It Starts…. Oklahoma beheadings, and the FBI’s Drebin moment.

“Nothing to see here.” Three hours after a recent convert to Islam, who was fired for arguing the merits of stoning women, went into the main office and stabbed a woman to death, then cut her head off.

Sgt. Jeremy Lewis says the alleged suspect, 30-year-old Alton Nolen had just been fired when he drove to the front of the business, hit a vehicle and walked inside.

He walked into the front office area where he met 54-year-old Colleen Hufford and began attacking her with a knife.

Sgt. Lewis confirms the type of knife used in the attack is the same kind used at the plant.

Lewis confirms that Hufford was stabbed several times and that Nolen “severed her head.”

At that point, Lewis claims Nolen met 43-year-old Traci Johnson and began attacking her with the same knife.

Officials say at that point, Mark Vaughan, an Oklahoma County reserve deputy and a former CEO of the business, shot him as he was actively stabbing Johnson.

“He’s, obviously, a hero in this situation,” Sgt. Lewis said, referring to Vaughan. “It could have gotten a lot worse.”

Authorities say it appears Nolen was attacking employees at random.

Uh…no, he was attacking FEMALE employees.  It is driving good cops insane that the FBI refuses to admit we are in the midst of this ISIS/AQ war.  We bomb them there, they encourage someone- directly or indirectly to do something here.  It is a war of cultures, and the other side will win because they acknowledge with great zeal they are at war.

If you don’t think the jihadist goal is to do as much harm as possible, look at Australia’s recent arrests.

Two men were charged Thursday in connection with a terror plot that Australia’s prime minister said involved plans to carry out a public execution.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott said authorities obtained intelligence about a “demonstration killing” — a killing, Australian media reported, in which alleged assailants planned to kidnap a member of the public, behead the victim and then drape him or her in an ISIS flag.

The foiled plot comes just days after the country raised its terror alert to high and in the midst of Australia committing to helping the United States and a broad international coalition to beat back the Islamic State, or ISIS.

The militant group has been slaughtering people and taking over villages in Syria and Iraq. One of its members beheaded two Western journalists and an aid worker — brutality that was videotaped and broadcast throughout the world. ISIS vows that it will stop at nothing to create a caliphate governed by the intensely strict Sharia law.

One of the members was an 18yrs old and now dead after attacking the police with a.. knife!

An alleged teenage terrorist stabbed two Australian counterterrorism cops and planned to behead them in the name of ISIS — but one of his victims shot and killed him before the savage would-be execution played out.

Australian police fatally shot Abdul Numan Haider Tuesday night after he used a small knife to attack two officers outside of a Melbourne police station.

When police searched his body, they found a second, larger knife and an ISIS flag, the Age reported.

Police said the 18-year-old came to the station with plans to stab the cops, behead them, wrap their bodies in the Islamic State flag and post photos of the killings online.

Haider, whose family is originally from Afghanistan, was following instructions from ISIS leaders in the Middle East, police said.

Knife, beheading, business….  I’m seeing a pattern.

And all the while the FBI and the police say there is no religious component here.  Not the arguing stoning women is a good idea, or the recent conversion to Islam (while in jail- a very dangerous issue), or that he had Islamic tattoos, or that he, well beheaded a woman as a sign of dominance.

Nope, not a damn thing…wait a minute!

Oklahoma beheading suspect Alton Alexander Nolen calls himself “Jah’Keem Yisrael” on his Facebook page, where he uploaded photos of himself reading the Koran and wearing Muslim religious clothing.

Nolen’s Facebook “cover” photo appears to be of several Taliban fighters, according to a Google reverse image search.

A Philadelphia-based friend asked Nolen if he was praying in one of his photographs at “the Masjid on Luzerne,” appearing to refer to the Muslim American Society of Philadelphia. Nolen replied, “LAA,” to which his friend responded, “oh you not in Philadelphia.”

“I JST WANT TO SAY AS AN MUSLIM WE DNT CELEBRATE AMERIKAS HOLIDAYS,” he wrote in a caption accompanying a photograph of an Islamist fighter.

“KAFIR KAFIRS MEANS SOMEONES WHO DISAGREES WITH ISLAM. JST CAUSE YOU AS-SALAAMU ALAKIUN EVERY MORNING DNT MEANS YOUR AN MUSLIM THANK YOU THO,” he wrote in April, disparagingly referring to non-Muslims or “Kafirs.”

Okay, I can see how the FBI could say no Islamic connection, after all they were on the case for only three hours before they came to their conclusion!

But there is this. Now remember, the “new” media does not have access to the FBI database or technology, but they got this anyhow.

Hmmm…. If, IF the FBI agents were allowed to do their jobs without the CAIR restrictions, I’m sure they’d be telling a different story.  As it is, the arrogance of Islam is on display after the killing.  Having shame seems to be not part of Islam.

And we continue to take it. Remember, a religion of peace.

Or is it, a religion that leaves others in pieces.

Like I said earlier, be ready, gear up, you may be the next good citizen stopping a threat.

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Getting a grip on what “terror” looks like, or will, in America.

As we struggle with the long war on terror, Western minds have trouble grasping just how dedicated and violent and sadist and committed the enemy is.  Make no mistake, we are facing the SAME enemy the Crusaders did nearly a thousand years ago, the enemy just have better equipment to harm us with!

Over at Heritage Institute, they compiled a list of terror attacks in the United States back in 2012.  It had gone up ten from 2011.  So let’s say 1o a year, so add another twenty to the 2012 list, plus the ones they missed and you can see we are approaching a hundred attacks.  A hundred….

Add to the latest list the jihadi that was caught by local police after killing at least four men in a nationwide spree, we can see that the terrorists are here, and they are active.

As I said in a email to my friends, ISIS has no air force of their own, so their retaliation is going to have to be something different, but just as effective.  I fear they will do their best to repeat something like Belsan or the Kenyan mall attack.  Belsan took alot of manpower and explosives.  What we’ll probably see smaller units of well armed terrorists doing more of a sweep and kill approach like the mall attacks.

It really doesn’t matter. Their goal will be to maximize the damage in order to maximize the media coverage.  In turn, that will pressure Obama, one of the most feckless leaders of our time, to change course and stop bombing. He has telegraphed he is reluctant to get involved in the first place. How much of a push to move him off his spot is what ISIS will want to find out.

My advice to my friends was to be armed (legally) and alert. If the attack comes it will be an armed citizen interdicting the initial attack that may saves lives, like it did in Kenya.

Most importantly, we need to get away from our Western mindset, our PC driven investigative manner of looking at the threat or a bunch of us innocent citizens and police are going to get killed.  It will never be our “enlightened leaders,”  just us schmucks thinking we are safe because the people in charge say so.  Here is part of the problem.

It is not an exaggeration to say that because of Democrat political correctness hamstringing our FBI agents, they could not combat the Islamists in our midst without Steven Emerson. Oliver “Buck” Revell, former head of FBI Investigations and Counter-Terrorism, said as much in these words: “The Investigative Project has been one of the most important sources of accurate and timely information on the real goals and objectives of the wide spread and powerful Islamist movement.”

The FBI turns to Emerson to find out what is happening. So does AT. This is what Emerson told us:

Isis is Al Qaeda 3.0. They are already in the United States and the only reason there has not been a terror attack is that they have not decided to do it yet.

The chief danger Steven Emerson sees is that there are three to four hundred ISIS killers in Syria and Iraq with American passports, who can return whenever they want, and the Obama administration is blocking the FBI from monitoring them in mosques. As Emerson told Judge Jeannine Pirro on Fox News:

The FBI has been handcuffed in terms of investigating religious extremists in mosques, as a result of guidelines put out by the attorney general earlier this year. And so therefore, there is… a definite problem now in investigating those militants in the United States who are either recruiting for ISIS or have returned from Syria or Iraq having fought for ISIS, and are ready to carry out freelance or directed terrorist attacks on behalf of ISIS against the United States…

the Department of Justice [which] put out guidelines that restricted the FBI and other law enforcement agencies from using religious factors in identifying threats, national security threats to the United States in the homeland.

…we’re seeing ISIS recruiting biophysicists, engineers, social media types, people who have expertise in really carrying out sophisticated terrorist attacks coming back to the United States.

there’s one recruiter that [had been]… picked up [in the past], well identified, in Bloomington, Minnesota at the Al Farooq Mosque. There are recruiters going around the country in other mosques, where they identify potential volunteers. They test them out to see if they’re willing to die on behalf of martyrdom of the cause for Allah. Then they give them cash, they provide money for their families in case they die. They give them tickets to go to Turkey. Turkey has allowed them, hundreds, to go through to Syria, then to Iraq. And we [the U.S.] count Turkey as one of our top allies. We haven’t put [many of] them on the terrorism watch list, which we should. So there’s a major disconnect, Judge, here between what we should be doing to protect the homeland and protect American citizens.

In the end, the adults in the room, the few of us left anyway, will have to sacrifice and clean this mess up.  Until then, just keep your eyes open and be safe.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Of Dunces, sadists and armed civilians. How all of this may play out here at home.

Gear up.  If I were in charge, that would be the first thing I would say to the armed American citizen.  If you can legally carry, then carry.  Be alert and be ready.  Why? Because the confluence of actions are going to end up right here in the United States.  And it will be left for the adults in the room to hold the line.

First, let’s examine how we got here.  I’m not a fan of the term “Homeland” when refering to the United States, it seems to Germanic for my taste.  This is the United States of America, not “the homeland”.  Just saying.  But to the point here, how did we get in a position where our national security team denies a problem two weeks ago, then bombs the living daylights out of an “imminent threat” yesterday?  I’m thinking somebody is lying, and who would that be?  Victor Davis Hanson has a few thoughts in his article called “Confederacy of Dunces.”

 The military effort against the Islamic State hinges on a successful threefold approach involving intelligence, homeland security, and diplomacy. Unfortunately, the Obama administration does not have much past history in these areas to warrant confidence.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper just announced that the U.S. has underestimated the Islamic State. Clapper was probably correct, if unwise in apprising the world of U.S. incompetence. But he left out of his apologia any mention of why the U.S. has continuously downplayed the dangers of radical Islam. The answer is largely found among the Obama team, of which Clapper is a key part, and which has constructed its assessments to fit preconceived political directives.

The overriding belief of the Obama administration is that there is not really a radical Islamic movement that seeks to destroy the present nation-state order in the Middle East, form some sort of caliphate out of the mess, and then marshal the region’s population and resources to attack the West.

Clapper himself usually adheres to that belief. He once described the radical Islamist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as largely secular. His veracity and his judgment are equally suspect. Under oath before Congress, he once insisted that the NSA did not gather information on ordinary Americans — a flat-out lie (or, as he put it, the “least untruthful” answer he was in a position to give). He also once assured us that Moammar Qaddafi would survive in Libya.

The present director of the CIA, John Brennan, called the idea of a caliphate absurd. He has given us all sorts of strained, politically correct takes on jihad (“a holy struggle,” “a legitimate tenet of Islam”). He warned us when he took office in 2013 that the new Obama administration would focus on “extremists” rather than radical Islamists. That naïveté might explain why, days after the foiled attempt by the so-called underwear bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Brennan seemed to have almost no detailed knowledge of the plot and suggested that there had been no breakdown in either intelligence or airport security. Then again, Brennan also once assured us that there had not been a single collateral death from drone attacks for an entire year, and insisted to U.S. senators that the CIA had never hacked into their computers.

Yep, not impressed with Clapper or Brennan.  They are either  diabolically smart geniuses with a long range plans, or they are just not that bright at all.   Hanson points out that if the administration doesn’t believe that ISIS isn’t trying to establish a Caliphate, then they are the ONLY people who don’t believe it.  Sometimes you can suffer political blinders and governors on what you want to say, sometimes you are just dumber than a bag of hammers, and sometimes you are just lying.  None of those possible outcomes gains any respect with us.

Over at American Thinker, James Lewis makes an obvious- to some- conclusion after witnessing the ABSOLUTE evil that is ISIS. This isn’t a few really bad guys embedded within a large group of just regular bad guys. These guys are EVIL.  As I said in a comment recently, “How many psychopaths exist in the world? At least thirty thousand, and they are all wearing black masks.”

 As a psychiatrist Dr. K knows all about the difference between psychopaths and sadistic criminals, but in this case he calls the latest jihadis only “psychopaths.” But they are obviously sadists (as well as psychopaths) because they show pleasure in torturing and killing people.

What’s the difference? It’s very simple: psychopaths don’t feel guilt about hurting other people, but sadists take active pleasure in committing horrors that civilized people can’t even look at. In his pornographic novels the Marquis de Sade wrote about taking sexual pleasure from torturing and even murdering innocents. That is where we get the term “sadism.”

Dr. Krauthammer must be aware of the modern rise of a very different kind of criminal behavior in politics, the rise of sadistic politics. As you might expect, sado-politics goes along with a long, growing sadistic streak in the arts and media, hand in hand with the rise of the radical Left in US and European culture. Those trends are not accidental.

Now the take Lewis has is that society is breeding the love for sadist behavior.  I won’t disagree in general.  Many people who know me know I am greatly disgusted over the thug/rap culture because of its hateful and almost sadist manner.  Beating people up for fun, because you get off on it, can be argued a sadist act.  Writing and singing about it should qualify too.  Yet, we give those artists tens of millions of dollars, women, gold and fame. And kids begin to follow those visions in real life, so Lewis may be onto something.

ISIS is a sadistic war cult. It attracts people who take joy in torturing women and children. You can easily see the difference in their facial expressions. Psychopaths have “flat” expressions, like Vladimir Putin. Sadists show a kind of demonic joy when others are suffering. They are the classic face of human evil.

Look at typical violent perps in American courtrooms, and most of the time you see flat emotions. But then watch 1930s films of Hitler’s speeches, and he is constantly mixing hysterical rage with laughter. Mussolini and Hitler pioneered the use of radio to whip up millions of followers, who were inculcated in the dark arts of sadistic mob hatred to destroy the scapegoat of the moment — the French, the rich, the Jews, the bankers, the gays, Gypsies, on and on and on.

Thus the most highly educated country in Europe, Germany, was rapidly indoctrinated into becoming a war and suicide cult little different from Jim Jones. The 1930s showed the rise of mass sadistic cult politics throughout Europe and Japan after the middle class was broken by mass inflation and poverty.

Today we are seeing the identical mass psychopathology — just using different flags, slogans, hats and uniforms. The psychology of mass murder cults remains the same. That is why we see ISIS versions of KKK-types today, recruiting young, depressed, alienated teenagers from many nations by using snuff videos on social media. For those eager recruits, murderous barbarism for some cult delusion is a magnetic attraction. They need a faith, any faith, and if they feel desperate enough, ISIS will do. These were the same kinds of kids who wanted to join the Hitlerjuegend and a hundred other totalitarian youth cults in the last century.

Here’s the thing about the theory of poverty equals sadist cults.  We’ve been a poor nation far longer than a rich one or a middle class one, and we haven’t created the thug/rap culture before.  We haven’t created Islamic enclaves where kids are recruited into murderous groups.  So what happened?

Obviously, it was the undermining effect of the sixties generation. Remember, the USSR warned us they would destroy us from within, without firing a shot.  Why? Because we allowed the perversion of our rules and laws through the effort of PC and “fairness” rather than forcing citizens to be GOOD citizens for the well-being of the future of the country.

In that environment bad ideas, bad thoughts and bad cultures were allowed to grow to a malignant level. Those cultures bred foolish men and women who were selfish, short sighted and arrogant.  They were not good citizens. Then we let lawyers and politicians run our nation, that was our fault because we became lazy and short sighted and selfish and allowed governments and special interests to bully our fellow citizens who dare sound the alarm bell into silence or worse.

The result we get, in the greatest nation ever created, is a society that is simply coming unglued.

We are growing amateur sadists and psychopaths at a far greater rate than law enforcement will be able to control.  And the newest recruiting effort being done here is that of ISIS.  Except ISIS doesn’t want to have their fighters travel to Syria, they have plenty there.  They want the fighters to take the fight to their enemies within the borders of their enemies.

And that is where the armed citizen comes in.  ISIS does not have an air force to bomb their enemy in the war zone.  They have suicide bombers and IEDs but that’s about it. (Outside the occasional chlorine gas attacks! Awkward for those who thought there were no WMDs in Iraq!)  So their retaliatory effort to strike at us will be here in the United States.  They believe, rightly I fear, that Obama will prosecute this war until public opinion swings in another direction.  Krauthammer is right in the fact he is the first President in modern history to be led to war BY the public instead of the other way around. His resolve is paper thin, and ISIS thinks they can break him.

Already trained ISIS terrorists have returned to the United States. We know it because we allowed it (another PC freezing common sense moment).  The FBI, the same FBI that screwed up the Boston bombing investigation, says not to worry they are keeping an eye on the nearly forty THEY KNOW have returned. (Under CAIR written restrictions I’m sure.)

Those forty will be training and recruiting other volunteers to be the counter-battery effort of ISIS.  ISIS gets hit in Syria, their confederates attack us here. And the types of attacks will mimic the mall shooting in Kenya and the school attacks in Belsan.  Remember, religious zealot sadism- which is about as bad as it can get.

So what can you do, now that the dunces and the fools and the PC police have managed to get us here?  Simple, if you can- stay armed, vigilant and ready to respond.  It will be the armed citizen who is shopping and finds themselves in the middle of the initial attack who may make a difference.  They may be able to hinder the plans of the terrorists long enough for the police to arrive. And hopefully the police will execute the “active shooter” procedure and chase the suspects down, rather than surround the place and let the terrorists systematically kill people.

Mall terror attack. Responded too late for this victim

So what should you do?  1. Be armed. 2. Travel in groups (husband and wife team if possible.)  3. Don’t hesitate if your alarm bells go off.  There are really bad guys out there, you aren’t imagining them. 4. Remember to identify your targets- that guy running around with a gun could be a rookie off duty cop trying his best not to piss himself. 5. Be aware of your surroundings.  The attacker may not be alone. (This isn’t Chuck Norris time.  The old man who engaged the two shooters in Walmart, after the two killed two police officers, was killed by the wife he didn’t see.) 5. Survive.  If you shoot and keep moving, the bad guys may or may not pursue you. If they don’t then they have to worry about you, which screws up their operational plan.  6. When you go dry or run out of opportunities- then get out. The police will need to know what you know.  Shoot your way out, take as many as you can with you- as in the case of the Kenyan mall shooting.

Lastly, two in the chest is good, if it brings them down, but remember, they are professionally trained, which means vests, so one in the head to make sure isn’t a bad idea. There is no John Wayne moment here. No honor, no moral victory.  This is kill or be killed. You saw the videos.  We know who they are and what they are capable of, and they will use your death to influence policy, which is almost worse than dying itself.  So don’t let them.

Like I said, this isn’t a John Wayne moment, but more like a Mal Reynolds one.

New Picture (9)

Good luck.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Lois Lerner and the type of person who is drawn to government. Of course she thinks she didn’t do anything wrong.

If you want a peek into the mindset of your typical bureaucrat read the article at Politico. Not all government employees are bad people, but many turn into “bad people” because of the power unaccountable government jobs give them.  A person who needs constant reminders not to be mean or overbearing is a dangerous government employee.  Think of Lois Lerner as that bad cop you meet who loves the power the badge gives her, and tells people to do things “because I said so.”

Lois doesn’t think she did anything wrong. She’s not lying. She knows she did ILLEGAL things, like sending donor information to the DOJ upon their request.  But wrong? Wrong is a matter of personal opinion at this point in our society’s history.  The sixties taught us “the ends justify the means” which translated simply means “all is good, unless you get caught.”

Employers won’t hire her. She’s been berated with epithets like “dirty Jew.” Federal agents have guarded her house because of death threats. And she’s spent hundreds of thousands of dollars defending herself against accusations she orchestrated a coverup in a scandal that has come to represent everything Americans hate about the IRS.

Lois Lerner is toxic — and she knows it. But she refuses to recede into anonymity or beg for forgiveness for her role in the IRS tea party-targeting scandal.

“I didn’t do anything wrong,” Lerner said in her first press interview since the scandal broke 16 months ago. “I’m proud of my career and the job I did for this country.”

Now remember, this is a soft ball job by Politico where no hard question were asked.  In that light, even this article can’t hide Lerner’s arrogance and dismissive nature.  She IS that guard standing in the docks a Nuremberg bewildered that he is thought to be guilty of a crime “because I was only following orders.”

Lerner is a liberal who hates the conservative part of America.  She also felt the Supreme Court decision allowing non-profit organizations to participate in campaigns- something SHE disagreed with.  (The arrogance of Lerner.)

Lerner is that type of personality that is drawn to the power of the office she holds.  We all know who she is, we’ve worked with her doppelgangers all our lives.

Lerner, who sat down with POLITICO in an exclusive two-hour session, has been painted in one dimension: as a powerful bureaucrat scheming with the Obama administration to cripple right-leaning nonprofits. Interviews with about 20 of her colleagues, friends and critics and a survey of emails and other IRS documents, however, reveal a much more complicated figure than the caricature she’s become in the public eye.

The portrait that emerges shows Lerner is, indeed, fierce, unapologetic and perhaps even tone-deaf when she says things that show her Democratic leanings. She had a quick temper and may have intimidated co-workers who could have helped her out of this mess. It’s easy to see how Republicans have seized on the image of a devilish figure cracking down on conservative nonprofits.

What do we know to be true?  Over at theconservativetreehouse, they lay out the reason the IRS scandal will never be addressed by the DOJ- it was the DOJ’s idea in the first place.

We first discovered it on June 28th 2014 as an outcome of another research project we were working on. We have tried to draw as much attention to it as we can. Thankfully the Daily Caller is closing in, The Wall Street Journal is stumbling in that direction, and The American Center for Law and Justice’s Jay Sekulow has finally connected the dots.

How can the DOJ conduct an investigation into unlawful aspects of the IRS targeting of specific 501(c)(4) groups, when the DOJ is the initiating body for the illegality they are seeking to investigate ?

The IRS scandal is NOT about the IRS. Yes, the IRS did indeed target conservative groups; however, they were NOT the originating entity in the overall plan to create a list of targets.

The U.S. Department of Justice was the originating governmental agency who constructed the plan to make a target list and then weaponize various government agencies against those on the list.

As said, we stumbled onto the DOJ trail of evidence back in June when we reviewed one of very few disclosures given by Lois Lerner’s attorney William Taylor III. In a moment of clarity, which was not caught by the interviewer, William Taylor responded to questioning by stating that his client, Lois Lerner, was merely responding to a request from the Department of Justice, when she sent confidential tax files to the DOJ.

Taylor said Lerner didn’t know and sent them because Justice requested the documents: “She [understood] the donor information on Schedule B had been removed. In some cases, we later learned, it may not have been.” (link)

Lois Lerner sent the DOJ 1.1 million pages of 501(c)(4) tax filing data. Including a very specific set of “33 Schedule B attachment files”. The Schedule B’s were specific to Large Conservative 501(c)(4) groups operating and organized to oppose the agenda of President Obama. The Schedule B’s include the donor lists of specific people and sub-groups attached to the 501(c)(4).

In essence the donor group or names of every person who supported the larger conservative group.

For obvious reasons it is illegal to distribute that data. It is primarily illegal because such information could be used to create a list of people in opposition to the executive branch; that is exactly what happened. Lois Lerner sent the data to the DOJ just before 2010 mid-terms.

The DOJ hid the connection for three years and did not admit the submission until 2013 when congress was about to find out through one of their IRS subpoenas. The DOJ said it was some form of miscommunication, merely a mistake. The DOJ claimed they did not expect to get the Schedule B information, and never noticed it until the House investigation began.

If it is now public knowledge this happened, then why isn’t Congress doing something? Because they don’t have the power- except the power of the purse.  Eric Holder refuses to appoint an independent prosecutor because it would lead to indictments. Bob Beckel at the “FIVE” made the point that nobody in this administration had been indicted for anything- as though that was a point of honor instead of a black mark against Holder’s ethics.   I’m sure if we checked, during the reign of the Nazis in Germany no one in their administration was indicted for things like the wholesale slaughter of Jews either. Doesn’t make it right.

Back to Lerner.

Lerner, then head of the division handling organizations claiming tax-exempt status, obliged and dropped what turned out to be a political bombshell at an American Bar Association conference, using a planted question to apologize for the treatment of right-leaning nonprofits from IRS “front-line people” in Cincinnati.

Within days, lawmakers in both parties were calling for her resignation, furious that IRS leaders, including Lerner, had withheld information when asked by lawmakers for months about the matter. Top officials also blamed Cincinnati, when, in fact, Washington was also handling the cases.

Called to testify before the House Oversight Committee, Lerner decided to take the Fifth and read a defiant speech declaring her innocence — one that Republicans argued waived her rights. She says she’d do it again.

“By taking the Fifth, Lois put a sign on her back: Kick me,” said Paul Streckfus, editor of the EO Tax Journal. “To the average person, that sounds like, ‘Oh my God, she must be hiding something!’”

Lerner, for her part, assumes she is at the center of the storm because “I was the person who announced it. I assume the other part of it is because I declined to talk, and once I declined to talk, they could say anything they wanted, and they knew I couldn’t say anything back.”

Okay calling bullshit.  Anyone who has been in police work and done investigations know the reason the person pleads the fifth is they are hiding something.

First of all she could talk, and talk honestly but she didn’t. SHE chose to plead the fifth. Why?  If she did nothing wrong, then she could simply explain why she lied about the abuses coming from a remote office, or why she sent- knowing it is illegal (she is a IRS lawyer after all)- private records to the DOJ, or how her hard drive crashed, or how six of the people DIRECTLY involved in the DOJ/IRS effort had the same thing happen to theirs.

She could.  But she didn’t. And for obvious reasons.  Lerner is a loyal and eager foot soldier, who agreed with the current administration’s ideology on shutting down opinions from the conservative side.  (Again the US Supreme Court ruling against her former agency.) She said so in her emails that were turned over.  One can only assume the key ones, from the key period of time that are still missing, contain far more damning information. Many think they would link the DOJ and others inside the IRS to an illegal effort to use federal agencies to intimidate and harass political opponents.  It really is that simple.  And the paper trail would run right into the campaign organization in the White House.  Remember, “the ends justify the means.” And the end in this case was to reelect Obama.  Americans have trouble recognizing just how cold and dangerous certain elements are within our society.  We wouldn’t cheat like that, so we think others in America wouldn’t either.

But Republicans contend her skepticism of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision lifting limits on corporate political contributions is damning. They point to emails, including one from June 11, 2012, about how states responded to the case by creating their own disclosure rules. Lerner wrote to the author: “You done good! Now, if you can only fix the darn law!”

In another email, Lerner commented on an IRS group email circulating Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen’s legislation requiring more disclosure of political groups getting tax breaks. She wrote: “Wouldn’t that be great?”

Although she wouldn’t discuss these issues at the behest of her lawyers, Lerner said it is unrealistic to expect public servants not to have opinions: “What matters is that my personal opinions have never affected my work.”

Not everyone is convinced. Reagan-appointed former Federal Election Commission Commissioner Lee Ann Elliott and Craig Engle, a former executive assistant to a GOP commissioner, who worked alongside Lerner in her role prosecuting campaign finance violations at the FEC, think she was biased against big political spenders. They say she was tough on certain groups because she didn’t like them influencing elections.

“Lois’ ideology is against money in politics, is ‘anti-contribution’; that’s her bias,” said Engle, an Arent Fox partner. “Her ideology inhibited fair administration of the law.”

Lerner isn’t a monster.  She’s just that ideological bureaucrat that believes her way is the right way.  We see it all the time, from a bureaucrat in a school giving a kid detention for sharing a sandwich, to the cop who says he can’t be videotaped in public because HE doesn’t like it.  Where the difference occurs is that having a kindred spirit in the White House allowed her to execute her bias without worries of retaliation or accountability.

The only way you stop this kind of abuse it so hold the abuser to account.  In Lerner’s case, I wished Romney had been elected if only for that independent counsel indicting her and putting her in jail for five years.  Trust me, old Mrs “I see nothing! Schultz” there would be singing like a canary and we’d be getting a lot more indictments INCLUDING some from the staff of Representative Cummings. (Who is on the panel even after that was discovered- so how serious are they?)

Already, the blow back from the interview is caustic.  She came across arrogant and  unrepentant, then walked off with a toss away comment to anyone who thinks being the source of unknown damage to many innocent citizens and possibly change the course of a Presidential election.

Of course, that also means she can’t escape public humiliation when she is recognized. She’s been berated by strangers and told she is “going to be put away in the deepest, darkest dungeon, and they were going to lock me up and throw away the key.”

Maybe someday she’ll write a book. Maybe not. She doesn’t know when, or if, she’ll tell the full story of what happened, though she assures POLITICO that “you don’t hear half of what happened because they are picking and choosing.”

Asked what she’d say if she could tell the world anything, she reiterated her innocence. Then, as she starts to get up to walk away from the interview, she added: “And, oh, one more thing: I’m doing just fine.”

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Politico allows the truth to come out about the Middle East and the “why” it is a mess. Well done.

Not sure why, but they did. Maybe getting ahead of the coming disaster is a good idea on their part.   No matter, this article is well done.  Limited in history- but is an article, not a book.  However, it does it a number of highlights and it NOT PC!

Arab civilization, such as we knew it, is all but gone. The Arab world today is more violent, unstable, fragmented and driven by extremism—the extremism of the rulers and those in opposition—than at any time since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire a century ago. Every hope of modern Arab history has been betrayed. The promise of political empowerment, the return of politics, the restoration of human dignity heralded by the season of Arab uprisings in their early heydays—all has given way to civil wars, ethnic, sectarian and regional divisions and the reassertion of absolutism, both in its military and atavistic forms. With the dubious exception of the antiquated monarchies and emirates of the Gulf—which for the moment are holding out against the tide of chaos—and possibly Tunisia, there is no recognizable legitimacy left in the Arab world.

Is it any surprise that, like the vermin that take over a ruined city, the heirs to this self-destroyed civilization should be the nihilistic thugs of the Islamic State? And that there is no one else who can clean up the vast mess we Arabs have made of our world but the Americans and Western countries?

No one paradigm or one theory can explain what went wrong in the Arab world in the last century. There is no obvious set of reasons for the colossal failures of all the ideologies and political movements that swept the Arab region: Arab nationalism, in its Baathist and Nasserite forms; various Islamist movements; Arab socialism; the rentier state and rapacious monopolies, leaving in their wake a string of broken societies. No one theory can explain the marginalization of Egypt, once the center of political and cultural gravity in the Arab East, and its brief and tumultuous experimentation with peaceful political change before it reverted back to military rule.

Nor is the notion of “ancient sectarian hatreds” adequate to explain the frightening reality that along a front stretching from Basra at the mouth of the Persian Gulf to Beirut on the Mediterranean there exists an almost continuous bloodletting between Sunni and Shia—the public manifestation of an epic geopolitical battle for power and control pitting Iran, the Shia powerhouse, against Saudi Arabia, the Sunni powerhouse, and their proxies.

There is no one single overarching explanation for that tapestry of horrors in Syria and Iraq, where in the last five years more than a quarter of a million people perished, where famed cities like Aleppo, Homs and Mosul were visited by the modern terror of Assad’s chemical weapons and the brutal violence of the Islamic State. How could Syria tear itself apart and become—like Spain in the 1930s—the arena for Arabs and Muslims to re-fight their old civil wars? The war waged by the Syrian regime against civilians in opposition areas combined the use of Scud missiles, anti-personnel barrel bombs as well as medieval tactics against towns and neighborhoods such as siege and starvation. For the first time since the First World War, Syrians were dying of malnutrition and hunger.

Iraq’s story in the last few decades is a chronicle of a death foretold. The slow death began with Saddam Hussein’s fateful decision to invade Iran in September 1980. Iraqis have been living in purgatory ever since with each war giving birth to another. In the midst of this suspended chaos, the U.S. invasion in 2003 was merely a catalyst that allowed the violent chaos to resume in full force.

The polarizations in Syria and Iraq—political, sectarian and ethnic—are so deep that it is difficult to see how these once-important countries could be restored as unitary states. In Libya, Muammar al-Qaddafi’s 42-year reign of terror rendered the country politically desolate and fractured its already tenuous unity. The armed factions that inherited the exhausted country have set it on the course of breaking up—again, unsurprisingly—along tribal and regional fissures. Yemen has all the ingredients of a failed state: political, sectarian, tribal, north-south divisions, against the background of economic deterioration and a depleted water table that could turn it into the first country in the world to run out of drinking water.

It gets better.

The jihadists of the Islamic State, in other words, did not emerge from nowhere. They climbed out of a rotting, empty hulk—what was left of a broken-down civilization. They are a gruesome manifestation of a deeper malady afflicting Arab political culture, which was stagnant, repressive and patriarchal after the decades of authoritarian rule that led to the disastrous defeat in the 1967 war with Israel. That defeat sounded the death knell of Arab nationalism and the resurgence of political Islam, which projected itself as the alternative to the more secular ideologies that had dominated the Arab republics since the Second World War. If Arab decline was the problem, then “Islam is the solution,” the Islamists said—and they believed it.

At their core, both political currents—Arab nationalism and Islamism—are driven by atavistic impulses and a regressive outlook on life that is grounded in a mostly mythologized past. Many Islamists, including Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood (the wellspring of such groups)—whether they say it explicitly or hint at it—are still on a ceaseless quest to resurrect the old Ottoman Caliphate. Still more radical types—the Salafists—yearn for a return to the puritanical days of Prophet Muhammad and his companions. For most Islamists, democracy means only majoritarian rule, and the rule of sharia law, which codifies gender inequality and discrimination against non-Muslims.

And let’s face the grim truth: There is no evidence whatever that Islam in its various political forms is compatible with modern democracy. From Afghanistan under the Taliban to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and from Iran to Sudan, there is no Islamist entity that can be said to be democratic, just or a practitioner of good governance. The short rule of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt under the presidency of Mohamed Morsi was no exception. The Brotherhood tried to monopolize power, hound and intimidate the opposition and was driving the country toward a dangerous impasse before a violent military coup ended the brief experimentation with Islamist rule.

Let’s assume the Arab on Arab thing has been going on for thousands of years, and the Islam component since just after the founding of Islam, when did it start to affect us directly?

The year 1979 was a watershed moment for political Islam. An Islamic revolution exploded in Iran, provoked in part by decades of Western support for the corrupt shah. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan and a group of bloody zealots occupied the Grand Mosque in Mecca for two weeks. After these cataclysmic events political Islam became more atavistic in its Sunni manifestations and more belligerent in its Shia manifestations. Saudi Arabia, in order to reassert its fundamentalist “wahhabi” ethos, became stricter in its application of Islamic law, and increased its financial aid to ultraconservative Islamists and their schools throughout the world. The Islamization of the war in Afghanistan against Soviet occupation—a project organized and financed by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan—triggered a tectonic change in the political map of South Asia and the Middle East. The Afghan war was the baptism of fire for terrorist outfits like the Egyptian Islamic Group and al Qaeda, the progenitors of the Islamic State.

This decades-long struggle for legitimacy between the dictators and the Islamists meant that when the Arab Spring uprisings began in early 2011, there were no other political alternatives. You had only the Scylla of the national security state and the Charybdis of political Islam. The secularists and liberals, while playing the leading role in the early phase of the Egyptian uprisings, were marginalized later by the Islamists who, because of their political experience as an old movement, won parliamentary and presidential elections. In a region shorn of real political life it was difficult for the admittedly divided and not very experienced liberals and secularists to form viable political parties.

So no one should be surprised that the Islamists and the remnants of the national security state have dominated Egypt since the fall of Hosni Mubarak. In the end, the uprising removed the tip of the political pyramid—Mubarak and some of his cronies—but the rest of the repressive structure, what the Egyptians refer to as the “deep state” (the army, security apparatus, the judiciary, state media and vested economic interests), remained intact. After the failed experiment of Muslim Brotherhood rule, a bloody coup in 2013 completed the circle and brought Egypt back under the control of a retired general.

In the end, it won’t matter what we do. We aren’t there to change their minds, we are there to limit their ability to harm us.  How long will it take before the Muslim/Arab world will recover in this author’s mind?

Yes, it is misleading to lump—as some do—all Islamist groups together, even though all are conservative in varying degrees. As terrorist organizations, al Qaeda and Islamic State are different from the Muslim Brotherhood, a conservative movement that renounced violence years ago, although it did dabble with violence in the past.

Nonetheless, most of these groups do belong to the same family tree—and all of them stem from the Arabs’ civilizational ills. The Islamic State, like al Qaeda, is the tumorous creation of an ailing Arab body politic. Its roots run deep in the badlands of a tormented Arab world that seems to be slouching aimlessly through the darkness. It took the Arabs decades and generations to reach this nadir. It will take us a long time to recover—it certainly won’t happen in my lifetime. My generation of Arabs was told by both the Arab nationalists and the Islamists that we should man the proverbial ramparts to defend the “Arab World” against the numerous barbarians (imperialists, Zionists, Soviets) massing at the gates. Little did we know that the barbarians were already inside the gates, that they spoke our language and were already very well entrenched in the city.

Basically, we’ll be dealing with this guy, and his friends for  long, long time.

 

Pull up a chair, we might be there awhile.

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The NFL, domestic violence and race. The clashes of PC

I hate Political correctness because it clouds good sense.  It creates artificial obstacles to our ability to handle issues in our society.  It adds the “you can’t do that because he’s..” or “you must do that because he’s..”.   What a person is should no longer factor into how they are treated.  They must be judged by their behavior, attitude and performance, and nothing else.

But we can’t get away from it because each time someone steps up the chorus of PC lovers shout that person down, THEN try to ruin the person’s life.

However, there have been a couple of situations popping up in our PC driven society that are going to be a joy for me to watch unfold, not because I like the harm caused by the acts, but I will love to see how they get themselves out from under the mess PC has caused.

First, there is the case of Ray Rice, who beat his girlfriend, now wife, on camera.  PC demands he be thrown out of society, lose his job, lose his ability to make a living in order to support his wife and family.  Yet, Ray Rice is black.  Ray Rice came from a part of our society we have allowed the glorification of female abuse in music, the culture and in our media.  We don’t flinch when rap music talks about “slapping those bitches.”  In fact, our PC society rewards the artists with money, gold and..well bitches.

We look the other way when our black culture abuses young women because well “you can’t say anything because they are…”

However, we have made domestic violence a third rail in the PC world.  Abusing your spouse is wrong.  Knocking her out and then standing over her like she was a piece of meat and dragging her like a sack of corn meal- on video- is REALLY wrong! Yet, Ray Rice has a reputation of doing good things for the community and being a nice guy. So was this a one time thing? It was obvious both of them were at each other, so is there a less than stellar victimhood here for the wife?

A couple of generations ago, during my youth, there was a golden rule- you didn’t hit a woman.  Feminism has demanded women be treated like men.  Over the last twenty yers or so, we’ve seen women literally morph into men as far as attitude and violent behavior. ESPECIALLY in the black culture.  Something the liberal white elites simply don’t get.

Here’s a couple.

So, does the rule still apply?

Let’s put that aside for another day.  You know how I feel about the cancer of glorification of thug behavior.  Let’s talk about race vs feminism in the light of the NFL.

First and foremost, I support the NFL if it decides to be the FIRST organization in America to no longer tolerate thug/criminal/abusive behavior as a term for employment.  Somebody has to start that ball rolling in the nation!

However, IF they decide to do this, it must be applied equally across the board.  A third stringer goes, a star goes on equal charges.

But the problems this creates are many and deep.  The first one that comes to mind is the issue of culture (not necessarily race but that will be the argument).  IF the NFL says to teams that they will suffer the loss of  highly paid player if that player commits a crime, then the teams will do what is prudent- background checks on potential players in order to see past behavior.  Past behavior is indicative of future behavior.  Not a bad idea, it is done in a number of field, including law enforcement.

But that will come at a price.  Some of the best athletes come from troubled backgrounds. And sometimes the opportunity of playing pro sports gets them out. (Ray Lewis for example.) So does the NFL say you can come in, just leave your thug behavior and life behind?  Is one offense the end all- like apparently it will be for Ray Rice? Is there a sliding scale?

And of course, will the activists in the black community point out the obvious. If the NFL demands a squeaky clean record, then, much like the city of Ferguson, the NFL won’t find many qualified black players.  That equals racism, as you have noticed.

And then the fun begins.  Feminists and DV advocates will demand a good man play sports.  The fans and the black activists will scream racism, because far too many young black players grew up in the thug community and were in trouble.  It would take a full generation of up and coming players to adjust their personal lives BEFORE entering the league to shake out the troublemakers.  A kid that is ten now will have to realize if he wants to play he needs to stay clean- no drugs, no gangs, no fighting, no crime.  And that poor kid will have to do that in an environment where if he does try to stay clean he might end up dead at the hands of fellow blacks thinking he’s gone “Uncle Tom” on them.

That’s how it is in the real world.  So, what to do?  Do we continue to look the other way why a culture grows kids who think beating and abusing women is a rite of passage? Or do we hold the paycheck as the carrot, and living like a thug for the rest of your life being the stick?  And do we stop there in the NFL?

How about the law? Are judges and lawyers going to be held to the same career ending level of behavior?

An Alabama federal judge was arrested on a misdemeanor battery charge early Sunday after he allegedly hit his wife when she accused him of infidelity.

U.S. District Court Judge Mark Fuller, who was a registered Republican before he held the mallet, is known for sentencing former Alabama governor and Democrat Don Siegelman to prison on bribery charges.

But this time it’s Judge Mark Fuller, 55, who might have to take the stand.

According to the police report, the federal judge and his wife, Kelli Fuller, 41, both admit to an altercation but each blamed the other for the blowout that happened at the Ritz-Carlton hotel on Sunday.

Mark Fuller said he was watching television when his wife threw a drinking glass at him as she accused him of cheating with a law clerk in his Montgomery office. He told officers that he was defending himself when he grabbed her hair and threw her to the ground.

And that could be very true, which swings back into the feminism “treat me like a man” moment. A man screams at another man, throws a drink on him and then ends up on the ground stunned.  Nobody goes to jail.  Just saying…

And if you think it is a race thing, this is that judge.

But then there is THIS judge.  Remember, PC is an issue.

Lance Mason

CLEVELAND — Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Lance T. Mason has been indicted for an Aug. 2 attack on his wife, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy J. McGinty announced Tuesday afternoon.

A Cuyahoga County Grand Jury indicted Mason, 47, on two counts of kidnapping, a first-degree felony; three counts of felonious assault, a second-degree felony; one count of domestic violence, a first-degree misdemeanor; and two counts of endangering children, a first-degree misdemeanor.

But what did he do?

Court documents reflect that Mason hit his wife with his fists, slammed her head against the dashboard and bit her.

They have been married since 2005 and separated this past March.

In a 9-1-1 call, his wife told dispatchers he threw her out of the car, beat her and then drove off with the children.

Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court records show that Aisha Mason filed for divorce Aug. 4, citing extreme cruelty and gross neglect of duty.

Oh THAT!…. The old “beat the piss out of you and throw you from the car” trick.  Not good.  And then when they went to his house

Cleveland.com reported that authorities confiscated a cache of weapons from inside the judge’s home for “safe keeping”:

- About 2,300 live rounds of various calibers
- Nearly 500 shotgun slugs
- A Mossberg 12-gauge shotgun
- A Winchester shotgun
- A 50-shell shotgun belt
- A FNH P90 semi-automatic rifle still in the box
- A JLD Enterprises Inc. PTR-91 semi-automatic rifle with a scope
- A Smith & Wesson handgun
- A Springfield Armory .40 caliber-handgun
- A sword
- Four canisters of smoke grenades
- A KDH bulletproof vest
- A Jaguar knife

So should both men go to jail and lose their careers, their ability to make money and eat because they beat a woman?  Will the federal judge, who we can argue did quite a bit less in DV incident get treated different than the Ohio judge who just, well whupped himself into some legit jail time?

(PS- the FHN P90 is the same caliber that Hasan used in Fort Hood. If the judge decides to make a statement one day- he’ll do some serious damage.)

If that happens, will Al and Jessie show up, dragging Eric and Barack behind them to scream racism?  If NEITHER go to jail because of their protected profession, will the feminist scream holy hell?

If you’ll note our vaunted NOW gang isn’t yelling at Ray Rice as much as they are yelling at the big money and far safer target played by Roger Goodell.  This is a man trying to manage a herd of not so easy to manage people.  To blame him is easy. To understand his plight takes a little more effort.  He represents billions of dollars.  He is in his position because a bunch of very rich Type A personalities think he can manage their billion dollar investments.  He has to market to the entire nation a product of professional football players made up of all kinds of characters, good and bad.  And the bad ones who are special get a pass.  That’s the business.

Adrian Peterson is a good example of the professional thug.  He is a great football player.  A year or so ago, everybody felt bad when one of his kids died.  He went to the funeral, which as it turned out, was one of the few times he actually saw the kid.  Why? Because Adrian has baby mommas all over the nation.  When he quits playing million dollar football, he’s screwed.  Beating his kid with a switch caused him to get arrested, and his post football commentator opportunities to dwindle. (Again, is that fair?)

 

Baby No. 5, who’s living with her mom in Minnesota, is a 3-month-old daughter, decked out adorably in a purple-and-gold onesie proclaiming her love for the Vikings, her fast-and-loose father’s franchise, according to TMZ.com.

Peterson, 28, has admitted that he only saw the boy for the first time after the child was in a coma.

It was unclear if Peterson has met his little fan/daughter, but the baby’s mother said she was upset over the little boy’s death.

“Today has been a long day finding out my [daughter’s] brother passed away and knowing that she never even got to meet him,” the mother, a steak-house waitress, said on her Facebook page, according to TMZ.com. The Web site said the girl’s birth certificate lists Peterson as the last name.

But another woman has come forward to say she is the mother of another Peterson child — a 4-year-old boy — and that the running back has fathered enough children to run offense on seven-on-seven drills.

So what about that behavior- or is having kids out of wedlock okay?

As I write this, Jessie Jackson has already complained the NFL hiring three women to work on the DV problem wasn’t good enough, because they were white.

This-is-going-to-be-fun!

 

Posted in PC, politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

“The Benghazi Brief” from CTH.

I think it’s worth the link to here.  They have done an outstanding job picking out the details of Benghazi and putting together the narrative that makes sense.  Why we were there, why we didn’t supply the right amount of protection, why we stayed behind, and why the compound was attacked.

It is a combination of silly policies, foolish academic theories and liberal agendas, not to mention Obama’s desire to prove he was smarter than GWB by taking over a country (or two) without our boots on the ground. A “clean coup” if you will. If your remember, he did quite a bit of crowing about that after the initial ouster of Gaddafi.

But not so much nowadays. From their main website. (And remember, these are the guys who dug up all the bad stuff on Trayvon while the MSM and Obama’s DOJ were working hard to hide it!)

As most readers are now aware the Benghazi FUBAR is essentially two-thirds a result of bad policy, and one-third a result of terrible decisions as a result of that bad policy. To date nothing has surfaced to undermine the essential research we have shared within the Benghazi Brief.

Here is the basic outline.

March 2011 through Pre 9/11/12 attack: Who knew of Operation “Zero Footprint”?:

        • President Obama and Vice President Biden (both Dems)
        • Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Dem)
        • CIA Director Leon Panetta (March 2011 – June 2011)
        • *CIA Director General David Petraeus (?) (Sept 2011 – Nov 2012)
        • NATO Commander, James G Stavridis
        • White House National Security Advisor Tom Donilon (Dem)
        • White House National Security Spox Tommy Vietor (Donilon aide)
        • White House National Security Advisor John Brennan (Dem)
        • Speaker of the House John Boehner (Rep)
        • Minority Leader – Nancy Pelosi (Dem)
        • House Permanent Select Committee on Intel Chairman – Mike Rogers (Rep)
        • Minority House Intel Committee – Charles Ruppersberger (Dem)
        • Senate Minority Leader – Mitch McConnell (Rep)
        • Senate Majority Leader – Harry Reid (Dem)
        • Senate Intel Chair – Diane Feinstein (Dem)
        • Minority Senate Intel Committee – Saxby Chambliss (Rep)
        • [State Dept] U.S. Libyan Ambassador – Chris Stevens
        • [State Dept] U.S. Asst Secretary of State – Andrew Shapiro
        • [State Dept] Senior Head of U.S. Weapons Office – Mark Adams

And who knew after?

This Brings us to who knew about “Operation Zero Footprint” post Benghazi 9/11/12 attack:

To wit you can easily add:

        • CIA Director General David Petraeus
        • Adjunct, and Interim, CIA Director – Mike Morrel
        • U.S. Attorney General – Eric Holder
        • President Obama Advisor and now Chief of Staff – Denis McDonough
        • President Obama Advisor and now Treasury Sec – Jack Lew
        • President Obama Advisor and now National Security Advisor – Tony Blinkin
        • Former UN Ambassador and now Senior Nat Sec Advisor – Susan Rice
        • Chief White House Communications Director – Ben Rhodes

So they caution we may never get to the bottom of this.  1. It wasn’t illegal, just unwise.  2. A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE knew about it that now claim ignorance. Do you think Gowdy will chase down the “gang of eight” or McConnell?  Naahh…

But it does explain why everyone is eager to cover it up.  This was a monumental error in judgement that continued like an out of control train, crushing everything in its path- including the four killed on 9-11-12.   It can be argued that ISIS is an indirect result of Obama and his people’s desire to prove just how smart they were, at a great cost to an entire region.

Now the Pandora’s box is open, whether by accident or by bad design, and ISIS has jumped out to kill and maim and destroy.

That is on Obama and Hillary.  He’ll never admit it. She wants to be President.

Think about that.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Funny thing happened on the way to the war.

Just a short note.  Is it me, or is it a little ironic that Obama refused to leave a force behind in Iraq (and yes, we can argue about how much effort he put into it), even the five thousand or so that Iraq wanted, and now we are back in Iraq, and the estimates now coming in on how many people we’ll have to send there is about…five thousand?

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told Fox News Sunday that up to 5,000 American troops will be in Iraq by the end of the year.

He’s basing that estimate on the number of support troops it will take to carry out the air campaign against ISIS.

The Hill:

“In terms of intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, logistics, advice, command and control assistance, tactical air control parties, look I’m betting we’re up close 5,000 by the end of the year,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Hayden explained he doesn’t think they will be “combat maneuver units,” but predicted U.S. special operations forces could wind up on the ground in Syria. 

“I think we will at some point. It might be through covert action rather than more overt activity,” he said. “I actually think we will end up with small American special operations forces active within this broad theater in Syria and Iraq.” 

The most difficult plan to execute, Hayden said, will be training and arming the Free Syrian Army, or vetted moderate opposition groups in Syria. 

The U.S. would be “starting from zero” to create a “substantial” combat power, said Hayden, who served as director of the CIA under President George W. Bush and director of the National Security Agency under Bush and President Bill Clinton. 

“That is a result of an American policy not to help that group over the last few years,” he said.

 

Now it’s not like Obama wasn’t warned about what would happen if he left Iraq.

It’s not like the Left didn’t know.  They just didn’t care.

Idiots.

 

 

 

Posted in Iraq, politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Obama and the moment when people realize they are being led by “feckless” man.

“Feckless” belongs to Charles Krauthammer. He’s been pushing that description, along with narcissist, for a long time over at FOX.  To watch Charles, who is a veteran psychiatrist, deal with his colleagues while they try to figure out how come Obama is such a screw up is priceless.  Charles gives them the “Why can’t you SEE what is in front of your face!” look almost every time.  Why? Because to Charles, the verdict is in, and has been for a long time.

Obama is nuts.  Worse, he’s a weak, indecisive nuts.  Not the crazy, “woo-hoo look at me I’m a bird!” nuts, but the “I’m the greatest thing since Jesus” nuts.  The thing with these nuts is when the reality of the world hits them in the nose, instead of waking up, they retreat farther into the alternate reality they inhabits, sadly taking many of us with them.

Even the good people in the government are struggling to maintain a mask over the situation.  What are they going to do, tell the truth and let the world slip farther into a hole?

Here’s how psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, M.D., explains it in his classic best-seller, “People of the Lie”:

Malignant narcissism is characterized by an unsubmitted will. All adults who are mentally healthy submit themselves one way or another to something higher than themselves, be it God or truth or love or some other ideal. They do what God wants them to do rather than what they would desire. “Thy will, not mine, be done,” the God-submitted person says. They believe in what is true rather than what they would like to be true.

… In summary, to a greater or lesser degree, all mentally healthy individuals submit themselves to the demands of their own conscience. Not so the evil, however. In the conflict between their guilt and their will, it is the guilt that must go and the will that must win.

The reader will be struck by the extraordinary willfulness of evil people. They are men and women of obviously strong will, determined to have their own way. There is a remarkable power in the manner in which they attempt to control others.

As we will now see, Obama has been preparing to “control others” for a long time.

Two things are apparent now. The United States is a world power which needs to be engaged in the world’s activities in order to keep civilization on some kind of even keel.  The Left complains we can’t be the world’s policeman forever.  Agreed, but we need to accept the fact when we pull away from that responsibility, we have to accept that into the vacuum will flow evil.  And because we have allowed Europe to grow fat and lazy under our NATO umbrella, we cannot expect them to jump up and defend anything.  Their choice was to let us spend our money on armies while they spent their defense budget on the welfare state.  Obama wants to do that here, which means our armies are leaving, and the Europeans are going to have to make some hard decisions in the future.

One of those decisions the rest of the world has made is NOT to get caught in Obama’s version of reality.  In his world, he’s never wrong.  He is a strong leader never wavering from his commitments.  And he never loses.  In the REAL world, he is almost always wrong- a predicted outcome of liberal theories running into the real world reality of life, he is a “feckless” leader moving positions to match the events on the ground so he can say he was right all along- even though we SEE him move (remember…nuts).   And he runs from any conflict he can’t control.  You see, he may be nuts, but he’s not crazy. He lives in our world, he sees our world, he just doesn’t accept it because all of us are so stupid and can’t see how great he is.

This is why when he decides, because of bad optics to bomb ISIS, he can’t get any real help. But after admitting how the bad optics affected him, (Not how badly it affect Foley’s parents, a total disconnect that even people other than Krauthammer had to pause over.) Obama does it again.  The spanking he got from the first didn’t sink in because he believes that it is OUR fault for feeling that way.

It really is that simple.

What we see is his people supporting his decisions beyond what we would consider reasonable. Why is that? Can’t they see the hole?  Maybe not.  There has been a great deal written about corporate narcissism. Interesting stuff.  Here is one take.

Don’s now the Evan Pugh Professor, Smeal Chaired Professor of Management at the Smeal College of Business at Penn State.

A few years ago, Don decided to explore through a rigorous academic study just how damaging Narcissistic CEOs can be.  It turns out they can be amazingly damaging – to the point of, in some cases, eventually killing their companies.

Don just completed a follow-up study that offers even more clarity on the problems they cause.

Why study Narcissistic CEOs?

Besides the fact that we know lots of them exist out there today in business, Don explains it this way:

[O]rganizational researchers may not believe that executive narcissism is of much theoretical or practical significance.  They may see executive narcissism as incidental to organizational functioning – annoying to those who must endure it, grist for jokes about self-absorbed CEOs, but little more.  However, narcissism in the executive suite can be expected to have effects on substantive organizational outcomes, potentially including strategic grandiosity and submissive top management teams.  Narcissism can affect an executive’s choices in such areas as strategy, structure, and staffing.

Although we throw around the term narcissism easily, there’s been extensive study of the topic by psychologists over the years.  Hambrick, going from the psychological literature, defines a narcissist as someone showing the following four personality characteristics:

(1) Exploitativeness/Entitlement –> I insist upon getting the respect that is due to me;

(2) Leadership/Authority –> I like to be the center of attention;

(3) Superiority/Arrogance –> I am better than others; and

(4) Self-absorption/Self-admiration –> I am preoccupied with how extraordinary and special I am.

One of the key challenges Don faced in studying this topic is that it’s hard to approach a corporate CEO who you believe to be a narcissist and ask him to fill out a personality questionnaire to see how narcissistic he is.  You don’t get past his assistant with that request.  So, anyone studying the topic has to find unobtrusive ways at assessing how narcissistic someone actually is.

Luckily, Don’s a smart and creative guy.

Here’s a summary of what Don found in both studies with his co-author Arijit Chatterjee:

-  In the first study, the authors studied 111 CEOs in the computer and software industries between 1992 and 2004.  Coincidentally, I can think of a number of Narcissistic CEOs from the world of tech in recent years including Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Eric Schmidt, and John Chambers. (I’ll say more later about why I don’t think Steve Jobs was a Narcissistic CEO in the way that was defined in this study.)

- They created a 4 measure index of CEO narcissism which were:

  • The prominence (size) of the CEO’s photo in the annual report

  • CEO prominence (number of mentions) in company press releases

  • CEO’s use of first person singular pronouns in transcripts of public comments to shareholders

  • The gap between the CEO pay (salary, bonus, deferred income, stock grants, and stock options) and the pay of the 2nd highest paid executive

What did he find?  They kill companies.  Worse, they have loyal followers who enable the murder. Here is another take.

How does narcissism occur in the workplace?

What links patrimonial bureaucracy and totalitarian organizations? The answer is narcissism. Narcissism includes the narcissists and their codependents (or enablers/followers). Patrimonial bureaucracy occurs when employees become personally loyal to their superiors in such a way as to always feel the need to seek their approval before acting.

Corporate narcissism is spreading with epidemic proportions throughout the business world.1

Narcissists foster this type of behaviour in their subordinates, and peers if possible, who become codependents. It works well for the narcissist’s self-esteem, but not so well for the business. Narcissism in the workplace results in poor judgements that turn into costly decisions,2 ultimately resulting in negative long-term outcomes.3 As patrimonial bureaucracy spreads throughout the business, it becomes a totalitarian organization.

Corporate narcissism occurs when a narcissist becomes the leader (CEO) or a member of the senior management team and gathers an adequate mix of codependents around him (or her) to support his narcissistic behavior. This leads almost inevitably to a deterioration in the organization’s performance. Narcissists profess company loyalty but are only really committed to their own agendas, thus organization decisions are founded on the narcissists’ own interests rather than the interests of the organization as a whole, the various stakeholders, or the environment in which the organization operates.4

 

Huh….sound familiar?

And as we wind down our experience with the grand experiment of letting a far Left narcissist be President, I might want to remind you that Hillary is just another side of the same coin.

We need a break.  Find an adult with some humility and put him in charge.  (Or her if we can find one qualified BEYOND being a female!) Over at the NYTimes one writer talks about “The Great Unraveling.”  It is pretty bleak and ends up with this passage:

It was a time of disorientation. Nobody connected the dots or read Kipling on life’s few certainties: “The Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire / And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire.”

Until it was too late and people could see the Great Unraveling for what it was and what it had wrought.

Heady stuff.  What he doesn’t talk about is HOW IT BECAME UNRAVELED!  Who did it?

A hundred years of progressive agenda in Europe and the United States has left our nation, the one that leads the world, rudderless and amoral.  Until we face why it happened, we cannot fix it.  And the next column that author writes will be far darker.

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The “That doesn’t apply to me.” moment. An example of “bad policing” looks like when caused by other bad decisions and policies.

Big title, complicated and silly event.  Why?  Because this story is an example of how the police are often stuck doing something they don’t want to do, by other forces, often misguided.

Years ago, I told a story trying to illustrate how the cops are not the bad guys they are thought to be BECAUSE they are just tools reflecting the current environment and desires of the population.  A abbreviated version goes like this-

A young man hires on as a cop back in the early sixties in Alabama. All he wants to do is keep people safe.  But his boss tells him one day that the mayor wants the cops to get the dogs, water cannons, batons and shields and go and beat up a bunch of black people who are protesting.  He does because that is part of his job, to follow the orders of the society he represents.

Not happy, he quits and goes to another job in Chicago around 1968.  It’s a great job, a great city, but suddenly he gets a heads up from his sergeant, who tells him the Chief said the Mayor said that the cops needed to get their batons, shields and tear gas and beat up a bunch of smelly hippies protesting on the street.  He does, because that is what he was told to do by the powers at the time.

But he doesn’t like it at all. That is not what he wanted to be.  So he quits and goes to a job in Cleveland.  What could go wrong in Cleveland?  In 1972, he is minding his own business when he is told the Chief was told by the Mayor that the cops needed to get their batons, shields and tear gas and go and beat a bunch of white folks who were protesting blacks coming to their kids’ schools.  Now the irony of all of this is not wasted on the smart, still young cop.  But he suits up, because in between being asked to be the “strong arm” of society, he is actually helping people. It makes him feel good and saves countless lives.

But again, it doesn’t sit well.  So he sees the chance to go to another agency, one in California called San Fransisco.  It’s great.  Everything is fine, UNTIL he gets a call from his boss saying a group of gays are protesting and he needed to get his shield, baton and helmet.  At this point he’s just not sure why he is doing what he is doing.  But he goes. It’s the tradeoff he has made to do some good when he can.  That’s just a cop’s life.

Why?  Because the police are a reflection of how the people want to be managed. They either demand it (murder is wrong- arrest the fiend!), suggest it (speeding IS bad, you need to stop me on occasion), or allow it without comment (the millions of regulations and rules created by unelected bureaucrats).

In the end, the face of the law is that poor schmuck in a uniform. He/She may love the power (a bad thing) or consider it a necessary burden that helps get a job done (a good thing).  He may be smart or a bit slow, or quick tempered or steady as a rock. The point is he is just like you, being asked to do things you don’t want to do.

Sometimes he runs into a person, usually it is a young person or a person of color with an entitlement bent, who just doesn’t realize the rules DO apply to them.

HOUSTON — The day after HISD police officers wrestled a 10th grade girl to the hallway floor of Sam Houston High School, the girl and her family protested in front of the campus demanding an investigation and an apology.

In cell phone video first aired on KHOU Tuesday night, three HISD police officers surround Ixel Perez, two of them have her pinned to the floor face down. One officer has his knee pressed to the side of her head.

“Both of the cops just tackled her down to the floor. They put her knee on her head and after that they just arrested her, took her phone,” said student Gustavo Lucio who took the video on his cell phone. “The cop just said you can’t use your phone and after that, no words no nothing, just actions, grabbed her, threw her down.”

“It was embarrassing,” said Perez outside the high school Wednesday morning.

Boy, sounds bad, but wait, there is more.

Perez, with her mom and her brother by her side, described the chain of events that led to the officers wrestling her to the floor.

She says her reading teacher caught her using her cell phone in class, which is against school rules, and told her to go to the hallway. That’s where Perez says she was confronted by an assistant principal who demanded she relinquish the phone. Students caught using phones in class are required to turn them over to school administrators and then retrieve them at the end of the school day, for a fee.

“I just didn’t want to give up my phone,” said Perez who said she was talking to her mom who suffers from medical conditions. Perez said she was trying to make sure her mom was OK.

“She asked me for the phone and I didn’t want to give it to her, because I was scared. I ended up walking down the stairs trying to get away from the AP (assistant principal) and then she had already called the cops.”

The HISD resource officers also demanded she hang up the phone and hand it to them. Perez admitted she refused again.

‘He grabbed my hand, one of them was right here, one grabbed my hand, I didn’t want to let go of my phone because I was on the phone with mom,” she said.

Perez was detained. Her mom says she was turned away when she rushed to the school to make sure her daughter was OK. And as of Wednesday morning Perez said school officials had not returned her cell phone, in lieu of a $15 fee she would need to pay.

“We all know it was wrong,” said Perez’ brother Chris Cardenas. “It doesn’t take three cops to take down one teenage girl, especially a 70-pound teenage girl!”

Well, actually it does when the seventy pound girl is being a bitch about it.  Let’s go over the problem step by step to illustrate how dumb this whole mess is.

1. Is it illegal for a girl in school to have a cellphone? We know how obsessed they are with them, so trying to teach them anything while Face Book updates and tweets are coming in would be a waste.  So, the administration (not the cops, not the elected officials) decide to make a rule everybody understands- including this girl.  A good idea?  Legal to charge a fee to get back personal property? (I’m not sure about that- sounds a little like extortion. Here is some questions an enterprising reporter should ask- “Where does that money go? Is there an accounting of it? Where is the statute that allows seizure of personal property and its return for a fee?) However, it is up to the people running the place and who is in charge of them.  I will state in the past I’ve dealt with the little Nazis who run schools.  Talk about an assumption of power by a group of people who should have no power!  I had a SRO actually warn me the principle BELIEVED he was running the place like a kingdom, HIS kingdom. But that is what citizens ALLOW to happen, an argument for another day.

2. The girl was asked by two sources of authority to stop violating a rule she knew was a violation, and she refused.  That is the “It doesn’t apply to ME!” syndrome cops deal with all the time. At any time she could have complied. She chose not to.

teentackled

One of the most difficult types to deal with. An outraged teenage girl!

3. The SRO works for the school.  He is actually the legal arm of the principle, the same guy/gal who thinks he really is a king. I’ve had SROs run interference for the principle against me, while I was conducting a lawful investigation.  A move I quickly corrected.  But it shows how easy things can go sideways.  The police tell her to stop being a spoiled child (in essence at least) and she again refuses.

But is it against the law?  At this point yes.  School administrators have the responsibility to enforce their rules.  Those rules may not be legal or ethic or even right. But they are rules.  However, when the police show up and order you to do something, a good citizen complies IF that order doesn’t put anyone in jeopardy.  You may disagree, you may want to protest- and can as you are complying, you can file a complaint later- and the girl should have.  But at the time, when told to comply a good citizen does.  A kid thinking she has a “right” to do something else is going to get jammed up.

4. “He grabbed my phone and I didn’t want to give it up.”  At this point silly is taking over. It is no longer a case of phones or rules or anything outside a young female teenager going nuts over something as silly as a phone.  (Which again points to why the schools put limits on them having phones! I swear if you took the phones away from teenagers, they would look like fish flopping on the riverbank gasping for air!)

The cops have no choice- their “bosses” told them to get that phone and probably take the girl to the office. The girl decides THIS is the hill she is going to make her stand, and we have the classic irresistible force meeting the immovable object standoff.  Well, not really the cops pounce on her and that is that.

Except for the blowback that is coming.  The school says we need to keep students safe.  I’m not sure how jamming that girl up fits the description, but it is the standard bumper sticker statement that translates to “move along, nothing to see here.”  But there is.  The police officers will get sued.  They did nothing wrong.  The school will get sued, you can argue they could have done things differently- like escort the girl and her phone to the office, call the mom- who is apparently near death but can still get to the school in a hurry??

And the media will pick this low hanging fruit trying to make a Hispanic version of Ferguson out of it, so they can report more “outrage”.

And the police get more of a bad rap.

All over a freaking teenager and a phone.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment