Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 16, 2014, 02:18:09 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
79074 Posts in 2226 Topics by 1036 Members
Latest Member: Evgeny Vasilyev
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 230
201  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Great news: ObamaCare website written by Belarus-linked programmers on: February 04, 2014, 03:41:18 PM

Great news: ObamaCare website written by Belarus-linked programmers

posted at 12:01 pm on February 4, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Don’t worry. I have it on good authority from a Nigerian prince and a friend who lost his wallet in Vladivostok that these guys were totally on the level:

U.S. intelligence agencies last week urged the Obama administration to check its new healthcare network for malicious software after learning that developers linked to the Belarus government helped produce the website, raising fresh concerns that private data posted by millions of Americans will be compromised.
The intelligence agencies notified the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency in charge of the network, about their concerns last week. Specifically, officials warned that programmers in Belarus, a former Soviet republic closely allied with Russia, were suspected of inserting malicious code that could be used for cyber attacks, according to U.S. officials familiar with the concerns.
The software links the millions of Americans who signed up for Obamacare to the federal government and more than 300 medical institutions and healthcare providers.
“The U.S. Affordable Care Act software was written in part in Belarus by software developers under state control, and that makes the software a potential target for cyber attacks,” one official said.
We’ve been hearing all along that the architecture of the website is particularly susceptible to hacker penetration. David Kennedy, a former Marine Corps cyberwarfare expert turned Internet security consultant, has warned since October that the system leaves critical identity information exposed. That got worse rather than better after the operational fixes made in November, and HHS doesn’t even have systems in place to detect such intrusions.
Small wonder why the Obama administration didn’t want to brief Congress on security issues in December.  These security gaps were presumed to be the product of incompetent programming and management. Until now, we didn’t realize that the subcontracts for programming went in part to a firm connected with a hostile regime.  Belarus has remained a satellite to Moscow with a dictator in charge ever since the breakup of the Soviet Union, Alexander Lukashenko, and the regime is decidedly unfriendly to the West. Currently, the US doesn’t even recognize the legitimacy of Lukashenko’s government after his rigged 2010 election.
How did this happen? Normally, we’d pay good money to keep hostile regimes from penetrating our government operations. In this case, it looks as though we paid them to do it. Great job, HHS!
But it’s not all bad. If you think your identity information has been hijacked, just call the ObamaCare hotline. Be sure to ask for Peggy.
202  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Asia's 1937 Syndrome on: February 04, 2014, 03:36:57 PM
Published on The National Interest (

Source URL (retrieved on Feb 4, 2014):


Asia's 1937 Syndrome


Share on emailShare on twitterShare on facebookShare on digg|More Sharing ServicesMore [1]

Gordon G. Chang [2]
February 4, 2014

Gordon G. Chang [2]
In first days of July 1937, Chinese and Japanese soldiers skirmished in Wanping, a few miles southwest of what is now the Chinese capital. China’s Chiang Kai-shek then knew his army was no match for Japan’s, and he had many opportunities to avoid battle with a vastly superior foe. Yet he ultimately chose war.
So why did Chiang decide to fight? And how did a minor—and probably accidental—clash turn into years of disastrous conflict? Now, analysts think today’s Asia feels like 1914 Europe [3], and last month in Davos Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe likened today’s situation involving his country and China to that of England and Germany a hundred years ago [4]. The better comparison, however, is 1937. The parallels between then and now, unfortunately, are striking.
The “China Incident,” as the Japanese then called the war, began on the banks of the Yongding River in Wanping during the night of July 7, 1937. Imperial troops, shooting blanks in an evening exercise, found themselves under fire, presumably from elements of the Chinese 29th Army. After the minor exchange near Lugouqiao, commonly known as the Marco Polo Bridge, Japanese officers were alarmed when one of their soldiers failed to turn up for a roll call. They then demanded that Chinese guards let them search nearby Wanping, where the Japanese had no general permission to enter.
A refusal triggered days of skirmishes. Once the fighting started, it did not matter that the stray Japanese private, who is thought to have wandered off to urinate, eventually turned up unhurt. Soon, Chiang Kai-shek’s Republic of China was at war. The Japanese in short order would take the Marco Polo Bridge, cut off Beijing from the rest of the country, and seize that city. They would then drive Chiang’s forces from the metropolis of Shanghai, the capital of Nanjing, and most of the rest of eastern China.
Chiang could have avoided the descent into a war in July 1937. In fact, both sides had agreed to a truce after the initial fighting around the Marco Polo Bridge. Yet the agreement did not hold. Oxford professor Rana Mitter compares the events [5] then to those surrounding the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo in 1914. War, in both cases, was coming.
It is not hard to see why conflict between China and Japan was inevitable in the late 1930s. Japan was obviously determined to control portions of continental Asia. Its troops were stationed near Wanping pursuant to a 1901 treaty signed after foreign powers, including Japan, had put down the Boxer Rebellion. Japan had previously humiliated the Qing dynasty in a quick war ending in 1895, wresting control of Korea and Taiwan. Japan had also grabbed a portion of northeastern China from the Russians in the first decade of the twentieth century and invaded Manchuria in 1931, establishing puppet state of Manchukuo there. The Japanese massacred Chinese under their control.
In the late 1930s there were many incidents involving China’s troops and those of Japan. Most of these were settled quickly because Chinese commanders on the ground would give into Japanese demands or make concessions of some sort. In July 1937, officers guarding Wanping refused Japanese demands and Chiang realized he would have to make a stand. “The dwarf bandits have attacked at Lugouqiao,” he wrote in his diary, using one of his favorite terms for his enemy. “This is the time for the determination to fight.”
Chiang, in other circumstances, might have been willing to give up Beijing, but he had been roundly criticized for letting the Japanese have their way in northeastern China and in any event realized they would not be satisfied with taking only the old imperial capital. As he noted on July 10, “This is the turning point for existence or obliteration.” The decision Chiang made at the Marco Polo Bridge proved to be catastrophic, but at the time the decision to fight was about the only one he could make.
Why is 1937 relevant to us? Today, China, no longer the victim, is aggressive, continually pressing its weaker neighbors to its south and east. For decades, the People’s Republic has been seizing specks in the South China Sea from Vietnam and the Philippines.
Most recently, Chinese vessels took Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines [6] in the middle of 2012. Washington, not wanting to antagonize Beijing and hoping to avoid a confrontation, did nothing to stop Beijing gobbling up the shoal despite America’s mutual defense treaty with Manila. The Chinese were not satisfied with their seizure, however. Now they are pressuring Second Thomas Shoal and other Philippine territory, also in the South China Sea. Beijing claims about 80 percent of that critical body of international water [7] as an internal Chinese lake.
And as soon as the Chinese took Scarborough, they began to increase pressure on the Senkakus in the East China Sea, regularly sending their ships into territorial waters surrounding the islands and sometimes flying planes into airspace there. The barren outcroppings are claimed and in fact administered by Japan, but Beijing, which calls them the Diaoyus, wants them.
Why should the Japanese care about rocks in the East China Sea? The reason is that the Chinese are acting like classic aggressors. They were not satisfied with Scarborough, so they pressured the Senkakus. Chinese analysts, egged on by state media, are now arguing that Beijing should claim Japan’s Okinawa and the rest of the Ryukyu chain [8].
Chinese leaders, it is true, have not launched a large-scale invasion since 1979. Instead, they now employ “salami-slicing” tactics so as not to invite retaliation. For instance, the Chinese have denied access to Scarborough Shoal with a ring of fishing and patrol vessels so as to effectively control the area. They issued fishing regulations [9], effective the first of this year, purporting to exercise sovereignty over a large portion of the South China Sea, thereby infringing on freedom of navigation. Moreover, there are indications that Beijing will declare an air-defense identification zone over that sea [10], just as it did over the East China Sea last November.
The Chinese were not the first to use the salami-slicing stratagem. They were, in fact, victims of these same tactics. As noted, the hardline Japanese military in the 1930s kept advancing in northeastern China, and the Chinese then were continually pushed back and humiliated. By 1937, there was a feeling in Chinese circles that Chiang Kai-shek had no choice but to fight back.
This is, of course, a lesson for Washington today because the parallels between then and now are striking. First, the Japanese military then, like the Chinese one today, was emboldened by success and was ultra-nationalist. The views now expressed by China’s senior officers are deeply troubling. For instance, General Liu Yazhou, the political commissar at the People’s Liberation Army National Defense University, recently urged armed conflict to seize territory [11]. “Those borders where our army has won victories are more peaceful and stable, but those where we were too timid have more disputes,” he said in a recent magazine interview. “An army that fails to achieve victory is nothing.”
Second, the media in the 1930s publicized the idea that Japan was being surrounded by hostile powers that wished to prevent its rise. That’s exactly what the Communist Party says today about China.
Third, then, like now, civilians controlled Asia’s biggest army only loosely. Although many believe that new Chinese ruler Xi Jinping is firmly in command, he appears to be allowing the military to engage in provocative behavior to obtain its support. In the complex bargaining process inside Beijing, Xi may be letting flag officers, head of the most powerful faction in the Party, tell him what policies he will adopt. If the PLA is now Xi Jinping’s faction—as many now believe—it is unlikely that he is in a position to tell the top brass what to do.
Yet whether Xi is an aggressor in his own right—a logical conclusion of the majority view that he is in control of the military—or is being led by the nose by flag officers, China is lashing out, taking on many nations at once. That is the same thing Japan did beginning in the 1930s.
Instead of ignoring Beijing’s provocative behavior, as Washington does, American policymakers should be concerned that countries on China’s periphery, pushed to the limit by Beijing’s unrelenting belligerence, could very well be forced into the same decision that Chiang Kai-shek made in 1937, to resist aggression with force of arms.
World War II, as we now know, started not on the plains of Europe in 1939, but near Beijing two years before, at a village named Wanping.
Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China. Follow him on Twitter: @GordonGChang [12].
More by

Gordon G. Chang [2]

Topics:Defense [13]
 Grand Strategy [14]
 Great Powers [15]
 Rising Powers [16]
 Security [17]
Regions:China [18]
 Northeast Asia [19]
 Japan [20]
 Asia [21]



Source URL (retrieved on Feb 4, 2014):

203  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Declassified Transcripts Released: Smoking Gun: Obama and Hillary lied on: February 04, 2014, 03:27:44 PM

Jan 13 2014

Declassified Transcripts of Benghazi Briefings Released

Armed Services Committee Examined Actions Of Military Chain Of Command Before, During, and After Attack

WASHINGTON— The House Armed Services Committee today released a series of recently declassified transcripts of briefings on the September 11th 2012 attack on Americans in Benghazi, Libya. The briefings were conducted by the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations then chaired by Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL), though they were open to all members of the Committee and attended by Members off the Committee. The briefings, which took place over the course of several months, were part of the Committee’s examination of the actions of the military chain of command before, during, and after the attack. A report summarizing the conclusion of the HASC Oversight & Investigations majority Members draw from these briefings is expected to be released later this week.
Read the transcripts linked below



The Benghazi Transcripts: Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ‘attack,’ not video or protest

By James Rosen
 • Published January 14, 2014 •



Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation's top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a "terrorist attack," declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president's Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.

Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, told the House in classified testimony last year that it was him who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The tense briefing -- in which it was already known that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens had been targeted and had gone missing -- occurred just before the two senior officials departed the Pentagon for their session with the commander in chief.

According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Ham -- who was working out of his Pentagon office on the afternoon of Sept. 11 -- said he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center.

"My first call was to General Dempsey, General Dempsey's office, to say, 'Hey, I am headed down the hall. I need to see him right away,'" Ham told lawmakers on the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation on June 26 of last year. "I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta."

Ham's account of that fateful day was included in some 450 pages of testimony given by senior Pentagon officials in classified, closed-door hearings conducted last year by the Armed Services subcommittee. The testimony, given under "Top Secret" clearance and only declassified this month, presents a rare glimpse into how information during a crisis travels at the top echelons of America's national security apparatus, all the way up to the president.

Also among those whose secret testimony was declassified was Dempsey, the first person Ham briefed about Benghazi. Ham told lawmakers he considered it a fortuitous "happenstance" that he was able to rope Dempsey and Panetta into one meeting, so that, as Ham put it, "they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House." Ham also told lawmakers he met with Panetta and Dempsey when they returned from their 30-minute session with President Obama on Sept. 11.

Armed Services Chairman Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., sitting in on the subcommittee's hearing with Ham last June, reserved for himself an especially sensitive line of questioning: namely, whether senior Obama administration officials, in the very earliest stages of their knowledge of Benghazi, had any reason to believe that the assault grew spontaneously out of a demonstration over an anti-Islam video produced in America.

Numerous aides to the president and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly told the public in the weeks following the murder of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans that night -- as Obama's hotly contested bid for re-election was entering its final stretch -- that there was no evidence the killings were the result of a premeditated terrorist attack, but rather were the result of a protest gone awry. Subsequent disclosures exposed the falsity of that narrative, and the Obama administration ultimately acknowledged that its early statements on Benghazi were untrue.

"In your discussions with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta," McKeon asked, "was there any mention of a demonstration or was all discussion about an attack?" Ham initially testified that there was some "peripheral" discussion of this subject, but added "at that initial meeting, we knew that a U.S. facility had been attacked and was under attack, and we knew at that point that we had two individuals, Ambassador Stevens and Mr. [Sean] Smith, unaccounted for."

Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, a first-term lawmaker with experience as an Iraq war veteran and Army reserve officer, pressed Ham further on the point, prodding the 29-year Army veteran to admit that "the nature of the conversation" he had with Panetta and Dempsey was that "this was a terrorist attack."

The transcript reads as follows:

WENSTRUP: "As a military person, I am concerned that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration. I would hope that our military leadership would be advising that this was a terrorist attack."

HAM: "Again, sir, I think, you know, there was some preliminary discussion about, you know, maybe there was a demonstration. But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack."

WENSTRUP: "And you would have advised as such if asked. Would that be correct?"

HAM: "Well, and with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir."

Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee in February of last year that it was him who informed the president that "there was an apparent attack going on in Benghazi." "Secretary Panetta, do you believe that unequivocally at that time we knew that this was a terrorist attack?" asked Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. "There was no question in my mind that this was a terrorist attack," Panetta replied.

Senior State Department officials who were in direct, real-time contact with the Americans under assault in Benghazi have also made clear they, too, knew immediately -- from surveillance video and eyewitness accounts -- that the incident was a terrorist attack. After providing the first substantive "tick-tock" of the events in Benghazi, during a background briefing conducted on the evening of Oct. 9, 2012, a reporter asked two top aides to then-Secretary Clinton: "What in all of these events that you've described led officials to believe for the first several days that this was prompted by protests against the video?"

"That is a question that you would have to ask others," replied one of the senior officials. "That was not our conclusion."

Ham's declassified testimony further underscores that Obama's earliest briefing on Benghazi was solely to the effect that the incident was a terrorist attack, and raises once again the question of how the narrative about the offensive video, and a demonstration that never occurred, took root within the White House as the explanation for Benghazi.

The day after the attacks, which marked the first killing of an American ambassador in the line of duty since 1979, Obama strode to the Rose Garden to comment on the loss, taking pains in his statement to say: "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." As late as Sept. 24, during an appearance on the talk show "The View," when asked directly by co-host Joy Behar if Benghazi had been "an act of terrorism," the president hedged, saying: "Well, we're still doing an investigation."

The declassified transcripts show that beyond Ham, Panetta and Dempsey, other key officers and channels throughout the Pentagon and its combatant commands were similarly quick to label the incident a terrorist attack. In a classified session on July 31 of last year, Westrup raised the question with Marine Corps Col. George Bristol, commander of AFRICOM's Joint Special Operations Task Force for the Trans Sahara region.

Bristol, who was traveling in Dakar, Senegal when the attack occurred, said he received a call from the Joint Operations Center alerting him to "a considerable event unfolding in Libya." Bristol's next call was to Lt. Col. S.E. Gibson, an Army commander stationed in Tripoli. Gibson informed Bristol that Stevens was missing, and that "there was a fight going on" at the consulate compound.

WESTRUP: "So no one from the military was ever advising, that you are aware of, that this was a demonstration gone out of control, it was always considered an attack -"

BRISTOL: "Yes, sir."

WENSTRUP: "-- on the United States?"

BRISTOL: "Yes, sir. ... We referred to it as the attack."

Staffers on the Armed Services subcommittee conducted nine classified sessions on the Benghazi attacks, and are close to issuing what they call an "interim" report on the affair. Fox News reported in October their preliminary conclusion that U.S. forces on the night of the Benghazi attacks were postured in such a way as to make military rescue or intervention impossible -- a finding that buttresses the claims of Dempsey and other senior Pentagon officials.

While their investigation continues, staffers say they still want to question Panetta directly. But the former defense secretary, now retired, has resisted such calls for additional testimony.

"He is in the president's Cabinet," said Rep. Martha Roby R-Ala., chair of the panel that collected the testimony, of Panetta. "The American people deserve the truth. They deserve to know what's going on, and I honestly think that that's why you have seen -- beyond the tragedy that there was a loss of four Americans' lives -- is that  the American people feel misled."

"Leon Panetta should have spoken up," agreed Kim R. Holmes, a former assistant secretary of state under President George W. Bush and now a distinguished fellow at the Heritage Foundation. "The people at the Pentagon and frankly, the people at the CIA stood back while all of this was unfolding and allowed this narrative to go on longer than they should have."

Neither Panetta's office nor the White House responded to Fox News' requests for comment.

James Rosen joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in 1999. He currently serves as the chief Washington correspondent and hosts the online show "The Foxhole."
204  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / "Illegal alien" as defined by statute on: February 04, 2014, 03:19:27 PM

(3)The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.

8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien

Search 8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien

 3 1542


(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. (b) Improper time or place; civil penalties Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of - (1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or (2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection. Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed. (c) Marriage fraud Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than $250,000, or both. (d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, or both.
 - See more at:
205  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Syria on: February 04, 2014, 12:23:04 PM
I'm sure Israel will get blamed.
206  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: If true, this presents some real problems , , , on: February 04, 2014, 11:58:07 AM
Columnist Cal Thomas:

"Republicans have convinced themselves that Hispanics are a 'natural' constituency for their party because they are hard workers, religious and family-oriented. ... According to Pew, 53 percent of babies born to Hispanic immigrants are to single mothers, about twice the rate of whites. As for Republican 'family values,' Pew found a majority of Hispanics, 53 percent, support same-sex marriage. ... In a recent column, Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative political analyst, cited an American National Election Study that asked Hispanics their views about the free market vs. big government solutions to problems. Schlafly noted, 'Only 17.9 percent of Hispanics responded "the less government the better," and 85.3 percent said "a strong government involvement is required to handle economic problems."' This is not the profile of a future Republican voter."

It is. The pubs aren't called the stupid party for nothing.
207  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Affirmative Action in Action on: February 04, 2014, 11:56:09 AM

In the US code, the term is illegal alien.
208  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Libya and on: February 03, 2014, 09:56:12 PM
Sure they did.…

209  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: WSJ: Wesbury is right, DBMA forum is wrong on: January 31, 2014, 08:23:53 AM

They must be missing all the really bad economic news that isn't hard to find.
210  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Iran on: January 30, 2014, 05:03:39 PM
Actually I was talking about Buraq. This was his plan to let Iran go nuclear while he hamstrung Israel.
211  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Too late; ball game over on: January 29, 2014, 10:59:08 PM

Anyone think this wasn't the plan all along?
212  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Causes of False Confessions on: January 25, 2014, 09:07:43 PM
An interesting exploration of the roots of false confessions that reinforces my belief that, post incident, clamming up and demanding a lawyer are the legal route:

Depends if you are actually guilty or not.
213  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dinesh D'Souza indicted on: January 24, 2014, 08:26:25 AM

Pure coincidence. Just like the IRS audits of conservative groups. How many indictments/arrests for the murders of Americans in Benghazi, Libya?
214  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Privacy, Big Brother (State and Corporate) and the 4th & 9th Amendments on: January 22, 2014, 10:32:56 PM
Oh yeah, be sure not a bit of firearm accessory or stray ammo is in your vehicle. It's not like you'll get the professional journalist gun law exemption David Gregory got...
215  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Privacy, Big Brother (State and Corporate) and the 4th & 9th Amendments on: January 22, 2014, 10:27:40 PM
If I was in such circumstances, I'd provide the requested documents. If questioned about firearms, I'd state in a polite manner that I would not answer any questions without an attorney present. I would not consent to a search and I would politely ask if I was still being detained.
216  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Privacy, Big Brother (State and Corporate) and the 4th & 9th Amendments on: January 22, 2014, 10:21:46 PM
I wonder if a MD judge would uphold the search of a vehicle based on an out of state medical marijuana card? What about a possible illegal alien from a state that gives them driver's licenses?
217  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: barack_hussein_soebarkah on: January 22, 2014, 10:17:37 PM

A fresh angle here, one I have not seen before.  Perhaps I read with emotion more than logic, but I am intrigued , , ,

Interesting. The key thing is the opaque nature of a sitting president's personal history. If only the press acted as watchdogs rather than propagandists/praetorian guards...
218  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Junior Varsity stopped by Israel on: January 22, 2014, 10:09:35 PM
A US embassy is American soil, hence my posting this in this thread

Israel has an unfair advantage over our Intel agencies. Primarily they get to operate without CAIR overseeing their training and personnel.
219  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: This Traffic Stop Brought to you by the Letters DHS on: January 22, 2014, 08:44:27 PM
Hmm, looks like every time I drive my wife to the eye clinic at Johns Hopkins the trip will turn into a Big Brother crapshoot:

I'm curious what the PC for the stop would be.
220  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Pathological Science on: January 22, 2014, 08:00:44 PM
Sorry I failed to communicate that I get that.

My intended point is that absent proof, putting the government and the UN in charge of the weather, and taxing us to do so to boot, is probably a real bad idea.

Even with proof, putting either in charge is a bad idea.

221  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: UN Small Arms Trade Treaty on: January 22, 2014, 07:58:08 PM
Why is D next to their names? Communist starts with C...
222  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics on: January 22, 2014, 06:20:02 PM

Wall Street adviser: Actual unemployment is 37.2%, 'misery index' worst in 40 years

I'm sure Wesbury would say this means it's a great time to invest!
223  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Plowhorsetastic! 1 in 5 American households using food stamps! on: January 22, 2014, 06:16:38 PM

USDA: Record 20 percent of American households used food stamps in 2013

posted at 2:01 pm on January 22, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

The Obama administration has an unfortunately deliberate penchant for talking out of both sides of its mouth when it comes to touting the slow-going economic “recovery” through which they have been leading the country for the past five years; on the one hand, they insist, the private sector is creating jobs, we’re making steady economic gains, and things are definitely improving. On the other, however, there’s “still more work to be done,” and despite the manifold economic improvements, they assert that the further expansion of entitlement programs like unemployment benefits and food stamps are an absolute necessity to keeping their “recovery” going — and on the latter especially, the Obama administration has been particularly aggressive. CNS News reports that, even in the first year of President Obama’s second term, the federal food-stamp program continued to grow, with a record 20 percent of American households and a record number of individuals participated in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — and that the program itself reached its record-high budget.

The USDA says that there were 23,052,388 households on food stamps in the average month of fiscal 2013, an increase of 722,675 from fiscal year 2012, when there were 22,329,713 households on food stamps in the average month. …
In 2013, the monthly average for individuals on food stamps hit an all-time-high of 47,636,084, according to the USDA, an increase of 1,027,012 over the  46,609,072 individuals who were participating in the program in 2012. …
For fiscal year 2013, the SNAP program cost $79,641,880,000, which is a 164% increase over the past decade. When adjusted for inflation, the cost of the SNAP program was $30,153,090,000 in fiscal year 2003.


Why, exactly, is it a victory of our economic “recovery” to vastly grow a program designed to temporarily help Americans in need of economic assistance, and why exactly is the program failing to add all the “economic stimulus” the administration promised it would? The version of the farm bill on which lawmakers are currently conferring has sought out a compromise-cut to the almost $80 billion annual program in the form of $9 billion over ten years, but no doubt Democrats will object to even that relatively small budgetary reduction by clobbering Republicans over the head with “draconian”-style demagoguery — rather than asking themselves why it is the continual expansion of the program seems to be so necessary in the midst of the Obama “recovery.”
224  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Chicago thug style on: January 22, 2014, 06:09:43 PM

Report: Tim Geithner threatened S&P after it downgraded America’s credit rating in 2011

posted at 6:01 pm on January 22, 2014 by Allahpundit

My favorite part of this is a DOJ official wondering why no one had made this allegation publicly until now, more than two and a half years after it supposedly happened. Any theories on why a business that had already been threatened by a cabinet member but couldn’t prove it might want to keep mum lest it piss him off further? How many minor or major threats are government officials involved in daily, do you suppose, and how many get reported? (Timothy Carney cites a few examples from Hopenchange’s first term in his post about this.) Sometimes they don’t even bother to hide it: Remember, one of the reasons HHS was able to “convince” insurance companies to start moving ObamaCare deadlines around is because Sebelius threatened to boot companies from the exchanges next year if they didn’t comply. When you can strong-arm private industry in public, without fear of reprisal, that’s when you know you’re on the road to a de facto, if not de jure, government takeover.
Not all cabinet officers are so lucky, though, so some have to resort to this:

Harold McGraw, the chairman of McGraw-Hill Financial Inc, made the statement in a declaration filed by S&P on Monday, as it defends against the government’s $5 billion fraud lawsuit over its rating practices prior to the 2008 financial crisis.
McGraw said he returned a call from Geithner on Aug. 8, 2011, three days after S&P cut the U.S. credit rating to “AA-plus,” and that Geithner told him “you are accountable” for an alleged “huge error” in S&P’s work.
“He said that ‘you have done an enormous disservice to yourselves and to your country,’” and that S&P’s conduct would be “looked at very carefully,” McGraw said. “Such behavior could not occur, he said, without a response from the government.”
There was in fact an error — a $2 trillion one — in S&P’s calculations related to the downgrade, but the company swore afterward that it didn’t affect their decision to drop the U.S. from AAA to AA+. Meanwhile, a few days after Geithner’s phone call, news broke about the SEC launching a preliminary investigation of S&P for insider trading related to the downgrade assessment. Geithner himself was scathing about the company when he addressed the downgrade publicly. Now they’re being sued by the feds for fraud. Maybe those things are unrelated or maybe not — even S&P probably doesn’t know for sure — but this is why scrupulous government officials tend not to dial up antagonists to warn them they’re being “looked at.” Given the power they wield, it’s easy to draw the wrong conclusion about retaliation even if it’s not intended. You don’t suppose a mellow, easygoing guy like Tim Geithner intended it, do you?
By the way, it was the first debt-ceiling standoff between the parties in 2011 that helped trigger that downgrade. According to Jack Lew’s letter to Boehner today, the next standoff is coming next month. I wonder if S&P’s learned its lesson.
225  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: My belle Michelle on: January 22, 2014, 05:56:25 PM

Anyone shocked to read this?
226  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dark Money on: January 22, 2014, 05:55:17 PM

It's obvious that's why president Romney won. Right?
227  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 22, 2014, 05:52:59 PM
"Why can't the Right come up with their Barack Obama?"

A glib douche with no credible experience and a hatred of America? That's a lefty thing....
228  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: WH suggested FOX lay off Benghazi on: January 21, 2014, 01:26:12 PM

Chicago thug style.
229  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 21, 2014, 10:56:49 AM
Enjoy the results of your stupidity, millenials.
230  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: January 20, 2014, 05:46:51 PM
One website says Kruggy has a personal wealth of 2.5 million.

I'm sure he's given it all away to the poor, right?
231  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics on: January 20, 2014, 05:11:00 PM
If you have an increase in unemployment, just tweak the labor participation rate.

Problem solved.
232  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: From Russia, with intelligence on: January 20, 2014, 01:40:02 PM

So why is Buraq sitting on this?
233  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics on: January 20, 2014, 10:46:03 AM
No half measures. 100 dollar an hour minimum wage!
234  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: January 20, 2014, 04:44:58 AM
It's about seizing power and control over the public. It was never about insuring the uninsured.
235  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Let's ask an expert on: January 17, 2014, 07:59:20 AM

Funny how some of us saw this coming in 2008.
236  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: DOJ says reality is now illegal on: January 16, 2014, 05:35:50 PM

Laying the groundwork for the next 9/11.
237  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: No bail for texter killer on: January 16, 2014, 11:04:35 AM
Despite the apparent stupidity of the kill, I am surprised at no bail[1395614907358309]&action_type_map=[%22og.recommends%22]&action_ref_map=[%22AddThis_Blogs%22

Usually bond schedules are set by state statute.often it will go down at the discretion of the judge.
238  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues on: January 16, 2014, 11:02:18 AM
This would be the same MSNBC that hired Al Sharpton ? Ethics?
239  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Islam in America on: January 16, 2014, 10:57:52 AM
The proper response is if you want to live under sharia, pack your stuff and head towards the 3 rd shiite hole of your choice.
240  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Interesting Canadian case on: January 16, 2014, 05:39:49 AM

This is where the left consumes itself.
241  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Hamas "Israel has eight years left to exist" on: January 15, 2014, 08:37:15 PM

They think Israel will survive Obama.
242  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics on: January 13, 2014, 09:03:26 PM
It's not about helping the poor. It's about gathering permanent underclass voting blocs.
243  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US-China (& Japan, South China Sea-- Vietnam, Philippines, etc) on: January 13, 2014, 01:03:15 PM
"Lurch"?    cheesy cheesy cheesy

More seriously now, this is serious  cry angry

China knows that Buraq isn't going to stand up to them. What's stopping them?
244  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: WSJ: Investment about to pick up? on: January 13, 2014, 11:43:56 AM

The stock bubble will inflate until the big pop.
245  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Battle seems unavoidable on: January 13, 2014, 11:40:49 AM
No worries  they'll send Biden or Lurch to sort it all out.
246  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Hero 14 year old Pakistani boy on: January 12, 2014, 08:09:06 AM

247  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Economics, the stock market , and other investment/savings strategies on: January 10, 2014, 05:29:31 PM
The jobs recovery? Are you fcuking kidding me?
248  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: This is real scary , , , Gold, the German Bank, Fort Knox, and the Fed on: January 09, 2014, 03:18:29 PM

Anyone remember William H.Macy's character from Fargo trying to cover up his embezzlement ?
249  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: January 09, 2014, 02:35:59 PM
Using a traffic study to inflict political payback is disgusting. Imagine if we had a president that used federal law enforcement officers to barricade the WWII monument from being visited by veterans and shut down national parks?
250  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: January 09, 2014, 02:27:27 PM
Good point.Christie got a pass when he smuggled guns to the Mexican cartels and got a pass when he used the IRS to target politics opponents and the MSM  gave him a pass on Beghazi, so it's about time the media stopped giving him a pass on this scandal. Right ?
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 230
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!