Why the US Navy Should Fear China's New 093B Nuclear Attack Submarine...

Why the US Navy Should Fear China's New 093B Nuclear Attack Submarine

06/27/16

Dave Majumdar

Security, 

It might be able to match some of America's most prized subs--and that is a BIG problem 

Is China’s new Type 093B nuclear-powered attack submarine on par with the U.S. Navy’s Improved Los Angeles-class boats?

At least some U.S. naval analysts believe so and contend that the introduction of the new People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) submarines is an indication of just how quickly Beijing is catching up to the West.

“The 93B is not to be confused with the 93. It is a transition platform between the 93 and the forthcoming 95,” said Jerry Hendrix, director of the Defense Strategies and Assessments Program at the Center for a New American Security—who is also a former U.S. Navy Captain. “It is quieter and it has a new assortment of weapons to include cruise missiles and a vertical launch capability. The 93B is analogous to our LA improved in quietness and their appearance demonstrates that China is learning quickly about how to build a modern fast attack boat.”

Other sources were not convinced that Beijing could have made such enormous technological strides so quickly—but they noted that the topic of Chinese undersea warfare capability is very classified. Open source analysis is often extremely difficult, if not impossible. “Regarding the question on the Type 093B, I really don’t know, anything is possible I suppose, but I doubt it,” said retired Rear Adm. Mike McDevitt, now an analyst at CNA’s Center for Naval Analyses. “I have no doubt that the PLAN has ambitions to at least achieve that level of capability and quietness.”

Though the Seawolf and Virginia-classes have surpassed the Improved Los Angeles-class as the premier U.S. Navy attack submarines, such older vessels will remain the mainstay of the service’s undersea fleet for many years to come. If the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s newest boats are able to match the capabilities of the U.S. Navy’s shrinking undersea fleet, Washington could be in serious trouble. Indeed, the U.S. Navy already anticipated that it could be facing-off against a Chinese submarine fleet that is nearly twice its size, but not as technically capable.

Read full article

Does Obama Really Play the Foreign-Policy Long Game?...

Does Obama Really Play the Foreign-Policy Long Game?

06/27/16

Nikolas K. Gvosdev, John A. Cloud

Global Governance, Americas

Derek Chollet reflects on the last eight years.

It is unfortunate for Derek Chollet that the infamous David Samuels interview with Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes has rapidly emerged as the definitive summary of the foreign-policy approach of the Obama administration, with, as Peter Apps of Reuters noted, its focus on the insularity and inexperience of the president’s inner circle, as well as its supposed reliance on spin substituting for policy achievement. It is to be hoped that with the release of his magisterial recapitulation of Barack Obama’s approach to U.S. national security and America’s place in the global order—The Long Game: How Obama Defied Washington and Redefined America’s Role in the World—Chollet, who helped to formulate and execute the foreign-affairs policies of the United States, will be able to shift the conversation back towards the actual record of events.

As outside observers of the administration’s efforts from our perch in the National Security Affairs department of the Naval War College, we note that Nikolas Gvosdev’s assessment of the Obama approach as one of “strategic patience” is confirmed by an insider—one who served as principal deputy director of the Policy Planning Staff at the State Department, as the senior director on the National Security Council for strategic planning, and as assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs. Chollet terms the Obama approach as the “long game”—an effort to renew and sustain American power in the world for the foreseeable future, rather than have it be frittered away chasing ephemeral and, in many cases, unrealizable short-term objectives.

Read full article

16 Reasons to Celebrate Brexit's Win...

16 Reasons to Celebrate Brexit's Win

06/27/16

Doug Bandow

Politics, Europe

The UK electorate made a wise choice.

Watching the Brexit campaign generated mixed feelings: it was a little like the man who saw his mother-in-law drive his new Mercedes off a cliff. In the United Kingdom, some people who hated free trade, immigration and market innovation challenged the officious, wannabe superstate headquartered in Brussels. Who to cheer for?

We should cheer for the Brexiteers, who deserve at least a couple of hurrahs. The European Union created a common market throughout the continent, an undoubted good, but since then has focused on becoming a meddling Leviathan like Washington, DC. For Britain, the virtues of remaining appeared to pale in comparison to the likely costs of continued subservience to Brussels. In a variety of imperfect ways, Brexit promoted liberty, community, democracy and the rule of law. In short, the good guys won.

Here are sixteen reasons why the United Kingdom was better off Brexiting:

1. Average folks took on the commanding heights of politics, business, journalism and academia and triumphed. Obviously, the “little guy” isn’t always right, but the fact he can win demonstrates that a system whose pathways remain open to those the Bible refer to as “the least of these.” The wealthiest, best-organized and most publicized factions don’t always win.

2. Told to choose between economic bounty and self-governance, a majority of Britons chose the latter. It’s a false choice in this case, but people recognized that the sum of human existence is not material. The problem is not just the decisions previously taken away from those elected to govern the UK; it’s also the decisions that would have been taken away in the future had “Remain” won.

3. Those governed decided that they should make fundamental decisions about who would rule over them. The Eurocrats, a gaggle of politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, academics, lobbyists and businessmen were determined to achieve their ends no matter what the European people thought. A constitution rejected? Use a treaty. A treaty rejected? Vote again. A busted monetary union? Force a political union. And never, ever consult the public. No longer, said the British.

Read full article

The U.S. Army’s Return to Great Power Conflict...

The U.S. Army’s Return to Great Power Conflict

06/27/16

Kris Osborn

U.S. Army, United States

“This is not back to the future…this is moving towards the future where Army forces will face adaptive enemies with greater lethality." 

The Army’s “live-fire” combat exercises involve large-scale battalion-on-battalion war scenarios wherein mechanized forces often clash with make-shift, “near-peer” enemies using new technologies, drones, tanks, artillery, missiles and armored vehicles.

The Army is expanding its training and “live-fire” weapons focus to include a renewed ability to fight a massive, enemy force in an effort to transition from its decade-and-a-half of tested combat experience with dismounted infantry and counterinsurgency.

Recent ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have created an experienced and combat-tested force able to track, attack and kill small groups of enemies -- often blended into civilian populations, speeding in pick-up trucks or hiding within different types of terrain to stage ambushes.

“The Army has a tremendous amount of experience right now. It has depth but needs more breadth. We’re good at counterinsurgency and operations employing wide area security. Now, we may have to focus on 'Mounted Maneuver' operations over larger distances,” Rickey Smith, Deputy Chief of Staff, Training and Doctrine Command, told Scout Warrior in an interview.

(This story originally appeared in Scout Warrior)

While senior Army leaders are quick to emphasize that counterinsurgency is of course still important and the service plans to be ready for the widest possible range of conflict scenarios, there is nonetheless a marked and visible shift toward being ready to fight and win against a large-scale modernized enemy such as Russia or China.

The Army, naturally, does not single out these countries as enemies, train specifically to fight them or necessarily expect to go to war with them. However, recognizing the current and fast-changing threat environment, which includes existing tensions and rivalries with the aforementioned great powers, Army training is increasingly focused on ensuring they are ready for a mechanized force-on-force type engagement.

Read full article

Get Ready to Fight ISIS's "Virtual Caliphate" ...

Get Ready to Fight ISIS's "Virtual Caliphate"

06/27/16

Brian R. Moore, Sim Vireak

Security, Middle East

The next big battle won’t be fought with guns.

2016 continues to see young Muslims inspired by radicalism commit terrorist attacks across the globe. In Orlando, forty-nine were killed and fifty-three more injured at the hands of Omar Mateen, a single gunman who pledged allegiance to ISIS. In the Philippines, at least eighteen soldiers were killed and fifty-two injured in clashes with Abu Sayyaf militants. In Indonesia, eight were killed and twenty-four injured in several explosions directed by ISIS. The events, though unique in scale, felt eerily familiar for the United States and the rest of the world. They are a continuation of ISIS’s rhetoric falling on receptive ears, with social media often being the tool used in the recruitment process aimed at reaching even the lowest-end user, as seen by Orlando’s lone-wolf attack.

In fact, as ISIS loses territory and is driven off the battlefield, it is likely to further turn to social media to groom future lone wolves to carry out attacks at home. Look no further than ISIS’s official spokesperson and senior leader Abu Muhammad al-Adnani’s statement that “The smallest action you do in their heartland is better and more enduring to us than what you would do if you were with us.” Indeed, ISIS is evolving into a “virtual caliphate.”

Extremist groups today are particularly skilled at social media. The radical activity online includes Hollywood-quality videos that glorify violence, and offer a sense of brotherhood and belonging in hopes of reaching young Muslims who may be disillusioned with their current social position. These groups boast a social media presence that releases ninety thousand tweets and other media responses every single day. Social media may not be the decisive factor in the decision to radicalize and travel to the Syrian battlefields or downtown Jakarta, but the nature of terrorism requires only few to inflict large-scale damage and death to many.

Read full article

(I CAN RELATE TO THIS!). "I'm 70"...

I'm 70.

By Robert A. Hall, Five term member of the Massachusetts
State Senate and a former US Marine

I’m 70   -   Since I was 18, except for one
Semester in college when jobs were scarce and a
Six-month period when I was between jobs, but
still Job-hunting every day, I've worked,
Hard.
Despite some health challenges, I still put in
50-hour weeks, and haven't called in sick in
Seven or eight years. I make a good salary, but
I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I
Worked to get where I am. Given the economy,
there's no retirement in sight, and I'm tired.
Very tired.

I'm tired  of being told
That I have to "spread the wealth" to people who
Don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being
Told the government will take the money I
Earned, by force if necessary, and give it to
People too lazy to earn it.

I'm tired   of being told
That Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every
Day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men
Killing their sisters, wives and daughters for
Their family "honor"; of Muslims rioting over
Some slight offense; of Muslims murdering
Christian and Jews because they aren't
"believers;" of Muslims burning schools for
Girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims
To death for "adultery;" of Muslims mutilating
The genitals of little girls; all in the name of
Allah, because the Qur'an and Shari???a law tells them to.

I'm tired   of being told
That, out of "tolerance for other cultures," we
Must let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund
Mosques and madrassa Islamic schools to preach
Hate in America and Canada, while no American
Nor Canadian group is allowed to fund a church,
Synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to
Teach love and tolerance..

I'm tired of being told I
Must lower my living standard to fight global
Warming, which no one is allowed to debate.

I'm tired of being told
That drug addicts have a disease, and I must
Help support and treat them, and pay for the
Damage they do. Did a giant germ rush out of a
Dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up
Their noses while they tried to fight it off?

I'm tired of hearing
Wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians
Of both parties talking about innocent mistakes,
Stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we
All know they think their only mistake was
Getting caught. I'm tired of people with a sense
Of entitlement, rich or poor.

I'm real tired of people who
Don't take responsibility for their lives and
Actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the
Government, or discrimination or big-whatever
For their problems.

Yes, I'm damn tired. But I'm also glad to
Be 70.. Because, mostly, I'm not going to have
To see the world these people are making. I'm
Just sorry for my granddaughters and grandsons.

Robert A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served
Five terms in the Massachusetts State Senate.

There is no way this will be widely publicized, unless
Each of us sends it on!
This is your chance to make a difference.
If you don't forward this you are part of the problem.

ISIS commits acts of war against us and we let them get away with it. Time to kickass starting with the infestation in the White House...

Fellow Patriots, Obama honestly believes that, as bad as terrorist attacks are, American "overreaction" is worse.  In Obama's view, defending ourselves only increases the problem rather than reducing it, making us as much a part of the problem as the terrorist threat itself. ISIS commits acts of war against us and we let them get away with it.  Our failure to defend ourselves is an incentive for the terrorists to strike even harder. Joseph, as if Obama's policies weren't destructive enough, we are faced with the very real threat that his ideological clone Hillary Clinton will win the White House...and she is ahead in recent polls.  For four, maybe even eight more years, we will be held hostage by the same failed ideology that leaves us defenseless today. I refuse to let Hillary Clinton become President - not on my watch!  So will you make an urgent contribution of $25, $50, $100 or more so that I can mount a huge national campaign to defeat her? Joseph, the way to defeat this terrorism is militarily in the places that it exists. Neither Obama nor Hillary has the guts to admit that.  Joseph, there's more you need to know.   I'm facing an imminent fundraising deadline. I need to have the maximum amount of resources on-hand to send a message to the Clinton campaign that serious attacks are coming. The deadline is midnight on June 30th.  So will you show your commitment to defeating Hillary Clinton by making an urgent donation towards my June 30th deadline? Click here now if you can help. Joseph, keeping America safe and strong starts with electing leaders with the guts to defend American freedom...and that's simply NOT Hillary Clinton.  For America,    John Bolton Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations

Saudi Newspaper Writes Article Called ‘Ayatollah Obama – A Tehran Love Story’...

New post on Now The End Begins

Saudi Newspaper Writes Article Called ‘Ayatollah Obama – A Tehran Love Story’ by Geoffrey Grider Saudi Arabia’s official daily Okazpublished an article titled 'Ayatollah Obama – A Tehran Love Story,' slamming President Barack Obama for going against traditional U.S. foreign policy by supporting Iran and abandoning the Middle East. EDITOR'S NOTE: When Republicans call Obama a Muslim, the Liberal cry foul. So I wonder how they will react to this story, written by a Muslim writer in Saudi Arabia, that calls him 'Ayatollah Obama' because of his love for Iran and his desire to see them succeed in finally getting a nuclear weapon. In the article, translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), columnist Muhammad Al-Sa’id argues that the Islamic Republic is exploiting “romantic” Obama’s naïve affinity for revolutionary countries to realize its own nuclear aspirations. Al-Sa’id writes, “The U.S. has always viewed Iran as a rogue country that violates international law and sponsors terrorism – [terrorism] that has targeted the U.S. in many places around the globe.” However, Al-Sa’id asserts, Obama’s legal and academic background, coupled with the fact that he grew up as part of a minority community, have shaped his personality to run counter to the traditional profile of American presidents. “Obama believes in revolutionary countries and feels that they are closer to his heart and his conscience than the veteran, stable nations. He believes Iran is a model for a successful revolution that can be improved upon, worked with, and transformed into a democratic revolution, as he sees in his senseless dreams. This is a romantic view that Obama holds.” According to Al-Sa’id, officials at the Iranian foreign ministry have piggybacked on Obama’s delusions by “painting themselves as victims and as having adopted values of democracy and [human] rights.” “All the world’s liberals, like Obama … support liberal ideology, yet they turn a blind eye to the hypocrites who use it as a means to seize power,” he writes. The danger with Obama, Al-Sa’id says, is his belief that the National Security Council can help realize the fantasy of a democratic revolution in Iran, “even if it claims the lives of tens of millions of innocent people.” Iran’s journey into the Obama administration’s good graces started with providing intelligence on Al-Qaeda and other affiliated terrorist organizations. Iran even “sacrificed the lives of commanders” who were no longer of use to the Islamic Republic in order to prove that it is combating terror. Al-Sa’id expounds on the “rich and influential” Iranian diaspora, which he claims number in the tens of thousands in Washington alone, who have set aside their political differences in order to serve the Iranian cause. “Naturally, Saudi Arabia was in the crosshairs of Iran, which saw the personality of ‘Mullah Obama’ as a safe haven to realize its interests. The ripeness of the Iranian lobby [in the U.S.] and its infiltration into American media, and especially into the State Department, enabled Iran to do this,” he writes. source

All of a sudden, pouf no USA....NOT ON MY WATCH!

 
 We are so asleep and in need of an awakening.  Some of these things 
on the list are NOT "all of a sudden," but have been going on several 
years already. Some would have been unbelievable a few years ago.  
May God help us and have mercy.
 
Think, all of this in less than 8 years. Before Obama there was virtually 
no outlandish presence of Islam in America.
 
• All of a sudden there is no money for American poor, disabled veterans, 
jobless Americans, hungry Americans, or displaced Americans but there 
is endless money for Obama's "Syrian refugee" resettlement programs.
 
• All of a sudden, Islam is taught in schools. Christianity and the bible are 
banned in schools.
 
• All of a sudden we must allow prayer rugs everywhere and allow for 
Islamic prayer in schools, airports and businesses.
 
• All of a sudden we must stop serving pork in prisons.
 
• All of a sudden we are inundated with law suits by Muslims who are 
offended by American culture.
 
• All of a sudden we must allow burkas to be worn everywhere even 
though you have no idea who or what is covered up under them.
 
• All of a sudden Muslims are suing employers and refusing to do 
their jobs if they personally deem it conflicts with Sharia Law.
 
• All of a sudden the Attorney General of the United States vows 
to prosecute anyone who engages in "anti-Muslim speech".
 
• All of a sudden, Jihadists who engage in terrorism and openly 
admit they acted in the name of Islam and ISIS, are emphatically 
declared they are NOT Islamic by our leaders and/or their actions 
are determined NOT to be terrorism, but other nebulous terms 
like 'workplace violence."
 
• All of a sudden, it becomes Policy that Secular Middle East 
dictators that were benign or friendly to the West, must be 
replaced by Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood.
 
• All of a sudden our troops are withdrawn from Iraq and the 
middle east, giving rise to ISIS.
 
• All of a sudden, America has reduced its nuclear stockpiles 
to 1950 levels, as Obama's stated goal of a nuke-free America 
by the time he leaves office continues uninterrupted.
 
• All of a sudden, a deal with Iran must be made at any cost, 
with a pathway to nuclear weapons and HUNDREDS of 
BILLIONS of dollars handed over to fund their programs.
 
• All of a sudden America APOLOGIZES to Muslim states 
and sponsors of terror worldwide for acts of aggression, 
war and sabotage THEY perpetrate against our soldiers.
 
• All of a sudden, the American Navy is diminished to 
1917 Pre-World War I levels of only 300 ships. The Army 
is at pre-1940 levels. The Air Force scraps 500 planes and 
planned to retire the use of the A-10 Thunderbolt close 
air support fighter.  A further draw down of another 
40,000 military personnel is in progress.
 
• All of a sudden half of our aircraft carriers are recalled 
for maintenance by Obama rendering the Atlantic 
unguarded, NONE are in the Middle East.
 
• All of a sudden Obama has to empty Guantanamo 
Bay of captured Jihadists and let them loose in Jihad-
friendly Islamic states.  He demands to close the facility.
 
• All of a sudden America will negotiate with terrorists 
and trade FIVE Taliban commanders for a deserter and 
Jihad sympathizer.
 
• All of sudden there is an ammunition shortage in the 
USA.
 
• All of a sudden, the most important thing for Obama 
to do after a mass shooting by two Jihadists, is disarm 
American Citizens.
 
• All of a sudden, the President of the United States 
cannot attend the Christian Funerals of a Supreme 
Court Justice and a former First Lady because of 
previous (seemingly unimportant) commitments.
 
All of a sudden the President of the United States won’t 
attend the funeral of a flag-rank Officer (Gen. Greene) killed 
in action; he played golf.  But he sends a big delegation to 
Michael Brown’s funeral.  He sends a minor delegation to 
Margaret Thatcher’s funeral.  He won’t acknowledge Chris 
Kyle’s murder but he’ll fly the Flag at half mast for Whitney 
Houston.

 All of a sudden, I’m sick to my stomach.  I’m not sure the 
majority of Americans recognize the seriousness of the 
situation and how much “progress” has been made by 
Islam these last 7 years, a very brief time compared to a 
75 year lifetime!

 If you agree, be strong enough to at least forward this to 
a few friends.
 

General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church USA (Useful Idiots) Offers Prayers To Allah

Now The End Begins

CHRISLAM ALERT: General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church USA Offers Prayers To Allah by Geoffrey Grider The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) offered prayers to the Islamic deity, Allah. EDITOR'S NOTE: As the fallen Laodicean end times church continues it's rise, we see more and more chrislam rearing its ugly head from within the congregation. This is right in line with the endless  wooing of Islam done by the Catholic pope in Rome. The One World Religion, by the time the Antichrist arrives, will absolutely be a combination of fallen Christianity and Islam known as Chrislam. The prayer was led by a representative of the Muslim community on behalf of the Presbyterian Assembly. The representative, Wallid Said, prayed… “Allah bless us and bless our families and bless our Lord. Lead us on the straight path – the path of all the prophets: Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad.” Forward to the 14:00 mark to hear the prayers to Allah: The Islamic prayer was the the first order of business for the assembly. The prayer was arranged by the Ecumenical and Interfaith ministry staff for the PCUSA. They apparently got what the asked for. CLICK TO READ THE CHICK GOSPEL TRACT 'ALLAH HAD NO SON' The full transcript is as follows: “Allah bless us and bless our families and bless our Lord. Lead us on the straight path – the path of all the prophets: Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. Peace be upon them all Amen. “In the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful, let us praise the Lord. The creator of the universe, the most merciful, the most compassionate and the Lord of the universe who has created us and made us into nations and tribes, from male and females that we may know each other, not that we might despise each other, or may despise each other. Incline towards peace and justice and trust in God, for the Lord is one that hears and knows everything and the servants of God, the most compassionate, the most merciful, gracious are those who walk in the earth in humility and when bigots and hateful and Islamophobes address them, they say peace. Peace be upon them and peace be upon Allah.” source

Western Universities: The Best Indoctrination Money Can Buy...! Egypt: New Attacks on Christians...!

In this mailing: Denis MacEoin: Western Universities: The Best Indoctrination Money Can Buy Raymond Ibrahim: Egypt: New Attacks on Christians Western Universities: The Best Indoctrination Money Can Buy by Denis MacEoin  •  June 26, 2016 at 5:00 am The tendency of modern liberals to wring apologies out of governments for the actions of their ancestors, from the slave trade to Orientalist depictions of the peoples of Islam, is a pointless attempt to re-write history. There are, of course, no calls for Muslim governments to apologize for anything from their slave trade to the early Arab conquests. "The ethics of establishing a campus in an authoritarian country are murky, especially when it inhibits free expression." -- Professor Stephen F. Eisenman, Northwestern University (which has a branch in Qatar) Oxford and Cambridge, have accepted more than 233.5 million pounds sterling from Saudi and Muslim sources since 1995 -- the largest source of external funding to UK universities. "Several agreements made between the MEC [Oxford's Middle East Centre] and donors appear to indicate that funders have sought to influence the centre's output and activities." -- Robin Simcox, A Degree of Influence, 2009, p.35 One of those "dilemmas" is the influence by teachers across the United States on impressionable students who organize Israel Apartheid Weeks. They join with assorted anti-Semitic demonstrators, condemn Israel for every sin under the sun, and use intimidation against Jewish and Zionist colleagues, but are never told any historical, legal, or political facts by their equally biased faculties. Fundamentalist Islam, backed by vast monetary power, is corrupting our dearest Enlightenment values. Oxford's Middle East Centre "has received substantial sums of money from sources in the Middle East. The way in which this money has been used means there is a clear risk that donors will seek to influence the output and activities of the MEC. -- Robin Simcox, A Degree of Influence. (Image source: Zaha Hadid/Flickr) In asking why Western civilization has been the greatest in history, many point to European and, later, American military power, the strength of the British, French, Spanish and Portuguese empires, their command of the oceans, or the progress brought about through the Industrial Revolution. Today, of course, there is a general trend to picture Western achievements in a uniformly negative light, often for valid reasons, including our use of slavery or the mistreatment of so many Native Americans. This negativity is, however, highly selective. Why, for example, are Western Christian empires considered a blight on mankind while the great many Muslim empires of the past -- which lasted over a much longer period, engaged in the largest and longest-lasting slave trade in history, sought to impose one religion over all others, and placed enormous barriers on rational thought from about the 10th century -- regarded as a blessing? Continue Reading Article Egypt: New Attacks on Christians by Raymond Ibrahim  •  June 26, 2016 at 4:00 am After appearing, the police stood back and allowed the mob to continue destroying the house and setting more Christian homes and vehicles on fire. Last month in Egypt, a 70 year old Christian woman was stripped naked, beaten, and paraded in the streets of her village by a mob of 300 Muslim men. "How long will these acts continue with impunity -- will they never stop?" — Dr. Mona Roman, host of the Arabic-language news show, Behind the Scenes. On June 17, 2016, rioting Muslims in Egypt attacked Christians and their property, and burned down Christian homes. (Image source: "Behind the Scenes" video screenshot) In a chronically familiar scene, angry, rioting Muslims in Egypt burned down around 80 Christian homes on June 17. In the words of one of the victims, Moses Zarif, "On Friday afternoon, after noon prayers, a large number of Muslims gathered in the front of the new house of my cousin because a rumor had spread in the village that it would be turned into a church. They were chanting slogans against us: 'By no means will there be a church here' and 'Egypt will remain Islamic!'" According to the report, rioting Muslims beat the two cousins, attacked the building, destroyed all construction materials, and threw rocks at any Christian trying to intervene. Then they "turned their wrath on the Christian homes adjacent to the building, hurled rocks, looted houses and set fire to any Christian property in their wake." Continue Reading Article

Obama Tells 18 Million Immigrants They Can Skip Pledge To Defend America ...!

Obama Tells 18 Million Immigrants They Can Skip Pledge To Defend America by Geoffrey Grider Under the Obama administration’s expansive interpretation of executive authority,  legal immigrants seeking citizenship through the nation’s Naturalization process are now exempt from a key part of the Oath of Allegiance. Immigrants seeking to become citizens no longer have to pledge to “bear arms on behalf of the United States.” They can opt out of that part of the Oath. Nor do they have to cite any specific religious belief that forbids them to perform military service.   According to the Naturalization Fact Sheet on the US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) website, In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015, the nation welcomed 729,995 Legal Permanent Residents into full citizenship. Over the past decade 6.6 million have been naturalized through a process that ends with the Oath of Allegiance. In the decade 1980-1990, the average number completing Naturalization was only 220,000 annually, but from 1990 to 2000 that number jumped to over 500,000  annually. 1,050,399  new citizens were welcomed in the year 2008. 18.7 million immigrants are eligible to eventually become citizens, and 8.8 million already meet the 5-year residency requirement. The pledge to help defend America was good enough for the 6.6 million immigrants naturalized since 2005 and good enough for the over 15 million naturalized since 1980, but Obama’s appointees at the USCIS think that is too much to ask of the 18.7 million estimated legal immigrants eligible today for eventual naturalization or the 750,000 who will be naturalized in the coming year. This radical change was announced a year ago, in July of 2015. Congress did not enact the change in new legislation. There was no congressional debate, no filibuster in the US Senate, and no sit-in in the House to demand that a bill to repeal the USCIS action be brought to a vote. No, this radical change was implemented while Congress slept. Like other Obama actions to undermine our immigration laws, the Republican-controlled Congress has not used its constitutional powers to reverse the administrative action. Thank God many states are stepping up to fill that void. This week, the US Supreme Court let stand a federal district court ruling invalidating Obama’s unconstitutional “DAPA” amnesty. By a 4-4 tie vote, the Supreme Court declined to review the Circuit Court’s ruling upholding the Houston district court decision. Therefore, it is now the law and Obama’s DAPA amnesty is voided. If Justice Scalia were still alive and participating in the case, it would have been a 5-4 ruling because the “swing vote,” Associate Justice Kennedy, voted with Justices Alito, Roberts and Thomas. Where was Congress? Why did it take a lawsuit by the Governors and Attorneys General of 26 states to overturn Obama’s unconstitutional actions? It’s true that other Presidents have made changes in the Naturalization process by administrative decree and without congressional approval. In 2002, in the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attack, President George Bush by executive order expedited the naturalization process for 89,000 immigrants serving in the armed forces. While many will agree with Bush’s action and even applaud, that change should have been done by act of Congress, not a presidential executive order. In fact, most Americans will think it extremely odd that the USCIS action with regard to the Oath of Allegiance is not illegal. But the fact is, unelected bureaucrats at the USCIS can change the wording of the Oath without approval of the people’s representatives in Congress. Strange as it sounds, the law as it stands today allows USCIS bureaucrats great leeway in managing the Naturalization process, so Obama’s actions will not be challenged in federal court. Yet, in view of Obama’s actions, why doesn’t Congress change the law and take control of the Oath of Allegiance? So far, there is no indication that the Republican leadership will do so. If they won’t even bar Islamic terrorists from the refugee program, why should we expect them to protect the Oath of Allegiance? Some members of Congress will grumble, make speeches and issue press releases, but the Republican leadership will do nothing. Such is the state of the nation as we approach this 240th anniversary of the  Declaration of Independence. Some Americans see great irony in the British declaring their independence from the tyranny of Brussels while Americans quietly accept the new tyranny of Washington, DC. source

Brexit: The Nation is Back! Is France next?

Brexit: The Nation is Back! by Yves Mamou  •  June 25, 2016 at 5:00 am In France, before the British vote, the weekly JDD conducted an online poll with one question: Do you want France out of the EU? 88% of people answered "YES!" In none of the countries the surveyed was there much support for transferring power to Brussels. To calm a possible revolt of millions of poor and unemployed people, countries such as France have maintained a high level of social welfare spending, by borrowing money on international debt markets to pay unemployment insurance benefits, as well as pensions for retired people. Today, France's national debt is 96.1% of GDP. In 2008, it was 68%. In the past few years, these poor and old people have seen a drastic change in their environment: the butcher has become halal, the café does not sell alcohol anymore, and most women in the streets are wearing veils. Even the McDonald's in France have become halal. What is reassuring is that the "Leave" people waited for a legal way to express their protest. They did not take guns or knives to kill Jews or Muslims: they voted. They waited an opportunity to express their feelings. Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, celebrates the Brexit vote under a sign reading, "And Now: France!", June 24, 2016. "How quickly the unthinkable became the irreversible" writes The Economist. They are talking about Brexit, of course. The question of today is: Who could have imagined that British people were so tired of being members of The Club? The question of tomorrow is: What country will be next? In France, before the British vote, the weekly JDD conducted an online poll with one question: Do you want France out of the EU? 88% of people answered "YES!" This is not a scientific result, but it is nevertheless an indication. A recent -- and more scientific -- survey for Pew Research found that in France, a founding member of "Europe," only 38% of people still hold a favorable view of the EU, six points lower than in Britain. In none of the countries surveyed was there much support for transferring power to Brussels. Continue Reading Article