SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : How Quickly Can Obama Totally Destroy the US? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/16/2013 5:11:25 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
HuffPost Sees Mass Exodus as More Users Reject New Comment System

The Epoch Times ^ | December 15, 2013 | Zachary Stieber


While there’s no way to confirm hard numbers, it seems thousands of users if not more, are leaving the Huffington Post (also known as HuffPost) and its previously robust community because of the newly introduced comment system.

The new system requires people to sign in through Facebook if they want to comment on any of the stories. It also requires Facebook verification, which requires a cell phone number.

(Excerpt) Read more at theepochtimes.com ...



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/18/2013 4:10:48 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Advisers Urging CA's Jerry Brown to Run For President...



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/18/2013 4:28:45 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
CNN host orders producers to cut Larry Klayman from screen during interview
...
......................................................................................................................................................

Larry Klayman in huge CNN smackdown


By TAL KOPAN | 12/18/13

Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman got into an argument on CNN with host Don Lemon and legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin when he was brought on to discuss his victory this week in a lawsuit challenging NSA surveillance, resulting in Lemon cutting him off the screen and Klayman comparing Lemon to disgraced former MSNBC host Martin Bashir.

Klayman’s appearance Tuesday night on CNN was preceded by a profile of him that included a quotation from a former George W. Bush staffer saying his lawsuits were about “fighting for himself and his own, in my opinion, delusions of grandeur.”

When Klayman was brought into the conversation, he came out firing. “I think it is important to note that you’re a big supporter of Obama,” Klayman said to Lemon. “That you have favored him in every respect. You have to try to do a hit piece to diminish a very important decision.”

Lemon interjected to clarify that Klayman was speaking about him personally, saying, “None of that is true, but go on.”

“Well, it is true. I’ve watched you for many years. You’re an ultra-leftist and you’re a big supporter of Obama,” Klayman said. “Let’s talk about the NSA, let’s not talk about Larry Klayman. This victory is for the American people. It wasn’t for me. And you, as somebody from the left … should appreciate that you don’t have a police state in this country that’s going to be able to intimidate Americans to chill their free speech rights.”

Lemon again protested the characterization, saying that only he knows his political affiliation, over interruptions from Klayman, prompting the host to threaten to cut Klayman’s mic. He then brought on Toobin, CNN’s legal analyst, who slammed Klayman as a “lunatic.”

“This case is based on Larry Klayman’s tin-foil hat paranoia about the NSA being after him. He had some fantasy that the NSA was after him. This case is not about Larry Klayman, it’s about the metadata program that affects everybody, but the idea that Larry Klayman is the representative is simply outrageous,” Toobin said. “He is a professional litigant and lunatic who should not be a representative of the very important issues of this case.”

Klayman responded that Toobin should read the opinion and what the judge wrote.

“It’s not about me, Jeffrey, and the fact that you want to try to do a hit on me shows me that you’re not a serious person and, frankly, should not be doing legal commentary for CNN,” Klayman said. “I think you should read the complaint rather than shooting your mouth off. … This is a disgrace.”

“Oh, my gosh. Are you OK?” Lemon asked Klayman. The pair began to argue, and Lemon asked his producers to remove Klayman from the screen.

After allowing Toobin to speak about the case, Lemon brought Klayman in for the last word “to show you we’re going to be the bigger person.”

“The last word is you’re not the bigger people. Don’t kid anybody,” Klayman said. “Let anybody watch this and see that CNN removes you from the screen when it doesn’t like what you think. You know what, you’re not CNN, Don, and Toobin, you’re not CNN. CNN is a reputable organization, but you have not acted in a respectful way, and it’s in fact disgraceful. You’re more like Martin Bashir.”

Klayman was the plaintiff in a lawsuit decided Monday in which a judge ruled the NSA’s surveillance program is likely to be unconstitutional. The decision is arguably the biggest victory of a long career as a gadfly for Klayman, who has been a character in Washington since the 1990s.

Read more: politico.com



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/18/2013 5:22:26 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Democrat Senator Schumer: Veterans Should Take a Pay Cut But Congress Should Not

................................................................................................
Right Wing News ^ | 12/18/13




To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/20/2013 11:23:09 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/20/2013 12:03:39 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/21/2013 8:33:28 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2014, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other countries nor the only "America" in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishes.



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/21/2013 3:11:01 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
THE FOUR CARJACKERS WHO KILLED NJ LAWYER

............................................................................................................................................

Karif FordHanif Thompson

rKevin RobertsBasim Henry

............................................................................

4 charged in NJ carjack execution of lawyer protecting his wife


Bail was set at $2 million for Ford, Henry, Roberts and Thompson in the point-blank shooting of Dustin Friedland, 30, as his wife looked on.



To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/21/2013 10:23:15 PM
From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
 

Houston grand jury won’t indict abortionist for twisting heads off newborn babies


..........................................................................................
Life Site News ^ | Operation Rescue staff








The house where Osama bin Laden was finally hunted down. SAEED SHAH — MCT





















Related Stories:
  • Bin Laden film leak was referred to Justice; leaker top Obama official
  • Senators: Did CIA tell 'Zero Dark Thirty' filmmakers torture led to bin Laden?


  • WASHINGTON — More than two years after sensitive information about the Osama bin Laden raid was disclosed to Hollywood filmmakers, Pentagon and CIA investigations haven’t publicly held anyone accountable despite internal findings that the leakers were former CIA Director Leon Panetta and the Defense Department’s top intelligence official.

    Instead, the Pentagon Inspector General’s Office is working to root out who might have disclosed the findings on Panetta and Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael Vickers to a nonprofit watchdog group and to McClatchy.

    While the information wasn’t classified, the inspector general’s office has pursued the new inquiry aggressively, grilling its own investigators, as well as the former director of its whistle-blowing unit, according to several people, including a congressional aide. They requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issues surrounding the 2012 movie “Zero Dark Thirty.”

    “I’m concerned that the inspector general’s office is barking up the wrong tree,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who long has championed government whistle-blowing. “There’s no doubt they should look into the ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ fiasco, but they should focus on holding people accountable for leaking highly classified operational material instead of wasting time and money investigating who leaked the report.”

    The handling of the disclosures of protected information to the makers of “Zero Dark Thirty,” the award-winning account of the U.S. hunt for bin Laden, points up an apparent double standard in President Barack Obama’s unprecedented crackdown on unauthorized leaks.

    Disclosures by lower-level officials have been vigorously pursued. For example, seven Navy SEALs were reprimanded for disclosing classified material to the makers of a military video game. Moreover, the administration has prosecuted a record number of intelligence community personnel for leaking.

    Rarely, however, has the administration taken criminal action against senior officials for leaking.

    A central pillar of the crackdown – labeled the Insider Threat Program by the administration – aims to use behavioral profiling and tips from co-workers to identify federal employees who someday might make unauthorized disclosures.

    Under the program, the Defense Department equates leaking to the news media with spying. Many of those who’ve been targeted, however, contend that they’re compelled to leak about official malfeasance because the government’s whistle-blower protection system doesn’t work, a defense raised by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

    The handling of the “Zero Dark Thirty” disclosures “suggests that some leaks are tolerated depending on who makes them,” said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, a conservative nonprofit group that’s pressed Republican and Democratic administrations for greater transparency. “Snowden should call his lawyer. This is exactly what he’s talking about.”

    Among the few high-profile leak cases the administration is known to have pursued are two that involve retired four-star generals.

    The FBI launched an investigation more than a year ago into allegations that Panetta’s successor at the CIA, retired Army Gen. David Petraeus, had disclosed classified material to his former paramour. The FBI and Petraeus’ lawyer refused to comment on the status of the case. A former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, retired Marine Gen. James Cartwright, reportedly lost his security clearance amid allegations that he’d leaked information on Iran to The New York Times. The status of any criminal investigation remains unclear.

    In the bin Laden matter, Panetta himself exhorted intelligence and military personnel involved in the operation on the need to protect secrets at an awards ceremony at CIA headquarters. “In a sensitive operation like this, one leak – one leak – would have undermined the entire operation,” he said at the June 24, 2011, event.

    “Everyone involved held this information tight,” he continued, according to a declassified transcript of the speech that Judicial Watch obtained in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. “It is a tribute to you that you kept this secret, and as a result this mission was accomplished.”

    It was in his speech that Panetta disclosed classified information to Mark Boal, the “Zero Dark Thirty” screenwriter. Boal was the only audience member who didn’t have top-secret clearance.

    The speech contained classified NSA intelligence and top-secret military information, including the protected identity of the ground commander of the Navy SEAL unit that staged the bin Laden raid, according to a Defense Department Inspector General’s Office document that Judicial Watch obtained.

    Members of the raiding party sat in the front row in uniform, wearing name tags. They and the then-commander of U.S. Joint Special Operations Command, Adm. William H. McRaven, were “surprised and shocked” that a Hollywood screenwriter had been invited to the top-secret event, said a draft report on the Pentagon Inspector General’s Office probe.

    The draft report was obtained by the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit watchdog group. The Pentagon Inspector General’s Office internal leak inquiry is partly aimed at determining whether any of its personnel slipped the document to the organization, said the people familiar with the matter.

    The issue is controversial because the draft report’s findings on Panetta – who’d become the secretary of defense by the time the document was completed – were sanitized from the final version that was released to the public eight months later. Instead, the findings were declared top-secret and sent to the CIA inspector general for “appropriate action,” according to a declassified document obtained by Judicial Watch.

    CIA Inspector General David Buckley, however, recused himself from the matter for unknown reasons, according to former and current U.S. officials, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation. One possible explanation for Buckley’s recusal might have been that he witnessed the disclosures. He was listed as attending Panetta’s speech.

    Whatever the reason, the only action Buckley’s office is known to have taken was reviewing policies that guide the CIA’s engagement with the entertainment industry.

    Nor was any known action taken after a review by the CIA’s Office of Security that also concluded that “Boal was exposed to classified information by the DCIA (Panetta) comments,” according to an Oct. 22, 2012, document that Judicial Watch obtained.

    Buckley referred McClatchy for comment to the CIA Office of Public Affairs. It declined to say anything, as did the Pentagon Inspector General’s Office.

    Panetta didn’t respond to a request for comment. He recently told The Associated Press that he didn’t know Boal was in the audience.

    The other facet of the Pentagon Inspector General’s Office internal leak inquiry is aimed at determining whether anyone in the office was a source for a Dec. 17, 2012, McClatchy report, said the people familiar with the matter.

    McClatchy’s story said the inspector general’s office found that Vickers had disclosed the protected name of a U.S. Special Operations Forces officer who helped plan the bin Laden raid to Boal and Kathryn Bigelow, the film’s director, and referred the case to the Justice Department. No final determination of the issue has been announced.

    Like the findings on Panetta, the conclusion that Vickers had leaked restricted information was part of the draft Pentagon inspector general’s report but was sanitized from the final version. At the time, Vickers was Panetta’s leading choice to replace him as CIA director.

    Several current and former officials who are familiar with the investigations saw the excising of the findings on Panetta and Vickers from the final Pentagon Inspector General’s Report and the inaction of Buckley and his office as part of a pattern of politically driven efforts to shield senior officials.

    These current and former officials, who also requested anonymity to avoid retaliation, said those efforts began after Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., first asked the Pentagon and CIA inspectors general to investigate a report that the administration had provided Bigelow and Boal “top-level access” to details of the bin Laden raid.

    The CIA and Pentagon inspectors general were hesitant to get involved, according to the officials.

    During an initial meeting between the pair and investigators from their offices, Buckley expressed reluctance about launching a full-blown investigation, saying he wanted to stick to a review of CIA policy on cooperating with the entertainment industry, said an official who attended the session.

    Buckley later recused himself from the matter

    Then-acting Pentagon Inspector General Lynne M. Halbrooks, meanwhile, found herself smack in the middle of the controversy at an inopportune moment. Halbrooks wanted to be considered for the post permanently, according to the current and former officials. Her main competitor was Buckley. Neither got the permanent post, and Halbrooks returned this year to her position as the principal deputy inspector general.

    Nonetheless, she authorized an investigation in December 2011, which by several accounts was aggressively pursued. The probe was approaching completion the following November, when investigators reviewed a set of talking points in preparation of the imminent release of a final report, according to documents McClatchy obtained.

    Halbrooks, however, stepped in, telling several officials overseeing the inquiry that the report wouldn’t be released, igniting a dispute.

    As the disagreement escalated, Daniel Meyer, who was then Halbrooks’ director of whistle-blowing, accompanied one of her staffers to a meeting on Capitol Hill at which the staffer told congressional aides that Halbrooks and her general counsel, Henry Shelley Jr., were trying to slow-roll the investigation until Panetta left office.

    Meyer is among those who’ve been questioned in the Pentagon inspector general’s internal leak investigation.

    The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, where Meyer now works as the executive director for intelligence community whistle-blowing, didn’t respond to a request to speak with him.

    In his three years as the Pentagon inspector general whistle-blower advocate, Meyer became well-known for aggressively investigating whistle-blower allegations. In 1990, Meyer himself became a whistle-blower as a naval officer when he told the Senate Armed Services Committee about alleged misconduct by the investigators who were looking into an explosion aboard the battleship Iowa.

    No final report had been released when the Project on Government Oversight published on June 4 the draft containing the findings that Panetta and Vickers had released restricted information. The final version, from which those conclusions had been deleted, was released June 14.

    “There needs to be a more serious investigation of what went on here,” said Fitton of Judicial Watch. “These investigations appear to be haphazard and hapless. It looks like the whole thing was blowing up, and rather than do a serious investigation, these agencies went into cover-up mode.”



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/25/2013 12:29:00 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Joy — that’s at the heart of this Christmas season we are beginning to celebrate.

    .
    .

    Outrage as Army bans word ‘Christmas’: ‘Treats pornography better than it does Christmas’

    VA hospital refuses to accept 'Merry Christmas' cards
    foxnews.com

    Augusta (GA) VA hospital bans Christmas carols
    The State.com ^

    Outrage after school removes all references to God in 'Silent Night'


    MICHELLE O: OBAMACARE A HOLIDAY TREAT...


    Comedian Bob Newhart cancels show for Catholic group after gay activist pressure
    Life Site News ^

    Parents Upset After School Removes Religious Lyrics From 'Silent Night'...

    Britain Grovels Further for Sharia
    dailymail.co.uk

    McDonald’s To Pay $50,000 To Muslim Employee In Discrimination Lawsuit


    Truth Not Welcome in Pajama Boy America

    Democrat Senator Schumer: Veterans Should Take a Pay Cut But Congress Should Not


    Schumer: Veterans Must Face Budget Cuts, Too

    VETS TAKE THE CUTS...

    Disabled military retirees NOT exempt...


    Marine faces dishonorable discharge after WARNING soldiers of Taliban insider attack that killed 3 US soldiers
    atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com

    Obama commutes drug sentence of Deval Patrick’s first cousin

    Obama commuted sentence of Deval Patrick kin
    politico.com

    Children taking antipsychotics triples in decade...




    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/28/2013 6:51:47 PM
    From: joseffy1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    The1Stockman

      Respond to of 16547
     
    House Report: Al Qaeda in Maghreb and Al Qaeda-Linked Ansar al-Sharia Did Benghazi

    .....................................................................................
    CNS ^ | April 23, 2013 | Terence P. Jeffrey

    House Report: Al Qaeda in Maghreb and Al Qaeda-Linked Ansar al-Sharia Did Benghazi


    The burnt-out interior of a building at the U.S. State Department Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 13, 2012. (AP Photo/Mohammed Hannon)

    (CNSNews.com) - A congressional report released Tuesday on the terrorist attack on the U.S. State Department compound in Benghazi, Libya says there is “ample evidence that the attack was planned and intentional” and that al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and al Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Sharia joined in carrying it out.

    The report also notes that al Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Sharia took credit for the attack while it was still unfolding, and that the State Department reported this at the time to other government agencies, including the White House.

    “The volatile security environment erupted on September 11, 2012, when militias composed of al Qaeda-affiliated extremists attacked U.S. interests in Benghazi,” says the report.

    “The U.S. government immediately had information that the attacks were conducted by al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists, yet Administration officials downplayed those connections, and focused on the idea that provocation for violence resulted from a YouTube video,” says the report that was produced by the Republican staffs of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the House Judiciary Committee, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and the House Armed Services Committee.

    “The attackers were members of extremist groups, including the Libya-based Ansar al-Sharia (AAS) and al Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)," says the report.

    The report includes a timeline of the attack, which began at 9:42 p.m. Benghazi time or 3:42 p.m. Washington, D.C. time. The timeline says attackers from unspecified “other groups” also joined with members of Ansar al-Sharia and Al Qaeda in the Maghreb in conducting the attack.

    “The attack begins at the TMF [State Department Temporary Mission Facility] in Benghazi,” the timeline starts. “Dozens of lightly armed men approached the TMF, quickly and deliberately breached the front gate, and set fire to the guard house and main diplomatic building. The attackers included members of Libya-based Ansar al-Sharia (AAS) and al Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), among other groups.”

    The report says the State Department quickly notified the White House that the attack was taking place in Benghazi, and that within two hours of the start of the attack the department was telling the White House that al Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Sharia was claiming responsibility for it.

    “In an 'Ops Alert' issued shortly after the attack began, the State Department Operations Center notified senior Department officials, the White House Situation Room, and others, that the Benghazi compound was under attack and that 'approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well,’” said the report.

    “Two hours later, the Operations Center issued an alert that al-Qa’ida linked Ansar al-Sharia (AAS) claimed responsibility for the attack and had called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli,” said the report. “Neither alert mentioned that there had been a protest at the location of the attacks. Further, Administration documents provided to the Committees show that there was ample evidence that the attack was planned and intentional. The coordinated, complex, and deadly attack on the [CIA’s] Annex [down the road from the State Department mission]--that included sophisticated weapons--is perhaps the strongest evidence that the attacks were not spontaneous. “

    “The U.S. government knew immediately that the attacks constituted an act of terror,” says the report.

    The report says that the Obama administration purged references to al Qaeda from the talking points that U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice used when she appeared on Sept. 16 on five Sunday talks shows to discuss the Benghazi attacks.

    “After the attacks, the Administration perpetuated a deliberately misleading and incomplete narrative that the violence grew out of a demonstration caused by a YouTube video,” says the report. "The Administration consciously decided not to discuss extremist involvement or previous attacks against Western interests in Benghazi."

    “To protect the State Department, the Administration deliberately removed references to al Qaeda-linked groups and previous attacks in Benghazi in the talking points used by Ambassador Rice, thereby perpetuating the deliberately misleading and incomplete narrative that the attacks evolved from a demonstration caused by a YouTube video,” says the report.

    The reports criticizes the administration for responding to the attack as a criminal event requiring an FBI investigation rather than as an act of terrorism against the United States requiring a military response.

    “It was only after the September 11, 2001 attacks, when the United States responded to terrorism with military force, that the government successfully brought some of the perpetrators of those attacks and the previous attacks to justice,” the report concludes. “Terrorists who successfully attack U.S. interests are not deterred by criminal investigations.”

    - See more at: cnsnews.com



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)12/30/2013 2:24:09 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    How the New York Times tried to airbrush al Qaeda out of Benghazi

    Power Line by Paul Mirengoff

    Yesterday, in discussing the New York Times’ claim that, as far as it can tell, neither al Qaeda nor any other international terrorist group had a role in the Benghazi attack, I wrote:

    The Times chooses to focus on a militia leader named Ahmed Abu Khattala, whom it characterizes as “an erratic extremist” and very much his own man. But I believe that other leaders connected to the attack have been tied to al Qaeda or its affiliates. I will try to document this in a future post.

    For documentation, I turn (as I expected) to the invaluable Tom Joscelyn:

    [The Times] piece totals more than 7,000 words and yet [it] fingers only one suspect out of the dozens who took part in the attack. Another suspect, an ex-Guantanamo detainee, is briefly mentioned, but only then to dismiss the notion of his involvement.

    Left out of the Times’s account are the many leads tying the attackers to al Qaeda’s international network.

    For instance, there is no mention of Muhammad Jamal al Kashef, an Egyptian. This is odd, for many reasons.

    On October 29, 2012 three other New York Times journalists reported that Jamal’s network, in addition to a known al Qaeda branch (al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb), was directly involved in the assault. The Times reported (emphasis added): “Three Congressional investigations and a State Department inquiry are now examining the attack, which American officials said included participants from Ansar al-Shariah, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the Muhammad Jamal network, a militant group in Egypt.”

    Jamal was trained by al Qaeda in the late 1980s, and has been loyal to Ayman al Zawahiri since at least the 1990s. He served as a commander in the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), a terrorist group headed by Zawahiri that merged with bin Laden’s enterprise.Jamal left prison in 2011 and quickly got back to work.

    The Egyptian press has published some of Jamal’s letters to Zawahiri. In the letters, which were written in 2011 and 2012, Jamal is extremely deferential to Zawahiri. Jamal heaps praise on Zawahiri, seeking the al Qaeda master’s guidance and additional support. Jamal even mentions that he attempted to visit Zawahiri in person, but failed to do so because of restrictions on his travel. So, Jamal writes, he sent an emissary instead.

    Jamal’s letters read like status reports. He writes that he has received financing from al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), but requires additional funds to purchase more weaponry. Jamal also explains that he had formed “groups for us inside Sinai” and had established “an advanced base outside Egypt in Libya to take advantage of the conditions in Libya after the revolution.”

    Jamal’s operations inside the Sinai and Libya included training camps. Some of the trainees from those camps took part in the Benghazi attack.

    Since the New York Times and other press outlets first reported on the Jamal network’s involvement, both the U.S. State Department and the United Nations have designated Jamal and his subordinates as terrorists. Both the U.S. and UN designations tie Jamal’s network directly to al Qaeda. . . .

    While the State Department’s designation does not mention the Jamal network’s participation in the Benghazi attack, the UN’s designation does. The UN noted that both Jamal and members of his network are “[r]eported to be involved in the attack on the United States Mission in Benghazi, Libya, on 11 Sep. 2012.”

    The evidence of the Jamal network’s involvement in Benghazi is enough to discredit The Times’ revisionist claim that international terrorist organizations connected with al Qaeda were not involved in the attack. But Jamal isn’t the only key Benghazi suspect with significant ties to al Qaeda. According to Joscelyn:

    Another suspect is Faraj al-Shibli, a Libyan who, according to U.S. intelligence officials contacted by The Weekly Standard, served as Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard during the 1990s. According to these same officials, al-Shibli is suspected of bringing materials from the Benghazi compound to senior al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan. Al-Shibli was detained in Pakistan and then Libya. Al Shibli did not immediately admit his involvement in the Benghazi attacks and was subsequently released. But U.S. officials continue to believe he played a role.

    If Times reporter David Kirkpatrick truly found “no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the [Benghazi] assault,” this must be because he spent little effort to uncover any.

    credit fubho



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)1/13/2014 4:03:44 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Harry Reid Bagman Asks for Leniency

    ............................................................................

    Former powerbroker asks Nevada State Bar for leniency
    KSNV-TV ^ | 1/13/2014 | AP


    RENO (AP) — Former powerbroker Harvey Whittemore told a Nevada State Bar disciplinary panel that he did not think he broke the law when he used family and friends as "straw donors" to pump more than $130,000 into the campaign of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in 2007.

    Whittemore, who was convicted last year of violating campaign finance laws and sentenced to two years in prison, is seeking leniency from the panel.


    (Excerpt) Read more at mynews3.com ...



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)1/15/2014 2:42:45 PM
    From: joseffy1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    Cage Rattler

      Respond to of 16547
     
    One Month After JFK’s Murder, Former President Truman Called For Abolishing CIA
    International Business News ^ | January 13, 2014 | Joseph Lazzaro



    One month to the day after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas, former President Harry Truman recommended that the U.S. abolish the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

    In an op-ed column published in the Washington Post on Dec. 22, 1963, Truman never linked the CIA to President Kennedy’s murder, but the timing of the explicit and strongly worded column and complaint implied a connection.



    “For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment,” Truman wrote. “It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.”



    Truman continued:

    “This quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue -- and subject for cold war enemy propaganda,” the former president wrote.

    Truman: No Distant Observer

    Truman was no distant, uninformed public policy professional when it came to the CIA: In July 1947, then-President Truman signed into law the legislation that created the agency, which replaced the former U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS).

    In 1944, William J. Donovan, the OSS’ creator, suggested to President Franklin D. Roosevelt that the nation should create a new, centralized organization/agency directly supervised by the president -- "which will procure intelligence both by overt and covert methods and will at the same time provide intelligence guidance, determine national intelligence objectives, and correlate the intelligence material collected by all government agencies."

    Donovan also proposed that the new agency should have authority to conduct “subversive operations abroad.”

    In December 1963, Truman articulated in no uncertain terms what he thought of the CIA’s covert operations dimension:

    Truman said they should “be terminated.”

    Later, in 1964, Truman would reiterate his call for removing covert operations from the CIA in a letter to Look magazine -- underscoring that he never intended the CIA to get involved in “strange activities” when he signed the legislation creating the institution.

    Further, Truman is not the only high-profile U.S. public official to call for the abolition of the CIA’s operational activities. Former U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., wanted to abolish the agency and transfer its intelligence functions to appropriate existing U.S. government departments. For example, weapons intelligence would be under the U.S. Department of Defense, political intelligence under the State Department and non-public economic intelligence under the Commerce Department.

    What’s more, placing intelligence gathering and covert operations in separate government institutions helps prevent the government’s covert operations wing from influencing or distorting the intelligence-gathering wing’s reports to support its own goals. This separation addresses the inherent or at least potential conflict-of-interest problem that occurs when one institution is home to both research and operations functions.

    Equally significant, placing the covert operations function in the U.S. Department of Defense would give the president more direct oversight of those operations than if they remain with the CIA. In other words, covert operations as part of the U.S. DOD -- whose secretary of defense regularly speaks with the president -- would improve their visibility and accountability via more-frequent policy reviews. It would also make it harder for an improvisational or rogue/unauthorized group in the department to create a “shadow operation” -- literally, an unauthorized covert foreign policy or para-military policy.

    Truman: An Agency For Intelligence-Gathering Only

    The risk of the potential creation of covert operations and para-military policies not authorized by and hidden from the U.S. president is at the core of Truman’s Dec. 1963 complaint about the CIA: By that point, the CIA had created numerous covert operations, missions and projects -- the sort of “strange activities” in which Truman never intended the CIA to get involved.

    In other words, to Truman in Dec. 1963, the CIA was an agency that had run amok, and although the former president could have called for the end of the CIA’s operational duties at any time, the fact that he timed his complaint to be published one month after the JFK assassination is significant. At minimum, Truman’s column is an expression of his concern about a CIA that had strayed far from its creators’ intent. At maximum, Truman’s column -- published when a stunned nation was still grieving and exhibiting shock and confusion over JFK’s death, and as suspicions of a plot reverberated across America -- is one of the earliest expressions of doubt concerning the government's official narrative that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and unaided to assassinate President Kennedy.

    Further, the year-later release of the Warren Commission’s report on the JFK assassination -- which concluded that Oswald had acted alone in killing Kennedy with three rifle shots, and that Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby had acted alone in killing Oswald two days after Oswald’s arrest -- did little to dispel public concern that the report was implausible and unconvincing. In the months and immediate years that followed, assassination researchers would rebuke the Warren Commission for its grossly slipshod investigation procedures -- particularly for failing to collect 100 percent of the evidence, and for failing to analyze evidence it had collected -- and for other serious violations of basic protocols for criminal investigations.

    Those doubts by the American people and by assassination researchers about the lone-gunman conclusion would increase in 1978, when a second investigation, the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), concluded that President Kennedy was very likely assassinated as a result of a plot/conspiracy. However, the committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.

    Making Public JFK Assassination Files Held By The CIA Would Clarify Much

    Further, as noted, Truman’s complaint is not an indictment of the CIA in the aftermath of the tragedy that occurred in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963 -- one of the darkest and most ignominious days in the nation’s history -- a day that changed the trajectory of both U.S. domestic and foreign policy.

    That said, the U.S. intelligence community in general, and the Central Intelligence Agency specifically, could resolve many of the questions/anomalies that form the mystery at the center of this case -- and fill in the dozens of gaps left by the Warren Commission -- by making public more than 1,100 classified files related to the JFK assassination.

    In particular, when made public, the classified files -- of CIA Officer George Joannides; CIA Officer David Atlee Philips, who was involved in pre-assassination surveillance of Oswald; Birch D O’Neal, who as counter-intelligence head of the CIA, opened a file on defector Oswald; and the files of CIA Officers Howard Hunt, William King Harvey, Anne Goodpasture, and David Sanchez Morales -- will help the nation determine what really happened in Dallas, who Oswald was and how the CIA handled Oswald’s file.

    However, the CIA says the Joannides’ files and the files of the CIA officers -- which the Agency said are “not believed relevant” to the JFK assassination -- must remain classified until at least 2017, and perhaps longer, due to U.S. national security. But the CIA’s national security claim has never been independently verified, according to JFKFacts.org Moderator Jefferson Morley.

    Morley v. CIA – An Attempt To Obtain The Full Truth

    Morley is the plaintiff in the ongoing Morley v. CIA suit, which seeks to make public Joannides’ classified files.

    In Morley’s suit, his attorney has responded to the CIA’s latest brief, on the issue of court fees. Having won on appeal twice, Morley argued that the standard practice of the U.S government paying court fees for a successful appeal should apply. The CIA countered that the litigation has not generated any significant new information, and therefore the government should not have to pay the court fees. The issue is now in the hands of U.S. Judge Richard Leon.

    It must be underscored that, to date, there is no smoking gun or incontrovertible evidence of a plot or conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, but there is a pattern of suspicious activity, along with a series of anomalies and a commonality of interests among key parties, that compel additional research and the release of non-public documents.

    Further, the CIA probably is not covering up some tectonic, systemic crisis-triggering secret about the assassination of President Kennedy, or even evidence of a colossal Agency operational failure that would prompt the American people to call for a dismantling of the national security state apparatus.

    However, until all of the JFK assassination files are made public, the pattern of suspicious activity, anomalies, and commonality of interests, along with the observations of the investigators and public officials -- including former President Harry Truman's Dec. 1963 call for the elimination of the CIA’s operational duties -- form a preponderance of evidence that strongly suggest that -- at minimum -- the American people do not know the full truth regarding the assassination of President Kennedy, and that the Agency is hiding something.

    TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Click to Add Topic
    KEYWORDS: cia; truman; Click to Add Keyword
    [ Report Abuse | Bookmark ]

    Interesting read. Truman shut down the old WWII OSS. Then realized his problem and brought it back as the CIA. Then he saw what the CIA was becoming.

    1 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:24:56 PM by RetiredArmy
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: RetiredArmy
    I haven't read the entire post but, what does he mean by "original assignment" ?What was the CIA supposed to do/be as opposed to what it became (at that time) ?

    2 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:48:45 PM by knarf (I say things that are true .. I have no proof .. but they're true.)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: RetiredArmy
    I've always been interested by the presence of the AR-15 prototype.



    3 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:50:56 PM by smoothsailing
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: RetiredArmy
    Re the Kennedy assassination: The real story has yet to be told and is quite a way from the BS that has been put out so far. Just like Benghazi, IRS,NSA etc.



    4 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:51:33 PM by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: RetiredArmy
    And there’s a new book that asks the question:

    Who had the most to gain by JFK being dead, or the most to lose by him staying alive...

    And je’accuse finger points directly to Lyndon B. Johnson...



    5 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:57:53 PM by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: NFHale
    Had family that said essentially the same thing.



    6 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:04:59 PM by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: smoothsailing
    There was a book published 15 or 20 years ago (forgot the title, but I have it at home) which claimed that at least one of Kennedy’s wounds was caused by an AR-15 round most likely fired accidentally by a Secret Service agent immediately after the first round from the Book Depository hit Kennedy.



    7 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:05:37 PM by riverdawg
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: smoothsailing
    M16. Just coming around for the military.



    8 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:06:47 PM by RetiredArmy (I am proud to be a Christian and follower of my Lord Jesus Christ. Time is short for U to know Him!)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: NFHale
    The fellow who wrote the book on LBJ was on BookTV last weekend. I thought I knew a lot about the assassination but this fellow (Roger Stone, I believe is his name) had me convinced on some new details and charges against LBJ. looks like a good read.



    9 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:09:08 PM by bunster
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: F15Eagle
    Think the author is Roger Stone, and his new book has pretty strong evidence it was LBJ.

    He was under indictment in his own state, JFK was going to drop him form the ticket for the second term, he had connections to Ruby, etc., etc.

    Lays a pretty strong case. Heard the author interviewed on several radio shows. Very convincing...



    10 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:09:50 PM by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: bunster
    Yes, that’s the guy. He’s made a pretty convincing case of it for me, at least.

    Thanks, friend!



    11 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:10:43 PM by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: RetiredArmy
    There’s no mistaking that high front sight...

    Surprised they weren’t carrying Tommyguns on slings, with the shoulder stock removed under their sport jackets...

    They were still around back then... or M3’s...



    12 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:13:28 PM by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

    To: RetiredArmy
    “For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment,” Truman wrote. Lord have mercy. He would have an absolute coronary to see what the FBI, CIA and even Secret Service has morphed into. Not to mention so called "Homeland Security".

    13 posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:13:49 PM by Altura Ct.



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/6/2014 8:40:57 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Drug dealers didn't kill Philip Seymour Hoffman -- Hoffman did

    .......................................................................................
    Fox News ^ | February 6, 2014 | Dr. Keith Ablow



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/11/2014 8:42:06 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Democrats are coming out as the anti-work party.
    .......................................................................................

    Bill Maher vs. S.E. Cupp: "Disincentives To Work Are Not Always A Bad Thing"


    Democrats are coming out as the anti-work party. Government is going to liberate you from those "shitty jobs."



    ..........

    MAHER: Yeah disincentives to work are not always a bad thing. Americans work too much. Americans are over-worked, overstressed. They take less vacation time. They don't retire when they want to. Not everything is GDP.

    S.E. CUPP: No. Um, no. Disincentivizing work, up until two days, was agreed by Democrats and Republicans to be not a great thing. The project of economics on the left and the right has always been to come up with welfare programs that disincentivize work the least. Why? Work is dignity. Work is social and economic empowerment. Work is women's lib. Work is opportunity. So this false argument that somehow disincentivizing 2 million people to work and leave the economy is now a good thing is bull. It's absolute spin.

    MAHER: You're work is all that. When I worked at Arthur Treacher's Fish & Chips throwing fish pieces into a vat of boiling oil it was not dignity.

    CUPP: Wasn't that more dignity than no work at all?

    MAHER: No. No. I wish I could have gone to college without having to take that shitty job.


    CUPP: I wish everyone had the luxury of saying no to a shitty job, when in fact, a lot of people -- five million -- have decided to stop looking because there aren't shitty jobs to get.

    MAHER: But Social Security is a disincentive to work.

    MENENDEZ: Pell grants are a disincentive to work. I mean, you take basically any program and you say that because you're giving another opportunity now I don't need to fish fry. (HBO's Real Time, February 7, 2014)

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/02/08/bill_maher_vs_se_cupp_disincentives_to_work_are_not_always_a_bad_thing.html

    credit brumar



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/11/2014 12:31:09 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Will Victoria Nuland be Fired?
    ..........................................................
    Ken Blackwell | Feb 11, 2014



    She’s described as “the top U.S. diplomat for Europe.” And so, when her indiscreet telephone call goes viral on the Internet, it ought to be big news. Victoria Nuland was promoted from her post as State Department spokesperson following the 2012 elections. Now, she holds the coveted post of Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. The specific quote being circulated has an unmistakable Nuland saying “F--- the [European Union]!”

    Well, now, isn’t the kind of thing you would expect a seasoned diplomat to be saying? We know she is seasoned because we watched her seasoning. She might have won the Gold Medal for ice dancing around a simple question: Is Jerusalem the capital of Israel?

    Last year, she went to extraordinary lengths to avoid stating the obvious fact that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel. Interestingly, there has never been a time when Jerusalem was the capital of anyone else’s country or empire. The Muslim Ottomans controlled Jerusalem for more than half a millennium, but they did not name it as their capital. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan controlled East Jerusalem from 1948 to 1967, but never made it their capital. This should not have been a hard question.

    Nuland might have consulted our own CIA Country Fact Book. It’s readily accessible online. The spooks at the CIA have figured out what the capital of Israel is. But she bobbed and weaved and generally looked ridiculous refusing to answer one of the simplest questions. A follow-up question might have been: Madame Assistant Secretary—Is there any other country whose capital you cannot name?

    So now, having thoroughly blotted her copybook on the Mideast, she is promoted to handle still-sensitive relations with Europe and Eurasia. That covers a lot of territory. We learn that the Obama administration has been spying on German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cell phone calls.

    That certainly is a shock for a president who was the first candidate in history to deliver a campaign speech—before a million adoring Germans—at the Victory Monument in Berlin. President Obama basked in the glow of their adulation as he proclaimed himself a “citizen of the world” in 2008.

    Barely a year later, in 2009, Mr. Obama blew off the twentieth anniversary celebrations of the Fall of the Berlin Wall. He sent instead a video in which he notes that the Fall of the Wall made it possible for Germany to elect a woman chancellor and America to elect a black president. How’s that again? Did Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., ever say “Ich bin ein Berliner?”

    So now, when Ukraine is convulsed in anti-government demonstrations, as violence threatens the capital of Kiev, we have this vulgar and insulting comment from the Obama official specifically tasked to handle a delicate situation.

    Blank the E.U.? Germans are understandably outraged. So are Austrians.

    This degrading Nuland talk of “Blank the E.U.” ought to be beyond the pale. It seems no one can get fired from the administration. Granted, the president cannot fire Vice President Joe Biden for announcing at the 2010 White House signing ceremony for Obamacare that this is “a big f-----g deal.” The hosed-up launch of Obamacare might be seen as divine punishment for such an arrogant act.


    Secretary Sebelius seems all the more secure in her job having presided over the “disastrous” launch (their word) of the Healthcare.gov website.

    Susan Rice misled the world in the hours after the tragic deaths of four Americans at Benghazi—and she was kicked upstairs to the White House national security staff.

    Victoria Nuland is in a class of her own. We never recall her being associated with anything except embarrassment to the United States and its special role in the world. Will she be fired? Of course not. She’s a perfect representation of the administration she serves!





    ..................................................................................................
    Townhall.com ^ | February 11, 2014 | Ken Blackwell



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/12/2014 11:37:29 AM
    From: joseffy1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    The1Stockman

      Respond to of 16547
     



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/14/2014 10:16:27 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Cruz: GOP senators think they have 'foolish, gullible constituents'
    .......................................................................
    February 14, 2014, 07:26 am By Peter Sullivan
    thehill.com



    Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) explained fellow Republican senators’ anger over his filibuster of the debt ceiling vote by saying that they hate being “forced to tell the truth.”

    “In the 13 months I’ve been in the Senate it has become apparent to me the single thing that Republican politicians hate and fear the most, and that is when they’re forced to tell the truth. It makes their heads explode,” Cruz told radio host Mark Levin Thursday.

    Cruz tried to filibuster a vote in the Senate to raise the debt ceiling Wednesday, forcing the approval of 60 senators instead of a simple majority. That required Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to take a politically risky vote in favor of the increase.

    “Make no mistake about it, this was their desired outcome,” Cruz said. “A lot of the Republicans wanted exactly what Barack Obama wanted, exactly what Nancy Pelosi wanted, exactly what Harry Reid wanted,
    which is to raise the debt ceiling, but they wanted to be able to tell what they view as their foolish, gullible constituents back home they didn’t do it.”

    Cruz pointed out that in the weeks before, Republican senators had been saying that they wanted concessions attached to the increase, not the “clean” bill that ended up passing.

    “It’s like they think the American people are just a bunch of rubes, that we don’t remember what they say,” Cruz said.

    Read more: thehill.com



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/19/2014 10:47:58 AM
    From: joseffy2 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    The1Stockman
    Woody_Nickels

      Respond to of 16547
     
    O’Keefe Busts Illegal Voter Scheme to ‘Turn Texas Blue’
    .....................................................................................................







    by Brandon Darby 19 Feb 2014
    breitbart.com


    SAN ANTONIO, Texas—In an apparent violation of state law, Battleground Texas officials are exploiting legally protected information to turn voters out to the polls as part of the Democratic party's quest to paint the Lone Star State blue, a new undercover video from James O'Keefe reveals. The footage shows Battleground Texas volunteer Jennifer Longoria saying the group uses the phone numbers from voter registration forms in later efforts to boost turnout on election day.

    Texas Election Code prohibits the use of, or even the copying of, phone numbers provided by individuals registering to vote.

    “Every time we register somebody to vote, we keep their name, address, phone number,” Longoria said.


    The video also shows volunteers calling to boost turnout for Wendy Davis's gubernotorial bid.

    The new revelations are likely to add to concerns about an apparent culture of data sharing among Democrat-aligned political and nonprofit organizations. For example, a previous O'Keefe expose raised questions about whether campaigns to get people to sign up for Obamacare had secondary political motives.



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/23/2014 12:17:25 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    D'Souza: 'Vindictive' Obama Sees Critics as Enemies...



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/25/2014 12:31:39 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    IBM Employees Fear Company Will Begin Up To 13,000 Layoffs Tomorrow

    ..............................................................................
    Business Insider ^ | 02/25/2014 | Julie Bort





    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/26/2014 12:51:02 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Eric Holder To State Attorneys General: You Don't Have to Enforce Laws You Disagree With

    Tuesday, February 25, 2014
    townhall ^




    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/26/2014 12:54:11 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Justina Pelletier - A Sick Girl Trapped Between Two Hospitals And The State
    ...........................................................................
    Political Realities ^ | 02/25/14 | LD Jackson




    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)2/27/2014 10:33:15 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Revealed: Obama considered SCRAPPING healthcare.gov website just 16 days after its launch

    ......................................................................................
    UK Dailymail ^ | 27 February 2014 | David Martosko




    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/3/2014 9:23:23 AM
    From: joseffy1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    The1Stockman

      Respond to of 16547
     
    “In a world of free trade and highly globalized markets, territorial conquest simply isn’t a good way to make your country stronger,” the Center for American Progress insists.



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/6/2014 1:42:31 PM
    From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
     
    Government’s growth industry: watching the American people



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/11/2014 10:55:20 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    De Blasio’s Approval Drops to 39 Percent Less Than 3 months in Office
    ...................................................................................
    By Alec Torres
    March 7, 2014 2:53 PM

    Just barely into his third month of office, New York mayor Bill de Blasio is already suffering in the polls. In a Wall Street Journal?/NBC 4 New York-Marist poll of registered voters, de Blasio eked out a paltry 39 percent approval rating for his job performance with 57 percent of respondents saying the mayor was doing only either fair or poorly.

    However, while correspondents think the mayor is doing his job badly, the majority of New Yorkers still have a favorable opinion of him personally. Only 33 percent of respondents viewed de Blasio the man unfavorably while 59 percent viewed him unfavorably.

    De Blasio was inaugurated just after midnight on January 1 after a landslide election over his Republican opponent, Joe Lhota. Having won nearly three out of every four votes, de Blasio began his tenure with a 64 percent approval rating.

    While no single issue appears to be the cause of de Blasio’s low favorability ratings, a series of decisions may have contributed to the fall, including his mishandling of snowstorms early in his tenure, his failure to close schools during a particularly bad snowstorm, his violation of traffic laws days after announcing a plan to reduce the speed limit to make streets safer, and his decision to stop the co-location of three charter schools to the detriment of hundreds of low-income students.

    credit watsonyouth





    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/12/2014 12:50:28 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/12/2014 12:51:43 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/14/2014 12:19:03 PM
    From: joseffy1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    The1Stockman

      Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
     
    NSA Denies Allegations that it Infected Millions of PCs with Malware

    .........................................................................
    thewhir.com ^ | March 14, 2014 | Chris Burt



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/17/2014 2:08:09 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/21/2014 12:45:56 PM
    From: joseffy1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    The1Stockman

      Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
     
    R.I. state police take over House Speaker Fox’s office
    ....................................................................................................................................
    Prov Journal ^ | 3/21/14 | Catherine Gregg


    PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Federal and state law enforcement authorities took over House Speaker Gordon D. Fox’s State House office Friday morning, carrying storage boxes and a bag marked “evidence.”

    Rhode Island state troopers took up positions outside the office just before 11 a.m. They were followed just before noon by other investigators, including some wearing IRS jackets.

    The troopers would not answer questions about why they were there nor would they allow reporters into the office. They referred questions to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

    Jim Martin, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said the office, the FBI, the state police and the IRS are engaged in a law enforcement action which included the execution of a federal search warrant Friday morning at a location he would not disclose. Larry Berman, Fox’s spokesman, said he had no idea why the troopers were at Fox’s office.

    Meanwhile, the door to Fox’s law office, at 32 Custom House Street, was locked. A piece of plywood had been nailed over a section of the door near the lock.

    .........................................................................................................................................................................

    Just heard about this on WPRO 630 Prov RI. I'm sure you're wondering what party Fox belongs to:

    WIKIPEDIA: Gordon D. Fox (born 1961) is an American politician from Providence, Rhode Island and the Speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives. A Democrat, he was first elected to the legislature in 1992 and was elected speaker on February 11, 2010.



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/26/2014 1:52:40 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    The Charge of the Lightweight Brigade [Obama]
    .........................................................................................
    steynonline
    by Mark Steyn
    Mar 20, 2014

    Excerpt:

    I heard the "leader of the free world" on the radio this morning speaking from the White House on Russia's annexation of the Crimea. President Obama's big thought was about the "choices that the Russian government has made". It was delivered in the condescending tone of a grade-school guidance counselor lecturing Little Vladdy on the "bad choices" he kept making, and what's more "choices that have been rejected by..." Stand well back! "...the international community".

    Other than that, the President announced he was imposing "sanctions" for more individuals in the Russian government thinking of visiting Disneyland or opening a savings account with the First National Bank of Dead Cactus Junction. If you're one of those so named and your wife's hassling you for a weekend of shopping on Madison Avenue or Rodeo Drive, tough: Obama's put you on the No-Shop list. For anybody in the Kremlin who still bothers watching US government press conferences, the only real danger from American "pressure" is that you may die laughing.

    Daniel Henninger begins his Wall Street Journal column this week as follows:


    By the time the second World Trade Center tower collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, the whole world was watching it. We may assume that Vladimir Putin was watching. Mr. Putin, a quick calculator of political realities, would see that someone was going to get hit for this, and hit hard.

    He was right of course. The Bush presidency became a war presidency that day, and it pounded and pursued the Islamic fundamentalists of al Qaeda without let-up or apology.

    During that time, it was reported that Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer in East Germany, deeply regretted the fall of the Soviet Union's empire and despised the Americans who caused it to fall. But no one cared what Mr. Putin thought then.


    That's true. A couple of days after September 11th, the Bush Administration called Moscow and demanded the Russians agree to letting the US use military bases in former Soviet Central Asia for their planned invasion of Afghanistan. That must have been quite a phone call. Washington was proposing not only to do to the Afghans what the Kremlin has so abysmally failed to do, but to do it out of the Russians' old bases. And yet Moscow understood that, for once, America was serious. And so, presented with a fait accomplis, they agreed to it.

    Thirteen years later? Daniel Henninger again:


    Sometimes world affairs go off the grid. Diplomats may give reasons why it is not in the interests of Mr. Putin or Russia to take this course. Vice President Biden told the Poles in Warsaw Monday that Mr. Putin's seizure of Crimea was "flawed logic." It is difficult for men embedded in a world of rational affairs to come to grips with Mr. Putin's point of view: He doesn't care what they think.

    Indeed. He only cares what they do. And everything Obama does confirms to Putin that the Crimea is his. And, if that's the case, why stop there?

    So Putin will march on, reassembling the Russian Empire, while the Obama Administration pursues its own foreign policy priorities:


    Secretary Kerry: U.S. To Send Scientists To Discuss Homosexuality With Ugandan President

    That's from a State Department "town hall meeting" with John Kerry moderated by Buzzfeed's foreign affairs editor, who asked him about Uganda's "anti-LGBT" policies. The Secretary of State has been in touch with Mr Museveni:

    *snip*

    Full Commentary



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/26/2014 9:11:05 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    As Obama Dismisses Russia As "Regional," It Expands Its Reach

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014 8:23:52 PM · by jazusamo · 12 replies
    Investors.com ^ | March 26, 2014 | IBD Editorial





    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)3/29/2014 7:10:29 PM
    From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
     
    Obama's 'Incredible Mistake' Over Phantom Kosovo Referendum

    ......................................................................................................
    Breitbart ^ | 2014-03-27







    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/1/2014 10:13:32 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    CA Obamacare exchange patches deaf callers through to phone sex hotline...



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/5/2014 12:37:30 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    The New Torquemadas: CEO Brendan Eich Would not recant his heresy

    ..........................................................................................
    National Review ^ | 04/05/2014 | By Charles C. W. Cooke







    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/7/2014 5:38:47 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    UPDATE: Two arrested in Detroit mob attack...

    Victim remains in coma...



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/11/2014 4:31:23 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Nevadan Named BLM Chief - Senate Confirms Former Reid Adviser

    ...........................................................................................
    CBS/Las Vegas ^ | April 9, 2014



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/16/2014 9:22:24 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Obama administration’s ‘Culture of intimidation’ seen in Nevada ranch standoff

    Critics say fight isn’t first instance of feds’ ‘overkill’

    The Battle over Cattle Continues


    NBC's KRNV-DT reported that Harry Reid vowed the battle over cattle is not over.





    By Valerie Richardson The Washington Times Tuesday, April 15, 2014

    Sending scores of armed agents along with helicopters and dogs to confront an elderly Nevada rancher over grazing fees may seem like overkill, but critics say it’s not inconsistent with the federal government’s recent approach to environmental enforcement.

    The simmering truce between the Bundys and the Bureau of Land Management comes after high-profile raids last year by armed federal agents on small-time gold miners in tiny Chicken, Alaska, and guitar makers at the Gibson Guitar facilities in Tennessee.

    That doesn’t include more subtle threats, such as recent efforts by the Obama administration to raise grazing fees or pressure permit holders to transfer their water rights as a condition of renewal, said Ryan Yates, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau.“Some have called it a culture of intimidation,” Mr. Yates said. “It’s issue after issue, threat after threat. It’s becoming harder and harder to keep those operations in business.”

    The atmosphere was quiet but tense Tuesday at the Bundy ranch near Bunkerville, Nev., just days after Bureau of Land Management chief Neil Kornze pulled federal agents off the property and returned about 400 head of cattle to rancher Cliven Bundy.

    A BLM spokesman said the agency would work to resolve the dispute “administratively and judicially,” but so far Bundy supporters aren’t buying it. Patrols of armed supporters remained at the ranch on the lookout for the return of BLM agents, instead of heeding calls from lawmakers to disband and return home, according to KLAS-TV in Las Vegas.

    That may be in part because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid warned Monday that “it’s not over.”

    Meanwhile, former Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Republican, told Fox News he worried the federal government could hit back hard at the Bundy ranch.

    “The other thing is, governments don’t give up their power easily, and they may well come back with a lot more force, like they did at Waco with the Davidians,” said Mr. Paul, referring to the deadly 1993 federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound. “So I don’t know which way it’s going, but so far, so good.”Examples of hostile behavior by federal agencies prompted an Oct. 29 oversight hearing by a House Natural Resources subcommittee on “Threats, Intimidation and Bullying by Federal Land Managing Agencies.”

    Rep. Rob Bishop, Utah Republican, said in his opening statement at the time that the hearing would feature “a number of troubling cases in which federal land managing agencies have employed abusive tactics to extort rural families into giving up property rights or to bully farmers and ranchers into making concessions to which the federal agency had no legal right.”

    While Mr. Bundy has been criticized for failing to pay his grazing fees, a move made after federal efforts to limit grazing after the desert tortoise was listed as threatened, the BLM’s over-the-top response has helped turn him into a sympathetic figure among rural Westerners.

    “I think there are many people who object to someone not paying grazing fees but who also find the federal government’s behavior in this situation in particular, and with regard to management of the enormous federal estate in general, to be increasingly indefensible — intimidating, destructive and cruel,” said Heritage Foundation senior adviser Robert Gordon.

    As Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval put it shortly after the BLM’s arrival, “No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation, which currently exists, nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans.”

    Read more: washingtontimes.com



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/20/2014 3:15:01 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Bundy Ranchers Post Photos of Mass BLM Cattle Graves (What ACTUAL Terrorism looks like)
    Facebook ^ | 4-20-2014 | Bundy Family


    Posted to the official Bundy Ranch Facebook page, the gruesome image shows several dead cattle being removed from a makeshift grave discovered just this weekend.Video from the area also revealed holes in water tanks, a smashed tortoise burrow, as well as destroyed fences and water lines. Separate images taken from an airplane also uncovered hundreds of cattle stuffed into small pens on a BLM compound, prompting the FAA to order a no-fly zone over the area.

    (Excerpt) Read more at facebook.com ...



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/23/2014 11:24:47 AM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    FIREHOSES TURNED ON OBAMA PROTESTERS
    Police armed with truncheons, shields and a fire hose clashed with more than 100 left-wing activists who rallied at the U.S. Embassy in Manila on Wednesday to oppose a visit by President Barack Obama and an expected security pact that would increase the American military presence in the Philippines.

    Some of the protesters carried paper U.S. flags with the message: "Obama not welcome."




    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)4/28/2014 6:02:55 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Rick Perry Takes A Victory Lap After Texas Takes Toyota From California

    ............................................................................
    BI - AP ^ | 4-28-2014 | Hunter Walker



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)5/23/2014 12:27:45 PM
    From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
     
    Obama Covers His Eyes and Hopes We Can't See Him

    ...................................................................

    Townhall.com ^ | May 23, 2014 | John Ransom



    To: Cage Rattler who wrote (6855)7/11/2014 7:51:49 PM
    From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
     
    Black American from Gang-Besieged Baltimore: 'Where Can I Get Asylum?'