Showing posts with label World. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World. Show all posts

Saturday, December 14, 2013

14 Experts Predict Economic Catastrophe for 2014 and Beyond

Guest post by Michael Snyder

Some of the most respected prognosticators in the financial world are warning that what is coming in 2014 and beyond is going to shake America to the core. Many of the quotes that you are about to read are from individuals that actually predicted the subprime mortgage meltdown and the financial crisis of 2008 ahead of time. So they have a track record of being right. Does that guarantee that they will be right about what is coming in 2014? Of course not. In fact, as you will see below, not all of them agree about exactly what is coming next. But without a doubt, all of their forecasts are quite ominous. The following are quotes from Harry Dent, Marc Faber, Gerald Celente, Mike Maloney, Jim Rogers and nine other respected economic experts about what they believe is coming in 2014 and beyond...

-Harry Dent, author of The Great Depression Ahead: "Our best long-term and intermediate cycles suggest another slowdown and stock crash accelerating between very early 2014 and early 2015, and possibly lasting well into 2015 or even 2016. The worst economic trends due to demographics will hit between 2014 and 2019. The U.S. economy is likely to suffer a minor or major crash by early 2015 and another between late 2017 and late 2019 or early 2020 at the latest."

-Marc Faber, editor and publisher of the Gloom, Boom & Doom Report: "You have to say that we are again in a massive financial bubble in bonds, in equities, in [other] asset prices that have gone up dramatically."

-Gerald Celente: "Any self-respecting adult that hears McConnell, Reid, Boehner, Ryan, one after another, and buys this baloney… they deserve what they get.

And as for the international scene… the whole thing is collapsing.

That’s our forecast.

We are saying that by the second quarter of 2014, we expect the bottom to fall out… or something to divert our attention as it falls out."

KAPOW: Police Chief Shreds Kanye West for Comparing His Job to Police and Military

Guest post by Police Chief David Oliver of the the Brimfield, Ohio Police Department


Dear Kanye West,

I am honored to be writing such an important star. I am a mere Internet sensation. I’m not sure I am worthy to address you, although the Huffington Post did say I was “Humorous and Insanely Popular.” I don't pay much attention to those things. Anyway, please excuse my interference in your life for a quick second.

I read your interview and also watched it on video. You said: “I’m just giving of my body on the stage and putting my life at risk, literally.….and I think about it. I think about my family and I’m like, wow, this is like being a police officer or something, in war or something.”

I want to thank you for putting your life on the line for all of us every day. I know that being a rapper is tough work. I have tried to rap, and it is very difficult to keep up with the pulse of the rhyme flow…although when Ice Ice Baby comes on the radio, I can usually keep up with ol’ Vanilla. Anywho, your job is just some very dangerous work. Most people don't consider... if you rap really fast, without a chance to inhale, you could pass out and hit your head.

That last paragraph was covered in sarcasm. I’m letting you know, just so you do not think I agree with your very ignorant assessment of your career (or any other performer)as it relates to a person in the military or a police officer’s service. You sir, are as misguided as they come. I do have a suggestion for you. Since you are accustomed to danger, from your life as an international rapper, I am strongly encouraging you immediately abandon you career as a super star and join the military. After joining, I would like you to volunteer to be deployed in Afghanistan or one of the numerous other forward locations where our men an women are currently serving. When the Taliban starts shooting at you, perhaps you could stand up and let the words flow. It could be something like “I’m Kanye West, wearing a flak vest.” I’m sure they would just drop weapons and surrender. You could quite possibly end all wars, just from the enemy being star-struck.

Your line of thinking is part of the problem in the world today….which include entertainers thinking they are something more than just entertainers. I know it is supply and demand and the demand for your services is high. I get economics. What I do not get is you EVER comparing what you do for a living to our heroic military members, who are always in harm’s way… and my brother and sister police officers who have to go to work carrying weapons and wearing a bullet-proof vest to protect themselves.

Check yourself, before you wreck yourself, fool.

Chief Oliver.


Note: I added the word "fool" at the end. Follow Chief Oliver on Facebook

EXCLUSIVE PHOTO: Iran sends monkey into space, president says

I always get these hirsute little fellows mixed up.


Hat tip: Biff Spackle.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

MARK LEVIN ON OBAMA'S HANDSHAKE WITH CASTRO: "The bigger the gulags that they have, the more deference he gives them"

Yesterday Mark Levin returned to the microphone, offering some choice words for Barack Obama and his bizarre deference for mass-murdering dictators.

All this talk about the memorial for Nelson Mandela in South Africa. And Obama conducting himself in a reckless manner because that's what he does for which he's cheered on by the lib media. Honestly, I was surprised that Obama and Raul Castro didn't exchange spit. Really.

We all know Obama has an affinity toward these totalitarian regimes. I'm not surprised in the least. And he's bowing to them and shaking their hands -- almost the bigger the gulags that they have, the more deference he gives them.

And I was thinking about this, and I'm not going to waste a lot of time on it because folks, here's the truth, no one will remember what Obama said in South Africa. We don't even remember what he said today and he said it today. No one will remember much about that memorial other than it was for Mandela. So, take that to heart.

But, I was thinking. When Obama leaves office, there won't be tens of millions of people newly freed from behind the Iron Curtain, or under the thumb of some third world dictator, and so forth as they were under Reagan and Thatcher. Margaret Thatcher was responsible for -- along with John Paul II and Ronald Reagan -- the freedom of over a hundred million people behind the Iron Curtain, and with Reagan, also in our own hemisphere in toto.

Obama won't be in any such movements. In fact, I dare say more people will be imprisoned and enslaved when he leaves office then before he came to office. And it's a disgrace -- as I said maybe two weeks ago, but certainly last week -- how our government, the Obama administration, treated the passing of Margaret Thatcher, who is responsible for the freedom of more people than any of Obama's favorite leaders or what have you. Absolute disgrace.

And there they are clowning it up, acting goofy, in the stands, in the cheap seats. Just ridiculous. I listened to Obama for Obama for about fourteen seconds and there he was again, what effect Mandela had on him. He started with the I, I, I. I said that's enough, I don't need to hear this crap. And I didn't and I'm not playing any the clips either because I don't care what he said. It doesn't matter to me. It doesn't affect my life nor yours.

One thing that did happen there that should draw our attention, at least to a point, as pointed out in the White House Dossier website. When Former President Bush, George W. Bush, when his face appeared on the video monitor at the memorial, in Johannesburg, he was booed. He was booed according to the White House poll report, which cited local press outlets.

Now, when the images of Obama and his wife popped up there was a thirty-second deafening roar, the pool writer wrote.

George W. Bush did more for South Africa and Africa period than Barack Obama has ever done. Obama is better at crafting his public image and saying the right things.

Bush personally saved the lives of millions of South Africans with his President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, ensuring AIDS drugs are available to South Africa’s impoverished masses.

And he's booed. He's booed. The Washington Compost talked about the success of this program. It said:

In South Africa, the success ( of PEPFAR) was extraordinary. AIDS killed roughly 2.3 million in South Africa -- once one of the worst-affected countries in the world -- and orphaned about a million children there, according to the United Nations. Today, rates of infection have fallen to 30 percent, and nearly 2 million people are on antiretroviral drugs.

Meanwhile, Obama has cut this program and generally has been customarily inattentive to it, as The Washington Post essentially reported. He's cheered, Bush is booed, the media is slobbering all over Obama.

Larry Elder also posed an excellent question that is sure to be ignored by the left and vintage media (but I repeat myself).



Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Missing Radioactive Material Highlights the Nuclear Terror Threat Lurking on our Porous Southern Border

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

National Security: The theft of a truck carrying dangerous radioactive material combined with terrorist group activity in the hemisphere shows that the need for a secure border involves more than illegal immigration.

Mexican authorities said Wednesday they found the stolen truck and likely recovered all of the radioactive cobalt taken by a group of thieves who were probably after the truck, unaware it carried a deadly cargo.

Cobalt-60, which is used in radiation therapy to treat cancer, was being transported from a hospital in the northern city of Tijuana to a radioactive waste storage center. But what if the thieves were terrorists who knew what the truck was carrying and targeted it to gain material for a so-called "dirty bomb"?

At a nuclear security summit in South Korea last year, Yukiya Amano, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), identified cobalt-60 as one of the materials that could be used with conventional explosives to make such a weapon.

"A dirty bomb detonated in a major city could cause mass panic, as well as serious economic and environmental consequences," Amano said, according to a copy of his speech. Detonation of such a bomb in a big city, he warned, "could cause mass panic, as well as serious economic and environmental consequences."

Bombs made with cobalt-60 "pose a threat mainly because even a fraction of a gram emits a huge number of high-energy gamma rays; such material is harmful whether outside or inside the body," according to a 2011 report by the Congressional Research Service.

The U.S. government has sensors at border crossings and seaports to prevent radioactive materials from entering the country. But nuclear terrorists are not likely to check themselves through customs or show up at border checkpoints. They'd more than likely cross through porous openings in our border with Mexico, or maybe through one of the sophisticated tunnels that have been dug under the border.

We know state sponsors of terror have nuclear material and that terrorist groups have plans for such material. We know OTMs — other than Mexicans — have been coming across our border with the flood of illegal immigrants. We also know that cross-border tunnels capable of smuggling more than drugs, guns and people have been uncovered.

Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., recently sent a letter to the Homeland Security Department asking that a task force investigate growing ties between Hezbollah and the drug cartels as well as growing evidence of a Hezbollah presence in Mexico. If the cartels can smuggle drugs and people into America, Hezbollah and al-Qaida have to know they can smuggle in trained terrorists or the makings of a dirty bomb.

Sunday, December 08, 2013

PRENTICE-HALL OUTRAGE: Its Common Core-aligned History Textbooks Depict World War II-Era America as Evil

Thanks to Townhall's Terrence Moore, we have a pretty good idea of the kind of brainwashing America's high school students are in for as it applies to World War II.

The opening page of the slim chapter devoted to World War II called “War Shock” features a photograph of a woman inspecting a large stockpile of thousand-pound bomb castings. The notes in the margins of the Teacher’s Edition set the tone:
In this section, nonfiction prose and a single stark poem etch into a reader’s mind the dehumanizing horror of world war. . . .
The editors of the textbook script the question teachers are supposed to ask students in light of the photograph as well as provide the answer:
Ask: What dominant impression do you take away from this photograph?

Possible response: Students may say that the piled rows of giant munitions give a strong impression of America’s power of mass production and the bombs’ potential for mass destruction.
Translation: Americans made lots of big bombs that killed lots of people.

The principal selection of the chapter is taken from John Hersey’s Hiroshima. It is a description of ordinary men and women in Hiroshima living out their lives the day the bomb was dropped...

There is no reading in this chapter ostensibly devoted to World War II that tells why America entered the war. There is no document on Pearl Harbor or the Rape of Nanking or the atrocities committed against the Jews or the bombing of Britain. The book contains no speech of Winston Churchill or F.D.R.

The United States of America, you turds at Prentice-Hall, was engaged in an existential fight against pure evil.

Tell me, schmucks: did you show some of the photographs taken by Japanese soldiers at the Rape of Nanking as they impaled babies on bayonets and raped women to death with sharp sticks?

Tell me, you freaking moonbats: did you show the bodies stacked like cord-wood at Auschwitz?

Millions upon millions murdered -- gassed, shot, starved -- and America is the malevolent actor?

History lesson for the progressive dimwits at Prentice-Hall: World War II drew to an abrupt conclusion with the detonation of two nuclear weapons.

Had the bombs not gone off, tens of millions on both sides would have perished and the war would have continued for years on end.

In fact, had the bombs failed to detonate, the Allies were prepared to launch Operation Downfall, the invasion of mainland Japan. Downfall was itself split into two massive ops: Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet.

Given the suicidal defensive stands mounted by the Japanese at Iwo Jima and Okinawa, war planners assumed for a minimum of "millions for American casualties and the tens of millions for Japanese casualties."

Put simply, Prentice-Hall should celebrate America's nuclear weapons as helping to defeat pure evil while preventing tens of millions of additional deaths.

Moore concludes with an excellent question:

Do we want the children just now entering school and in the years to come—who may have never met their great-grandparents—to be made ashamed of that Greatest Generation, of America, and of our resolution to remain free?

No, it is Prentice-Hall -- not our veterans -- that should be ashamed of itself. I would recommend any school board reject that company's left-wing propaganda and utilize real American History books instead.


Related: No Substitute for Victory. Hat tip: Sara Noble.

Saturday, December 07, 2013

HECKUVA JOB, BARRY: Saudi Arabia Seeks Russian Help As Mideast Nuclear Arms Race Heats Up

There are credible theories that President Barack Obama actively conspired with Iran to allow that country to build nuclear arms.

As Caroline Glick put it, Obama "never explained how allowing Iran to continue to enrich uranium decreases the likelihood of war":

The negotiations with the Iranians that culminated in [the] agreement went on for a year.

And yet, the final deal reflects Iran’s opening positions.

That is, over the course of the entire year, American and European negotiators were not able to move Iran’s positions one iota.

So what has the Obama administration been doing for the past year? Since Iran’s positions were the same all along, why didn’t they sign this deal a year ago? The US’s strength relative to Iran did not diminish significantly since a year ago. So the US didn’t need this agreement more now than it did a year ago.

Clearly, Obama did not spend the last year trying to build domestic American support for a deal that enables the regime that calls daily for the annihilation of America to become a nuclear power. With Iran building military bases all over Central and South America, Obama never bothered trying to make the case to the American people that they would be more secure with this regime in possession of the capacity to kill millions of Americans with one bomb.

Obama never stood before the Congress to explain how a deal that gives America’s Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval to Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program advances US national security. He never explained how allowing Iran to continue to enrich uranium decreases the likelihood of war.

As anyone could have predicted, the other shoe has dropped. Fars News reports that Riyadh has gone to Russia to seek its assistance in building nukes.

Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Bandar Bin Sultan in a recent meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin has asked him to help Riyadh construct a nuclear power plant, the Arab-language al-Qods al-Arabi newspaper quoted informed diplomatic sources in the Persian Gulf Arab littoral states as saying.

According to the report, Prince Bandar has told Putin that if Russia declares readiness in this regard, Saudi Arabia can provide Moscow with preliminary studies that it has conducted since six years ago.

Saudi Arabia and other members of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC) have been conducting nuclear studies and the PGCC secretariat has been in charge of these studies.

Last month, a report said that Saudi Arabia has invested in Pakistani nuclear weapons projects, and believes it could obtain atomic bombs at will.

In 2009, Obama famously said, "As the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility to act" to reduce their proliferation.

That statement had about as much veracity as his infamous "If you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan" trope.

Although I feel certain that, at least when it comes to disarming America, Obama means business. He intends to strip away America's nuclear deterrent force by 80 percent or more while China, Russia and Iran are ramping up their militaries to unprecedented heights.

This president is, without question, making the world a far more dangerous place and is actively undermining America's national security interests.


Hat tips: BB and BadBlue News

Friday, December 06, 2013

Russia and the ACLU (But I Repeat Myself) Extremely Perturbed by New Spy Agency Logo

Hey, I'm in favor of a robust U.S. intelligence capability, so long as it isn't directed against American citizens.

That said, English language periodical Russia Today ain't happy:

The US National Reconnaissance Office launched a top-secret surveillance satellite into space Thursday evening, and the official emblem for the spy agency’s latest mission is, well, certainly accurate, to say the least.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence live-tweeted Thursday’s launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, and throughout the course of the ordeal made no effort to ignore the logo for the NROL-39 mission... The latest spy satellite to be sent into orbit by the NRO can be recognized by its seal: a malevolent octopus with furrowed brows that also happens to be wrapping its tentacles around all corners of the Earth...



...For half a year now, leaked NSA documents have let the world learn that the US monitors the phone habits of not just Americans, but also foreigners sitting atop the governments of allied nations.

...That being said, you’d think ODNI would reconsider launching a new spy satellite. Or maybe even not put an octopus strangling the Earth on the outside.


If the ACLU protected Second Amendment rights as diligently as they pretend to protect First Amendment rights, they might have a modicum of credibility left.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Wednesday, December 04, 2013

EX-SECRET SERVICE DROPS BENGHAZI BOMBSHELL: Obama Refused Help Fearing Another "Blackhawk Down" During Debates

Writing at The Tatler, Bridget Johnson confirms that the Obama administration had ample time to organize a response to the attacks in Benghazi.

Members of the House Intelligence Committee learned in a closed-door briefing yesterday that more contractors are corroborating the report that the Obama administration had plenty of time to respond to the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic facility ... Nunes said the timeline begs the question: “What if the attack had went on for another 24 hours?”

“Would they have eventually sent help then? I mean, there is no accountability in this process that I’ve seen so far. And nobody knows what the president knew and when he knew it,” he said.

Interviewed late last month on The Mark Levin Show, ex-Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino laid out a timeline that appears to validate Johnson's reporting.

It's worse [than just a scandal]. Having been overseas, having been a Secret Service agent, I walked out of my house with my crying daughters... and I would tell them everything would be okay. This was going to Afghanistan, etc.

I thought the Cavalry would show up! ... I never thought in a thousand years that if we had an "A-to-Z security plan" that "B" would never show up... and that FEST team, the Foreign Emergency Support Team, over a seven-hour fight where our Ambassador was brutally killed, along with Sean Smith and those two heroic SEALs.

It's tough for me to talk about because it brings back really bad memories. I can't imagine if something had broke bad on my end. I can't imagine screaming in the radio calling for help and not one person answered to help. It's a national tragedy and it's worse than people know...

It was an insider attack, planned for months. The administration didn't want to admit that Libya was a failed mess. It had to be a foreign policy success right before the election, they knew there was a foreign policy debate coming up.

He [Obama] had just gotten destroyed during the first debate with Romney because he had nothing to stand on.

So they had to find a scapegoat when this happened. They tried this ridiculous meme about the video, which is basically laughed at now, but back then was accepted by a collaborative media that just wanted to propagate this Aesop's fable.

But I really believe that they just had them stand down because they had memories of "Blackhawk Down."

And if we got stuck over there, we're going to have to tell a story about how Libya is a failure. But they never -- can you imagine listening to the cries for help?

The horror. And now these tapes are apparently out there, there were drones overhead and there's video too, which were there about 90 minutes after the attack started.

They let these people die and suffer grievous injury because of a simple political calculation. It's sick.

In August of this year, unconfirmed but credible reports asserted that Obama consigliere Valerie Jarrett made the call to stand down.

Confidential sources close to Conservative Report have confirmed that Valerie Jarrett was the key decision-maker for the administration, the night of the Benghazi terrorist attack on 9/11/2012...

...at approximately 5 PM Washington time, reports came in through secure-channels that Special Mission Benghazi was under attack. Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey summoned the President,and briefed him on the crisis, face to face.

...As that meeting drew to a close, Ms. Jarrett, who is also the Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, went from the living quarters to the White House Situation Room, where the attack in Benghazi was being monitored by Dempsey, Panetta and other top-ranking officials.

Whether she was instructed by the President to go there, or if she went of her own volition, is only known by the President and herself.

Perhaps House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa could subpoena Valerie Jarrett to determine what she knows about the night of September 11, 2012.

That is, if it doesn't impact the 42 other investigations he's "working on".


Tuesday, December 03, 2013

PREEMPTIVE SURRENDER IN THE PACIFIC: Obama Bows to China, Humiliates Japan

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

National Security: As the media praised the president for sending two B-52s through disputed air space claimed by China, the administration instructed U.S. airlines to get approval as demanded from the Chinese government.

After China declared an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea encompassing the Japanese Senkaku Islands, two U.S. B-52s flew through the claimed air space without informing Beijing. It was an appropriate response.

Not so appropriate, however, was the Obama administration's instructions to U.S. carriers that they accede to China's demands for prior notification.

China announced last week that all aircraft entering the zone over the East China Sea, an area two-thirds the size of Britain located between China, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, must notify Chinese authorities beforehand, and that it will take unspecified defensive measures against those that don't comply.

The Japanese government, bristling at this infringement of its sovereignty, instructed its carriers not to comply with China's demand. In contrast, the New York Times reports, administration officials said they made the decision to urge civilian planes to adhere to Beijing's new rules in part because they worried about an unintended confrontation.

Unintended confrontation? China's move was carefully planned and its move to control the air space over and around the Senkaku Islands is no accident but part of a plan to project power far beyond its coastal waters.

United, American and Delta have said they have begun notifying Chinese authorities of flight plans when traveling through China's ADIZ in response to the Obama administration's request.

This is a slap in the face to Tokyo. And since Japan has refused Beijing's demand, just how does the administration's capitulation end the risk of confrontation? As China's power grows, so will its assertiveness.

Sunday, December 01, 2013

Old Soviet Jokes Become Our New Reality

Guest post by Red Square

I have seen the future and ran away.

At first the move to America from the former USSR made me feel as though I had made a jump in time, from the stagnant depraved past into a distant dynamic future.

There was an abundance of commonly available futuristic contraptions, machines, and appliances that made everyday existence easier and more enjoyable. Less obvious but just as exciting was the media's openness: I no longer needed to read between the lines to know what was happening.

Most importantly, there was honesty, dignity, and respect in relations among people.

Today I'm feeling like a time traveler again.

Only this time the productive, honest and self-reliant America is vanishing in the past, as we are quickly approaching the all too familiar future.

It is the future of equal poverty, one-party rule, media mooching, government looting, bureaucratic corruption, rigged elections, underground literature, half-whispered jokes, and the useful habit of looking over your shoulder.

It was nice living in America before it changed the course and followed Obama's direction "Forward," which, according to my compass, is pointing backward.

All of a sudden I find myself playing the role of a comrade from the future, helping my new compatriots to navigate the quagmire ahead of us.

Friday, November 29, 2013

Will the West withstand the Obama presidency?

Guest post by Martin Sherman

The really chilling aspect of the Obama-incumbency is that it is difficult to diagnose whether the abysmal results it produced—including the recent Geneva debacle—reflect crushing failure or calculated success


I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. – Barack Hussein Obama, Cairo, 2009

For anyone who understands that the US Constitution is not a Sharia-compliant document –neither in letter nor in spirit – it should be alarmingly apparent that the Obama-incumbency is a dramatic and disturbing point of inflection in the history of America and its “Western” allies. By “Western” I mean countries whose political practices and societal norms are rooted in Judeo- Christian foundations in a cultural rather than in any religious sense.

The devil is not in the details

One does not have to be an expert in Islamic history or culture, or be familiar with the details of Koranic verse or Hadithic texts to realize that Obama’s characterization of the alleged affinity between America and Islam is entirely detached from any reality on the ground–particularly with regard to the matters he enumerates in the preceding excerpt from his 2009 Cairo speech.

All one has to do is follow the daily news that routinely convey reports of the Hobbesian horrors that flared across Syria, Libya, Egypt and other Arab countries once the Leviathan “cap” of tyranny, holding these bestial impulses in check, was “uncorked.”

Worse, in some parts of the Muslim world, blood curdling atrocities have become so commonplace they hardly make the news at all.

For when it comes to issues such as justice, progress, tolerance and respect for societal and/or religious diversity, a yawning chasm divides America from Islam. Indeed, American society, as a product of the values embodied in the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian values it draws on; and Islamic society as a product of Sharia and the Muslim values it draws on, are irreconcilably exclusive and antithetically opposed to one another.

No amount of convoluted scholarly debate on the intricacies of Islamic scriptures or benign interpretations of their “real” significance, can change the gruesome facts that prevail throughout Muslim-majority societies – from West Africa to East Asia.

Monday, November 25, 2013

GOHMERT: Obama Has Repeatedly Betrayed Our Ally Israel

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) is the man:

I haven’t heard anybody else make a connection; maybe there isn’t any. But two days after we voted with all of Israel’s enemies against Israel, something called a flotilla left and moved to challenge the blockade, the lawful blockade, at the Gaza Strip. I don’t think it’s an accident. People notice when distance comes between a strong ally and the nation they’re against. That’s why we got to be so careful with what we’re doing.

And I’ve got this article, and I’ll just quote briefly. This is from February 2012, from the Washington Post; not one of my biggest fans — Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has a lot on his mind these days, from cutting the defense budget to managing drawdown of US forces in Afghanistan. But his biggest worry is the growing possibility that Israel will attack Iran over the next few months. Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike in April, May or June.

Folks, that is a betrayal of your ally. It was intentional, and they had been putting pressure on Israel not to defend themselves. I’m told by people in Israel, friends there, that you wouldn’t believe the pressure that this administration has brought to bear on Israel not to defend itself. And that’s a betrayal.

...Because another thing we did – we don’t know who, we know Panetta did that in the Washington Post. But the story came out in March of 2012. And this is from ABC News, also not one of my biggest fans — Israelis suspect Obama media leaks to prevent strike on Iran. And then it talks about — reports today about Iran’s nuclear program and the possibility of an Israeli strike. And what they did was they outed that Israel was going to use Azerbaijan in order to attack. Why in the world would an ally do that to another ally? That is a betrayal of incredible proportions, and Israel knew it.

And again this fall, we have betrayed them yet again, when the United States leaked that it was Israel that had an attack in Syria. If any of what is — there are some that believe that the negotiations with Iran were stepped up by this administration because they know — Israel knows they’ve got to defend themselves. And as I told Prime Minister Netanyahu two years ago – I’m really sorry we’ve put you in a position of not only defending yourself but defending us. You shouldn’t have to do that. We ought to be defending ourselves, not you.

But this administration, I believe, knew that they would jam Israel so badly if they were negotiating with Iran, as Iran moved very close, or perhaps developed their nuclear bombs. How could Israel attack while the United States is negotiating for peace?

Because Iran says — look, we’re not going to let you come into our facilities. But we’ll agree not to be developing nuclear weapons, you know.

(Laughter)

Now, if that sounds familiar – I knew it sounded familiar to me. And as Steve King and Scott Garrett tell me — you’ve got a phenomenal memory for minutia. Sometimes it’s helpful, sometimes it’s not.

This is from the New York Times. Now, they love me.

(Laughter)

UN Agency Doubtful on Deal — under the agreement reached earlier this week – wasn’t Iran — North Korea – this is October 21st, 1994 – North Korea agreed to in-place storage the fuel it removed last spring from a five-megawatt graphite reactor containing enough plutonium for four or five nuclear bombs. And the article goes on and talks about how Clinton and Madeleine Albright – you remember them?

(Laughter)

Yeah, they’re giving a lot of good advice these days. They felt like – and so they cut this tough deal with North Korea that we will give them nuclear power plants if they’ll promise not to use them to develop nukes. It reminded me of when Jeff Foxworthy said, you know, he had no money. And the guy comes to the door and says — I got to repossess your car. And he says — I’m sorry, could you just give me another month? He said — I’m told to either leave with the car, or cash, or a check. He said — a check? You’ll take a check? Oh, I got a check.

(Laughter)

That’s where North Korea and Iran are. Oh, you’ll take an agreement? Okay. This says in exchange North Korea will abandon its existing nuclear facilities and renounce any plans to build nuclear weapons. Only once the nuclear installations are substantially completed, however, will North Korea allow agency experts to inspect its sites. That could be five years or more, according to agencies in Vienna. That deal allowed North Korea to develop nukes. And they’re working with Iran.

Folks, elections do have consequences, and we’re living with some. But it doesn’t mean we have to multiply those. It is true what is said in Washington – no matter how cynical you get, it’s never enough to catch up.

Keep the faith. We can make a difference.

That, my brothers and sisters, is called speaking truth to power. Read the whole damn thing.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Sunday, November 24, 2013

The Iran Smart Power Reset Wrapup

Ambassador John Bolton calls it an "Abject Surrender by the United States":

This interim agreement is badly skewed from America’s perspective. Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its “right” to enrichment in any “final” agreement...

...Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a “comprehensive solution” will “involve a mutually defined enrichment program.” This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a “compromise” on Iran’s claimed “right” to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.

...A nuclear Iran would also be essentially invulnerable, providing a refuge that al Qaeda leaders hiding in Afghan and Pakistani caves could only dream of...

So in truth, an Israeli military strike is the only way to avoid Tehran’s otherwise inevitable march to nuclear weapons, and the proliferation that will surely follow. Making the case for Israel’s exercise of its legitimate right of self-defense has therefore never been more politically important...

Iran Supreme Leader Khamenei welcomes nuclear deal:

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Sunday the deal reached with world powers in Geneva was the basis for further progress, and the prayers of the Iranian nation had contributed towards its success.

"This can be the basis for further intelligent actions. Without a doubt the grace of God and the prayers of the Iranian nation were a factor in this success," Khamenei wrote in a letter to President Hassan Rouhani published by the IRNA state news agency.

Thursday, November 21, 2013

ENEMY WITHIN: Obama unilaterally dismantling U.S. nuclear deterrent far beyond what he promised Congress

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Defense: Breaking yet another promise, this one to Congress, the administration jeopardizes our national security with plans to eliminate an entire squadron of intercontinental ballistic missiles and destroy its silos.

Yet another example of what President Obama meant in 2012 when he promised Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, that after his re-election he would have more "flexibility" on defense issues, comes on the news that an ICBM squadron would be scrapped to comply with the New START Treaty — even as both the Russians and Chinese deploy new ballistic missiles.

A document prepared by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon maps out a strategy to eliminate an ICBM squadron — and destroy its missile silos — by Dec. 5, 2017.

The military would begin removing ICBMs next October, after an environmental assessment is complete, and the silo elimination would begin in May 2016.

The fact is, as the Heritage Foundation notes, the U.S. does not need to eliminate an ICBM squadron to meet New START's limits. The State Department's Oct. 1 fact sheet says the U.S. must dismantle 109 of its deployed ICBMs, deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and deployed heavy bombers, and remove another 138 warheads.

Heritage notes the U.S. has already reduced its deployed warheads by 112 and that destroying an ICBM squadron to comply with New START is unnecessary.

Sunday, November 17, 2013

STATE-CONTROLLED EDUCATION: Common Core Teaches Children Marxist Axioms About Government

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Schools: Opposition is rising to new national education standards pushed on public schools. They have turned schools into re-education camps for liberalism, with political statements masquerading as English lessons.

If one had to include one speech by President Ronald Reagan as recommended reading in a national standardized curriculum it might be the one in which he stood in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin and said, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

One might pick Reagan's first inaugural address when he said, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Or even his 1964 "A Time for Choosing" on behalf of Barry Goldwater that launched him to political prominence.

The speech chosen by Common Core for its English Standards, which recommends "exemplar texts" for reading, including addresses by a host of worthy historical figures — such as Patrick Henry, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and Martin Luther King — was Reagan's May 1988 speech to students at Moscow University.

It is a fine speech and in it he speaks of the fruits of liberty in the West and of the promise of the "Moscow Spring" but its softer tone does not speak of the "evil empire" that would soon come crashing down.

There is no stirring rhetoric on the evils of tyranny, or of the dangers of big government.

Could it be that recommending a Reagan speech that defines government as the problem rather than the solution might conflict with the subliminal messages in a worksheet that asks students to rewrite sentences to make them "less wordy." Sentences like, "The commands of government officials must be obeyed by all."

The worksheets, published by New Jersey-based Pearson Education, ask fifth-graders to edit such sentences as "(The president) makes sure the laws of the country are fair," and "The wants of an individual are less important than the well-being of the nation."

That last sentence sounds suspiciously like the old Marxist axiom "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

Saturday, November 16, 2013

OH, SUPER: The NSA Has Weaponized the Internet

It seems that Edward Snowden has revealed another interesting and dangerous capability of the NSA. It can attack virtually any computer system in the world by monitoring requests and forging replies.

A basic example: say you visit an Al Qaeda website. Monitoring major Internet backbones would allow the NSA to detect that visit. It begins with the browser requesting information and the server responding. Once the attacker (in this case, the NSA) sees that request go by, it forges a reply that includes an exploit kit.

In other words, virtually anyone using the Internet could be targeted by the NSA.

Nicholas Weaver, writing at Wired, describes some of the more interesting forms of attack.

The NSA has a collection of FOXACID servers, designed to exploit visitors. Conceptually similar to Metasploit’s WebServer browser autopwn mode, these FOXACID servers probe any visiting browser for weaknesses to exploit.

All it takes is a single request from a victim passing a wiretap for exploitation to occur. Once the QUANTUM wiretap identifies the victim, it simply packet injects a 302 redirect to a FOXACID server. Now the victim’s browser starts talking to the FOXACID server, which quickly takes over the victim’s computer. The NSA calls this QUANTUMINSERT.

The NSA and GCHQ used this technique not only to target Tor users who read Inspire (reported to be an Al-Qaeda propaganda magazine in the English language) but also to gain a foothold within the Belgium telecommunication firm Belgacom, as a prelude to wiretapping Belgium phones...

HTTP cache poisoning. Web browsers often cache critical scripts, such as the ubiquitous Google Analytics script ‘ga.js’. The packet injector can see a request for one of these scripts and instead respond with a malicious version, which will now run on numerous web pages. Since such scripts rarely change, the victim will continue to use the attacker’s script until either the server changes the original script or the browser clears its cache.

Zero-Exploit Exploitation. The FinFly “remote monitoring” hacking tool sold to governments includes exploit-free exploitation, where it modifies software downloads and updates to contain a copy of the FinFisher Spyware. Although Gamma International’s tool operates as a full man-in-the-middle, packet injection can reproduce the effect. The injector simply waits for the victim to attempt a file download, and replies with a 302 redirect to a new server. This new server fetches the original file, modifies it, and passes it on to the victim. When the victim runs the executable, they are now exploited — without the need for any actual exploits.

Mobile Phone Applications. Numerous Android and iOS applications fetch data through simple HTTP. In particular, the “Vulna” Android advertisement library was an easy target, simply waiting for a request from the library and responding with an attack that can effectively completely control the victim’s phone. Although Google removed applications using this particular library, other advertisement libraries and applications can present similar vulnerabilities.

DNS-Derived Man-in-the-Middle. Some attacks, such as intercepting HTTPS traffic with a forged certificate, require a full man in the middle rather than a simple eavesdropper. Since every communication starts with a DNS request, and it is only a rare DNS resolver that cryptographically validates the reply with DNSSEC, a packet injector can simply see the DNS request and inject its own reply. This represents a capability upgrade, turning a man-on-the-side into a man-in-the-middle.

One possible use is to intercept HTTPS connections if the attacker has a certificate that the victim will accept, by simply redirecting the victim to the attacker’s server. Now the attacker’s server can complete the HTTPS connection. Another potential use involves intercepting and modifying email. The attacker simply packet-injects replies for the MX (Mailserver) entries corresponding to the target’s email. Now the target’s email will first pass through the attacker’s email server. This server could do more than just read the target’s incoming mail, it could also modify it to contain exploits.

Amplifying Reach. Large countries don’t need to worry about seeing an individual victim: odds are that a victim’s traffic will pass one wiretap in a short period of time. But smaller countries that wish to utilize the QUANTUMINSERT technique need to force victims traffic past their wiretaps. It’s simply a matter of buying the traffic: Simply ensure that local companies (such as the national airline) both advertise heavily and utilize in-country servers for hosting their ads. Then when a desired target views the advertisement, use packet injection to redirect them to the exploit server; just observe which IP a potential victim arrived from before deciding whether to attack. It’s like a watering hole attack where the attacker doesn’t need to corrupt the watering hole.


Is someone providing oversight over the NSA's operation?

Is the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper going to be penalized for lying to Congress?

Is the NSA using the capability to attack the computers of U.S. citizens without warrants?

If we still lived in a Constitutional Republic -- and our leaders had any virtue whatsoever -- we'd have answers to these critical questions.


Hat tip: ZeroHedge.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Pentagon Report: Obama Administration Paid More than $150 Million to Fund Terrorist Attacks Against Americans

Guest post by Greg Campbell

As Americans struggle to make ends meet, as the current economic climate is anything but healthy, the Obama Regime is pumping millions of dollars into foreign companies that finance attacks on Americans.

Surely, there is a better use for our money than financing terrorism against our own people.

The national debt is just over $17.1 trillion dollars. Specifically, it is $17,162,395,935,482.18- or, at least it was when this article was written. In the time it took to type the numbers, the U.S. borrowed another $195,976. By this time tomorrow, the national debt will have increased by roughly $2,690,000,000.

We our hemorrhaging money at an astonishing rate and saddling Americans with unconscionable debt. A million here, a million there-money we don’t have is tossed around and thrown away like dropped pennies in a parking lot while our “leaders” not only refuse to make any meaningful changes to our unsustainable economic model, but make future plans for how to enlarge government and spend even more money.

And while that may seem like a betrayal of Americans, it cannot compare to the fact that America has given $150 million to groups that fund terrorists actions against Americans.

In our nation’s Quixotic quest to make the world love us, the U.S. has been funding terrorism against Americans. In a report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, the Pentagon has admitted that we are subsidizing at least 43 companies that are linked to Taliban leaders who have targeted and arranged attacks on Americans.

As Obama Slashes U.S. Military, China Deploys Strategic Bombers Equipped With Nuclear Cruise Missiles

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Military Superiority: As China does its own Pacific pivot, a new report reveals that Beijing's strategic bomber is equipped with a land-attack nuclear missile and an armed drone nearly identical to one of ours developed through cyberespionage.

To the casual observer, the Chinese Hongzha-6 (H-6) bomber is not that impressive. The two-engine medium-range jet is a variant of the old Soviet Tu-16 Badger. That plane first flew in 1959 and versions have been deployed by the Chinese Air Force since 1968.

A prototype H-6 was used to airdrop China's first three-stage thermonuclear device at the Lop Nor Nuclear Weapon Test Base in Malan, Xinjiang, on June 17, 1967.

To military observers, however, its latest incarnation, the Chinese H-6K, is a significant advance in China's military capability and is continuing evidence of China's determination to dominate the Western Pacific and challenge U.S. dominance in the region.

As noted in the Oct. 8 draft of the forthcoming report of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission to Congress, the People's Liberation Army in June accepted the first of 15 new H-6K bombers, each with an important new difference:

They'll be able to carry four nuclear-capable Changjian-10 (long sword) cruise missiles on four underwing pylons plus two more in its weapons bay. This effectively extends the bomber's combat range to Okinawa, Guam and even Hawaii from China's mainland.