Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Israel Transportation Minister: U.S. cancellation of flights to Israel gives a “prize to terror”

  / Jihad Watch
delta-airlines-e1308922684245
“There is no reason for the American companies to stop their flight and give a prize to terror.” Indeed. The cancellation of flights sends the message that terrorism works, and that Hamas doesn’t have to work all that hard to substantially hinder normal life in Israel. Did the Federal Aviation Administration decide to cancel flights to Israel as part of the Obama Administration’s general policy of constantly pressuring Israel?

“Israel Transportation Minister: Cancellation of Flights to Israel Gives a ‘Prize to Terror,’” by Shiryn Ghermezian, Algemeiner, July 22, 2014:
Israel’s Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz said on Tuesday that the just announced cancellation of European and U.S. flights to Israel handed a victory to terrorism.
“There is no reason for the American companies to stop their flight and give a prize to terror,” Katz said, according to Jerusalem Post correspondent Niv Elis.
On Tuesday, four major U.S. airline carriers announced their decision to cancel flights heading to Israel indefinitely, one specifically citing the danger of Gaza rocket attacks near Israel’s Ben Gurion airport.
Shortly after the airlines announced their decision, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said it told all U.S. airlines that flights to the airport are prohibited for 24 hours, according to The Associated Press. German carrier Lufthansa nixed all flights to and from Tel Aviv for the next two days, according to an ABC News correspondent, and Air France also suspended its flights to Israel.
Delta said it suspended service between its hub in New York and Tel Aviv “to ensure the safety and security of our customers and employees.”
The airline said one of its Boeing 747s, headed for Tel Aviv from New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport with 273 passengers and 17 crew members, on Tuesday diverted to Paris’ Charles de Gaulle airport following reports of a rocket or associated debris near the airport in Tel Aviv.
Israeli police confirmed that a rocket launched from Gaza landed in an area near Ben Gurion, The AP reported. The rocket caused damage to a house and slightly wounded one Israeli, police spokesperson Luba Samri said.
Delta said it “continues to work closely with U.S. and other government resources to monitor the situation,” adding, “a customer waiver for travel to Tel Aviv is in effect.”
US Airways also canceled a flight to Israel on Tuesday, according to USA Today. Flight 796, from Los Angeles, was canceled in Philadelphia before leaving for Tel Aviv.
“We are suspending operations to/from Tel Aviv until further notice,” US Airways spokeswoman Jennifer Dohm said. “We are working with government officials to ensure the safety of our customers and our employees and will continue to evaluate the situation.”
United Airlines on Tuesday canceled flights 84 and 90 from Newark to Tel Aviv, USA Today reported, and American Airlines told CNN it also suspended service to Ben Gurion airport.
More Hamas rockets found at another UN school in Gaza
Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

The UN has long been part of the problem, not the solution. The UN is driven by the largest world body, the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation). UN schools have become hotbeds of inculcation and radicalization. The first batch of Hamas rockets found at a UN school earlier this week was ….. returned to Hamas. Hamas terrorists are using UN ambulances.
“For second time, rockets found at UN school in Gaza,” TOI, July 22, 2014
‘How many more schools will have to be abused by Hamas missile squads before the international community will intervene?’ Foreign Ministry fumes.
“Today, in the course of the regular inspection of its premises, UNRWA discovered
rockets hidden in a vacant school in the Gaza Strip,” the organization said in a statement issued Tuesday. “As soon as the rockets were discovered, UNRWA staff were withdrawn from the premises, and so we are unable to confirm the precise number of rockets. The school is situated between two other UNRWA schools that currently each accommodate 1,500 internally displaced persons.”
As it did the last time around when missiles were found in a school it operates, UNRWA said it “strongly and unequivocally condemns the group or groups responsible for this flagrant violation of the inviolability of its premises under international law.”
UNRWA, the UN agency charged with overseeing humanitarian efforts in Gaza, said it immediately “informed the relevant parties and is pursuing all...
Obama has a new get-tough policy with Russia. 
 
It’s called the War on the Billionaires.

The United States is using narrow sanctions against Russian billionaires—private persons presumably-- some of whom Obama supposes supports Russia’s war in Ukraine. And the policy isn’t just bizarre; it’s Obama.

He’s seen our war on millionaires here at home, and raised them a war on billionaires in Russia.

“The U.S. and Europe are gearing up for a new round of sanctions expected to be announced this week that will impose travel bans and business sanctions against several Russian billionaires with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin,” reports CNBC. “In a phone call last night, British Prime Minister David Cameron told Putin that his ‘cronies’ will face sanctions unless Russia withdraws its support for the separatists in Ukraine.”

It tells you something about where Obama—and current world leadership-- believes real power resides in any country. It also tells you why Obama has been so anxious to take care of the oligarchs here at home: Zuckerberg, Gates, Soros, Buffett, Kaiser, Pritzker, Stryker.

Yes, you can throw up now.

I’m disturbed by the precedence, the message, the legality of targeting private individuals for their political views whether it happens here at home—as it has—or in Russia. Private property should be inviolate, subject to due process in the same way anything else we have been endowed with by our Creator is subject to due process.

Imagine if Obama, instead of pushing sanctions, used drones to attack and kill these oligarchs via missile strikes. Oh, and the oligarchs in Russia too.

Because really, it’s the same thing legally.

Now it’s one thing to sanction a state for pushing war, but to be judge and jury of the private political aims of private men of property…well that’s Obama in a nutshell isn’t it?

Wall Street, and the oligarchs who make up Wall Street, get a bailout, but not without some serious threats, extortion, and pressure politics put on it by the administration.

What Obama giveth, Obama can take away, and his power—at least in his own mind—recognizes no borders. You know? Except, of course, the border with Mexico which, he assures us, is secure. And the constitution, which he tells us he’s an expert on.

But like a lot of policies coming from Obama, the War on Russian Billionaires is more style than it is substance.

“Russia's richest men are unlikely to feel much pain,” says CNBC. “That's because Russia's richest men won't be targeted. And many of the rest of the Russian elite have already stashed much of their fortunes overseas, where they are safe from any sanctions.”

"You can't just target someone because they are a Russian worth 10 figures," said a European policy expert quoted by CNBC. "The aim here is to target people who supported this military campaign [in Ukraine]."

Well you CAN just target a Russian worth ten figures.

And doing that, would be so Obama. And so Eric Holder. And Nancy Pelosi. And Harry Reid.

How do you think they raise so much money?

But here’s something for American oligarchs to ponder: Russia can go after you too. Makes me wonder if there wasn’t an American heiress aboard MH17. Because Putin has shown a real willingness to call Obama’s threats a bluff and respond with that ultimate arbiter of power: Force.

That’s why Obama’s policy is so hollow. And in being that way, it’s soooo Obama.

You have to preserve the unities after all.
Here we go again with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry leveraging a tragedy to make another "strong case" based on limited evidence. We have already seen this in the case of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and chemical weapons. Now it's Russian President Vladimir Putin's turn for the global smear treatment.

Presumably we're supposed to rush to adopt the notion that Russia's fingerprints are all over last week's downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over Ukraine -- just as we were supposed to buy into Kerry's story last year about the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons against his own people. That rhetoric almost ended up serving as a pretext for U.S. military action, and it would have if Putin hadn't stepped in and offered to babysit Assad and oversee the removal of potential chemical threats.

The parallels in Kerry's rhetoric on Ukraine and Syria are remarkable. In the wake of last August's chemical weapons attack in Syria, Kerry said Assad's responsibility was "undeniable" and warned of an "informed response" by the U.S. that teetered on the brink of military action. Meanwhile, Putin noted that there was no actual evidence to back up Kerry's claim.

A subsequent United Nations report failed to pin any blame on Assad, but the narrative had already been entrenched. Face-saving headlines persisted in the mass media, attempting to reconcile the overwhelming speculation that had been peddled with the contradictory report findings (example from the New York Times: "Forensic Details in U.N. Report Point to Assad's Use of Gas").

Today it's Putin's turn to be subjected to a smear campaign designed to incite global outrage in the absence of hard evidence. And Kerry is once again front and center in the role of narrative salesman, pushing a rush to judgment. This time, Kerry is citing videos that were released by new Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko's office and are of debatable validity. On the CBS show "Face the Nation," Kerry cited one as showing a missile launcher, like the one that allegedly took down Flight MH17, moving from Ukraine into Russia. Presumably, this is supposed to implicate Russia as a state sponsor of the rebels, if not the attack itself. Other observers have since argued that the "evidence" actually shows the weaponry moving through a Kiev-controlled town many miles from the Russian border.

If separatist rebels in Ukraine are getting major military support from Russia, it would come as news to the separatists themselves. Rebel commander Igor Strelkov is a Russian military and intelligence veteran who cut his teeth fighting in other anti-Russian insurgencies. Kerry claims that Strelkov bragged on social media about shooting down a plane (hence further proof of Russia's involvement). And yet the New York Times describes Strelkov as a rogue operator "openly critical of Moscow for failing to provide more aid to the rebels" -- which flies in the face of the notion that the Kremlin has this guy on a short leash, let alone that Putin pulls his strings.

Separatists can be tricky to understand. On the surface, they appear to be fighting for their nation of allegiance. But more than anything, they're fighting against a nation they view as oppressive or threatening, using patriotism as a convenient rallying cry.

For example, as a Canadian by birth, I've always understood that the separatist movement in the Canadian province of Quebec was more about being anti-Canadian federal government rather than pro-France. A radical Quebec separatist group even stated this in its manifesto: "We have had enough of promises of work and prosperity. When in fact we will always be the diligent servants and bootlickers of the big shots ... we will be slaves until Quebecers, all of us, have used every means, including dynamite and guns, to drive out these big bosses of the economy and of politics, who will stoop to any action, however base, the better to screw us."

Much like Putin has offered moral encouragement to those who opposed the unelected post-coup regime in Kiev (rhetoric that he has publicly dialed back since the election of a new Ukrainian president), French President Charles de Gaulle visited Quebec in 1967 to shout the separatist slogan "Vive le Quebec libre!" ("Long live free Quebec!") in a public appearance. Canada didn't subsequently hold France or de Gaulle responsible for inciting terrorism when morally empowered Quebec separatists bombed the Montreal stock exchange, kidnapped a British diplomat and murdered the provincial labor minister -- even after de Gaulle called Canadian Minster of Justice Pierre Trudeau (who was soon to become prime minister) "the enemy of the French entity in Canada."

There were no calls at the time for the U.S. to assist in quelling the terrorist insurgency right on its own border with Canada by making France and de Gaulle international pariahs. Nor should there be any rush to do the same with Putin. Both the evidence and the dynamics of the situation are far more complex than any torqued narrative peddled by political figures might suggest.

Simple and to the point


Military Dogs Not Equipment, Says Retired Staff Sergeant 
Scott Raab, Outreach Coordinator 
 
Move America Forward has a special program to support the military war dogs and their handlers over in Afghanistan. We're so proud that this Soldier can be reunited with the 2 dogs he bonded with over in Afghanistan, but don't forget we still have hundreds of military dogs still over there, working with US troops.

Military Working Dogs are instrumental in sniffing out IEDs, bomb making materials, patrolling, or standing guard. It's as dangerous for these K9s as it is for our soldiers, especially in the harsh environment of Afghanistan. Our K9 care packages include special dog-goggles to protect their eyes from dust storms, booties to protect their paws from the rocks and hot ground, and finally some doggy treats to enjoy for a job well done.

You can help make the daily routine of our troops serving in Afghanistan a little better.

Nothing brings a serviceman or woman more joy than knowing that someone back home is thankful and thinking of them while they are on deployment. Care packages include a wonderful array of high quality food, snacks, and hygiene items that troops overseas consistently request. Click Here to Send One Today.


Now retired, Ryky the military dog heads to Washington to lobby for canine warriors

by Kim Chatelaine
Times-Picayune
July 15

A couple of weeks ago, Army Staff Sgt. James Harrington was reunited with his partner, Ryky, a Belgian malinois bomb-sniffing military dog that he had parted ways with almost three years ago after the two served a couple of tours of duty together in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now, instead of detecting underground bombs in the desert, sometimes with bullets and shrapnel in the air, Ryky spends her time diving into Lake Pontchartrain from the Mandeville sea wall to retrieve a ball thrown by Harrington.

Ryky, 8, is now officially retired from the military, her heroic and oftentimes hazardous duty behind her. But in the eyes of the military, she is categorized as "equipment" by the Department of Defense, a tag that limits rights and privileges for such dogs once they step down from service and makes adoption from the military more cumbersome.

In 2012, Congress passed the Canine Members of the Armed Forces Act, which among other things established a system for the veterinary care of retired military working dogs. But removed from the legislation during its trip through the governmental process was a clause to reclassify military working dogs from equipment to canine members of the armed forces.

Ryky, Harrington and five other retired military working dogs and their handlers will make the rounds in Washington to rally support for tweaking the law.

"She's a retired veteran, not a piece of equipment," Harrington said of Ryky.

The four-legged piece of equipment issued to Harrington over six years ago remains operational.


IRS Says Lerner’s Emails May Be Recoverable After All
IRS Says Lerner’s Emails May Be Recoverable After All
Along with news this week that several additional Internal Revenue Service employees with ties to Lois Lerner suffered computer crashes came another minor revelation from agency lawyer Thomas Kane, who told a Congressional panel that, just maybe, Lerner’s long-lost emails can still be retrieved.

On Monday, the House Oversight Committee released a portion of a transcript from testimony Kane had given last week, revealing that Kane suggested the possibility that tape drives used to archive IRS employees’ electronic data may still be intact, with her communications on them.

“I don’t know if there is a backup tape with information on it or there isn’t. I know that there’s an issue out there about it,” Kane told the Oversight Committee. “… It’s an issue that’s being looked at.”

As noncommittal as that sounds, what’s especially interesting is the fact that, if those drives are still out there — and if they still do contain Lerner’s emails — it’s because the IRS, once again, hasn’t been following its own protocols.

IRS policy calls for tape drives used for backup storage to be “recycled” every six months. That is, after a drive has successfully stored six months’ worth of information, that information can be erased and replaced with new backup data from the present. The emails relating to Lerner’s alleged computer crash date from some still-unknown time beginning in 2011 — when her computer supposedly went on the fritz.

Kane’s testimony that the drives (and with them, Lerner’s emails) may still be out there also contradicted IRS Commissioner John Koskinen’s testimony before the Oversight Committee last month, when he averred that all the backup drives used to save data generated in the IRS Exempt Organizations Division had been recycled.

Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) pounced on that revelation, accusing the agency of sloppy management and suggesting Koskinen is still attempting to conceal the truth from House investigators.

“Finding out that IRS Commissioner Koskinen jumped the gun in reporting to Congress that the IRS ‘confirmed’ all backup tapes had been destroyed makes me even more suspicious of why he waited months to inform Congress about lost Lois Lerner emails,” Issa said following Kane’s testimony.

“Commissioner Koskinen has repeatedly blamed the reporting delay on an effort to be sure what he said was correct. We now know that wasn’t the case.”

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS

Today, July 23rd at 2 to 4pm, on RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS, Craig and I will again be talking with leading terrorism expert Walid Shoebat on the happenings in the Middle East especially in relation to Israel vs Hamas. We will also have as our guest Dr. Gary Katz an Israeli psychologist who will tell our listeners things the media will NOT say...that is if he doesn't have to run for a bomb shelter.

Tune in to RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on CPR Worldwide Media at 2pm as this one show you do NOT want to miss. http://cprworldwidemedia.com/live-radio/

And chat with us live at: 


Tuesday, July 22, 2014

The shocking announcement that Microsoft is cutting 18,000 jobs is still sinking in. Most of those employees do not have a realistic chance of obtaining as good a job as the one they are losing.

In the United States, the number of engineering jobs has been sharply declining. In 2002 the number of electrical engineering jobs in the United States was 385,000, but despite increased demand for technology, the job total dropped to only 300,000 last year.

And that number is not even for American workers, because thousands of these jobs are soaked up by the H-1B visa racket, whereby companies like Microsoft can import and pay foreign workers less than it costs to hire an American. High-tech companies have thousands of foreign employees working on H-1B visas who are almost like indentured servants to the company, because they lose their right to be in our country if they leave their job.

Microsoft's massive layoff makes downright ridiculous the op-ed recently published by Bill Gates and his billionaire pals, Warren Buffett and Sheldon Adelson. They and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, who financed the lobby group FWD.us, demand immediate amnesty disguised as immigration reform in order to bring in more cheap labor.

The real shortage is in good jobs, but these visas flood the labor market and hold wages down, when wages should be climbing for American workers. Fewer Americans have a job today than just six years ago, even though the potential workforce has expanded during that time. One reason is the overuse of foreign labor by large companies.

Microsoft is highly profitable, breaking its own records for revenue and profits as recently as last year, with an effective tax rate of less than 20 percent. One of its directors has agreed to pay $2 billion for a basketball team, and Gates is often listed as the wealthiest man in the world.

In 2007, at a U.S. Senate committee hearing, Gates asked for permission to import "an infinite number" of foreign workers. "I don't think there should be any limit," he continued, but at any rate the cap should be "dramatically increased."

In 2008, before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Gates claimed he had jobs "going begging" that no American could be found to do, so he had no choice but to import workers from India. When Representative Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., suggested he might consider raising the pay for those jobs, Gates impatiently dismissed that option, saying: "No, it's not an issue of raising wages. These jobs are very, very high-paying jobs."

Economics 101 teaches that wages are a function of supply and demand. When the supply of labor is increased, such as by expanding immigration, then wages can and do decrease, despite increased productivity.

Recently a reporter caught up with the laid-off semiconductor engineer whose wife publicly challenged President Barack Obama in January 2012, "Why does the government continue to issue and extend H-1B visas when there are tons of Americans just like my husband with no job?" Darin Wedel eventually found a job in the health care industry, earning $40,000 a year less than before.

Obama is still deceiving the American public about the economy, bragging that 288,000 jobs were created last month. As Mortimer Zuckerman explained in The Wall Street Journal: "Most people will have the impression that the 288,000 jobs created last month were full-time. Not so." They were part-time jobs, which pay lower wages than the full-time jobs that have disappeared.

There are several reasons for this, such as employers' desire to avoid the Obamacare mandate to provide health insurance to anyone working 30 or more hours a week. Another is women's willingness to accept lower pay in exchange for a flexible schedule with fewer hours per day, per week and per year.

But now many breadwinners, including men, have been forced to take these jobs. Of men aged 25 to 54, one in six does not work; 50 years ago, only one in 20 was not working.

When we first brought the transformation of the American economy into a part-time-worker society in 2010, many scoffed and suggested that when the "recovery" really gets going, the temp jobs will all be morphed into high-paying full-time jobs. Instead, Zuckerman writes, "more than 24 million Americans remain jobless, working part-time involuntarily or having left the workforce."

Zuckerman hits us with the depressing conclusion: "Faith in the American dream is eroding fast. The feeling is that the rules aren't fair and the system has been rigged in favor of business and against the average person."

One senator who always speaks up for Americans, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, said, "I don't think you can make the argument that we have a labor shortage." The answer should be: close the border; absolutely no amnesty masquerading as "immigration reform."
Good news for the residents of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, et. al: according to a memo quietly posted on the HHS website last Thursday, Obamacare's coverage provisions no longer apply in these areas.
After a careful review of this situation and the relevant statutory language, HHS has determined that the new provisions of the PHS Act enacted in title I are appropriately governed by the definition of "state" set forth in that title, and therefore that these new provisions do not apply to the territories. This means that the following Affordable Care Act requirements will not apply to individual or group health insurance issuers in the U.S. territories: 1 guaranteed availability (Act section 2702), community rating (PHS Act section 2701), single risk pool (Affordable Care Act section 1312(c)), rate review (PHS Act section 2794), medical loss ratio (PHS Act section 2718), and essential health benefits (PHS Act section 2707).
Specifically, under this interpretation, the definition of "state" set forth in the PHS Act will apply only to PHS Act requirements in place prior to the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, or subsequently enacted in legislation that does not include a separate definition of "state" (as the Affordable Care Act does).
Naturally, this is a complete 180 from the rhetoric espoused by the HHS last year. Under Obamacare, insurance companies operating in America's territories had to accept every insurance applicant, but residents of the territories were not subject to the individual mandate and did not have to actually purchase insurance while still healthy. Additionally, subsidies were not available to residents of territories; only for people living in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. As a result of the law, insurance companies threatened to stop selling new plans altogether in American territories.

When territory officials asked for government leniency last year, they were told that there was nothing possible to remedy this problem:
"HHS, at the request of and with full support from territories, confirmed the Affordable Care Act's market reform provisions that are incorporated into the PHS Act, including the guaranteed availability provision, are applicable to the territories," Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight director Gary Cohen wrote in a July letter to territorial governors.
"However meritorious your request might be," Cohen continues, "HHS is not authorized to choose which provisions...might apply to the territories."
While it is certainly a good thing that the insurance market in these areas isn't going to be completely destroyed, it is somewhat troubling that the administration is continuing to pick and choose its definition of a state depending on the situation. Congress is supposed to write and change laws--not the Department of Health and Human Services.