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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 10:21:45 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1574270
 
Hillary Clinton lied when she swore she would faithfully discharge the duties of Secretary of State

.............................................................................
Canada Free Press ^ | 05/27/15 | Al Kaltman





To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 10:32:17 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1574270
 
Gov. Jindal: Rand Paul “unsuited to be Commander in Chief”
....................................................................
Hotair ^ | 05/27/2015 | Ed Morrisey



It didn’t take long for a return salvo to be fired over Rand Paul’s contention this morning that Republican hawks “created” ISIS.

Bobby Jindal blasted Paul as “ unsuited to be Commander in Chief,” accusing him of “taking the “weakest Democratic position” while Americans are fighting ISIS. Jindal slammed Paul as a superficial, “cocktail party” thinker, and that the real origin of ISIS is the metastasizing cancer of radical Islam:

“This is a perfect example of why Senator Paul is unsuited to be Commander-in-Chief,” Jindal said in a statement. “We have men and women in the military who are in the field trying to fight ISIS right now, and Senator Paul is taking the weakest, most liberal Democrat position.”

“It’s one thing for Senator Paul to take an outlandish position as a Senator at Washington cocktail parties, but being Commander-in-Chief is an entirely different job,” he continued. “We should all be clear that evil and Radical Islam are at fault for the rise of ISIS, and people like President Obama and Hillary Clinton exacerbate it.” …

“American weakness, not American strength, emboldens our enemies,” he said. “Senator Paul’s illogical argument clouds a situation that should provide pure moral clarity. Islam has a problem. ISIS is its current manifestation. And the next President’s job is to have the discipline and strength to wipe ISIS off the face of the earth. It has become impossible to imagine a President Paul defeating radical Islam and it’s time for the rest of us to say it.”

Paul’s argument is historically and politically deficient. The group now known as ISIS began in in Afghanistan in 1999 as Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, with encouragement and some resources from Osama bin Laden, long before the US invaded. Zarqawi took the organization to Iraq after the US invaded Afghanistan, but its mission was overthrowing the Jordanian monarchy and establishing a radical Islamic state there. When the US invaded Iraq, JTJ shifted its focus to the insurgency and became known as one of the most brutal and bloodthirsty groups in it, but at least initially they were more interested in fighting Shi’ite militias than the US.

Zarqawi publicly affiliated with al-Qaeda and changed JTJ’s name to al-Qaeda in Iraq, and sometimes publicly clashed with AQ over its brutality, before the US finally killed Zarqawi in a targeted bomb strike. The group had declared itself an Islamic State in western Iraq by then, but the Anbar Awakening and the alliance of Sunni tribes pushed them to the brink of destruction. Only much later did they return under a slightly different name — the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS — and only after the US had pulled completely out of Iraq, thanks to the Obama administration.

None of this is classified material. All of it was well known during the war, and was especially noteworthy during the lengthy effort by the US to find Zarqawi. The US, and “Republican hawks,” had nothing to do with “creating” ISIS, AQI, or JTJ. In fact, the efforts of Republican hawks to press the “surge” strategy to its conclusion resulted in the greatest success against AQI/ISIS and had the Sunni tribes almost entirely arrayed against it, no thanks to the non-interventionists who wanted a full withdrawal in 2007. It was the pullout in 2011 that allowed a cascading series of failures that breathed life into ISIS again.

To claim that the US, or “Republican hawks” created ISIS or even contributed to its returned strength is breathtakingly ignorant, both of ISIS and the history of the past 15 years. It also belies a mindset more interested in scoring points off of old arguments than in dealing with the reality of the situation we face now. Jindal’s correct that this blithe, blame-America approach is the kind of rhetoric that should disqualify Paul from serious contention for the Republican nomination, and makes us reminisce about his father for all the wrong reasons.



To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 10:53:37 PM
From: joseffy3 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
steve harris
TideGlider

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574270
 
US military pilots complain hands tied in ‘frustrating’ fight against ISIS
.............................................................................................................................
By Lucas Tomlinson May 27, 2015
foxnews.com

Discontent among US pilots carrying out air war against ISIS

U.S. military pilots carrying out the air war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are voicing growing discontent over what they say are heavy-handed rules of engagement hindering them from striking targets.

They blame a bureaucracy that does not allow for quick decision-making. One Navy F-18 pilot who has flown missions against ISIS voiced his frustration to Fox News, saying: "There were times I had groups of ISIS fighters in my sights, but couldn't get clearance to engage.”

He added, “They probably killed innocent people and spread evil because of my inability to kill them. It was frustrating."

Sources close to the air war against ISIS told Fox News that strike missions take, on average, just under an hour, from a pilot requesting permission to strike an ISIS target to a weapon leaving the wing.

A former U.S. Air Force general who led air campaigns over Iraq and Afghanistan also said today's pilots are being "micromanaged," and the process for ordering strikes is slow -- squandering valuable minutes and making it possible for the enemy to escape.

“You're talking about hours in some cases, which by that time the particular tactical target left the area and or the aircraft has run out of fuel. These are excessive procedures that are handing our adversary an advantage,” said retired Lt. Gen. David Deptula, a former director of the Combined Air Operations Center in Afghanistan in 2001.

Deptula also contrasted the current air campaign against ISIS with past air campaigns.

The U.S.-led airstrikes over Iraq during the first Gulf War averaged 1,125 strike sorties per day, according to Deptula. . In 2003, the famous “shock and awe” campaign over Iraq saw 800 strikes per day.

According to the U.S.-led coalition to defeat ISIS, U.S. military aircraft carry out 80 percent of the strikes against ISIS and average 14 per day.

Deptula blames the White House for the bottleneck.

“The ultimate guidance rests in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,” he said. “We have been applying air power like a rain shower or a drizzle -- for it to be effective, it needs to be applied like a thunderstorm.”

75 percent of pilots are returning without dropping any ordnance, due to delays in decision-making up the chain of command.

A senior defense official at the Pentagon pushed back on the comparisons between the air war against ISIS and past air campaigns.

“Our threshold for civilian casualties and collateral damage is low. We don’t want to own this fight. We have reliable partners on the ground.”



To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 11:10:35 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1574270
 
The Brownshirts of Our Time

by Dr. Phyllis Chesler26 May 2015
breitbart.com


Dr. Phyllis Chesler, Emerita Professor of Psychology, is the author of sixteen books, including An American Bride in Kabul, which won a National Jewish Book Award, a 2014 edition of The New Anti-Semitism, and Living History: On the Front Lines for Israel and the Jews 2003-2015. She has published pioneering studies about honor killing, and is a Fellow at the Middle East Forum and at the Institute for the Global Study of Anti-Semitism.

The following excerpt has been adapted from Living History: On the Front Lines for Israel and the Jews 2003-2015, released on May 6, 2015.

On Saturday evening, November 8, 2003, I addressed a free-standing feminist “networking” conference of mainly African-American and Hispanic-American women at Barnard College. The conference was sponsored by WERISE (Women Empowered through Revolutionary Ideas Supporting Enterprise), which was described as a grassroots, multi-cultural, multi-generational, and multi-disciplinary organization for women in the arts. The women ranged in age from 20 to 65 and were dressed in corporate business suits, colorful African and ethnic attire, and youthful jeans.

A few days before the conference one of the organizers asked me about my most recent book and I told her it was The New Anti-Semitism. I explained that Jew-hatred was a form of racism—only it was not being treated as such by anti-racist “politically correct” people. The organizer did not voice her disagreement nor did she say that the subject wouldn’t play well to her constituency. She only said that they needed me to explain the ways in which women sabotage each other, so that women could understand and overcome them in order to come together. They wanted me to talk about my book Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman. “Your speech will precede our big Unity panel,” she said.

I had been asked to talk about what women can do, psychologically and ethically, to enable sisterhood and to work in productive, even radical ways. As I spoke, the women in the audience sighed, cheered, applauded, nodded in agreement, laughed, groaned, nudged each other—it was a half hour of good vibes.

And then my first questioner blew it all to hell. I could not see who was speaking. A disembodied voice demanded to know where I stood on the question of the women of Palestine. Her tone was forceful, hostile, relentless, and prepared. I could have said that I am deeply concerned with the women of Palestine, but I did not.

Instead, I took a deep breath and said that I did not respect people who hijacked airplanes or hijacked conferences, or who, at this very moment, were trying to hijack this lecture. I pointed out that the subject of my talk was not Israel or Palestine. I did not want us to lose our focus. She grew even more hostile and demanding. She said, “Tell this audience what you said on WBAI. I heard you on that program.” Clearly, she wanted to “unmask” me before this audience as a Jew-lover and an Israel-defender.

I took the question head-on. I said if she was really asking about apartheid, I’d talk about it. I said that contrary to myth and propaganda, Israel is not an apartheid state. The largest practitioner of apartheid in the world is Islam, which practices both gender and religious apartheid.

Palestinian women—and all women who live under Islam—are oppressed by “honor”/horror killings, daughter-beatings, forced veiling, segregation, being stoned to death for alleged adultery, and suffer from female genital mutilation, polygamy, and sexual slavery.

I told them that Islam also practices religious apartheid. All non-Muslims (Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Bahá’í, Zoroastrians, animists, etc.) have historically been treated as sub-humans and must either convert to Islam or be mercilessly taxed, beaten, jailed, murdered, or exiled.

Today, the entire Middle East is Judenrein; there are no Jews in 22 Arab countries. Between 1948 and1956, 850,000 Arab Jews were forced to flee Muslim countries. They can only live in Israel, the only Middle Eastern country where Jews are welcome.

I told the truth. They had not heard it before. The audience collectively gasped. Then, people went a little crazy.

Someone muttered darkly, coarsely, in a near-growl, “What about the checkpoints? What about the fence?” As if checkpoints and fences are the same as being killed by your brother or father or, most recently in Ramallah in the Rofayda Qaoud case, by your mother (!) for the crime of having been raped—in the Qaoud case, raped and impregnated by your mother’s two sons. I asked the audience if they thought that being detained at a checkpoint was really the same as having your clitoris sliced off, the same as being stoned to death for alleged adultery. The only response I got was from the first questioner who demanded that I denounce Ariel Sharon—but not Yasser Arafat—as a murderer.

I refused to do so.

The lightning rod of “Palestine” was enough to turn a very friendly audience quite hostile and a bit unhinged. Two or three women proceeded to ask aggressive questions in which they accused me of somehow disrespecting poor women in my remarks.

As I was trying to leave, one woman, who said her name was “Lupe” (she was dressed in a button-festooned serape, and had a cross tattooed between her eyebrows), loped after me and demanded that I deal with the Palestine question. She kept trying to get at me physically. One of the organizers kept putting her own body between Lupe and me. Lupe behaved like a trained operative; her rage was empowered by her politics.

The questioner had at least one, and possibly two, henchwoman with her. Clearly, they wanted to “get” the pro-Israel white Jew.

A young African-American woman stopped me to say that I’d “hurt” her by how I had “disrespected” a “brown” woman. “What brown woman?” I asked. “Your first questioner was a brown woman,” she said, “and so are Palestinian women.” I said, “Jewish women, especially in Israel also come in many colors including brown and black.” She stopped me and said, “But you’re a white Jew”—as if this was proof of a crime.

The three young African-American women who had invited me were very supportive: they hugged me and thanked me for coming and looked rather embarrassed about what had happened.

What’s important is this: Not one of them tried to stop what was happening, no one stood up and said, “Something good has just turned ugly and we must not permit this to happen.” Thus, the “good” people did nothing to disperse the hostility. Perhaps they were unprepared or agreed with the view of Israel as an apartheid state. Perhaps they simply lacked the courage to stand up to the extremists in their midst.

Clearly, my speech had touched hearts and minds; there was room for common ground and for civilized discourse, but once the word “Palestine” was uttered—“Palestine,” the symbol for all downtrodden groups of color that are “resisting” the racist-imperialist American and Zionist Empires—everyone responded on cue, as if brainwashed. It immediately became “brown” versus “white,” “oppressed” versus “oppressor.”

These are the Brownshirts of our time.


That they are women of color and womanists/feminists is all the more chilling and tragic
.

Afterwards, my son, who was the only man present and who had been told to sit “apart,”—my ever-wise son, said, “Well mom, you have your answer. The Jew-haters will never allow you into their wider, wonderful world. You can’t go back.”



To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 11:18:14 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1574270
 
Christians Hacked To Death In Nigeria (Update)

...............................................................
Bos News ^ | 5/27/15 | Stefan J. Bos





To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 11:18:40 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1574270
 
Marilyn Mosby Endorsed Tweets Calling Baltimore Cops ‘THUGS’

..............................................................................................
The Daily Caller ^ | May 27, 2015 | by Chuck Ross





To: steve harris who wrote (860289)5/27/2015 11:19:04 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1574270
 
Raising the Minimum Wage causes McDonald’s to Install Kiosks, Ushering Out Workers

................................................................................................
Young Conservatives ^ | May 27, 2015 | John S. Roberts