Who is Really Waging a War Against Women?

First of all, I am a woman, happily so. Secondly, Florida’s Governor Rick Scott is not at war with me. Sometimes, I strongly differ with persons in his enormous government, but the Governor is not persecuting me as a woman, as being advertised in the media. In fact, there is only one real war against women in America, who are trafficked for sex and servitude.

Outside of the United States, there exists a ferocious, insatiable, grotesque war against the female gender under Sharia law, which literally hides, beats, mutilates, and murders women on a regular basis for a host of causes – like driving cars, publicly meeting with a male, advocating for educational opportunities, or refusing to obey thousands of male-initiated commands from a father, spouse, brother, or some other man. This, my fellow ladies, is a war against women.

To some degree, Rick Scott is aligned with me in real-time wars against many of my most important foes – marijuana legalization, human trafficking, and pill mills.

This is not an endorsement of a candidate. This is an avid endorsement of every candidate, official, and individual who is working aggressively against the menaces that matter most to this grandmother of four, teacher of 36 years, and maternal figure for thousands of students she has taught. As a woman, suffering children cause me to suffer, and I have personally seen children suffer from marijuana use, prescription over-medications, and trafficking by predators.

In the classroom, marijuana use, endorsed and promoted by Florida’s most boastful attorney, John Morgan, is a systemic destructive element in a child’s life, inducing lethargy, loss of inhibitions, malaise, lack of alertness, truancy, uncontrolled babble, and a host of symptoms counterproductive to high achievement and very productive for the coffers of lawyers.

In his infamous drunken speech at a Lakeland bar on August 28, 2014, Morgan not only advanced the legalization of marijuana, but also promised his young cheering audience, “I do have some money [many millions] …. And let me tell you what. Every one of you mother f—ers can get a sex on the beach. I’m gonna buy it for you ….”

Why is John Morgan still licensed to practice law in Florida? Why is he, as a lawyer, permitted to prominently and publicly promote human trafficking via prostitution? Is this not America’s real war against women, who are the primary victims of the sex trade, in which they are invariably drugged?

I challenge John Morgan to a real debate on marijuana legalization in front of an audience that is not intoxicated, using words that are not profane and disgusting.

I challenge the State of Florida to disbar this champion of prostitution and of illegal drugs, bragging, “Once I get out of Polk County, I might smoke a lot of grass.”

Our Pathetic President

The first thing you need to keep in mind is that Syria and Iraq are now just lines on a map at this point. They don’t exist as national states because the former is locked in a civil war that will replace its dictator one way or the other and the latter’s alleged government is deeply divided between the usual schism of Sunni and Shiite.

More to the point, Iraq’s government is led by men who are the friends and pawns of Iran. In a recent issue of the Iranian newspaper, Eternad, an Iranian analyst commented on the new Iraqi cabinet noting that its new prime minister “enjoys Iran’s support and spend his formative years in Iran, and continued (the operation of the Islamic al-Dawa party) until the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime.”

That fall was the result of the war waged against Saddam by President George W. Bush. The Iranian analyst noted that Iraq’s new foreign minister, Dr. Ebrahim Jafari “until recently lived in Tehran in Iran, and enjoyed Iran’s support in spite of his differences with Nouri al-Maleki (the former prime minister). The new Iraqi oil minister, transport minister, and minister of sport and youth were all described as “close to Iran, who either lived in Iran before, fought against the Ba’ath regime with Iran’s help, or constantly traveled to Iran.”

Iraq and Syria came into being when French and British diplomats created them as colonies following the end of World War I, the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and the Treaty of Versailles.

In his September 10th speech, President Obama uttered the word “war” only once and then only to say “We will not be dragged into another ground war in Iraq.”

The speech, like everything he says, was a lie constructed to undue the truth he inadvertently admitted when he revealed “We have no strategy.”  If you do not intend to go to war, you do not need a strategy. Instead, you can pretend to the American public that the war will be fought by Iraqis and Syrians.

So far the Syrian civil war has cost that “nation” 200,000 lives and driven a million Syrians out of the country. As for the Iraqis, their military fled in the face of the ISIS forces, leaving behind the weapons we gave them. Between Iraq and Syria, ISIS now controls a landmass larger than the size of Great Britain.

In the course of the speech, Obama said he had dispatched 475 more troops to Iraq. We have an estimated 1,500 or more troops on the ground. That is barely the size of an infantry regiment, composed of two battalions of between 300 and 1,300 troops each.

Significantly, though, Obama opened the speech by reminding Americans that he had “brought home 140,000 American troops from Iraq, and drawing down our forces in Afghanistan, where our combat mission will end later this year.”

President Obama has announced he intends to send up to 3,000 troops to West Africa to help combat Ebola. He can find troops to put in harm’s way in Africa, but not to combat ISIS.

All he has ever wanted to do is to flee from our declared enemies whether they are al Qaeda, the Taliban, ISIS or other Islamic holy warriors. Those numbers signal his failure to follow up our sacrifices in those two nations.

Years after World War II and the Korean War, we still have combat troops in Europe, South Korea, and on bases around the world, but he is pulling out troops in the two nations where our interests are currently threatened. He called the enemy “small groups of killers.” He claimed that “America is safer.”

He appears to think the greatest threat of our time, the holy war being waged by fanatical Muslims, can be won with air strikes and measures that do “not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.”

Fighting on foreign soil is what American combat troops did throughout the last century and into this one. They helped defeat Germany and the Japanese Empire in World War II. They stopped the communist North Korean attack on the South, but had less success in the long Vietnam War. They were successful in the Gulf wars until Obama was elected.

We have a President who has displayed a lack of leadership, a lack of judgment, ignorance of history, a cowardly approach to the threats we face, and who has demonstrated over and over again that he is a liar. His administration is likely to be judged the most corrupt in the history of the nation, indifferent to the Constitution and our laws.

Proclaiming that he “could not be prouder of our men and women in uniform”, this is a President who has engaged in dramatically reducing the size of our military to pre-World War II levels. After a two-star general, Major General Harold J. Green, was killed in Afghanistan in April not one single member of the White House attended his funeral. Obama was playing golf.

America must survive a man who many have come to believe is “the worst President” in our history. An essential stop toward that will be to defeat as many Democratic Party incumbents and candidates for office in the November 4 midterm elections. Americans—patriots—can do no less at this point.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

NFL Threw Ray Rice Under the Bus

By now most people have heard how Ray Rice has been thrown under the bus by the National Football League (NFL) and his former team, the Baltimore Ravens.

First, some background for the non-football fans. Rice was drafted by the Ravens in the second round (55th overall) of the 2008 NFL draft.  He signed a 4-year contract for $2.805 million plus a $1.1 million signing bonus. Last year, he signed a 5-year, $35 million contract, paying him a $15 million signing bonus.

Second, here are some cold facts:

  • On February 15, both Rice and his then-fiancée, Janay Palmer, were arrested and charged with assault after a fight at an Atlantic City, N.J. casino.
  • On March 27, a grand jury indicted Rice on third-degree aggravated assault (charges against Palmer were dropped).
  • On March 28, Rice married Palmer (the date had been planned and announced before the assault charge).
  • On May 20, Rice was allowed to enter into a pretrial diversion program. Upon successful completion of the program, which will be a minimum of one year, the third-degree charge of aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury would be dismissed. The arrest would remain on his record, but with no conviction.
  • On July 24, the NFL suspends Rice for 2 games.
  • On July 25, the Raven’s organization rallies around Rice.
  • On August 28, the NFL established a domestic violence policy for the league.
  • On September 8, the celebrity Website TMZ releases video of Rice knocking out his wife in an elevator and dragging her out of the elevator when it stopped .
  • On September 8, the Raven’s terminates Rice from the team.
  • On September 8, 2014, the NFL suspends Rice from the league indefinitely.
  • The Associated Press reports on Sept. 10th that a law enforcement official said he sent damaging video of Rice knocking out his then-fiancee to the NFL, despite League denials.

The above narrative is the only thing we know to be indisputable.

Prior to the video’s release, Rice had been caught on a security camera dragging his fiancée out of the elevator. That got him suspended for two games without pay. The penalty, which some criticized as too lenient, cost him about $530,000 in salary.

Now that everyone has seen the graphic video of the actual event, people have all of a sudden become filled with phony righteous indignation.  Rice should have been punished not because of the video, but because of the act itself. But doing a bait-and-switch on his punishment amounts to pilling on.

Now many professional athletes, entertainers, politicians, and the public want to make public statements about how terrible a person Ray Rice is.  Where was this outrage before the release of the video?  Where is the outrage from these athletes and entertainers about the precious Black children being killed in Chicago?  Where is their outrage about anything other than collecting a bigger paycheck?

To ultra-feminist groups, especially the National Organization of Women (NOW), why are you so selective in your outrage about how women are treated?  To this day, you have never criticized Beyoncé for objectifying herself and women in her music. Yet you criticize Hip Hop for the same thing.  Where is their outrage about a woman who raped a child in Arizona when he was 14 and now, at 20, is being forced to pay child support for a 6-year-old child he never knew existed?

It sickens me that people want to take, by all accounts, a good person and kick dirt in his face because he made a terribly horrible mistake; a mistake because there was nothing in his past that indicated this type of behavior. Even more troubling is the contention that Ray does not deserve a second chance. That’s a mighty high standard, considering human frailty.

There was absolutely nothing in the video that Rice hadn’t already admitted to police and the Baltimore Ravens. The Ravens have admitted as much.  The difference is that the NFL faced a growing backlash, based on the release of the video.

Rice is not guilty of breaking any laws. The criminal justice system – with everyone having access to the controversial video – treated Rice as the first-time offender that he was. He was dismissed by the NFL for violating a league’s “conduct” policy. In other words, for “conduct detrimental to the league.”  Once that is invoked by the league or a team, based on their collective bargaining agreement, punishment can be anything from a fine to being banned from the sport.

The NFL, after meting out a 2-game suspension, changed the rules in the middle of the ride. After serving half of his 2-game suspension, Rice was retroactively given a death sentence.

The Story of Electricity in America

Can you imagine a world in which you depended on unreliable energy to light up your world? Sounds like an unstable place to call home. That’s why the Story of Electricity is so important notes Tom Pyle from the Institute for Energy Research (IER).

IER reports solar energy accounts for only 0.2 percent of the electricity Americans use everyday. Wind and solar aren’t much better. Altogether, wind and solar provide about 4 percent of our electricity. Without affordable, reliable sources of power, our future would be pretty dark.  IER created the Twitter campaign #StoryofElectricity, which presents, among other things, these truths about American produced electricity:

EDITORS NOTE: For those interested in learning more about this topic may visit the power of electricity.

Obama’s plan to defeat Islamic State just ‘toothless’ platitudes

All Midshipmen and Cadets, while matriculating at one of the US Service Academies, are taught to fight to “Win” in academics, on the athletic field, and ultimately in combat—they learn that there is no substitute for victory!!

Unfortunately, the resident in the Oval Office’s plan to defeat the Islamic State in the Levant (ISIL), is not a serious plan; there is no consistency, no clarity, and no obvious will to “Win”  Allies have observed that Obama is calling the world to ride to an uncertain trumpet when he is not committed to it.  The failure to execute an effective air campaign (the 150 air strikes over many weeks should have occurred on the first day of air campaign and everyday thereafter).  The repeated statements by Obama that there will be no boots on the ground, and failure of the air campaign to strike supply lines, long convoys of armed terrorists, and weapons depots in Syria has signaled ISIL that the plan is not a serious plan.

The allies have watched over the last 6 years as Obama walked away from the victory in Iraq & refused to leave a residual US military force in Iraq overriding his own generals, Obama walked away from air strikes in Syria 3 years ago when Assad crossed the red line, he took out a friendly leader in Libya then walking away from a destabilized Libya that resulted in Al Q’ieda taking over Libya, walked away from the friendly Egyptian Army Junta after it removed the Moslem Brotherhood Mosci who was killing Christians, and Obama has sent a signal that he will walk away from Afghanistan leaving it to the Taliban and Al Q’ieda—Middle East & NATO allies are not interested in joining a consortium with a quitter who can’t be trusted to “Win” anything.

U.S. air power, the Kurdish Forces, the Iraqi Army (with an anti-Sunni Government), and the free Syrian Army cannot possibly defeat the 30,000 man ISIL army which is projected to soon grow to 60,000 men (ISIL is selling $3 million in black market oil to Turkey every day to fund its military operation).  Air strikes will not be sufficient, when there is no effective command and control organization on the ground, there is no effective reconnaissance operation on the ground, when the US does not have the ability to capture combatants in order to develop actionable intelligence.  The US is planning to spend one year to train 5000 Free Syrians Army personnel, while ISIL grows from 30,000 to 60,000 in the same year.

After 9/11 the US inserted small Special Operation Units and CIA Paramilitary forces on the ground in Afghanistan to coordinate with the Northern Alliance, in order to drive the Taliban, Al Q’ieda, and Osama Bin Laden out of Afghanistan  The failure of Obama to commit small Special Operations and CIA Paramilitary forces units on the ground in Iraq is dooming Obama’s plan to failure—Obama keeps telling ISIL that there will be no boots on the ground—what other occupant of the Oval Officer in 238 years has ever told the enemy what the US will not do?.

The Obama administration continues to send confusing messages to reluctant US allies who are being asked to join a coalition to defeat ISIL, to the American people who are being asked to support Obama’s inept plan to defeat ISIL (68% of the American people believe Obama’s plan to “Win” is folly), and to Obama’s leftist allies in the Democratic Party to prevent them from being alarmed before the November election (the leftists, Socialists, and Marxists in the Democratic party do not want Obama to carry out a comprehensive “War Plan” to defeat ISIL they want to take funds away from the US military and use those funds to expand the bloated and inept welfare state rift with fraud).

Obama doesn’t have the strength of purpose to do what Presidents Lincoln, Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Reagan did to protect the homeland.  Obama’s political policies are allowing ISIL terrorists to flood across the wide open southern border and threaten American citizens, while he hollows out the US Armed Forces, and creates a $1 trillion annual US deficient leading the nation to the brink of bankruptcy.

For the last 6 years, the Obama administration used drones to kill Al Q’ idea leaders who were immediately replaced by the next Al Q’ieda terrorist in line. They killed one leader after another who had a great deal of valuable intelligence, instead of employing small Special Operations units to capture the leaders, interrogate them, and develop the requisite intelligence to oppose the spread of Al Q’ieda worldwide.  The net result of the killer drone policy that the Obama administration bragged about, has been that ISIL metastasized and Islamic terrorism spread throughout the world like cancer—while the Obama administration was blinded because they lacked actionable intelligence from captured Islamic terrorists.

Obama didn’t want to capture, interrogate, and jail terrorists in Gitmo, all he wanted to do was to kill terrorists in the field so he could close the Gitmo operation.  The Gitmo interrogations developed an incredible amount of actionable intelligence, including providing the intelligence that led to the location of Bin Laden’s messenger, and that messenger ultimately led to US forces to the location of Osama Bin Laden’s lair in Pakistan, where SEAL Team SIX took out Bin Laden.

There is no Obama administration plan to pull out all the stops to “Crush” ISIL.  We encourage you to read the below listed macro approach to Crush ISIL written by the former National Security Advisor in the Reagan Administration, the Hon Robert C. McFarlane, USNA ’59, Col-USMC (Ret); he is calling for the effective employment of diplomacy, applying economic pressure, training  & support of Special Operation Forces, and not to continue following the past policy of  “leading from behind”, but to exercise traditional effective US leadership to “Win”.

Robert  “Bud” McFarlane is the Senior Advisor for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and supports the Combat Veterans For Congress.

A plan for crushing the Islamic State: Toothless diplomacy is no longer an option

By Robert McFarlane – – Wednesday, September 3, 2014

It is astonishing that nearly six years into the tenure of any administration the commander-in-chief would acknowledge publicly that he has no strategy for addressing an evident, serious threat to American interests.

Last week, marauders from the so-called Islamic State overran Tabqa air base in Syria, where MANPADS, or man-portable air-defense systems, are stored. These are the weapons that can bring down commercial aircraft. Considering the pledge of this group’s leader to take the war to the United States, they now have the means to do so whether targeting the takeoff of a U.S. commercial airliner from Dubai, or in a few weeks after penetrating the Mexican border, from Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport in Dallas.

Historically, every new administration spends the first year of its tenure enunciating goals — essentially, to keep the peace and establish a climate at home and abroad in which American interests can be advanced — and then developing strategies for achieving them in specific regions of the world. The process begins with the president stating his view of what our regional interests are, inviting the intelligence community and the Cabinet to identify how those interests are threatened, and then tasking these principals and staff to develop a range of integrated political, economic and military measures for defending and advancing American interests throughout the world. By the end of the first year, the president has evaluated the options submitted to him and has made decisions among them. He then goes about implementing them by publishing and explaining them to three constituencies — the American people, the U.S. Congress and our allies. While this process involves hard work and disciplined leadership, it’s not rocket science. Doing it well yields enormous benefits. It engenders confidence among the American people and nurtures cohesion and support among our allies. Finally, it puts adversaries on notice that we are a serious nation that has the will, the capability, a strategic plan and the resources to prevail against any challenge they might consider posing.

Since World War II, U.S. presidents have engaged this strategic process as a proven means for defining and announcing our interests overseas, assessing how they are threatened, and developing effective strategies designed to deter, or — if deterrence fails — to prevail in any conflict well in advance of any such conflict. In the Reagan administration, I had the privilege of managing that process, and in the ensuing years, it proved invaluable not only in identifying — and pre-empting — challenges still over the horizon, but in crisis management as well. In the remaining years of the current administration, there is still time for President Obama to lead in the resolution of the plethora of crises before us — starting with the threats posed by the Islamic State and concurrently in Ukraine, China and Iran.

Modern terrorism by Islamist groups has posed a “clear and present danger” to our country for more than 30 years. In Iraq, we are faced with an especially challenging form of it.  A well-financed, well-armed and well-trained barbarous force has declared its intention, inter alia, to conduct operations against the United States on its way to establishing an Islamic caliphate of global reach and jurisdiction.

Egypt’s Ultraconservative Islamists Back Sisi, Seek To Eclipse Brotherhood

Given the plausibility of their executing such a plan, the first comment our president must make is that this movement of uncivilized savages puts us all at risk — from Irbil to London, Chicago, Tokyo and Beijing — and that there is no basis for trying to reason with brainwashed, ideological, totalitarian, genocidal criminals bent on pursuit of an imperial strategy. The second is that they must be destroyed. Mr. Obama’s statement from Estonia on Wednesday was a good, though belated, beginning.

Developing a political, economic and military strategy for containing and then destroying the Islamic State is not something that will come easily for the president, given his proclivities toward engagement and toothless diplomacy. Yet in some respects, his task has been rendered less onerous.  Politicians in every civilized state — especially European states that have known this menace was coming for years — understand that if they don’t join in countering this scourge in Syria and Iraq, they will face it in their own countries before long.  This week, the president’s task is to forge consensus among his political counterparts in Western Europe to direct NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe Gen. Philip Breedlove and the NATO military committee to work with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a plan for overcoming this menace.

Economically, it’s time to lean hard on the Gulf Arabs to shut down their formal and informal funding of radical Islamists. The diplomacy needed to get this done ought also to be a little easier than it would have been even five years ago. Their tenure is at risk, and they are palpably conscious of it. Separately, our work with European allies should involve closing their financial institutions to Islamist transactions.

The U.S. military must work with Kurdish, Kuwaiti, Egyptian, United Arab Emirates, Saudi, Jordanian and Iraqi forces to forge a strategy, first to contain and then to destroy the Islamic State’s forces. U.S. and allied tactical aviation can help limit the enemy’s mobility and provide fire support during engagements. However, the training and supervision of ground forces from the aforementioned countries in the struggle to regain lost territory must fall to experienced U.S. special operations advisory personnel — several thousand of them.

By their brashness and brutality, the Islamists may have provided an impetus and a window for the civilized world to come together and reverse their gains. It will take extraordinary leadership from Washington to oversee this battle and stay the course. That window may not remain open for long.

As soon as we have stemmed this tide — a year from now — we must turn to the agenda that we have for so long avoided — bringing the moderate Arabs, Kurds and Israel into a sustained conversation on regional security that leads toward reconciling their differences. To do so offers a revered place in history for the American president. Yet it will require a far better understanding of the nature of the challenge than has thus far been apparent, together with the courage and commitment to lead such an effort successfully.

ABOUT ROBERT MCFARLANE

Robert McFarlane served as President Reagan’s national-security adviser. He is currently a senior adviser to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

RELATED ARTICLE:Egypt: Don’t Limit Action to ISIS; Islamists Elsewhere Share its Ideology

Strong Percentages of Americans Unlikely to Consider Voting for a Muslim, Transgender, or Agnostic/Atheist Presidential Candidate

NEW YORK, /PRNewswire/ — It’s all about the issues, right? Not necessarily, according to a new Harris Poll. When asked to describe their likelihood to consider voting for a presidential candidate fitting a varied series of backgrounds, there are clearly certain characteristics which are deterrents to strong percentages of Americans. Specifically, just over half (52%) say they’d be either “not that likely” or “not at all likely” to consider voting for a Muslim candidate (vs. 28% who would be “very” or “somewhat” likely to do so); meanwhile, pluralities would be unlikely to consider voting for a transgender man or woman (48%, vs. 34% who would be likely to do so) or an agnostic/atheist candidate (45% vs. 39%).

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll® of 2,537 adults surveyed online between August 13 and 18, 2014. It should be noted that when evaluating these hypothetical candidates, respondents were asked to assume each was qualified and in alignment with their own political views. It should be noted that while these questions give a good measure of the relative impact of different characteristics and backgrounds, they do not necessarily predict their real impact on voting behavior because such decisions are made based on a more comprehensive set of factors.

(Full results, including data tables, available here)

Voting booth biases

Americans are more split on the idea of a Hindu candidate (39% not likely vs. 37% likely) and a candidate unwilling to discuss his or her religious views (40% and 41%, respectively).

As for a candidate who won’t discuss their sexuality, 43% would be likely to consider such a candidate while 36% would not. While likely support outpaces opposition in this case, it’s important to note that this still means fewer than half of Americans would support a candidate declining to discuss this matter but who otherwise aligns with their political worldview. Similar results can be seen for Buddhist (43% likely and 36% not) and Mormon (47% and 35%, respectively) candidates, as well as candidates identifying as bisexual (46% and 38%, respectively) and homosexual (49% and 34%, respectively).

The safe bets? Majorities of Americans would be likely to consider voting for Protestant (72%), Catholic (72%) and Jewish (69%) candidates, candidates without children (72%), and candidates who have never been married (70%).

Generational disparities

Matures are more inclined than any other generation to say that they’d be unlikely to consider voting for a Muslim presidential candidate, while opposition is lowest among Millennials (74% Matures vs. 58% of Baby Boomers, 51% of Gen Xers and 39% of Millennials). As a rule, opposition to most of the candidate types evaluated is higher among older generations:

  • Looking at sexuality as a factor, older Americans are more inclined than their younger counterparts to say they’d be unlikely to consider voting for transgender (59% Matures, 55% Baby Boomers, 46% Gen Xers, 37% Millennials), bisexual (52%, 43%, 33% and 30%, respectively), or homosexual (47%, 39%, 30% and 26%, respectively) candidates, along with those unwilling to discuss their sexuality (47%, 40%, 30% and 31%, respectively).
  • Turning to the impact of religious views, older Americans are also more inclined than those in younger generations to say they’d be unlikely to consider voting for Agnostic/Atheist (65% Matures, 50% Baby Boomers, 40% Gen Xers, 34% Millennials), Hindu (50%, 44%, 35% and 32%, respectively), or Buddhist (48%, 43%, 34% and 27%, respectively) candidates, as well as those unwilling to discuss their religious views (52%, 45%, 39% and 30%, respectively).

Millennials, on the other hand, are more likely than any other generation to display reluctance to vote for a Mormon candidate (42% Millennials vs. 34% Gen Xers, 33% Baby Boomers and 27% Matures).

Political partialities

A similar story emerges along political lines, with Republicans more likely than Democrats or Independents to show resistance to many of the candidate types under consideration:

  • Looking at religion as a factor, Republicans are more inclined than Democrats or Independents to say they’d be unlikely to consider voting for Muslim (73% Republican, 39% Democrat and 53% Independent),  Agnostic/Atheist (63%, 37% and 40%, respectively), Hindu (55%, 31% and 38%, respectively), or Buddhist (53%, 28% and 35%, respectively) candidates, as well as those unwilling to discuss their religious views (56%, 34% and 34%, respectively).
  • As to the impact of sexuality, Republicans are more inclined than Democrats or Independents to say they’d be unlikely to consider voting for transgender (68% Republican, 34% Democrat, 50% Independent), bisexual (57%, 27% and 34%, respectively), or homosexual (52%, 23% and 31%, respectively) candidates, along with those unwilling to discuss their sexuality (49%, 31% and 31%, respectively).

Moving in the opposite direction, Democrats are more likely than Independents – who in turn are more likely than Republicans – to indicate reluctance when it comes to voting for a Mormon candidate (45% Democrat, 33% Independent, 25% Republican).

Independents present an interesting case: on the one hand, they are more likely than Democrats to show reluctance to vote for Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, transgender, bisexual or gay candidates; on the other, their views are more in line with those of Democrats in responding to candidates who choose not to discuss their religious views or sexuality.

Methodology

This Harris Poll was conducted online, in English, within the United States between August 13 and 18, 2014among 2,537 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling, are subject to multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, The Harris Poll avoids the words “margin of error” as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Poll surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in our panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

SOURCE: The Harris Poll.

About The Harris Poll®

Begun in 1963, The Harris Poll is one of the longest running surveys measuring public opinion in the U.S. and is highly regarded throughout the world. The nationally representative polls, conducted primarily online, measure the knowledge, opinions, behaviors and motivations of the general public. New and trended polls on a wide variety of subjects including politics, the economy, healthcare, foreign affairs, science and technology, sports and entertainment, and lifestyles are published weekly. For more information, or to see other recent polls, visit the HarriPhoto – http://twitter.com/harrisints Poll News Room. To see other recent Harris Polls, please visit the Harris Poll News Room.

RELATED LINKS

http://www.harrisinteractive.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheHarrisInteractive
http://twitter.com/harrispoll
http://www.facebook.com/HarrisPoll
http://www.facebook.com/harrisinteractive?ref=share
http://twitter.com/harrisint

EDITORS NOTE: These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls. The results of this Harris Poll may not be used in advertising, marketing or promotion without the prior written permission of The Harris Poll. Product and brand names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.

Texas Sheriff says it’s “naive” to say Islamic State not here: “We have found Muslim clothing, they have found Quran books”

In June 2014, Representative Ted Poe (R-TX) enunciated the concerns that increasing numbers of people have about jihadists exploiting our open Southern border when he said:

“This jihadist group ISIS and its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi have promised direct confrontation with America. He is looking forward to that day and he has said that publicly, we should believe him when he says that. These folks hate everything about the United States.” What’s more, “Of course the way they would come to the United States would be through the porous border with Mexico. The drug cartels will bring people into the country no matter who they are — for money. Everyone in the world knows that the border between the United States and Mexico is completely porous.”

Jihad terrorists and their enablers and accomplices have been entering the U.S. illegally by means of the Mexican border for many years. According to TheBlaze, “Hezbollah members and supporters have entered the U.S. through the southern border as early as 2002, with the case of Salim Boughader Mucharrafille, a Mexican of Lebanese descent. He was sentenced to 60 years in prison by Mexican authorities on charges of organized crime and immigrant smuggling. Mucharrafille had owned a cafe in the border city of Tijuana, near San Diego. In 2002, he was arrested for smuggling 200 people into the U.S., including Hezbollah supporters, according to a 2009 Congressional report.” Nothing has changed since then. It’s only gotten worse.

“Texas Sheriff: Reports Warn Of ISIS Terrorist Cells Coming Across The Border,” CBS Houston, September 15, 2014 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Midland County, Texas (CBS HOUSTON) – Midland County Sheriff Gary Painter said that law enforcement agencies along the “wide open” border have received alerts to be on the lookout for terrorists from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria crossing into the United States.

Painter, who said he has worked along the border for “about eight years,” stated that alerts have been issued to border law enforcement to be on the lookout for suspicious terrorist activity, specifically involving ISIS cells being smuggled into the United States.

“I received an intelligence report that said that there was ISIS cells that were active in the Juarez area, which is the northern part of the Chihuahua state, and that they were moving around over there, that there was some activity…” Painter told Fox News. The report asked “for the sheriffs along the border to be on the alert, for all law enforcement to be on the alert, and to be on the lookout for these people maybe trying to come across.”

Painter sidestepped any direct knowledge that ISIS, specifically, is along the border, but he reiterated that the border “is wide open.”

“Well I’m saying the border is wide open, there is no control on the border, it’s not shut off,” said Painter. “There’s places along the Rio Grande you can walk across, there’s no water in it. I worked the border for eight years I walked back and forth across the Rio Grande; I was in Mexico, I was on this side. I never got challenged.

“There’s always a way to get across, there’s coyotes that bring those people across for thousands of dollars.”

Painter noted that “Muslim” items have been strewn along the border and estimated that 10 to 15 million “undocumented aliens” have crossed the border.

“I think it’d be naive to say that (ISIS is) not here…We have found Muslim clothing, they have found Quran books that are lying on the side of the trail, so we know that there are Muslims that have come across and are being smuggled into the United States,” Painter told Fox News….

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Pro-Muslim Brotherhood DHS adviser let go amid allegations of coverup

Holder announces pilot programs to counter “violent extremism”

Muslim UN “high-level expert” says Muslims in West become terrorists because of “Islamophobes” and counter-terror legislation

Islamic State threatens to kill British aid worker who thought his work for Muslim charity would save him

Jordan: 32% of all registered marriages of Syrian refugees involved girls under 18

Liberated Women and the Traditional Family

Photo from Best of Feminist Memes.

My generation, born in the late 1930s and the 1940s, has witnessed a dramatic change in the role and the rights of women in America. A significant result of the women’s liberation movement is a change in the role of traditional marriage that was reported in early September.

If you count a generation as spanning 20 years,” wrote Terence P. Jeffery, an editor of CNSNews.com, “then approximately 36 percent of the American generation born from 1993 through 2012—which has begun turning 21 this year and will continue turning 21 through 2033—were born to unmarried mothers.”

By comparison, Jeffrey noted that “Back in 1940, only 3.8 percent of American babies were born to unmarried mothers. By 1960, it was still only 5.3 percent.” There was a time when being a single mother was regarded as a reflection of the woman’s moral values. How a society deals with issues affecting the family as its single most important factor reflects its attitudes regarding marriage.

“It is a statistical fact that the institution of the family,” wrote Jeffrey, “has been collapsing in American over the past 45 years.”

Another statistic has significance as well. Today 51% of the U.S. population is single. A new generation of Americans, men and women, have decided that a committed relationship holds little allure.

The call for women’s rights has a long history. In 1794, Mary Wollstonecraft wrote “A Vindication of the Rights of Women.” She would have felt at home in today’s society. After affairs with two men, giving birth to a daughter by one of them, she married William Godwin, one of the forefathers of the anarchist movement. She died ten days after giving birth to a daughter, Mary Shelley, who grew up to be the author of “Frankenstein.”

Militant political action in Britain began with the formation of the Woman’s Social and Political Union in 1903. Following World War I when women participated in the war industries and support services, they were granted the right to vote in 1918, but it would take until 1928 for the age to be lowered to 21. In the United States in 1848 Elizabeth Cady Stanton led a Women’s Rights Convention followed in 1863 of the Women’s National Loyal League by Susan B. Anthony who wrote and submitted a proposed right-to-vote amendment in 1878. It would take until 1920 for it to be ratified as the 19th Amendment.

feminist-meme23

Photo courtesy of Best of Feminist Memes.

The women’s rights movement as we know it gained momentum in the 1960s. It was led by a feminist, fellow writer and friend, Betty Friedan, who was also a committed Leftist and, in 1966, she would help create the National Organization for Women (NOW). In 1971, the National Women’s Political Caucus emerged, led by Bella Abzug, Shirley Chisholm, and Gloria Steinem. Other groups were created as well. The effort to secure an Equal Rights Amendment, however, failed.

Aside from political rights, the issue that most concerned feminists was reproductive rights with the repeal of laws against abortion being the priority. The issue was decided, not by Congress or the states, but by a 1973 decision of the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade, that ruled 7-2 that the 14th Amendment extended a right of privacy and by extension the right of a woman to opt for an abortion.

That decision freed women both within and outside of marriage to abort an unwanted child. Unforeseen by the Court, was the rise of single-parent families led primarily by women.

As Jeffery noted “In the latest annual report to Congress on “Welfare Indicators and High Risk Factors,” the Department of health and Human Services pointed to the high rate of births to unmarried mothers, saying ‘data on non-marital births are important since historically a high proportion of welfare recipients first became parents outside of marriage.’”

We have reached a point in just over a few decades in which the government, through bad economic policies and a myriad number of programs, Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, and others, has produced 109,631,000 people receiving benefits. They represent 35.4 percent of the overall population.

That’s a long way from the traditional family and it means that half of the working population is providing the funds for those who are unemployed or have stopped looking for work thanks to a stagnate economy.

The single-parent family led by women has denied generations of the young men they are raising the male role models they need to understand that being a father is as great a responsibility as being a mother.

Men have become dispensable except as sperm donors.

Male values of courage, comradeship, and leadership have to be learned from sources outside the single-mother unit.

Then, too, the feminist goal of being in the workplace also frequently means that pre-school children’s early formative years are handed over to strangers in childcare centers whether they come from one or two-parent families. The economy has required that both parents have to work—if work can be found in a society where more than 92 million Americans are unemployed or have, as noted above, ceased looking for a job.

This is not a screed against women’s rights. It is a look at the consequences of the goals feminists have fought to achieve over the past decades.

It’s not about their right to vote or to secure an education to achieve success in the business sector.

It’s about generations of young men and women growing up in a society where a “father” is not an integral part of the “family” and the price our society pays for that.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Traditional families are still best

The War on Poverty Has Been a Colossal Flop

Carly Fiorina is redefining feminism

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from the Best Feminist Memes.

Naming The Enemy – 2 Million Bikers to D.C.

The 2 Million Bikers to DC rally is to honor the victims of 9-11, the survivors and first responders.

We salute our members of the Armed Forces and their families who have sacrificed so much in the name of duty, honor, and country. God bless America and God bless our troops.

Our country is rooted in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and rule of law. Our national identity of freedom and liberty is what we’ve been fighting for since the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. The names have changed but our enemies who hit us on 9/11, all fly under the black flag of Jihad. It is also under that black flag of Jihad they will be defeated.

Everyone is invited to join together, on the National Mall, in a celebration of American Exceptionalism.

People will be coming from all over the country by motorcycle, plane and car to remember 9/11 in our nations Capitol.
Last year a group called The American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) led by Rabbi MD Alam were granted permits for a 9/11/2013 Million Muslim March on the National Mall.

AMPAC picked the anniversary of the largest terrorist attack on United States soil surpassing even Pearl Harbor, to hold their Million Muslim March. The devout followers of Islam coordinating the Million Muslim March knew they would offend most every American in the country who watched our commercial airliners hijacked by Islamic terrorists, fly into the Twin Towers, Pentagon, and the last plane crashed into a field in Shanksville, PA.

AMPAC did not realize its insensitivity toward the American people would result in the largest motorcycle rally ever to descend on our nations capitol.

When word began to spread about the 2013 Million Muslim March a grassroots counter demonstration called 2 Million Bikers To DC was started on a single lonely Facebook page. Belinda Bee and the original group of founders joined forces and upwards of 80,000 bikers descended on Washington D.C. capturing the imagination of the nation.

Belinda Bee, Mike Belair along with their army of volunteers say the 2014 2 Million Bikers To DC Rally will be far bigger than last year. Madison Rising will provide the live entertainment along with a host of speakers. Sponsors include Harley Davidson, Budweiser, Breitbart, The United West, Operation 300, Tea Party Community and America The Movie.com.

Speakers include Dinesh D’Souza, Jan Morgan, Tom Trento, Carl Higbie – Former Navy SEAL, Karen Vaughn, Pastor Manning, Pope Dan Johnson, Manny Vega and more than we can name here.

The Tale of Two Catholic Cardinals: Chicago’s Francis George & New York’s Timothy Dolan

Hope all is well on this “Feast Day of Our Lady of Sorrows” as we bring you a very interesting e-mail here for you – a look at the two former Presidents of the USCCB – Cardinal Francis George (pictured above) and Cardinal Timothy Dolan – a stark comparison of two completely different men; two different types of cardinals; and two leaders of large and popular archdioceses in our country.

Cardinal George closely oversees the archdiocese of Chicago with two keen eyes while Cardinal Dolan nonchalantly watches over New York City with a very sleepy eye. Both archdioceses have their fair share of crime; the abortion rates are high and both cities are always under the spotlight. But, while Cardinal George takes pride in preaching boldly from the Gospels and getting out in the streets to fight crime and the other evils of a big city like Chicago – without looking for the limelight – Cardinal Dolan plays it safe – hangs out with the Pro-abortion politicians, ministers Holy Communion to them, has taken the title of the grand Marshall at the controversial St. Patrick’s Day Gay parade – and lives for the limelight…Two completely different men – both cardinals, both archbishops. Both walking in different directions.

Friends: Please take a look at the below article from the bold and courageous Cardinal George as his views on Gay marriage, Obamacare and abortion – to name a few – are quite different than this successor, Cardinal Dolan.

Cardinal George’s comments are right on target and what the Catholic faithful should consider as Catholic doctrine, Catholic teachings. He has no problem telling it like it is, has the courage to back it up and goes as far as referring to those Catholics who do not adhere to these Catholic Church teachings as the “fake church”. A devout supporter of the “Holy Roman Catholic Church”, he could not have said it any better as I refer to this new church-goer as the Progressive American Catholic – a member of this fake church that the cardinal is referring to and the church-goer that Cardinal Dolan has catered to and is actually in the process of creating, as we speak…

This “Progressive American Catholic” is completely different than the “Holy Roman Catholic” and that is the crux of the problem in the United States today.

The Catholic Church has become divided. One comes from the liberal “church of nice” – where everything is relative and everything is accepted. The other comes from the Holy Catholic Apostolic Church – the one that Jesus built upon Peter, the Rock, whose foundation is solid and will last throughout eternity. Those are the Catholic Church teachings that Cardinal George relies on and lives by. Cardinal Dolan, on the other hand, finds himself in that “politically correct” church of nice – where mostly anything goes and being in front of the media is more important than saving souls. Again, two completely different church leaders with two different agendas and two different approaches – but, yet, represent the same Holy Catholic Church and the Vatican in Rome.

It will be very interesting to see what happens with these two different schools of thought as I for one, have had more than enough of Cardinal Dolan and the liberal controversies that he has brought to our beloved Catholic Church. Dolan has disgraced our Church way too many times and millions of Catholics around the country have also had enough and even many of Cardinal Dolan’s colleagues have not been too keen on his latest attention-getting shenanigans.

Meanwhile, keep focused on what Cardinal George is preaching and bringing to the pulpit. This is the type of church leader – courageous cardinal – that the Holy Catholic Church needs today. If more cardinals and bishops spoke and acted like this Holy Man of GOD, the Catholic Church would not be in the trouble it is in today. If they all spoke from the pulpits like Cardinal George and Cardinal Burke have been doing for years, then the Catholic Faithful would know what to follow, what church doctrine really is and what the real Holy Roman Catholic Church is all about. It’s time we all boldly stand together as One Body in Christ and bring our Church back to where it is supposed to be – the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church that Jesus founded over 2,000 years ago…Like EWTN’s fired up Catholic evangelist, Tom Peterson, said this past Wednesday evening at St. Jude Church in Tequesta:

CATHOLICS COME HOME…MAY MORE CATHOLIC CHURCH LEADERS LIKE CARDINAL GEORGE STEP UP AND LET THEMSELVES BE HEARD LOUD & CLEAR WHEN THEY SPEAK NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH! MAY CATHOLIC CHURCH LEADERS LIKE CARDINAL DOLAN STOP THEIR SELFISH & BLATANT ANTICS THAT CONTINUE TO DISGRACE OUR BELOVED HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH!!

Cardinal: U.S. ‘Creed’ on Gay Marriage Like Sharia Law

September 10, 2014 – 2:07 PM

By Michael W. Chapman

cardinalgeorge

Cardinal Francis George, head of the Catholic archdiocese of Chicago and a former president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. (AP)

(CNSNews.com) – Cardinal Francis George, head of the Catholic archdiocese of Chicago, said the levers of power in government, education, entertainment, and media are enforcing a “public creed,” a “fake church” that requires all citizens to approve of gay marriage and related sexual anomalies or be punished by the State, just “as Christians and Jews are fined for their religion in countries governed by Sharia law.”

Cardinal George, who was president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in 2007-10, made his remarks in his Sept. 7 column for the archdiocesean newspaper. In his commentary, the cardinal explains that America , despite social frictions at certain times, had always strived to ensure religious freedom and respect for different religions.

The State, in the past, had “kept its promise to protect all religions and not become a rival to them, a fake church,” said the cardinal.

But that has now changed, he said. “In recent years, society has brought social and legislative approval to all types of sexual relationships that used to be considered ‘sinful,’” he continued.  “Since the biblical vision of what it means to be human tells us that not every friendship or love can be expressed in sexual relations, the church’s teaching on these issues is now evidence of intolerance for what the civil law upholds and even imposes.”

“What was once a request to live and let live has now become a demand for approval,” said Cardinal George, whose archdiocese includes about 2.2 million Catholics.  “The ‘ruling class,’ those who shape public opinion in politics, in education, in communications, in entertainment, is using the civil law to impose its own form of morality on everyone.”

“We are told that, even in marriage itself, there is no difference between men and women, although nature and our very bodies clearly evidence that men and women are not interchangeable at will in forming a family,” he said.  “Nevertheless, those who do not conform to the official religion, we are warned, place their citizenship in danger.”

The cardinal then noted that Americans who objected on religious grounds to the Obamacare mandate on contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs, were chastised by many in the media, including the liberal Huffington Post, which claimed the opposition, and the six Catholic judges on the Supreme Court, raised “concerns about the compatibility between being a Catholic and being a good citizen.”

This was not the anti-Catholic voice of nativists, or the Know-Nothing Party, or the Ku Klux Klan, said the cardinal, but, “rather, the self-righteous voice of some members of the American establishment today who regard themselves as ‘progressive’ and ‘enlightened.’”

“The inevitable result is a crisis of belief for many Catholics,” said Cardinal George.  “Throughout history, when Catholics and other believers in revealed religion have been forced to choose between being taught by God or instructed by politicians, professors, editors of major newspapers and entertainers, many have opted to go along with the powers that be.

”This reduces a great tension in their lives, although it also brings with it the worship of a false god,” he said.  “It takes no moral courage to conform to government and social pressure. It takes a deep faith to ‘swim against the tide,’ as Pope Francis recently encouraged young people to do at last summer’s World Youth Day.”

The cardinal continued, “Swimming against the tide means limiting one’s access to positions of prestige and power in society. It means that those who choose to live by the Catholic faith will not be welcomed as political candidates to national office, will not sit on editorial boards of major newspapers, will not be at home on most university faculties, will not have successful careers as actors and entertainers.” “Nor will their children, who will also be suspect,” he said.

“Since all public institutions, no matter who owns or operates them, will be agents of the government and conform their activities to the demands of the official religion, the practice of medicine and law will become more difficult for faithful Catholics,” said Cardinal George.  “It already means in some States that those who run businesses must conform their activities to the official religion or be fined, as Christians and Jews are fined for their religion in countries governed by Sharia law.”

Cardinal George went on to argue that U.S. civil law has done much to weaken and destroy the family, which in turn has forced the State to impose more and more restrictions on people and their activities that are unloosed from the “internal restraints that healthy family life teaches.”

He also says that many of the “tenets of the official State religion” are largely dictated by elements of a certain social class, noting that “’same-sex marriage,’ as a case in point, is not an issue for the poor or those on the margins of society.” How the situation may end, said the cardinal, is unclear because there are many Americans, “even among the ruling class, who do not want their beloved country to transform itself into a fake church.”

Catholics and traditional Christians know by faith, said Cardinal George, thatChrist will return to judge the living and the dead and the church “will be there to meet Him.”

However, “[t]here is no such divine guarantee for any country, culture or society of this age or any age,” concluded Cardinal George.

The archdiocese of Chicago, established in 1843, serves about 2.2 million Catholics through 356 parishes, and with more than 1,400 priests and 1,600 women religious. The archdiocese operates 44 schools and 5 colleges, the latter educating 49,000 students. The archdiocese also oversees 17 Catholic hospitals, assisting 2.6 million people a year, and helps another 1.2 million people through 150-plus different charities.

Islamic State releases map of 5-year plan to spread from Spain to China

The Islamic State will not succeed in advancing this far, of course. But they will murder many people as they try.

“The Structure of the Islamic State (ISIS),” by Col. (ret.) Dr. Jacques Neriah, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, September 8, 2014 (thanks to Victor):

Much has been written and said about the Islamic State in Iraq and Sham (the Levant) — ISIS. Most of the commentators have looked at ISIS as another terrorist organization, an al-Qaeda off-shoot, waging a guerrilla war with cohorts of unorganized thugs. The Afghani-style gear, the pickup trucks, the all black or army fatigue uniforms which most ISIS fighters wear, the unshaven beards, the turbans, hoods and head “bandanas” with Arabic inscriptions have added to the confusion.

In fact, ISIS is much more than a terrorist organization; it is a terrorist state with almost all governing elements. Over the last three years, since the beginning of the civil war in Syria, the Islamic State developed from an extremist fringe and marginal faction participating in the civil war to become the strongest, most ferocious, best funded and best armed militia in the religious and ethnic war that is waged today in Syria and Iraq.

But first, what is the name of this entity and what are the borders of the Islamic State? From the first days of its appearance in Syria in 2011, the organization was known as ISIS. However, since the declaration in Summer 2014 of the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate headed by Ibrahim ‘Awad Ibrahim Al Badri al Samarra’i, alias Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — now the self-declared “Caliph Ibrahim” — ISIS has been transformed into the “Islamic State” (Al Dawla Al Islamiya ) in order to stress the fact that the Caliphate is not to be limited to Iraq, Syria, Israel (Palestine), Jordan and the Levant, but its ambitions lie well beyond those limited borders.

According to the maps published by the Islamic State, the Islamic State will include Andalus in the West (Spain) and stretch from North Africa — the Maghreb — (and the whole of West Africa including Nigeria) through Libya and Egypt (considered one geographical unit – Ard Al-Kinana), include what is called in Islamic state terminology, Ard el Habasha (from Cameroon in the west, Central Africa, the Victoria lake states, Ethiopia and Somalia), the Hijaz (Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States), Yemen until Khurasan in the east – defined as the Central Asian Muslim Republics beginning with Azerbaijan and including Pakistan and the South west part of China, land of the Muslims of Turkish origin, the Uyghurs. The Islamic State includes also Iran and Turkey (named Anadol) in their entirety and parts of Europe (mainly the Balkans, more or less conforming to the borders of the defunct Ottoman Empire with the Austro-Hungarian territories)….

RELATED ARTICLE: Islamic jihadists of Boko Haram now control land the size of Ireland

Obama does not acknowledge or recognize the fact that ‘Radical Islam’ exists

AA - Obama Stop ISISAs a lead into Obama’s prime time speech Wednesday he declared ISIL ‘the Islamic State’ is not Islamic. He justifies his comment that no religion condones killing innocents and that the vast majority of victims are Muslims. Obama refuses to either recognize or accept the fact that ISIL kills other Muslims, Christians and Jews because they are all infidels and are not true (Islamic) believers.

Radical Islam is a fact.

It appears Obama’s Muslim background has blinded him to reality.  It is difficult to see how as ‘commander-in- chief’ he can prosecute a war against an intractable Islamic enemy (Radical Islam) without understanding the nature and goals of the enemy.

In addition Obama says ISIL is not a State.  He is wrong.

ISIL controls a vast territory and its wealth, a caliphate. It passes laws, uses the wealth of the territory it conquered to further its malignant Statehood activities. It passes laws, jails or executes its adversaries and uses heavy weapons taken from those it defeated in war.. It is more than a hit and run terrorist organization. It sees itself as an Islamic Caliphate. These are the things that constitute a State? If it isn’t a State what is it?

It may be an evil State but it is a State – a caliphate. Unfortunately Obama doesn’t recognize the Islamic State (ISIL) for what it is.

Watch this compelling video with five experts speaking on the question – “Is the Islamic State Islamic?”

NOTE: The original propaganda video released by the Islamic State (IS, ISIS or ISIL) referred to by these five experts may be seen here (WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES): http://grid.pjmedia.com/?cmd=view-show-profile-article&id=2087

RELATED ARTICLE: 

Obama: Islamic State ‘Is Not Islamic”

Florida: GOP County Chairs unanimously vote to Oppose Pot Amendment

Saying it is filled with loopholes that would allow widespread access to pot, Republican county chairs voted unanimously Friday to oppose a proposed constitutional amendment that would legalize medical marijuana.

Critics of the November ballot initiative, backed heavily by attorney and Charlie Crist supporter John B. Morgan, of Morgan & Morgan law firm, say the measure is so broadly written that it would allow people who don’t truly need medical marijuana to get it.

Others question the medicinal value of the drug.

“I do not want to see Florida turned into the pot capital of the world,” said Tony Ledbetter, Chairman of the Volusia County party.

The chairs also voted to oppose a proposed conservation amendment that would dedicate a share of real-estate tax revenues to efforts such as buying and preserving land.

Opponents say that measure would endanger property rights and tie the hands of the Legislature when lawmakers craft the state budget.

Here is the latest video ad featuring John (for the reefer) Morgan released by VoteNoOn2:

charlie-crist-john-morgan-in-florida-trend

Charlie Crist with John B. Morgan.

Ana Cruz, former executive director of the Florida Democratic Party, said, “I wish that it didn’t take medical marijuana on the ballot to motivate our young voters. But listen, we’ll take it any way we can get it.”

Ben Pollara, a Democratic fundraiser and campaign manager for the United for Care group, stated, “We want to be able to have our stereotypical, lazy pothead voters to be able to vote from their couch.”

As American essayist and novelist Charles Dudley Warner wrote, “Politics makes strange bedfellows.” In this case marijuana makes strange bedfellows.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Welfare Recipients Can Use Debit Cards for Marijuana
Black market boom lays bare a social divide in Colorado’s marijuana market | The Guardian
Parents Warn Against Synthetic Marijuana After 19-Year-Old Son Dies | KTLA
New marijuana drug ‘Wax’ looks and feels like lip balm – DC News FOX 5 DC WTTG
Man Allegedly Shoots Teen Over Stealing Marijuana – Huffington Post
Two Teens Arrested for Marijuana Burglary
Porterville, CA teens busted for drugs at school with intent to sell, cops say – ABC News
Girl eats father’s marijuana-laced bar – AP

Republican within striking distance of picking up Delaware U.S. Senate seat

Kevin Wade

Kevin Wade, Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Delaware.

With the primary races over and growing attention at the local, state and national levels will be on Tuesday, November 4, 2014. The real battle nationally is in the U.S. Senate. Millions will be poured into races to retain or obtain control of that body.

However, there is one key Republican U.S. Senate race – in Delaware.

Kevin Wade, a self-made business man, believes he can take Joe Biden’s former U.S. Senate seat and put Delaware solidly in the “R” column. A Battleground Tracker poll shows Wade within striking distance of the incumbent Coons.

DE_Senate

Historically the Delaware U.S. Senate seat is won with approximately 150,000 total votes. The race in November will likely hinge on about 8,000 voters changing their voting pattern on the General Election Day. It is projected that the Republican turnout will be 10% higher and 10% lower for the Democrats. That leaves 8,000 voters to be convinced to swing  this U.S. Senate Republican on November 4th.

This is the seat formerly held by now Vice President Joe Biden. That alone must have Delaware Republicans energized.

According to Wade, “It is all in reach. I don’t understand the fascination with ‘big state’ races at the national level. My vote in the U.S. Senate would count as much as California’s U.S. Senator. The yield on a donor dollar and volunteer hour is so much higher in this small voting universe in Delaware.”

Kevin Wade on the Two Americas:

Recently Wade was at the Gaza Frontier with Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers. Wade notes, “No civilian was closer. I am a trusted friend and have trusted friends there. Because of this trust, senior IDF officers closed their eyes to my presence in the forward area. The soldiers I met were returning from house-to-house fighting inside Gaza. Others were going across the fence line to enter combat. It was and remains a tough fight. To be clear I was not in combat; just nearby. One explosion was so close I felt the blast wave and my ears rang.”

“The soldiers asked me to break bread with them at their late night mess. Another night I was invited to join their prayer circle for the traditional Soldiers Prayer before they entered combat. I went to Israel, when under attack by Hamas rockets, to form a personal impression. On my last night in Israel I was invited to be a guest on I24 TV, Israel’s “CNN” for a live worldwide broadcast about the conditions there. Thirty minutes later I was face down in a roadside ditch due to another rocket attack. I saw the two rockets rise up with a fiery tail from a field to my right,” recalls Wade.

Watch this short video of Wade’s visit to Israel:

To learn more about Kevin Wade visit WadeforUSSenate.com.

Syrian Opposition Leader Attends International Counter Terrorism Conference in Israel

President Obama’s eve of 9/11 speech  in which he declared “war” on the Islamic State, formerly ISIS, contained a commitment to arm and support so-called moderate Syrian opposition to assist in “degrading and ultimately destroying” the Salafist Jihadist self-declared Caliphate. He may have been referring to the Free Syrian Army. But which Free Syrian Army (FSA)? One group has been headed by American –Syrian members of the Muslim Brotherhood who have dominated the Syrian National Council like Louay Safi with access to the White House. Moreover, as we have learned tragically, it is this Free Syrian Army, with a Supreme Military Command in Erdogan’s Ankara, that purportedly sold American Journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, who were barbarously murdered by ISIS. Those graphic beheadings deliberately conveyed on videos aroused American public opinion demanding action that prompted Obama’s televized address to the nation. This weekend, ISIS revealed another grisly beheading of British aid worker David Haines. In August 2014, President Obama had dismissed the moderate Syrian opposition as a group of “bankers, doctors and pharmacists.”

Dramatically, one leader of the “moderate” Syrian opposition Dr. Kamal al-Labwani, a veteran Syrian secular opponent of the Assad regime, surfaced in Israel this weekend at the annual International Counter Terrorism  (ICT) Conference in Herzliya. You may watch live feed of the ICT conference, here. According to the Times of Israel , who interviewed him, he is in Israel for 10-days on what Labwani described as “academic” and “exploratory” and stated he was prepared to meet with Israeli policymakers “whenever they want.”

Labwani’s attendance at the ICT conference may reflect the outreach by the other FSA led by the Syrian Opposition Coalition headquartered near embattled Aleppo composed of ex-Assad military including Alawites, Christians and Sunni tribal leaders currently battling ISIS inside Syria. My colleague Ilana Freedman estimates through her sources that there could be as many as 50,000 Syrian opposition fighters in this “other FSA.”

In our September NER, article, Did Assad and Maliki Facilitate the Rise of the Islamic State? An Interview with M. Zuhdi Jasser and Sherkoh Abbas, we noted this exchange with Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser:

Gordon:  Syria lies on Israel’s Golan frontier. What has Israel contributed to the alleviation of the plight of Syrians and has there been any relationship between the democratic opposition in Syria and the Israeli government?

Jasser:  I think that’s such an important question and the Syrian National Council, they are still slowly coming around to that view. I would ask people to look at some of the writings and comments of Dr. Kamal al-Labwani who in the past few months has come out and said we should have visited more closely with Israel and guaranteed them security on the Golan as being a mechanism by which we could actually protect some of the more moderates in Syria. He’s realizing that there was no hope for the Syrian National Council (SNC) because it was being protected by Turkey and Qatar. The Islamists, including many American Syrians including Louay Safi and others who went back to run the SNC from an Islamist Brotherhood perspective. Labwani is awakening to the fact that the West is his friend, Israel is at the head of that coalition and the Golan is part of that.

Dr. Labwani has spent ten years in and out of Assad regime jails for his activism in support of a secular and democratic Syria. Labwani lives in exile in Sweden. Adam Pechter in a Fall 2007, Middle East Quarterly profile noted Labwani’s treatment by the regime of Bashar Assad for his dissidence:

Labwani has long been a thorn in the Syrian regime’s side. He angered officials with his advocacy for human rights and fundamental freedoms and has been a consistent advocate for reform. On August 28, 2002, a Syrian court sentenced him to three years in prison for his activities promoting reform during the “Damascus Spring,” the short period in 2000-01 in which the Syrian regime appeared to tolerate more open political criticism. Rather than cow Labwani, his previous imprisonment emboldened him. Following his September 2004 release from prison he founded the Democratic Liberal Gathering which calls for political and free-market reforms and equality for women.

On May 10, 2007, one week after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met Syria’s foreign minister Walid al-Moallem for the highest-level bilateral talks between the two governments in more than two year a Syrian court sentenced Kamal al-Labwani to twelve years imprisonment and hard labor. That the harsh sentence coincides with Washington’s decision to reengage Damascus suggests that Assad believes the White House no longer holds it accountable for its persecution of nonviolent dissidents.

The Times of Israel report discussed Labwani views critical of Obama’s new ISIS strategy at the ICT Counter Terrorism conference, “Syrian opposition leader skeptical of US plan to arm rebels”. Labwani commented:

“Currently, the aid could fall into the wrong hands in the absence of good management and oversight,” Labwani said. “Real authority on the ground requires investment in organization before the aid is even sent.”

“We cannot fight terror with terror or crime with crime,” he said. “We must combat all the criminals, be they the regime or the terrorists from the Islamic State and the other gangs. You can’t have the Syrian people choose between a criminal named Bashar Assad or a terrorist named [Abu Bakr] al-Baghdadi.”

“We must reconstruct a new leadership connected to the people,” he said. “This would also require a no-fly zone. It would be pointless to create a system inside and have the [Assad] regime destroy it.”

“They [the Americans] have relied on failed regimes. They gave a portfolio to Qatar and a portfolio to Saudi Arabia … but it’s the Syrians who must take responsibility and run their own lives. We could, for instance, form a base in liberated areas in the north and the south and establish good relations with people. But to receive orders from a Saudi sheikh or a Qatari sheikh or from foreign intelligence agencies? That won’t work.”

“How can we turn this chaos into order? We need to build an authority on the ground. This requires a budget, an economy, institutions, reconstruction, and protection. Weapons aren’t enough.”

An op-ed in the Weekend Edition of the Wall Street Journal resonated Dr. Labwani’s comments, Obama Needs the Free Syrian Army to Defeat the Islamic State. The authors are Oubai Shahbandar and Michael Pregent. Mr. Shahbandar, a former Pentagon analyst, is an adviser to the Syrian Opposition Coalition of which Dr. Labwani is a member. Mr. Pregent is an adjunct lecturer at National Defense University and a former U.S. Army intelligence officer. They noted:

Until recently, the U.S. intelligence community had a grim assessment of the prospects of working with the Free Syrian Army opposition forces in an anti-ISIS campaign. Issues with command and control and unclear links to a political framework were often cited as reasons for hesitation to invest in the type of military partnership the U.S. has with Kurdish security forces in Iraq in fighting ISIS.

Nonetheless, the success of President Obama’s strategy in Syria clearly depends on the ability of the Syrian Opposition Coalition and the Free Syrian Army to fight ISIS. The good news is the FSA has established a command center outside the village of Marea in the strategically important province of Aleppo to direct and manage the battle against ISIS in northern Syria. And in August the Syrian Revolutionary Command Council, an alliance between FSA and other rebel factions, was formed to increase coordination and unity.

How can these rebel groups help the U.S. assault on ISIS? Even with the world’s most advanced intelligence reconnaissance and surveillance platforms, the U.S. military still needs “eyes on the ground” to round out the intelligence picture of ISIS’s capabilities, locations and vulnerabilities. Establishing an advice and assist relationship with the Free Syrian Army and tribal networks in eastern Syria would pay dividends for military planning. In late July, the Shaitat tribe in eastern Syria rose up against ISIS and drove them from the villages of Abu Hamam, Kashkiyeh and Ghranijup. The Shaitat have in turn faced brutal recriminations, with ISIS fighters capturing and slaughtering some 700 tribal members.

In Iraq, Kurdish Peshmerga forces have proved to be the anvil to the hammer of U.S. airstrikes, denying ISIS strategic terrain and recapturing lost territory. ISIS suffered its first strategic setback in Iraq in August with the loss of the Mosul Dam —an important blow to its image among its fracturing Sunni support base. Iraqi Sunni tribes, whose tribal confederation crosses over into eastern Syria, are also joining the fight against ISIS. In Syria, airstrikes should enable the FSA and allied tribes to retake the country’s eastern oil fields, which are vital to sustaining and funding ISIS operations.

Perhaps, Dr. Labwani’s visit to the ICT conference in Israel may also discuss possible mutual interests regarding  covert support of the FSA military command and indigenous Sunni tribes’ opposition to ISIS and the Assad regime.  If the case, one can only hope that might include linking up with Syrian Kurdish resistance forces, despite earlier differences.

Watch this March 31, 2014, MEMRI video interview with Dr. Labwani that may have prompted his current visit to the IDC conference in Herzliya.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the New English Review. The featured image is of  Syrian Opposition Leader, Dr. Kamal Labani on right at ICT Conference Herzliya Israel 9-11-14. Source Moti Kahana,  Times of Israel.