of the questions Gowdy has pressed the State Department to answer are:

  • Who makes the ultimate decision as to which cities get refugees from what countries?
  • What variables are taken into consideration when distributing these refugees? Is it done, for instance, according to population density, geography, job and housing availability or availability of welfare benefits?
  • What local officials are brought into the decision-making process and at what point?
  • How are the other “stakeholders” chosen in the receiving communities?
  • How are the financial and economic impacts of the refugees to taxpayer-funded budgets being measured in the various cities where they are sent?

Hiding behind ‘public-private partnerships’

As Gowdy discovered, the State Department dodged most of the questions that concerned Americans have been asking for years.

After Secretary of State John Kerry provided an initial response that Gowdy called vague and “wholly inadequate,” the State Department followed up by saying any further information would have to come from the resettlement agency. In the case of Spartanburg, that would be World Relief, an evangelical agency that contracts with the government on resettlement work. Because it is a private agency, World Relief considers its reports on individual cities to be “proprietary information.” The public is not invited to the quarterly meetings in the receiving communities nor, typically, is the local media.

Approximately 70 percent of World Relief’s revenues last year came from government grants totaling $41.2 million, according to its IRS returns. It also receives funding from foundations such as the Vanguard Charitable Foundation, Mustard Seed Foundation, Soros Fund Charitable Foundation, Pfizer Foundation and Global Impact.

Besides World Relief, the other eight resettlement agencies that contract with the government are the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Church World Service, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the International Rescue Committee, Episcopal Migration Ministries, U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, and the Ethiopian Community Development Council. These nine agencies present themselves to local communities as “charities.”

But if they are truly doing the Lord’s work, why are their budgets funded so heavily by the government, and why have they agreed to carry out their work without sharing the gospel message to their refugee clients, many activists have asked.

The nine contractors share the wealth with more than 350 subcontractors. For instance, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops subcontracts with Catholic Charities, while Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service subcontracts with Lutheran Social Services and Church World Service contracts with affiliates of the National Council of Churches.

Many of the agencies and their myriad subcontractors also accept donations from leftist foundations tied to George Soros, Bill Gates, the Tides Foundation, Walmart, Target, the Komen Foundation, the United Way and many others.

Big money flows into resettlement business

According to research in a new book by James Simpson, an independent investigative journalist, the Lutheran resettlement efforts, which have been very active in bringing Somali refugees into Minnesota among other places, are financed 92 percent by the government. This Lutheran “charity” also receives donations from George Soros’ Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation, Global Impact, Fidelity Investments, Bank of America and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Simpson sums up the program in his book, “The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America.” He writes:

“Hatched by the U.N. and the American Left, the resettlement agenda is dedicated to erasing our culture, traditions and laws, and creating a compliant, welfare-dependent multicultural society with no understanding of America’s constitutional framework and no interest in assimilation. The ultimate target is a voting base large enough for the Left’s long-sought ‘permanent progressive majority.’

“Most people would be shocked to know that America currently takes more refugees from the world’s ghettos than all other refugee resettlement countries in the world combined. The State Department brags about it. Furthermore, most of those refugees are referred to the United States by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The refugees (and the illegal aliens flooding the southern border from Central America) are then ‘resettled’ by taxpayer funded ‘Voluntary Agencies’ or VOLAGs as they are called.”The Lower you go

And the CEOs of these resettlement agencies get paid handsomely. According to Simpson’s research, they bring in six-figure salaries of between $300,000 and $500,000 per year. Of the nine main resettlement agencies, six are faith-based or as Simpson says, “nominally religious,” because they operate with mainly government cash and they are forbidden by their government contracts from evangelizing their clients, many of whom are Muslim. “All are in it for the money and top staff make high six figures,” Simpson writes. “Together the VOLAGs are paid close to $1 billion in taxpayer dollars to resettle refugees. Two more organizations (including Baptist Family and Children Services) who settle most of the unaccompanied alien children (UAC) brought the total to over $1.3 billion last year.”

Forty-nine of the 50 states, with Wyoming being the lone exception, have a refugee resettlement program in place with the federal government. In most states the governor appoints a refugee resettlement coordinator to handle the shipments of refugees, but in 12 states the contractors handle the refugees with little or no input from the governor’s office.


freedom combo 2

Senators Want Answers: 121 Illegal Immigrants Avoid Deportation, Now Charged With Murder


Reported by Diana Stancy / / June 15, 2015

(Photo:Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/ Newscom)

More than 100 convicted criminals who remained in the U.S. despite receiving deportation orders between 2010 and 2014 now face murder charges, according to the agency charged with carrying out such deportations of illegal immigrants. U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement reports that 121 convicted criminals who were never removed from the country face murder charges today.

In response, Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., of the Judiciary Committee submitted a letter on June 12 requesting a “multi-departmental response” from Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of State John Kerry and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson. In their letter, Grassley and Sessions cite Immigration and Customs Enforcement statistics that show 1,000 of the 36,007 criminally-convicted illegal immigrants released from custody in fiscal year 2013 have been reconvicted of additional crimes.

 Picture4

The senators wrote that the murders committed by the 121 convicted criminals “could have been avoided” had they not been released. As a result, Grassley and Sessions are requesting an explanation from the Obama administration officials concerning the government’s decision to release the convicted criminals before deportation.Only Reason

The senators also ask for information concerning the future of U.S. initiatives to deport convicted criminals and whether immigration officials are “fully leveraging existing tools and resources to prevent these dangerous outcomes.” However, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Sarah Saldana wrote in a recent letter that convicted criminals may be released, even if the convicted individuals face deportation charges. In fact, the agency states some individuals who face deportation charges are not required to be detained by law.Why

This primarily manifests itself though the Supreme Court’s ruling in Zadvydas v. Davis, which requires Immigration and Customs Enforcement to release those who are being detained if the deportation does not occur within 180 days. Of the 121 convicted criminals, 24 were released because Immigration and Customs Enforcement could not deport the criminals within 180 days, as lawfully required.just-stop-300x200

Additionally, Grassley and Sessions’ letter claims that the majority of convicted criminals released due to the Zadvydas v. Davis ruling are from one of 12 countries. Nearly one-third of these criminals are originally from Cuba. Grassley and Sessions requested a statement from Kerry to delineate actions planned to “incentivize cooperation” with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement’s removal efforts. Both senators also requested a response from Johnson asking if initiatives including the visa waiver program had been implemented in order to “promote compliance with ICE removal efforts among recalcitrant countries.”Really with logo freedom combo 2

The US is close to making a huge announcement about Cuba


waving flagReported by Reuters Reuters, Jun. 12, 2015

Cuban-themed murals adorn the buildings along SW 8th Street, known locally as
Thomson Reuters; Cuban-themed murals adorn SW 8th Street in Little Havana, Miami

The two sides hope to conclude the deal by the first week of next month, clearing the way for Secretary of State John Kerry to visit Havana soon afterwards for a flag-raising ceremony to upgrade the U.S. Interests Section to a full-scale embassy, the sources said.

Since a breakthrough between the two former Cold War rivals announced in December, negotiators have settled all but a few differences and were confident they would soon be resolved, several sources told Reuters. They said the exact timetable for the formal embassy opening was unclear because of Kerry’s recovery from a broken leg suffered in a May 31 biking accident in France, as well as the looming June 30 deadline for a final nuclear deal with Iran, which would dominate Kerry’s schedule over the next weeks.

Restoration of relations would be the latest phase in a normalization process, which is expected to move slowly because of lingering problems over issues such as Cuba’s human rights record. A U.S. embargo will remain in place, and only Congress can lift it. The sources said the administration hoped to formally notify Congress within the next two weeks of its intention to reopen the Havana embassy. The State Department is required by law to give Congress at least 15 days’ notice of such an action.

Cuba’s Communist government is likely to act in sync with the United States on reopening of the embassies, issuing its own announcement on restoring ties, one source said. But it was unclear how fast the two sides would act in naming ambassadors. As part of its preparations to turn its interests section in Washington into a full-fledged embassy, Cuba erected a large flagpole on the front lawn of the building on Wednesday. The flag itself will await the formal announcement of relations. Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro pledged full restoration of ties on Dec. 17. The two leaders met in Panama in mid-April.

President Obama and Raul Castro
REUTERS/Peru Presidency Cuba’s President Raul Castro (L) stands with his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama before the inauguration of the VII Summit of the Americas in Panama City April 10, 2015.

Major issues resolved, officials say

Imperial President ObamaCuba was formally removed from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism late last month, a critical step toward rapprochement 54 years after Washington cut off relations at the height of the Cold War and imposed an economic embargo. U.S. and Cuban negotiators have resolved all but a few minor differences since the last round of high-level talks in May in Washington, the sources said. The main obstacles had been U.S. demands for relative freedom of movement for their diplomats on the island, comparable to that in Russia and Vietnam, while the Cubans had objected to U.S. training courses in journalism and information technology given at the U.S. interests section in Havana.

Negotiators are now settling issues such as how many shipping containers will be allowed into Havana for renovating the U.S. mission there.

kingobamafingerconstitution-300x204U.S. officials say there is little, if any, chance that hardline anti-Castro lawmakers in Congress would be able to block the restoration of ties.

The White House declined comment on the timing of any announcements. There was also no comment from the Cuban government.

(Editing by David Storey and Ken Wills)

Read the original article on Reuters. Copyright 2015. Follow Reuters on Twitter.

freedom combo 2

Cuba Formally Removed From U.S. List of State Sponsors of Terrorism


HAVANA (AP) — The Obama administration on Friday formally removed Cuba from a U.S. terrorism blacklist, a decision hailed in Cuba as the healing of a decades-old wound and an important step toward normalizing relations between the Cold War foes.

Evilio Ordonez holds Cuban and American flags during a protest against President Barack Obama's plan to normalize relations with Cuba, Saturday, Dec, 20, 2014, in the Little Havana neighborhood of Miami.  (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky)

Secretary of State John Kerry signed off on rescinding Cuba’s “state sponsor of terrorism” designation exactly 45 days after the Obama administration informed Congress of its intent to do so on April 14. Lawmakers had that amount of time to weigh in and try to block the move, but did not do so.

“The 45-day congressional pre-notification period has expired, and the secretary of state has made the final decision to rescind Cuba’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, effective today, May 29, 2015,” the State Department said in a statement.

“While the United States has significant concerns and disagreements with a wide range of Cuba’s policies and actions, these fall outside the criteria relevant to the rescission of a state sponsor of terrorism designation,” the statement said.Liberalism a mental disorder 2

The step comes as officials from the two countries continue to hash out details of restoring full diplomatic relations, including opening embassies in Washington and Havana and returning ambassadors to the two countries for the first time since the U.S. severed diplomatic relations with the island in January 1961. The removal of Cuba from the terrorism list had been a key Cuban demand.

The Cold War-era designation was levied mainly for Cuba’s support of leftist guerrillas around the world and isolated the communist island from much of the world financial system because banks fear repercussions from doing business with designated countries. Even Cuba’s Interests Section in Washington lost its bank in the United States, forcing it to deal in cash until it found a new banker this month. 

The terror list is a particularly charged issue for Cuba because of the U.S. history of supporting exile groups responsible for attacks on the island, including the 1976 bombing of a Cuban passenger flight from Barbados that killed 73 people aboard. The attack was linked to Cuban exiles with ties to U.S.-backed anti-Castro groups and both men accused of masterminding the crime took shelter in Florida, where one, Luis Posada Carriles, currently lives.

“I think this could be a positive act that adds to hope and understanding and can help the negotiations between Cuba and the United States,” said director Juan Carlos Cremata, who lost his father in the 1976 bombing. “It’s a list we never should have been on,” said Ileana Alfonso, 57, who also lost her father in the attack.

U.S. and Cuban officials have said the two sides are close to resolving the final issues but the most recent round of talks ended last Friday with no announcement of an agreement. Even as many of the biggest hurdles, including the terrorism designation, have been cleared, Washington and Havana are still wrangling over American demands that its diplomats be able to travel throughout Cuba and meet with dissidents without restrictions. The Cubans are wary of activity they see as destabilizing to their government.

Both the U.S. and Cuba say the embassies are a first step in a larger process of normalizing relations. That effort would still have to tackle bigger questions such as the embargo, which only Congress can fully revoke, as well as the future of the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay and Cuba’s democracy record.freedom combo 2

Monitor: ISIS Controls More than Half of Syria


waving flagby Edwin Mora21 May 2015Washington, D.C.

Heavy clashes between the two sides resulted in the death of at least 100 Assad regime fighters, said the Observatory, which monitors the Syrian war through a network of sources on the ground.

In a rare public appearance on May 6, Assad admitted for the first time that his regime had suffered a spate of military defeats at the hands of Syrian rebels including ISIS.

U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged on May 7 that Syrian rebel factions had made recent gains against Assad and suggested that the dictator should consider negotiating peace. “The capture of Palmyra is the first time ISIS has taken control of a city directly from the Syrian army and allied forces, which have already lost ground in the northwest and south to other insurgent groups in recent weeks,” notes Al Arabiya News.

Gen. Jack Keane, former Vice Chief of Staff for the Army, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that the U.S. was losing the war against ISIS, prompting criticism towards President Obama’s anti-ISIS strategy. Keane himself said Obama’s efforts to fight ISIS are “fundamentally flawed.”

On March 11, Secretary of State John Kerry told lawmakers that ISIL’s momentum has been diminished.”Liberalism a mental disorder 2

Palmyra is home to a UNESCO World Heritage site that includes colonnaded streets, temples, and a theatre that have stood for nearly 2,000 years. The ancient sites are at risk of being looted and destroyed if they have not been already.

On Thursday, the White House press secretary described ISIS’s seizure of Palmyra as a “setback” for the U.S.-led campaign against ISIS. He added that President Obama disagrees with Republicans urging the deployment of U.S. ground troops to combat ISIS.muslim-obama

The global community must respond to ISIS, said French President Francois Hollande on Thursday. “We have to act because there is a threat against these monuments which are part of humankind’s inheritance and at the same time we must act against Daesh,” declared Hollande, referring to ISIS by its Arabic name.

The Iraqi city of Ramadi, the capital of the country’s largest province Anbar, has also fallen to ISIS.

freedom combo 2

Congressman seeks to unlock secret refugee program


waving flagPosted By Leo Hohmann On 05/04/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/congressman-seeks-to-unlock-secret-refugee-program/

The Syrian civil war has caused 3.5 million refugees, with more than 350,000 being targeted by the United Nations for resettlement outside the region.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., has received a response to his letter demanding answers from Secretary of State John Kerry about the planned resettlement of dozens of foreign refugees in his state. But the answers failed to shed much light on the secrecy that surrounds the refugee program. The process by which cities and towns across the U.S. are selected to receive displaced persons from United Nations refugee camps remains largely a mystery.

As Gowdy discovered, the city of Spartanburg, South Carolina, was approved for an infusion of 60 refugees, mostly from Syria and Africa, by its own state government headed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley.

And if the program plays out in Spartanburg as it has in communities in Minnesota, California, Texas, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida and other states, then the 60 refugees will blossom into hundreds and eventually thousands every year. Minnesota, for example, is now receiving more than 2,000 Muslim refugees annually, mostly from Somalia. Texas receives more than 7,000 per year, and California more than 6,000, directly from the Third World.and why

Here are the top 10 states for refugee resettlement based on fiscal 2014 figures from the State Department website:

Texas, 7,2011

California, 6,110

New York, 4,079

Michigan, 4,000

Florida, 3,519

Arizona, 2,963

Ohio, 2,812

Pennsylvania, 2,743

Georgia, 2,693

Illinois, 2,578

The United Nations and nine private resettlement agencies are pressuring the United States to accept at least 65,000 refugees from Syria by the end of President Obama’s term in office.muslim-obama

Of the 815 Syrian refugees resettled in the U.S. so far, 749, or 92 percent, have been Muslim, according to State Department data. Only 43 Syrians allowed into the U.S. have been Christians, even though the turmoil in Syria and Iraq has driven thousands of Christians from their homes under threat of death by ISIS.

The U.S. takes in more refugees than any other country, about 70,000 per year, and has absorbed 3 million since 1975. But since the early 1990s, the trend has been to accept more from Muslim countries.Picture8

Some residents of Spartanburg are upset and asking questions, not only about the security risks associated with importing refugees from a Middle East war zone but also about the numbers of refugees that will eventually end up in their county and how much it will cost to absorb them into schools, housing and health-care facilities.

Almost all refugees coming into the U.S. from war-torn countries are hand-selected by the United Nations.Picture10

The plan to send refugees from Syria and Africa to Spartanburg first surfaced in March when a story appeared in a local newspaper.

Gowdy pressed Kerry’s State Department for more information in an April 13 letter.

Kerry’s response on May 1 indicated the process of picking Spartanburg as the country’s newest refugee haven actually began back in April 2013, when World Relief, one of nine private agencies that contract with the government to provide resettlement services, was contacted by local faith groups in Spartanburg. Gowdy’s own office was notified of the plans in August 2014.

Gowdy was not happy with Kerry’s response and fired off another letter May 4 to the secretary of state.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

“To begin, it is important to clarify and correct the timeline of events for the proposal. In your response you stated there were two community meetings, one in August 2014 and one in January 2015,” Gowdy wrote to Kerry. “You also stated the proposal was submitted in July 2014 and approved in November 2014. Is this correct? If so, does this mean the resettlement agency had only one community meeting, which occurred after the proposal was submitted and before the State Department’s approval?”

At the “community meetings” no media was invited and the public was not notified, WND has learned.Picture7

Gowdy said he sent his initial letter to the State Department on April 13 because he could not answer questions asked of him by constituents regarding plans for refugees in Spartanburg.

“We have provided State’s response so the public can read it. But some of the answers are inadequate and fail to provide specificity on who was consulted at the city and county level, within the public school system, and law enforcement, and if they provided input,” Gowdy said in a statement.

Gowdy is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration and border security, which has oversight responsibility for the refugee program. He sent a staff member, Josh Dix, to the secret meeting in August but Dix did not raise any concerns about the resettlement plans, according to Kerry’s response to Gowdy’s letter. Gowdy’s press secretary denied WND’s request for an interview with the congressman Monday and would not answer any questions.

Baptists working to resettle refugees in S.C.

World Relief, a nonprofit evangelical organization that works to resettle refugees nationwide, opened an office earlier this year in Spartanburg. A group of 40 churches and other faith-based groups has signed on to help World Relief resettle the refugees, according to Kerry’s letter to Gowdy. One of the lead agencies working with World Relief is the Spartanburg County Baptist Network. But the plan to place refugees in Spartanburg has been brewing for more than a year, long before any local residents caught wind of it.

Kerry’s letter provides a rare window into how a small group of people in the federal government, local church groups, a federal contractor and a Governor’s state refugee coordinator conspire to plant “seedlings” of refugees into communities across the U.S.Tyranney Alert

These refugees are seen by the White House and its network of pro-immigration and refugee partners – groups like National Council for La Raza, Welcoming America, the National Partnership for New Americans and the Chamber of Commerce – as potential “new Americans.” The refugees are set up with a full plate of government benefits, placed on a fast track to citizenship and full voting rights.Picture11

The White House is also pushing to have the thousands of Central Americans who crossed the southern border last year afforded asylum status, which qualifies them for various welfare benefits and a direct track toward citizenship.

So while Spartanburg residents found out about the plan for their town in March and April, others in key leadership positions have known about it for more than a year. No public hearings have been held before the city council or local school board. Gowdy is still trying to find out exactly who in Spartanburg was made privy to the plans and who provided input.

“The initial interest in resettling refugees in Spartanburg emerged in April 2013 when World Relief was approached by Spartanburg County Baptist Network,” Kerry’s letter states. “The group, along with 25 other individuals and church organizations, expressed their support for a World Relief resettlement program in their city.”Liberalism a mental disorder 2

Kerry said the State Department requires the national resettlement agency, in this case World Relief, to “thoroughly assess the local resettlement capacity and environment of any new proposed resettlement sites before determining whether to proceed with resettling refugees in that location.” The staffer Gowdy had present at the meeting in August did not raise any concerns about the program, according to Kerry’s letter.

Two community meetings (August 2014 and January 2015) were convened to discuss refugee resettlement in the area,” Kerry wrote to Gowdy. “The August meeting, convened by World Relief, was attended by 54 members of the community including Josh Dix from your office, members of local churches, the Immigration Forum, and the Convention and Visitors Bureau for Spartanburg. Mr. Dix did not offer any concerns during the meeting or in follow-up afterward.”Picture15

George Soros involved

The National Immigration Forum, which was present at the meeting, receives funding from billionaire George Soros. It is the driving force behind the so-called “Evangelical Immigration Table,” or EIT. Breitbart called it “a front group for players on the institutional left including billionaire George Soros and the Ford Foundation.”

The Immigration Forum and EIT were involved in an advertising campaign promoting the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill in 2013, a bill seen by many right-leaning lawmakers as “amnesty.” One of the Gang of Eight members was Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Kerry said in his response to Gowdy that Graham was also invited to attend the August meeting on refugees but no one from his staff showed up.

The South Carolina state refugee coordinator, who works for Gov. Nikki Haley, gave her approval in November for the resettlement program to move forward. Christina Jeffrey, a political science instructor at Wofford College in Spartanburg and former historian for the U.S. House of Representatives, said Kerry’s response shows the refugee program is ingrained not only in the federal bureaucracy but in state governments as well.

“It’s another grant program; it isn’t just the feds cramming this down our throats. It’s government corruption at all levels,” she said, “with a lot of money at stake flowing to these contractors.”squeeze into mold

World Relief, as the main contractor in Spartanburg, will be awarded a grant from the State Department of $1,975 for every refugee it resettles. Federal rules require $1,125 of that to be used in providing services directly to the refugee such as cash stipends, rents for housing or other material needs during the first 30 to 90 days of the refugee’s arrival. The remaining $850 may be used for staffing and administrative costs.

Nearly 70 percent of World Relief’s budget is covered by government grants. Others among the nine contractors, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, have upward of 90 percent of their refugee work covered by government grants.

Seeking a moratorium on refugees

Jeffrey said she’s happy that Gowdy has taken an interest in the program, but she believes his responsibility goes beyond fact finding. “I can do my own information gathering. I’m not looking to Trey Gowdy for that. I’m looking for him to do his job and provide oversight on whether this is a good use of taxpayers’ money,” Jeffrey told WND.

The refugee program costs the federal government about $1 billion a year, and that does not include the welfare benefits that many refugees receive. The Congressional Research Office recently put out a study that showed 74.2 percent of refugees receive food stamps.

“Rather than just gathering information on the Spartanburg resettlement, how about let’s put the whole program on hold until Congress has a chance to investigate it?” Jeffrey said.

Jeffrey and others have also voiced concerns about national security. Dozens of people from Muslim countries have come to America as refugees only to be charged with providing material support to foreign terrorist organizations, according to FBI reports. At least another 48 cases have been confirmed of Muslim immigrants leaving the U.S. to fight for ISIS in Syria and al-Shabab in Somalia.

The refugee program has flown under the radar for more than 30 years, but controversy flared in February when a top FBI counter-terrorism official, Michael Steinbach, testified before the House Homeland Security committee and said the U.S. has no way to vet the Syrian refugees for possible connections to ISIS and other terrorist organizations.

As WND reported, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, sent a letter to the White House Jan. 28 citing “serious national security concerns” about the Syrian refugee program and imploring Obama to not let it become a “back door for jihadists.”

Transforming cities, one at a time

muslim-obamaJeffrey believes the Obama administration is using the refugee program, along with its broader immigration policies, for political purposes.

“Their intention is to identify, recruit, transport, whatever you have to do to get 9 million ‘new Americans’ naturalized as citizens and to the polls in November 2016 and beyond,” she said. “I’ve never seen a more blatant ballot-stuffing program in my life.”

Gowdy said in the statement on his website that Kerry’s suggestion that Gowdy had a supportive role in the assignment of refugees to Spartanburg was “patently false.”

“[T]o correct the record, the State Department’s characterization that our office was ‘critical in the process’ of establishing the refugee resettlement is patently false. Our office sent one staff member to one meeting almost one year ago, as State’s own answers to our questions indicate,” the statement said. “We were provided no follow up information on the proposal or implementation of the plan, nor did we at any point provide approval of the plan. The South Carolina Department of Social Services, not a Member of Congress, is responsible for approving proposals of this type.

“Finally, government transparency and accountability to the public is paramount. While our office does not have a role under the law in the implementation of such a plan, we are interested in providing the community with answers. To that end, we will be following up with the State Department with additional questions regarding local input.”

Gowdy posted the full State Department’s response online.

The response reads in part that Spartanburg would play “an integral role in ensuring that former refugees find a community which they can call home and which they in turn can enrich through their contributions. Key stakeholders such as the local churches in Spartanburg, which provided the impetus to establish this site, are a wonderful example of the support and spirit of the community.”Bull

According to Jason Lee, director of World Relief Spartanburg, a letter signed by about 40 ministry leaders who support resettling refugees here was hand delivered to Gowdy’s district office in Greenville.

“We felt like we were able to enlighten his staff when we met on April 21st,” Lee told the Herald-Journal of Spartanburg.

“You can be a Bible-believing Christian and have one perspective. But as an elected official, you have an obligation to the people who you work for who have legitimate questions about how things will be paid for. They have legitimate questions about access to health care, security questions, educational opportunity questions,” Gowdy told the newspaper.

He said the state approves the resettlement plan, and the U.S. State Department interacts with the contractor agencies.

“Congress has no role whatsoever, but as the member of Congress, it is my job to get answers to questions,” Gowdy told the Herald-Journal.

Jeffrey hopes Gowdy will see his role as providing more than just information, but actual oversight.

“Alexander Hamilton once said that if ever two branches of government should gang up against the American people, the Republic is over,” she said.

The full text of Gowdy’s May 4 follow-up letter to Kerry is reprinted below in full:

Congressman Gowdy | May 4, 2015

The Honorable John Kerry
Secretary
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Kerry,

Thank you for your response to my April 13, 2015, letter. This issue continues to be important to my constituents, and as their representative in Congress, it remains my job to get complete answers to the legitimate questions raised.

Toward that end, parts of your Agency’s response lacked sufficient specificity. In an ongoing effort to better understand the process and public impact of the proposed resettlement of refugees in Spartanburg pursuant to the resettlement agency’s proposal, several follow-up questions are listed below. I appreciate your prompt, substantive, and specific responses.

To begin, it is important to clarify and correct the timeline of events for the proposal. In your response you stated there were two community meetings, one in August 2014 and one in January 2015. You also stated the proposal was submitted in July 2014 and approved in November 2014. Is this correct? If so, does this mean the resettlement agency had only one community meeting, which occurred after the proposal was submitted and before the State Department’s approval?

1) (a) Who, with specificity, were the “25 other individuals and church representatives”who “expressed their support for the resettlement program in Spartanburg”?

(b) Who specifically was consulted as part of the community and site assessment referenced in the timeline included in the proposal. Please include names and dates of the consultations where possible.

(c) Was anyone directly consulted in the South Carolina Governor’s office other than Dorothy Addison, the State Refugee Coordinator? Who did Ms. Addison talk with as part of the community assessment in order to validate the resettlement agency’s assessment of the community’s ability to support the influx of refugees?

2) After the August 2014 meeting, who provided feedback on the proposal? Was this feedback included in the proposal although it had already been submitted? Which of South Carolina’s United States Senators was contacted and did either provide feedback? Was Congressman Mick Mulvaney, whose district includes a portion of Spartanburg County, consulted?

3) Who were the “care providers” consulted as part of the community assessment? Please provide names and dates of consultations where possible.

4) Who were the local “public school representatives” consulted as part of the community assessment? Please provide names and dates of consultations where possible.

5) With whom did the resettlement agency meet to identify potential housing locations for the refugees? Please provide names and dates of consultations where possible.

6) (a) Is the per capita grant funding from the Department of State guaranteed for as long as there are refugees present?

(b) What happens if the local resettlement agency, World Relief in this case, can no longer offer support services for the resettled refugees? Will the Department of State relocate the refugees? How much funding must the resettlement agency provide each year?

7) According to your response, there are nine refugees who may start arriving in Spartanburg in the next few months. What is the country of origin of each of these nine refugees?

8) (a) What advanced notification will be provided to the community after the “annual proposal process is conducted by PRM” to determine how many additional refugees will be resettled in the Spartanburg area in the coming years?

(b) Must the State Refugee Coordinator sign off on any additional resettlement of refugees?

(c) What individuals will be consulted for the annual proposal?

(d) Who are the stakeholders that will be included in the ongoing community consultations? Please provide names where possible.

9) (a) Who generally will be part of the “Good Neighbor Teams”?

(b) Who will oversee the refugees’ access to public welfare benefits and/or assist them in job searches?

(c) Will this be solely World Relief’s role or will the South Carolina Department of Social Services play a role?

10) (a) What school district representatives did the resettlement agency consult with regarding the effect of minor refugees on Spartanburg’s seven (7) school systems?

(b) Were the discussions with school principals or district superintendents?

(c) Did representatives of the school districts sign off on the resettlement? If so, please provide the names of the individuals.

(d) Precisely who in the Spartanburg school systems told World Relief there is “capacity for more students” in the system’s already existing English immersion programs?

11) For what crimes, if any, can an individual be convicted and still be approved for U.S. refugee status? Do any of the nine refugees you indicated are currently slated for Spartanburg resettlement (or any who have subsequently been selected for resettlement) have such convictions?

12) How exactly are background checks performed on individuals seeking refugee resettlement in the United States? How can the background of an individual who is outside his country of origin be thoroughly investigated? Does the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) have access to background check procedures in the countries of origin of each of the individuals proposed to be resettled in Spartanburg?

13) (a) How do the national resettlement agencies “assess the capacity and environment” to determine the number of refugees a city can resettle? How is a “strong refugee program” quantified?

(b) Who must be included in the community consultation plan? Who is typically consulted in other communities?

(c) Please provide any and all guidance provided to resettlement agencies by USRAP regarding the process that must be undertaken to get to the point of submitting a resettlement proposal, the ongoing process until the time of approval, and how a resettlement proposal should be conducted.

(d) Are local law enforcement officials part of the initial consultation and do they remain so once the resettled refugees are in the community? What, if any, efforts exist to track the refugees’ interactions with local law enforcement officials?

14) How do you ensure long-term accountability on the part of any resettlement agency so the taxpayer is not ultimately left paying for the costs of refugee resettlement proposal?

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter. This issue remains important to my constituents, and I will continue to work with you to get answers to all their questions.

Sincerely,

Trey Gowdy

OARLogo Picture6

Flipus-Flopus Virus Contaminates White House


Complete Message

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/flipus-flopus-virus-contaminates-white-house/

Aug. 15, 2014 3:00pm

Molli Nickell

Molli NickellMolli Nickell is the author of “Uncle Scam Want$ Your Money & Your Country,” a collection of Politically Incorrect Fables. Her daily rants and fables also are available at her blog where she writes as a Granny Guerrilla to entertain and enlighten low-information voters, amuse patriots, and piss off progressives.

 

 

This just in! An incurable virus has resurfaced in the White House. No, it’s not ebola.

Secretary of State John Kerry, infected by this incurable, hot-air borne illness, Flipus-Flopus, revealed that he has been harboring the disease since 1971 when he was “for the Vietnam war before he was against it.”

Uh oh! It’s pretty scary that Kerry, influenced by Flipus-Flopus, speaks for America even though his symptoms are obvious.

First, he’s for Israel, then shifts to support Hamas, then back to Israel with “conditional” support. Back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, making himself and America’s foreign policy the laughing stock of the world. As if that isn’t bad enough, a White House leak indicates that Kerry has infected POTUS as well.

US President Barack Obama makes a statement on the situation in Iraq at Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, on August 11, 2014. AFP PHOTO/Nicholas KAMM NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images

US President Barack Obama makes a statement on the situation in Iraq at Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, on August 11, 2014. AFP PHOTO/Nicholas KAMM

Current symptoms of the severity of President Barack Obama’s Flipus-Flopus affliction are evident when he denies having made the decision to withdraw ALL American troops from Iraq in 2011. That had not been his call. No-siree!

With a perfectly straight face, he repeats, over and over and over, that the government of Iraq, led by President Nouri al-Maliki, made the decision to send Americas home. Iraq did not want any residual American boots on the ground in their country. But, were happy, happy, happy to get their mitts on 505 military bases (costing billions of American dollars to construct and maintain), and 3.47 million pieces of “used” military equipment devalued at $313 million.

And, can you believe it? The president continues to blame President George Bush for the impending collapse of Iraq because he neglected to leave a residual force behind. Excuse me? Am I missing something here? Who sat behind the desk in the Oval Office and declared it was time to abandon Iraq in 2011?

FLASHBACK TO 2011. President (and then re-election campaigner) Obama declared that he personally made good and sure that a residual force of American troops were not left in Iraq. Made good and sure that America didn’t leave even one brave soldier behind (including Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl… but that’s a story for another time).

“Yes-siree” he had fulfilled his promise to surrender the war in Iraq and bring our soldiers home. Mission accomplished.

If his mouth is open he must be lyingThose of us with brains and memories scratch our heads in bewilderment. Does the president not know there are multiple 2011 videos in which he takes full credit for ending the war and bringing ALL the troops home? How stupid does he think we are? Perhaps he’s confusing us with his hem-kissing followers who believe surrender is victory just because he says so.

Today, the president’s media lap-dogs and hem-kissers rejoice and repeat the fable about how the unfolding tragedy in Iraq is not the president’s fault. They actually believe he tried his very, very, very best to reach a stay-behind agreement. He really truly did! Then, they reach for more Kool-Aid.

The rest of us grab cans of light beer and wonder how the heck any one can be so stupid as to believe anything that comes out President Pinocchio’s mouth.

Whoopsie, the challenge might not be stupidity, but could be the sloth and greed of the entitlement slaves who worship the bestower of free stuff like ObamaPhones, welfare without responsibility, unverified disability, and food stamps for beer, cigarettes, and car tires.

Many of us shudder at the prospect of President-Don’t-Blame-Me sending America’s brave warriors back into Iraq, despite his pledge for “no American boots on the ground.” We also have those words on video.

An Iraqi Yazidi, who fled her home a week ago when Islamic State (IS) militants attacked the town of Sinjar, sits next to a baby inside a building under construction where Yazidis found refuge on August 10, 2014 in the Kurdish city of Dohuk in Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan region. 'The Kurdish peshmerga forces have succeeded in making 30,000 Yazidis who fled Mount Sinjar, most of them women and children, cross into Syria and return to Kurdistan,' said Shawkat Barbahari, a Kurdhish official who is in charge of the Fishkhabur crossing with Syria. AFP PHOTO/AHMAD AL-RUBAYE AHMAD AL-RUBAYE/AFP/Getty Images

An Iraqi Yazidi, who fled her home a week ago when Islamic State (IS) militants attacked the town of Sinjar, sits next to a baby inside a building under construction where Yazidis found refuge on August 10, 2014 in the Kurdish city of Dohuk in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan region. ‘The Kurdish peshmerga forces have succeeded in making 30,000 Yazidis who fled Mount Sinjar, most of them women and children, cross into Syria and return to Kurdistan,’ said Shawkat Barbahari, a Kurdhish official who is in charge of the Fishkhabur crossing with Syria. AFP PHOTO/AHMAD AL-RUBAYE AHMAD AL-RUBAYE/AFP/Getty Images

Lord of the Lies 2When America’s warriors head back to the Middle East, no doubt humanitarian needs will be cited as the reason for more involvement. Hmmm. Would that be akin to the Hillary-promoted program of the humanitarian bombardment which set the stage for an Al Qaeda take-over of Libya? Or the humanitarian crisis (created and supported by the president) at our borders which will fundamentally transform America’s demographics to ensure permanent Democrat control of a broken country?

Keep in mind that America is being sucked into battle against the degenerate barbarians of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria who rose to power in response to the leadership vacuum created by America’s surrender of Iraq, directed by the Flip-Flopper-in-Chief.

obama-liar4-266x189GOOD NEWS: We have to contend with incompetent (or purposeful) mismanagement of America for only two-and-a-half more years.

BAD NEWS: We have to contend with incompetent (or purposeful) mismanagement of America for two-and-a-half more years.

Will America survive 888 more days of Flipus-Flopus, illegal executive orders, and failed leadership? YES!

It’s possible when conservatives/Republicans take back the Senate in November and retire current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), to a home for the politically insane. Survival seems more likely when we increase our majority in the House of Representatives, send Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) back to the Planet Orange, and elect a speaker who truly has America’s best interests at heart.

On Nov. 4, 2014, vote as if your country’s future is at stake. Which it is.Truth The New Hate Speech

God bless America.

S. Additional columns and an almost DAILY RANT are available on Molli’s website, along with a FREE download of her quick-read book, “Uncle SCAM Wants Your Money and Your Country.” Use her snarky humor to help you initiate conversations with the less-aware people in your universe. Entertain first, then enlighten them with the truth about our need to wake up, wise up, stand up, speak out, and push back to fundamentally un-transform Obama’s America back into our America. Of, by, and for ALL the people.

Feature Photo Credit: Courtesy of Author

TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.

Article collective closing

Kurdish Soldiers: ISIS Close to Surrounding Baghdad


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/06/25/Kurdish-Soldiers-ISIS-Close-to-Surrounding-Baghdad

25 Jun 2014

An extensive McClatchy report quotes several Kurdish military leaders who are significantly concerned that Baghdad could fall to ISIS. At least two critical towns that hold a supply route to Baghdad have been captured, they reported, and ISIS appeared to be traveling south to capture routes on the other side of the capital.

ConfusedJabbar Yawar, the spokesman for the Kurdish peshmerga militia, told McClatchy that ISIS was reportedly six miles from Baghdad at times. “This area controls access to southern Iraq, and it appears as if they might try to push into Baghdad or even south towards the city of Hilla,” he stated.

ISIS moving south of Baghdad is significant because of strongholds they already possess in Anbar province, to the west, and their initiatives to control the north. They have also been moving ISIS jihadists east to attempt to cut off the remaining roads to the city.

The Kurdish peshmerga forces reportedly are the biggest force standing between ISIS and a complete control of Iraq, as many Iraqi soldiers have either been killed in mass executions or deserted. Kurdish areas have remained largely in peace, and ISIS has rarely clashed with peshmerga forces directly. Nonetheless, the Kurdish forces appear to have little interest in collaborating with the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, instead aiming to sever their territory from Iraqi sovereignty.

The Iraqi government has largely denied many of ISIS’s gains in the country. According to CNN, the Iraqi government claims they still control the nation’s largest oil refinery in Baiji after reports surfaced that ISIS jihadists had taken it over. Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Affairs Hussain al-Shahristani said in a statement that the Iraqi army is not in full control of the oil refinery but continues to fight and is slowly encircling it. Iraqi state media also claims the army has killed the jihadist allegedly leading the attack on Baiji, Abu Qutada.

Obama defending muslimsKurdish leaders told McClatchy that they, too, were told Iraqi forces were still fighting in Baiji and had not fully lost control of the refinery.

While the Kurds continue to fight ISIS and remain the most organized and feared military in Iraq, the United States government is urging Kurdish leaders to abandon dreams of sovereignty. During a visit to Iraqi Kurdistan this week, Secretary of State John Kerry urged Kurdish leaders to promote national unity and participate in the Iraqi government.

Who is better off

Wake up America
Article collective closing

 

This May Be the Best Opinion Article You Will Read This Week


John Kerry Condemns Faith, Takes One More Step Toward Fascism

http://lastresistance.com/5658/john-kerry-condemns-faith-takes-one-step-toward-fascism/#8rySvyBZQ7zrwRlj.99

Posted By on May 6, 2014

kerry

Self Absorbed Viet Nam Vet, and Wanna-Be Politician with His Mentor; Ted “I’ll Save Myself – Good Luck swimming out of the sunken car”, rapist, womanizer, EXTREME LEFTIST, Kennedy

“There is no surer sign of decay in a country than to see the rites of religion held in contempt.” – Niccolo Machiavelli

Everything changes. That statement may seem obvious, but what we often forget is that change isn’t always positive. While we are inundated by promising messages of change, like Obama’s 2008 campaign slogan, what change really amounts to is deterioration. Just as we all age, our philosophies are subject to a slow deterioration as well. The unfortunate side effect of an aging philosophy is that it will eventually be replaced by something else.

For quite some time now, there has been a targeted attack on Christianity in this country. However, over the last several years, the level of persecution has escalated rapidly. The reason behind the escalation rests squarely on the shoulders of our leadership. The Democratic Party has become the Party of the faithless. That’s not an exaggeration, or a smear, it’s just the truth. The faithless are drawn to the Party which best represents their positions.

The Democrats can believe—or not believe—whatever they want, but the problem starts when they attempt to stifle Christianity. The problem begins when their faithlessness turns to aggression. From the teacher who banned her student from reading his bible during his free reading period, to the HHS contraception mandate, our faith is being hammered. Secretary of State John Kerry saying this on his trip to Africa:

BS WARNING BS ALERT

“Some people believe that people ought to be able to only do what they say they ought to do, or to believe what they say they ought to believe, or live by their interpretation of something that was written down aHate thousand plus, two thousand years ago. That’s not the way I think most people want to live.”

That is one of the most powerful men in the United States government slighting the beliefs of millions of Americans. That comment is outrageous, and wildly offensive. Will the media care? No. Will the Democrats care? No. They may even applaud him. But you know who does care? The million of Christians in this country. Even if you are not a Christian, you should be frightened by Kerry’s remark. His attitude toward Christianity is indicative of other aspects of his personality. He has a tight grip around the throat of the first amendment. The way in which he chooses to use his power is frightening.

But Kerry’s remark, the HHS mandate, and the bible ban are just the tip of an iceberg which we are quickly approaching. When one philosophy fades, others take its place. A vacuum is never a good thing. A vacuum creates an opportunity for something new, and potentially dangerous. What will replace our Christian nation when it eventually falls? And it will fall. The pendulum swings in opposing directions, and I can see a creeping fascism approaching; an ever-expanding government, an ever-widening wealth gap, and a population which is becoming more and more addicted to federal handouts. The pendulum has swung toward fascism before, and the results were nothing short of horrific. We are a dying nation, and we are dying because our faith is being stripped away.

When the leaders of a nation condemn the faith of its people, we are not far from fascism.

The 2014 mid-terms, and the 2016 presidential election are our last chance, so far as I can see, to take the wheel away from those who would drive us into chaos.

VOTE 02

State Department “spokes-twit” can’t name ONE Clinton accomplishment


There may be a job opening at the State Department.  Jen Psaki is the spokeswoman for State and she’s a, well, boob.

Below is a video exchange between Psaki and reporter Mike Lee who makes short work of her.

State

Thank you Mike Lee for doing your job and doing it well.  You’ll never be part of the White House Press Corpse [sic] that questions the President.

Complete Message

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


“Meanwhile”

 

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


“No Laughing Matter”

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/laughing-matter/#VxjQWXqsieqEKBLU.99

 

No-Laughing-Matter

Complete Message

MAX HASTINGS: Putin thinks the West is as weak as jelly. And the tragedy is he’s right


You want to know how we are perceived in the world? Read the following report from England. Not good

Jerry Broussard

Three Star Line

By Max Hastings

PUBLISHED: 21:05 EST, 18 March 2014 | UPDATED: 21:05 EST, 18 March 2014

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2583970/Putin-thinks-West-weak-jelly-And-tragedy-hes-right.html#ixzz2wRDkVaxz

The West’s outrage at Russia’s illegal annexation of the Crimea found full expression at Monday’s meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels.

It was announced that 21 Russian and Crimean politicians and officials face a travel ban and asset freeze, a sanction matched by America. Thus, a tiny number of Moscow’s elite and their puppets find their Harrods cards suspended.

And in case you are wondering, it is as likely that President Vladimir Putin’s £25billion personal fortune will be discovered sitting in a current account at the Kensington branch of NatWest as that Sevastapol will win the 2014 Holiday Destination of the Year prize.

Armed aggression: Putin's actions in Ukraine rely on exactly the same arguments that Hitler once deployed

Armed aggression: Putin’s actions in Ukraine rely on exactly the same arguments that Hitler once deployed

 

Former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind yesterday dismissed this pea-shoot gesture as ‘pathetic’, and he is right.

Whatever the historic arguments for Crimean secession from Ukraine – and some exist – Putin’s act of armed aggression, with threats of more to come, relies on exactly  the same arguments that Hitler deployed to justify his 1938-39 lunges into Czechoslovakia and Poland.

Russia’s brutish president plays golf abroad with only one club in his bag — force, or the threat of it.

Nothing that has been said or done by the West since the Ukrainian crisis began will have caused him a moment’s discomfort.

Russia cannot impress the world by social or industrial achievements, because it boasts none. It can gain our attention only by inspiring fear or sponsoring mayhem, whether in Crimea, Iran or Syria, and Putin is content that this should be so.

The United States yesterday warned of further sanctions against Russia, including expulsion from the G8.

But it remains unlikely that the leading Continental nations will support convincing economic action.

Half of Europe cooks on Russian gas, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel opposes a display of real defiance against Putin, or indeed any foreign enemy.

Rally: Putin speaks at an event in front of a background reading 'Crimea, we are together'

Rally: Putin speaks at an event in front of a background reading ‘Crimea, we are together’

 

Unafraid: Kremlin supporters flood Red Square in celebration of the incorporation of Crimea into Russia

Unafraid: Kremlin supporters flood Red Square in celebration of the incorporation of Crimea into Russia

 

Thus the master of the Kremlin has concluded that the West is weak, jelly weak. The evidence of almost three decades since the Cold War’s ending suggests he is right.

Depressed

Europe’s major powers have largely dismantled their armed forces. NATO is more dependent on the Americans than ever in its history for any display of military power.

U.S. radar surveillance aircraft and U.S. fighters yesterday patrolled the skies over Eastern Europe, and mighty sick the American people are becoming of paying the bill for our defences.

And where in all this is Britain? The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have talked bravely since the crisis began.

Yesterday in the Commons, William Hague deplored Russia’s ‘land grab’, the manner in which Moscow has rejected ‘respect for the law of that country, or for international law’.

He asserts that Putin has made ‘a big miscalculation’; that Russia will face ‘costs and consequences’ for its military intervention in Ukraine.

Brave talk: Foreign Secretary William Hague has condemned Putin, but Britain now commands little respect internationally

Brave talk: Foreign Secretary William Hague has condemned Putin, but Britain now commands little respect internationally.

But why should Moscow be impressed? This British Government, for all its pretensions since 2010 to play a heroic lead, has conducted its affairs in a fashion that leaves us singing falsetto on the international stage.

A friend who recently accompanied a national delegation to the Middle East told me how depressed he was to discover how respect for Britain has slumped.

We have lost two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, albeit as junior partners to the Americans; then made an almighty mess of policy towards Syria.

There, David Cameron and William Hague marched to the top of the hill, then had to come scuttling down again when they found nobody else following. Libya is now a shambles.

Defence cuts have made a sorry impression. We can no longer posture in Washington as a credible partner in military operations, and the Government lies through its teeth about the state of our Armed Forces.

Stuck with two absurd giant aircraft-carriers under construction, it refuses to admit a truth well known in Whitehall – that it can afford only a handful of American-built F-35 jets to fly off them.

Ministers pretend they can make good their drastic reduction in Army strength by recruiting more reservists. Yet every man, woman and sniffer dog in the services knows the reserves scheme is dead in the water.

Thuggery

Moreover, in the secrecy of the Ministry of Defence, discussions have already started about prospective Army cuts below the planned 82,000 establishment, on the assumption that even this will soon be unaffordable.

David Cameron has placed Britain’s security in the hands of an accountant, Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, who displays as much understanding of strategy as Davina McCall.

It is welcome that a British Government should recognise our diminished place in the world. It is sad, however, that respect for this country should be so drastically reduced.

Accountant: Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has overseen plans to slash the Armed Forces

Accountant: Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has overseen plans to slash the Armed Forces

Britain commands enthusiasm among the rich and mighty as a great destination for shopping, country week-ending and Michelin-starred dinners.

But William Hague’s stern remarks about Ukraine impress foes and friends alike no more than the same lines delivered by Winnie the Pooh.

The lessons of the Ukraine crisis are written in neon lights. First, after decades in which the Left has denounced American ‘meddling’ in the affairs of other nations, here we see what happens when the greatest democracy on earth renounces its historic leadership role.

Barack Obama’s presidency is a failure for many reasons, rooted in the weird detachment of the man himself.

But it is scary indeed to see what happens when a big, ugly state such as Russia, ruled by a gangster elite, decides that the United States and its leader are no longer capable of resisting its thuggery.

Beyond this, it has been plain for decades that the U.S. is unwilling much longer to bankroll and spearhead our defence – and why should it, when Europe is a rich continent? Now, we see Germany refusing even to use its vast economic muscle to deter Moscow.

We must keep a sense of historical perspective. The Ukrainian crisis is grave, but it is not 1914 nor 1939. Nonetheless, it should provide a giant wake-up call to Europeans.

History did not end with the conclusion of the Cold War. There are still very bad people out there, willing to do very bad things unless they are deterred or stopped.

It is indispensable for NATO to warn Moscow, and mean it, that any act of aggression towards the Baltic states would provoke a major showdown.

Instead of imposing personal sanctions on a mere 21 Russians and Crimeans, every member of the Russian parliament who voted for invasion and annexation should be denied entry to the U.S. and EU.

Germany must recognise that its place as the richest and most powerful nation in Europe demands that it should start to do its share towards protecting our common security, as it has not done since 1990.

Crumbling

The British Government must find the money to rebuild our crumbling Armed Forces. We need a credible strategy for the 21st century, instead of a mere defence balance sheet.

Crumbling forces: Reductions in Armed Forces spending has left us less able to act

Crumbling forces: Reductions in Armed Forces spending has left us less able to act

It is a misfortune for the world that Russia, a great nation, should have fallen into the hands of brutes. Putin reveres Stalin, one of the most successful mass murderers of the 20th century.

Freedom and dissent are, in the Russian president’s eyes, unacceptable in his new czardom.

Yesterday, a Ukrainian servicemen was shot and killed at a base that came under attack in Crimea’s main town of Simferopol.

The acting Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk called it a war crime and said the Crimean conflict has now entered a ‘military phase’. These are chilling words indeed.

We neither need nor wish to fight Russia, but the West must abandon its dismally failed attempt to appease its leader.

The bear will continue to claw victims unless we display the will to drive him back into his lair – before he comes hunting closer to our own door.

Bolton: Sending Kerry to Ukraine Talks ‘Like Sending a Cupcake to Negotiate With a Steak Knife’


March 17, 2014 – 3:48 AM

kerry-lavrov

Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov meet at Winfield House in London on Friday March 14, 2014 to discuss the Ukraine crisis. (AP Photo/Brendan Smialowski, Pool)

(CNSNews.com) – Sending Secretary of State John Kerry to negotiate with his Russian counterpart in a failed bid to avert a Moscow-backed referendum in Crimea was “like sending a cupcake to negotiate with a steak knife,” former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton said on Sunday.

Speaking as the referendum was underway, Bolton told Fox News that both the Obama administration and the European Union (E.U.) were demonstrating weakness in their handling of the Ukraine crisis.

“We sent Secretary of State John Kerry to London to negotiate with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov – that’s like sending a cupcake to negotiate with a steak knife,” he said.

Bolton, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said there was “a real failure of leadership” in the West.

“We’ve ignored the security issues that are inherent in Ukraine not being part of NATO after the Europeans rejected it in 2008, so after five years of failing to even think about this issue we’re now seeing the consequences,” he said. (CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW VIDEO)

Bolton

The U.S. in 2008 backed putting both Ukraine and Georgia on a formal path to NATO membership, but objections by E.U. countries leery about Russia’s strong objections meant the required consensus was not achieved, and the decision was put off.

Now that Ukraine’s Crimea region – effectively under Russian military control – has voted to join Russia the willingness of the West to confront President Vladimir Putin will again be put to the test, beginning Monday.

For weeks the Obama administration and E.U. leaders have been talking about “costs” and “consequences” for Russia’s military intervention, and the White House said Sunday that President Obama in a phone conversation with Putin had done so again.

“[Obama] emphasized that Russia’s actions were in violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and that, in coordination with our European partners, we are prepared to impose additional costs on Russia for its actions,” it said.

So far actual punitive measures have been mild. The State Department has instituted a visa ban on a group of undisclosed “officials or other persons who have been complicit in or responsible for supporting actions which threaten the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.”

Separately, Obama has issued an executive order creating the authority for sanctions against such individuals or entities – but no targets have yet been named.

Even after Kerry’s last-ditch talks with Lavrov on Saturday failed to avert the referendum, Kerry seemed reluctant to talk about sanctions.

Asked during a press conference after the talks whether U.S. and E.U. sanctions would now be a fait accompli on Monday, he agreed that Obama and the E.U. “have said if the referendum takes place, there will be some sanctions” – but then added immediately, “There’ll be some response, put it that way.”

Kerry referred several times during the press availability to Russia’s “legitimate concerns” and “legitimate interests” in Ukraine.

“We hope President Putin will recognize that none of what we’re saying is meant as a threat. It’s not meant as a – in a personal way,” he said.

Kerry also held out the hope that Putin’s pledge to honor the outcome of the referendum did not necessarily mean he would move to annex Crimea.

“The reality is that President Putin’s statement that he will respect the vote offers him many options as to how he chooses to respect the vote,” he said.

Kerry said that Putin could “respect the vote” by ensuring that Crimea’s autonomy is increased and its people’s needs respected, “without necessarily having to make a decision to annex.”

E.U. foreign ministers meeting on Monday will decide on what steps to take in response to the referendum, with travel bans and asset freezes on some officials under active consideration.

Meanwhile in Crimea, the separatists are wasting little time. Local lawmakers were scheduled to meet on Monday morning (around 4 AM eastern U.S. time) to begin the “political process of reunification with Russia,” Voice of Russia reported. From there a delegation planned to visit Russia to take the matter forward

It said the final decision on the Russian side would rest with both houses of parliament and with Putin.

The leader of the third-largest party in the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, Sergei Mironov, predicted lawmakers would quickly pass the necessary measures on Crimea’s accession to the Russian Federation.

State Duma speaker Sergei Naryshkin told Russian television the Crimea referendum was a historic development after years of Russia “losing” people – a reference to the breakup of the Soviet Union and consequent loss of Russian minorities in former Soviet states.

“Here at last we’re getting our compatriots back,” Naryshkin said. “That’s a historic moment for Russia.”

– See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/bolton-sending-kerry-ukraine-talks-sending-cupcake-negotiate-steak#sthash.REPxkP8O.dpuf

John Kerry’s Message to Russia: “Peace Through Weakness”


Minutemennews Banner

http://minutemennews.com/2014/03/john-kerrys-message-russia-peace-weakness/#hDLEht3BeMhW0Hv5.99

15 March 2014

By:  Marilyn Assenheim

john-kerry-thug-murderer-assad-must-be-punished

The Washington Examiner ran an interesting headline on Thursday: “John Kerry: Russia has until Monday to reverse course in Ukraine.” The Examiner continued: “If there is no sign [from Russia] of any capacity to respond to this issue … there will be a very serious series of steps on Monday.” Chief among those “steps?” “…the U.S. and its European allies will not recognize (Russia) as legitimate under international law.” That ought to learn ‘em. Yet, unaccountably, The New York Times reported Thursday that, even in the face of Kerry’s paper kitten, Russia is busily massing forces on the borders of Ukraine.

The Washington Examiner quoted Kerry in saying how impressed he was at “… how united our European allies are on the issue…they are very, very committed to make sure there is accountability…” So was the U.N. when they shook their finger at Saddam Hussein for over twelve years. When Senator Lindsey Graham asked Kerry what the administration would do should Russia make further inroads into the Ukraine Kerry responded cautiously but in full pie-in-the-sky mode: “Our hope is not to create hysteria or excessive concern about that at this point in time,” he said. “Our hope is to avoid that, but there’s no telling that we can.” Hope. Hmmm. As the tune says, it seems we’ve heard that song before. Unfortunately for “Clap-For-Tinkerbelle” Kerry, he might have to wrestle with that very eventuality. The New York Times had the breaking story: “Russia’s Defense Ministry announced new military operations in several regions near the Ukrainian border on Thursday… A day after a deputy minister denied any military buildup on the border; the Defense Ministry released a series of statements beginning early Thursday that appeared to contradict that. They outlined what was described as intensive training of units involving artillery batteries, assault helicopters and at least 10,000 soldiers. The operations confirmed, at least in part, assertions by Ukrainian leaders on Wednesday that Russia was massing forces…columns of armored vehicles and trucks in a border village called Lopan, only 30 miles from the Ukrainian city Kharkiv.” The latest estimate of Soviet forces parked on Ukraine’s doorstep is 25,000 troops.

Angela Merkel and the rest of the European adherents of finger-wagging policy have joined America’s Secretary of State, warning Russia off of incurring possible economic and diplomatic sanctions. Europe’s trading ties with Russia, particularly when it comes to oil however, suggest that such a tack might be a case of the EU cutting off its nose to spite its face. Particularly when Russia is in a position to acquire the wealth of Ukraine. One would guess that Putin might be willing to gamble that Europe’s posture might hurt them more than it would hurt him.

Statists have long chosen to pervert what Ronald Reagan really meant by “peace through strength.” Although Reagan did not endorse military conflict he knew that not having a strong military would send a catastrophic signal to cultures that respect only strength. Democrats, believing that what they want makes their desires true, prefer diplomacy and sanctions and ignore the failures of the past. They eagerly neuter U.S. armed forces while providing military aid to nations hostile to America.

Kerry, although he has taken up room on planet earth for over 71 years, has not learned very much. Not surprising considering that Kerry earned a D in history, twice, at Yale. But he has, unfortunately, been foisted on a hapless America as Secretary of State. Even should he be willing to give up junk food to shield his own grades from public view, The Lyin’ King might have looked into Kerry’s political science grade at Yale before appointing Kerry: D. One can’t blame Kerry for everything even if what passes for The Lyin’ King’s ludicrous foreign policy is right up his alley. But embarrassing himself is one thing; making America a perennial clown on the world’s stage is another. And having Europe for company in the overcrowded clown car won’t help should the elephants run amok. Diplomacy is an ineffectual bludgeon; wielding it hasn’t worked throughout all of recorded history. Fear of an opponent’s strength has. Proof of this is rapidly becoming evident. Friday, Kerry met with his Russian opposite number, Sergei Lavrov, in London. After five hours of implementing his sure-fire diplomatic strategy the Kremlin told Kerry to stick an onion-domed minaret where the sun don’t shine. FOX News summed up Kerry’s dismay in the aftermath: “…he said that he came with ‘good faith with constructive ideas’ to address the concerns of both Ukraine and Russia. But he said Putin is not backing down.” Who could have seen that coming?

Europe and the free world used to rely upon America’s military might for safety, allowing them the fantasy of overcoming evil with a Coke and a smile. The world’s bad players may have dawning awareness, however, that America is becoming less of a threat and more Kool-Aid and a rictus grin.

The White House is still lying about the Keystone Pipeline


Here’s the White House Chief of Staff on NBC’s Meet the Press last Sunday lying is arse off about the President’s position on the Keystone Pipeline. See interview here;
Pipeline

Let’s be clear about one thing.

This particular fact holds true whether you are in favor of or you are opposed to building the Keystone Pipeline. The oil that is being extracted from the Canadian tar sands that would be moved in the Keystone Pipeline will be refined and used whether the pipeline is built or not. If we don’t build the Pipeline and reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, the Canadians will sell it to the Chinese.

Building or not building the pipeline will have about zero net impact on “greenhouse gas emissions”.

That said, let’s take a look at what happened last week. It’s important to remember that President Obama has been kicking this can down the street for the last five years and he still doesn’t seem poised to make a decision. He charged the State Department with producing an environmental impact statement – the pipeline crosses our northern border so State gets their two cents in – about the impact of the pipeline. That report was issued last week.

WASHINGTON — The State Department released a report on Friday concluding that the Keystone XL pipeline would not substantially worsen carbon pollution, leaving an opening for President Obama to approve the politically divisive project.

The department’s long-awaited environmental impact statement appears to indicate that the project could pass the criteria Mr. Obama set forth in a speech last summer when he said he would approve the 1,700-mile pipeline if it would not “significantly exacerbate” the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Although the pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to the Gulf Coast, the report appears to indicate that if it were not built, carbon-heavy oil would still be extracted at the same rate from pristine Alberta forest and transported to refineries by rail instead.

OK, so the State Department’s study meets the President’s criteria for moving ahead with construction of the pipeline. But of course, you know that’s not the whole story as far as this administration goes.

The report sets up a difficult decision for Secretary of State John Kerry, who now must make a recommendation on the international project to Mr. Obama.

Wait a minute. Out here in the real world, a “difficult decision” is one that you have to make with incomplete or questionable information. That’s not the case here. It’s also not the first environmental impact statement that has said “no harm, no foul”, it’s at least the third. So, what could be hard about the decision?

Mr. Kerry, who hopes to make action on climate change a key part of his legacy, has never publicly offered his personal views on the pipeline. Aides said Mr. Kerry was preparing to “dive into” the 11-volume report and would give high priority to the issue of global warming in making the decision. His aides offered no timetable. [/quote_box_center]

Oh, we understand now. It’s a political decision. Without regard to what the White House’ CoS has to say. How do we know that? Well, for starters, Ken Salazar, the President’s former Secretary of the Interior, had this to say.

President Obama’s former Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar says he thinks the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada should be built, calling it a “win-win” project despite the objections of environmentalists.

“At the end of the day, we are going to be consuming that oil,” Salazar told the conference. “So is it better for us to get the oil from our good neighbor from the north, or to be bringing it from some place in the Middle East?”

And then there’s former Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu. Here’s what he had to say.

Former Energy Secretary Steven Chu said Monday the decision to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline is a political one, and not one founded in science.

[…]

“I don’t have a position on whether the Keystone pipeline should be built. That is for the secretary of State and the president. But I will say that the decision on whether the construction should happen was a political one and not a scientific one,” Chu said.

We think that’s pretty clear. Obviously, the White House is lying about Keystone.

Again. And among lots of other things.

Related articles

Obama Administration Caught in More Lies


DISMANTLE THIS: Iran, ‘We Did Not Agree to Dismantle Anything’

http://clashdaily.com/2014/01/dismantle-iran-agree-dismantle-anything/#BFGWUwzCH6iwgOcs.99

By / 23 January 2014

 Watch CNN’s full interview with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani Sunday at 10 a.m. on “Fareed Zakaria GPS”
Nuke Lies

(CNN) — Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif insisted Wednesday that the Obama administration mischaracterizes concessions by his side in the six-month nuclear deal with Iran, telling CNN in an exclusive interview that “we did not agree to dismantle anything.”

Zarif told CNN Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto that terminology used by the White House to describe the agreement differed from the text agreed to by Iran and the other countries in the talks — the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany.

“The White House version both underplays the concessions and overplays Iranian commitments” under the agreement that took effect Monday, Zarif said in Davos, Switzerland, where he was attending the World Economic Forum.

As part of the accord, Iran was required to dilute its stockpile of uranium that had been enriched to 20%, well above the 5% level needed for power generation but still below the level for developing a nuclear weapon.

In addition, the deal mandated that Iran halt all enrichment above 5% and “dismantle the technical connections required to enrich above 5%,” according to a White House fact sheet issued in November after the initial agreement was reached.

Zarif accused the Obama administration of creating a false impression with such language.

“The White House tries to portray it as basically a dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program. That is the word they use time and again,” he said, urging Sciutto to read the actual text of the agreement. “If you find a single, a single word, that even closely resembles dismantling or could be defined as dismantling in the entire text, then I would take back my comment.”

He repeated that “we are not dismantling any centrifuges, we’re not dismantling any equipment, we’re simply not producing, not enriching over 5%.”

“You don’t need to over-emphasize it,” Zarif said of the White House language. A separate summary sent out by the White House last week did not use the word dismantle.

In an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria on Wednesday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani echoed Zarif’s statement, saying the government will not destroy existing centrifuges. However, he added: “We are ready to provide confidence that there should be no concern about Iran’s program.”

Read more: CNN.com

No, Mr. Kerry: Poverty Doesn’t Produce Terrorism — Islam Does


http://clashdaily.com/2014/01/poverty-doesnt-produce-terrorism-islam/#olJssq992o70jy4Y.99

By / 21 January 2014

kerry

Secretary of State John Kerry is not only a scathing liberal and traitor to his fellow soldiers–but he is also a blithering buffoon.

During a meeting last week with Vatican officials in Rome, Kerry spouted the following absurdity: “poverty, which in many cases is the root cause of terrorism or even the root cause of disenfranchisement on this planet.”

Puh-leez!

Kerry’s statement defies the following reality: 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden was worth an estimated $300 million.

Yeah, that’s right–$300 million!

Bin Laden–whose father was a construction magnate in Saudi Arabia–never knew the meaning of the word poverty. The terror kingpin was raised in the lap of luxury as a child, and never went wanting.

In fact–his fellow 9/11 hijackers/jihadists were all reared in upper-middleclass households. These Islamo-thugs were all well fed, clothed and educated by their parents. Not a one was ever a homeless beggar forced to scavenge through garbage cans for food. Yet whenever the issue of poverty is discussed–despite the above mentioned facts–Kerry (and his ilk) never fail to mention that it is the leading producer of global terrorism.

Buffoon!

So, if poverty isn’t to blame for terrorism–what is? ISLAM!

Osama bin Laden stated on numerous occasions that he was simply following the way of the Prophet Mohammed. Bin Laden often praised Mohammed for leading 72 military campaigns to violently liquidate the “pigs” and “infidels.”

In fact, bin Laden’s favorite Koranic passage was Sura 9:73 which reads: “O prophet! strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them. Their abode is hell, and an evil destination it is.

Bin Laden would often be heard reciting this passage just prior to, or just after, a terrorist attack in which innocent life was savagely eradicated at his behest.

Remember: not one major school of Islamic jurisprudence has ever (at anytime) condemned bin Laden’s use of this passage to justify his reign of terror and mayhem (including 9/11).

And why not? Because if they condemned bin Laden–they would have to condemn the very person Sura 9:73 was written for–Mohammed.

After all–Mohammed shed more innocent blood than even bin Laden.

In the final analysis–despite what the blithering buffoon says: poverty doesn’t produce terrorism–Islam does.

http://www.diggita.it/story.phptitle=Gli_Stati_Uniti_rallentano_e_Assad_Esulta_video

 About the author: Pete Parker

 Pete Parker is a Navy veteran and former strength athlete who writes about the current issues of the day from a conservative perspective. Pete was also the host of “TUFFTalk” radio which dealt with national security– and the threat Islam poses to Western Civilization. He is very passionate about preserving our great nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage.

Reports: Saudi Prince Bandar Using US to Topple Syria’s Assad – Freedom Outpost


http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/reports-saudi-prince-bandar-bin-sultan-using-us-to-topple-assad/

 By Joshua Cook

According to reports in Mint Press News made by veteran Associated Press reporter Dale Gavlak, the chemical attack came from Syrian rebel arms by Prince Bandar, not the Assad regime.

Gavlak writes, “The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was ‘a judgment …already clear to the world.'”

Gavlak’s report states that the U.S. is not interested in differing opinion, despite evidence that points to Saudi Arabian Prince Bandar.

The report continues,

“However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.”

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K.’ “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned.

She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.

Prince Bandar is said to have close ties to Washington, serving as Saudi Arabia’s ambassador. According to a report in the UK’s The Independent, Prince Bandar has re-emerged as a pivotal figure in the struggle by America and its allies to tilt the battlefield balance against the regime in Syria.

According to the Independent, it was Prince Bandar’s intelligence agency that first alerted Western allies to the alleged use of sarin gas by the Syrian regime in February.

According to the report,

“It is a long-term Saudi goal that in the past several days has been subsumed by the more immediate crisis over the purported use of chemical weapons by Damascus …That message is being delivered to President Barack Obama by the current Saudi Ambassador in Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, who is a Bandar protégé.”

This situation continues to become eerily similar to President George W. Bush’s intel on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

In fact, according to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, on January 11, 2002, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Richard Myers met in Cheney’s office with Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States to discuss plans to attack Iraq.

The Washington Post reported that Bandar, who helped arrange Saudi cooperation with the U.S. military, feared Saudi interests would be damaged if Bush did not follow through on attacking Hussein, thus Bandar became another advocate for war.

“Months of applying pressure on the White House and Congress over Syria have slowly born fruit. The CIA is believed to have been working with Prince Bandar directly since last year in training rebels at base in Jordan close to the Syrian border,” the Independent reported.

The Saudis are “indispensable partners on Syria” and have considerable influence on American thinking, a senior US official told The Wall Street Journal yesterday. He added: “No one wants to do anything alone.”

And right now, Secretary of State John Kerry is trying to justify intervening in Syria on the basis of crimes against humanity.

But it makes you wonder: Whose crimes?

Is Saudi Arabia using an attack on Syria by the west as a way to advance its own agenda?

Joshua Cook lives in Travelers Rest SC. He received his BA from Southeastern University and MBA from North Greenville University.

Obama Will Sign UN Gun Treaty While Congress Is On Vacation


If you have been living in a cave somewhere and just rejoined society, then you have not heard about the United Nations Gun Control Treaty. It is designed to control all gun purchases all over the world. It is also designed to control guns, ammunition and who can possess fire arms. In the treaty is a section for gun registration which always leads to gun confiscation. This treaty’s ultimate goal is the disarming of America, so that their One World Government can be established and all peoples be subjugated to tyrannical reign.
President Obama knows he will never get this treaty approved by Congress, and therefore has decided to ignore our Constitution and sign the treaty in private while Congress is on vacation.
While you are ready this article, please take the time to use their efforts to contact your Senators urging them to stop President Obama. – Jerry Broussard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

CCRKBA.org

CCRKBA.org

BELLEVUE, WA – -(Ammoland.com)- You heard it straight from the horse’s mouth. Jay Carney said Obama will sign the UN Arms Trade Treaty “before the end of August…We believe it’s in the interest of the United States.”

This is very strategic timing considering Congress is on a 5 week vacation lasting thru the month of August!

These back door tactics are nothing new for the Obama Administration, which is why we are using tactics of our own to stop his anti-gun agenda. We have the home fax numbers of every Senator so while they are absent from the Capitol we can demand they must not ratify the UN Gun Treaty once Obama signs it.

We CAN stop this international treaty from reaching American soil by killing it the United States Senate. The U.S Senate must ratify an international treaty for it to be effective. They would need 67 votes to ratify the treaty. Reach every U.S. Senator at their home office; tell them you do not want this treaty in OUR United States!

Select Here To Fax The U.S. Senate At Their Home Offices:

Demand They KEEP THEIR TREATY AWAY FROM OUR GUNS –

DO NOT Ratify The UN ‘Arms Trade Treaty’!

Everything Obama tackles in office is strategically timed and politically motivated. He only looks out for himself, his fellow liberals, and his anti-gun agenda. After mass shootings the Administration would launch all-out attacks on our gun rights since the country would be more susceptible to change after a traumatic event. He made sure the Benghazi cover up was swept under the rug until he got re-elected. He will wait to attack certain issues until the 2014 Congressional elections so he’ll know how many liberals are by his side.

Obama believes now is the best time to sign the UN Gun Treaty since Congress is out of Washington. He will have less scrutiny to worry about if Congress is not nearby. He also thinks the public eye is not paying attention too closely. It is the slow summer months, people are on vacation, Congress is out of Washington so nothing must be happening.

Obama may think he is being sneaky but we will make sure the public knows what he is up to and so will all 100 U.S. Senators. By sending faxes to each Senator’s home office, they will realize how important this issue is to the American people. If we are reaching out to them while they are on vacation they will know they must take action. We must flood the home offices with faxes from Patriots across the country demanding our U.S. Senate does not ratify this international gun grab!

Gun advocates are weary of the language in the treaty including the fact that ‘small arms and light weapons’ are among the included weaponry that could be regulated by the United Nations. The UN Gun Treaty is a lot like ObamaCare; we will not know what it fully entails until it is implemented. It is impossible to trust the UN’s reassurance that this treaty will not affect our current gun laws or our Second Amendment. After all, the UN Arms Trade Treaty had previously been rumored as a replacement of the Second Amendment.

The Obama Administration seems to be thrilled with the thought of global gun control. John Kerry cannot wait for it to be signed:

“As your review of the treaty continues, we strongly encourage your administration to recognize its textual, inherent and procedural flaws, to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership, and to defend the sovereignty of the United States, and thus to decide not to sign this treaty.”

We must make it clear TODAY to the Senate and the White House that the Second Amendment must be protected and that they must reject any and all U.N. Gun Control. Tell them to KEEP THEIR TREATY AWAY FROM OUR GUNS!

All of the evidence suggested Trayvon threw the first punch, Trayvon was on top, Trayvon was unloading significant damage onto Zimmerman, and Zimmerman used deadly force to defend himself. No matter what the facts are, the anti-gunners continue to push their agenda to try to get what they want.

It is our job as Americans and Second Amendment Patriots to meet the anti-gun crowd head on. We will fight any legislation that tries to destroy our self-defense laws or our Second Amendment rights. We need your help in order to launch a significant attack against the anti-gun agenda. They use smoke, mirrors, and lies to push their agenda while we show the facts. So many resources are needed in order to be successful against the anti-gun crowd. Anything you can give us will be substantial in maintaining our goal of protecting America’s Second Amendment!

Select Here To Fax The U.S. Senate At Their Home Offices:

Demand They KEEP THEIR TREATY AWAY FROM OUR GUNS –

DO NOT Ratify The UN ‘Arms Trade Treaty’!

The uncertainty begins in the discussion of small arms. Where will the regulations on our small arms start, and where will they stop? They are even trying to include ammunition regulations in the Arms Trade Treaty! Will the United Nations try to impose international licensing requirements, an international registry, or international?

The last negotiations for an Arms Trade Treaty took place in July 2012, just four months before the Presidential election. Obama did not want to take a big stance for global gun control just months before his re-election but now he has made it clear he is for total gun control. He also told voters he would not be re-visiting negotiations for an Arms Trade treaty but here we are.

Since his re-election it has become clearer than ever what is at the top of his agenda; taking our guns away! The Obama Administration has been exploiting tragedies since the election to push gun control at the city, state, federal, and now GLOBAL level.

Our Senate took a stance before the Presidential election when 51 of them wrote Obama a letter saying they would not support an Arms Trade Treaty. We must let our entire U.S. Senate know we do not support international gun control. They must not ratify this international treaty.

Sincerely Yours,

Alan M. Gottlieb
Chairman
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Ammoland Click to read AmmoLand FTC Marital Disclosures Distributed to you by AmmoLand.com – The Shooting Sports News source.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: