News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles.Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Follow @arra Contact: email@example.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Friday, August 21, 2015
Islamic Alliances Past and Future Part 3
by John C. Velisek, Contributing Author: Islamists and Marxists do not differ very much in the means to attain their goals. Both will accelerate the usage of “useful Idiots” to badger and harass those who disagree. Muslims are not averse to using the Palestinians, as Marxists have academia, and government officials to use. Both are a means to and end, the construction of a tyranny that cannot be broken, a totalitarian government that can be used to enrich themselves at the expense of the masses.
They both make no mystery of what they are trying to accomplish. The Quran, the holy book of the Islamists, written by an illiterate who is claimed to have gotten messages from angels to rule the world, and Marxism, Das Kapital, written by a man who never worked because he was supported by profits from a textile factory both have the need to dispel any indifference or objections to what they feel is a world where those left alive will be in bliss. Both feel that they know better than, and are of higher moral stature than the common man. They are willing to sacrifice others for the goals they wish to achieve. After all is said and done, they are totalitarian regimes willing to sacrifice the followers for the good of the elite, a seizing of power in its most basic form.
That is why, the Left does not appear as a threat to Islam, as Islam will not appear as a threat to the Left until they are the only two entities left. Communism and Nazism attained a balance in World War 2, only to fall apart after Hitler decided it was time to take on Communism as well. This was an effort that almost worked, and only the ruthless commands of Stalin, with help from the United States vanquished the German killing machine.
This Red-Green alliance is a threat to free society everywhere, and the individual freedoms that we enjoy are an anathema to the vision they have for the world. These freedoms are continually under assault, and combined with a loss of control by the alliance is the reason for terrorism today. It is an evil, and aggressive lust for power that keeps the regimes alive.
Today, there are many groups in the United States that could be classified as the “useful idiots for either of these regimes. The People for the American Way promotes Islamist principles including taquiyya, and muruna, It was PFAW who attempted to smear Michelle Bachman when she brought to the attention of the American Public the infiltration of our Government by Muslim Brotherhood members, a fact that should concern all Americans.
What is difficult to understand is the fact that top Republicans such as John McCain, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and even the Heads of the Homeland Security Subcommittee Jim Sensenbrenner have all either ignored or denounced Bachmann. Republicans will follow the PC of Islamism and not name any challenges this country faces. Of special concern is Huma Abedin, known to have Muslim Brotherhood ties. (Huma Abedin Unveiled - Part 2 and It's Getting Tougher To Provide Cover For Barack’s Religion Of Peace makes clear that the infiltration is ongoing.
One of the aspects of the infiltration is “Hijra” the immigration forced upon the country by Obamas “Welcoming America” program which is being used to bring in Third World refugees wh0o are being informed that they do not need to assimilate, and all the expenses of bringing them here, the housing, the food, the ability to live here is being borne by the American taxpayer. Our government is using our money to destroy or as Obama puts it to “fundamentally transform” our country.
Another such person is Zakiyah Ansari, a Muslim woman on Bill DeBlasio’s transition team for her opposition to charter schools. This same woman, who will not allow the repair of failing schools, and with a vocal opposition to charter schools recently received an award from the Communist Party of the USA after DeBlasios victory. The award was given for her fight against “racism” a term used as a catch all against the people of this country by both Islamists and Communists, in an attempt to silence opposition.
There are useful idiots everywhere. Al Gore, our former Vice President who sold his Current TV to Al Jazeera to give them a foothold in this country has admired Islam for environmental reasons. All religions have ties to the environment, but Islam is the religion that claims to have been given control over the Earth by God. Naturist in nature, Allah is said to be the male consort of Allat, the earth goddess.
This way of thinking, has lead to the diminution of man and the exalting of animals in the Islam religion. Man is given a backseat to the earth and animals as seen in both Islam and the environmental movement. It was once said by the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Ingrid Newkirk, a rat is a dog is a pig is a boy, signifying that she feels that all are on a common level. Man should have no special rights. Even today we see groups trying to give animals the right enjoyed by man. This is a concerted effort to force man to focus on the collective nature of the totalitarian regimes where man is made a servant to the state with no more rights than any animal.
Mayor Bloombergs office had its own radical Muslim activist by the name of Abdul Matin the author of Green Deen: What Islam teaches about Protecting the Planet. Population control is paramount, to the point that only children born after another has died will be allowed to live.
Add to this the eugenics of such people as Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood who addressed the KKK with the notion of using abortion to remove black and defectives from our society and you can understand why we face the challenges of today.
Matin was also a member of “Green for All” an organization founded to promote “green energy” in government, a government boondoggle wasting millions of dollars founded by avowed Communist Van Jones, once a member of President Obama's cabinet. Over 40 companies that were given money by the Government in the “Green Energy” initiative have failed and gone bankrupt, costing the taxpayer of this country billions of dollars. In the book, Matin describes the Caliphate and the word “caliphah” as “steward”, an term in high usage by environmentalists. The true meaning of the word in the Muslim word is the tyranny of sharia law, violence and a totalitarian form of rule.
There is no end to the Islamic conquest, and if the Islamists can use environmental policies to further degrade the American way of life, it will further the conquest, allowing the Islamists to push Americans into the theocracy of Islamic law.
Keith Ellison, an Islamist in our government has been known to praise Hamas, worked with communist front groups such as the National Layers Guild and has praised the like of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, which just called today for an army of 10,000 to kill those who they feel are the reason why the black Muslim has not moved forward. An anti-semite Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam are also eco-fascists.
Why the sudden, overarching push by the EPA for environmental rules which this administration have allowed to progress without Congressional oversight? We need look no further than Dr. Aziz Saddiqi, the proponent of the EPA’s expanding powers.
Environmentalism has become a quasi religion to many. Islam will continue to use the worries and concerns that are forced on the American people and the world of apocalyptic scenarios to further the goals of the monotheism of religion on the unsuspecting “useful Idiots.” It could be said that they will not allow capitalism and environmentalism to coexist. At this point, hugging a tree could get you killed.
--------------- This article is Part 1 of 3 Part Series addressing Islamic Alliances Past and Future. Next: the Islamic revolutions to come, and Islamic environmentalism. See Part 1 and Part 2
-------------- John C. Velisek, retired Navy, is a California conservative activist writing articles for various publication and is a contributing author to the ARRA News Service. You can follow John's work on @sjspecialist on Twitter and One Patriots Opinion on Facebook. He first shared this article on the Intellectual Conservative. Tags:John C. Velisek, Islamic Alliances, past and future, Islam, Marxist, People for the American Way, PFAW, Islamist principles, taquiyya, muruna, Huma Abedin, Muslim Brotherhood, Zakiyah Ansari, award, Communist Party of the USA, Abdul Matin, author of Green Deen, eco-fascistsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:Editorial Cartoon, AF Branco, undocumented immigrant, illegal alien, still illegal, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Newt Gingrich: When people read my report that 75% of the American people thought corruption was widespread in government, a number asked me how that 75% figure compared to other countries.
They were struck by the notion that three out of every four Americans believed there was " widespread corruption " in the American government.
"Is that just normal or is it a sign the United States is worse than other countries? " was a common question.
The Gallup World Poll has been asking this question all over the world since 2006. It shows a dramatic gap between perceived corruption in different countries. For example, only 44% of Canadians and 41% of Australians say that their country has widespread corruption. Germany is even better off with only 38% saying they have widespread corruption.
Russia, which we criticize for its corruption, has 4% fewer people saying their government has widespread corruption.
In the Gallup World Poll, there are actually 82 countries in which fewer people believe they have widespread corruption than the United States.
Americans can take some comfort.
Greeks, who are experiencing an enormous financial crisis, register a 10% higher belief (85%) of widespread corruption in their government.
In Italy, the belief in corruption reaches almost nine out of every ten Italians (89%).
In countries with traditions of honesty, the gap is really striking.
In Switzerland, only one out of four (25%) of the Swiss believe there is widespread corruption in their government. That means three times as many Americans believe they live under a corrupt government as do the Swiss.
Some countries have traditions of reform and honesty that even surpass the Swiss: Denmark (19%); Sweden (14%); and Singapore (8%). Rwanda, which has had a relentlessly reform government, is the most honest government in the world as measured by its own citizens at 5%.
A pervasive belief in corruption is very dangerous for a country.
For example, in Brazil, frustration with failing politicians has grown into a wave of anti-corruption demonstrations that are shaking the system nationwide. These demonstrations are taking place in a country in which 74% of the people say in the Gallup World Poll that there is widespread corruption in their government.
As I wrote earlier this week, the fact that 75% of the American people believe that corruption is widespread in our government may be the most important single indicator in the U.S. presidential race. The rise of so many outsider candidates is a signal the American people are tired of words and want decisive change.
My next two articles will explore corruption as a danger to the entire structure of freedom.
First, we will look at the American Revolution and the deep hostility American colonists felt toward the deep, pervasive corruption of the British government.
Finally, we will review the powerful condemnation of corruption by Pope Francis, who certainly witnessed it first hand in his native Argentina where today four out of five (80%) Argentines believe there is widespread corruption in their government.
Corruption is not a side issue. It may become a defining issue if we are to genuinely fix the American government.
---------------------- Newt Gingrich is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. The above commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions. Tags:Newt Gingrich, comparative corruption, Gallup Poll, corruption, government To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Property Tax Ranking Shakes Conventional Wisdom On ‘Taxachusetts’
In a new ranking of property taxes across the states,
Massachusetts’ ranking may surprise you when
compared to its NE neighbors. ~ Shutterstock image
by Peter Ingemi: The Tax Foundation’s new map on property taxes across the states may come as a shock to conventional wisdom. Texas, for example, has a reputation as a low tax state compared to California, yet Texas has the sixth highest effective property tax rate in the nation, with California at 34th. Hawaii is a small state and has some of the most desirable property in the entire country, yet their effective property tax rate is the lowest in the entire United States.
However the biggest shock comes from the Northeast, in a state commonly referred to as “Taxachusetts.”
While few would be surprised that 5 of the 10 states with the highest effective property tax rates in the nation are in the northeast–NJ at #1, NH at #3, CT at #4, VT at #9, and RI at #10–I suspect many people would be surprised to hear that of all the states northeast of the Mason Dixon line, the one with the lowest effective property tax rate is, in fact, Massachusetts, at 18th.
In fact, a complaint one regularly hears from former Massachusetts residents who have relocated to New Hampshire are the high property taxes they are now paying. It remains one of the few edges we have over our northern neighbor without a sales or an income tax.
The source of this advantage is from a law passed by referendum 35 years ago called Proposition 2 ½. The proposition put specific limits and caps on any increase in property taxes in a community. As the Massachusetts Department of Revenue explains online:First, a community cannot levy more than 2.5 percent of the total full and fair cash value of all taxable real and personal property in the community. In this primer we will refer to the full and fair cash value limit as the levy ceiling.
Second, a community’s levy is also constrained in that it can only increase by a certain amount from year to year. We will refer to the maximum amount a community can levy in a given year as the levy limit. The levy limit will always be below, or at most, equal to the levy ceiling. The levy limit may not exceed the levy ceiling.The formula for the levy ceiling looks like this:
Full and Fair Cash Value x 2.5% = LEVY CEILING
Full and Fair Cash Value = $100,000,000
$100,000,000 x 2.5% = $2,500,000
So if property values in a part of the city increase, their rate might go up over 2 ½ percent, but it cannot go up more than 2 ½ percent of the full and fair cash value of the taxable real and personal property of a city.
This means that if a city wants to push a big public project or wants to maintain high expenditures, they can’t do it without giving the taxpayers who would have to pay it a direct say.
Proposition 2 ½, made it on the ballot despite the strong opposition of both the unions and the Legislature. After it passed overwhelmingly with 59 percent of the vote, every teacher at school was given a pink slip, yet one year later, all the teachers were still there.
You might be surprised to hear that regular attempts at the local level to override Prop 2 1/2 are quite common in the state. In 2008, for example, the Boston Globe published this list of attempted overrides. In fact, the people of Belmont, MA approved another override this year.
Would the Massachusetts citizens who fought and died for the principle of “No taxation without representation” be pleased with its ranking in the report? It’s all relative.
--------------- Peter "DaTechGuy" Ingemi is a contributor to Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists. He has covered presidential, senatorial, congressional and state campaigns across the country with his trademark Fedora & Dr. Who scarf. Tags:Peter Ingemi, property taxes, Tax Foundation, new map, property taxes, Massachusetts, Taxachusetts, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: Most modern welfare states have a huge problem: their politicians promise more than government revenue covers. So they borrow and borrow until they can borrow no more.
And then they go down. Like Greece has gone down. Banks are closed there, and the people suffer.
The problem is over-spending and over-promising (the latter being merely committing to future over-spending, so let’s just call it all over-spending). But when you confront a partisan of such extravagance — whether that person be a politician or a constituency beneficiary or an ideological socialist or social democrat — the most common defense is: THEY WOULDN’T LET US TAX ENOUGH.
The “they” in such defenses could be an opposition party, or a constituency, or . . . “the evil rich.”
But anyone with something other than a lump of coal for a brain knows the real truth: responsible people don’t make such defenses. If a political difficulty gets in the way of the extra revenue needed for something promised, it’s practically the same as an economic difficulty, so the excuse falls apart.
If you cannot get enough revenue for your favorite program, it doesn’t matter whether the people who are the source of your “needed” revenue are broke — have nothing to give — or they simply balk at giving. The point is, you don’t have the revenue. The responsible reaction would be: cut back on spending.
Responsible people budget; irresponsible people blame others for not having the wherewithal to spend and spend and spend.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------ Paul Jacobs is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service. Tags:Paul Jacob, Common Sense, spenders, eternal excuse, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Hillary Clinton's email scandal is causing major headaches for her campaign. Each new day seems to bring a new revelation, and her excuses are falling flat.
For example, even though we now know that Clinton's unsecured personal server was full of classified information, she has asserted that nothing she received was ever "marked classified."
Earlier this week, she told reporters, "I did not send classified material, and I did not receive any material that was marked or designated classified."
That just doesn't pass the straight face test. As secretary of state, Clinton was fourth in the line of presidential succession. Presumably, she was handling sensitive information from foreign ministers, ambassadors and intelligence officials. If not, what was she doing for four years?
Her answer is perfectly Clintonian. Notice the words "marked or designated." But as Reuters reports today, some information is "born classified." And as secretary of state, she knew that.
It is difficult to say where this is all headed. Some are pointing out that her husband had to issue a presidential pardon to his CIA director for keeping classified information on his personal computer.
But the media seem to realize there is a serious story here. Consider these headlines from the past few days:"Hillary Clinton's Communications Problem May Go Beyond Email," CBS News, August 19th.
"Government Inquiry Into Clinton Emails Likely To Widen," National Public Radio, August 19th.
"Watchdog: Two National Security Laws Appear Broken In Clinton Email Scandal," Washington Free Beacon, August 20th.
"U.S. Said To Probe How Classified Data Got On Clinton Server," Bloomberg, August 20th.
"Clinton Facing Fresh Worries In Congress Over Emails," Associated Press, August 21st.CBS, NPR, Politico, Bloomberg, AP -- they're not exactly card-carrying members of the "vast right-wing conspiracy."
Whether Hillary is eventually prosecuted or not, her political ambitions have clearly been damaged. A new Quinnipiac poll finds Clinton losing Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania in general election matchups against leading GOP candidates.
------------- Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, media piles, Hillary Clinton, FBI reviews emails, Editorial Cartoon, AF BrancoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Daniel John Sobieski: President Obama ridiculed Mitt Romney in the 2012 debates for saying that Russia was our greatest geopolitical threat. Now, as Russia continues to gobble up pieces of Ukraine under the cover of a phony cease-fire, President Obama’s outgoing Army Chief of Staff, Gen. Roy Odierno, said exactly the same thing on Wednesday Russia is the most dangerous to the United States.“I believe Russia is the most dangerous because of a couple things,” Odierno said in the press conference.
Odierno said he considers Russia the most dangerous because of some of their intents and their capabilities in Ukraine.
“First they are more mature than some other of our potential adversaries and I think they have some stated intents that concern me in terms of how the Cold War ended,” Odierno said. “They have shown some significant capability in Ukraine to do operations that are fairly significant.”Odierno’s assessment of Russian capabilities and intention’s dovetails perfectly with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s expressed view that the demise of the Soviet Union was one of the greatest disasters of modern times. His actions in Ukraine in conjunction with massive Russian rearmament show his desire to reassemble the old Soviet Union.In his annual address to parliament in 2005, old KGB boss emeritus Putin made the grotesque claim that the "demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest political catastrophe of the century," demonstrating a nostalgia for what he considers the good old days.Back in 2012 when Romney put Russia at the top of the geopolitical threat list, President Obama gave a mocking response more worthy of a former community organizer rather than the leader of the free world. As Investor’s Business Daily noted:"You said Russia. Not al-Qaida. You said Russia," Obama rebuked him regarding our biggest threats. "The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because... the Cold War's been over for 20 years," said the president who promised the Russians more flexibility as he disarmed the United States.If the Cold War was over, somebody forgot to tell Moscow, for their belligerence towards Ukraine is straight out of the playbook of Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev. They ruthlessly repressed with Soviet armor the 1956 Hungary rebellion and the 1968 Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia.
Putin’s approach is perhaps more subtle, arming so-called “separatists” rather than sending in Soviet armored columns, but it is a distinction without a difference. Attacks by these separatists, with the full knowledge and support of Moscow, have increase markedly in recent days, making a mockery of the February cease-fire:Ukraine’s military reported 127 attacks on Monday by the pro-Russian rebels, including an assault by 400 separatists and tanks about 30 miles north of Mariupol, a strategic government-held port in southeastern Ukraine….
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry “expressed grave concern” Thursday about the escalation in rebel attacks in a phone call with Sergei Lavrov, his Russian counterpart. Kerry urged Russia to end its support for the separatists and stick to the Minsk ceasefire signed in mid-February….
Luke Coffey, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom who studies European security issues, said in an interview that Russian President Vladimir Putin is pursuing a “very incremental, deliberate, slow” strategy in Ukraine. By taking small pieces of territory over a months-long conflict, he can blunt a concerted response from an international community that has devoted attention to other immediate issues, such as the Iran nuclear deal.Grave concerns and sternly worded letters carry no weight with Putin, whose stated ambitions are clear. President Obama has done less than nothing, sending only supplies worthy of a Boy Scout Jamboree rather than a sovereign nation resisting Russian aggression. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko warned Congress last September that Russian actions in the Ukraine were the start of a new Cold War:On Thursday, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko gave a 40-minute speech to a rare joint session of Congress alerting lawmakers to the plight of his country under Russia's creeping "Anschluss."
Poroshenko once again pled for meaningful aid, including an affiliation with NATO, and warned that a new Iron Curtain may soon descend as Vladimir Putin tries to reassemble the Soviet Union whose demise he has publicly mourned….
In March, Ukraine asked for arms and ammunition, intelligence support, aviation fuel and night vision goggles. The Pentagon agreed only to provide the Ukrainians with supplies of U.S. military rations known as Meals Ready To Eat, or MREs.
This time Ukraine did not get much more than that — just some peripheral gear such as night-vision goggles and helmets. But once again it received no lethal aid that Poroshenko's country desperately needs, such as requested anti-tank weaponry.Just as Obama failed to aid Iran’s “Green Revolution” in Iran in 2009 when it might have brought the mullahs to their knees and nipped Iran’s nuclear threat in the bud, he is allowing Putin and Russia to take the first steps toward rebooting the old “evil empire” President Ronald Reagan worked so hard to defeat, Like Hitler’s 1936 march into the Rhineland it will lead to a bad end.
--------------- Daniel John Sobieski (@gerfingerpoken) writes for many conservative sites. He provided the ARRA News Service editor with this article which first appeared on the American Thinker. Tags:Daniel John Sobieski, President Obama, United States, Russia, Ukraine, Army Chief of Staff, Gen. Roy Odierno, editorial cartoon, AF BrancoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
We are less than 21 days until Congress makes the biggest decisions in decades–a potential nuclear deal with Iran. This is the greatest potential threat to our national security and must be stopped.
You know this is a #BadIranDeal.It doesn't stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Even if they abide by the deal, which is highly unlikely, we are merely kicking the can down the road and allowing them to develop nuclear weapons in 10-15 years, with the blessing of the world community. We must stop this bad deal.
The loss of anytime, anywhere inspections have crumbled the ability for the United States to enforce the deal. Iran will be notified 24-days before inspection of the inspection location and of the classified way we gathered intelligence of where to inspect. In the words of Prime Minister Netanyahu, "can you imagine giving a drug dealer 24 days’ notice before you inspect the premises?” We must stop this bad deal.
Unless Sec Kerry and President Obama get their way, our own State Department labels Iran as one of only three state-sponsors of terrorism. Their network of evil stretches far beyond the Middle East where they train, fund, and equip terrorist. An independent commission declared that Iran harbored and provided safe passage to the heinous terrorists that carried out the attacks on September 11th, 2001. What then will happen when we allow them to develop nuclear weapons and give them billions of dollars of sanction relief? We must stop this bad deal.
We must stop this bad deal. We must put pressure on Congress to reject this deal and prevent our children from inheriting a dangerous nuclearly-armed regime.
This deal guarantees that our children will inherit a nuclear Iran – one that already chants "death to America" in the streets and burns our flag.
ACTION ITEM: To view where your two Senators stand visit The Iran Scorecard." It identifies who is "On the Fence," who "Stands With Iran," and who "Stands With America."
Call your members of Congress right now at 202-224-3121. (Their staffs are working - Leave a message). Even if you have called before, call again. Discuss the following info and previously reported info on the Iran Nuke Deal Even if your representative or Senator has e already come out in favor of the deal, especially call them and express your anger over this sell out of America. If things continue on track, Iran will become capable of delivering nukes on America.
Tell them that they should not vote for any nuclear agreement that they have not fully read -- and they have not read these secret side deals. More importantly, they should not support any nuclear deal that allows Iran, given its history of deception, to self-inspect. Tell your senators and representative that Iran cannot be trusted. Tell them to oppose the Iranian nuclear deal. Then check out the names of Senators (all Democrats) still supporting this deal and call every friend or relative who lives in these Senators' states and beg them for the sake of future generations to Call their Senator.
Following the AP’s reporting on a secret deal between the IAEA and Iran that would let Iranians provide pictures and samples of its Parchin site that has long been suspected as a location for nuclear weapons work in violation of numerous international agreements, defenders of the Obama administration’s Iran deal cast doubt on the reports.
But last night, the AP released the text of the document it obtained, “a transcript of the original draft agreement between the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran covering inspections at the Parchin military site.” “Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed to The Associated Press that this draft does not differ from the final, confidential agreement between the IAEA and Iran.”
According to the AP, the agreement states that “Iran will provide to the Agency photos of the locations,” “Iran will provide to the Agency videos of the locations,” “Iran will provide to the Agency 7 environmental samples taken from points inside one building,” and that the photos and video will “tak[e] into account military concerns.”
In an analysis piece, AP reporter George Jahn explains what the agreement means. “According to a draft document viewed by AP, Iran has agreed to cooperate with the U.N. in answering longstanding allegations about possible past work to develop nuclear weapons at its Parchin plant — but only with the Iranians conducting the inspections themselves. Iran would collect its own environmental samples on the site and carry out other work usually done by IAEA experts. The IAEA will be able to review the Iranians' work after the fact. The deal on Parchin was between the IAEA and Iran. The Obama Administration was not a direct party to the agreement, but apparently was aware of it.”
Jahn notes, “Any IAEA inspection of a country suspected of nuclear irregularities is usually carried out by agency experts. . . . The document on Parchin, however, will let the Iranians themselves look for signs of the very activity they deny — past work on nuclear weapons. It says ‘Iran will provide’ the agency with environmental samples. It restricts the number of samples at the suspect site to seven and to an unspecified number ‘outside of the Parchin complex’ at a site that still needs to be decided.
“The U.N. agency will take possession of the samples for testing, as usual. Iran will also provide photos and video of locations to be inspected. But the document suggests that areas of sensitive military activity remain out of bounds. The draft says the IAEA will ‘ensure the technical authenticity of the activities’ carried out by the Iranians — but it does not say how.”
Further, Jahn writes, “Any indication that the IAEA is diverging from established inspection rules could weaken the agency, the world's nuclear watchdog with 164 members, and feed suspicions that it is ready to overly compromise in hopes of winding up a probe that has essentially been stalemated for more than a decade. . . .
“Faced with more than a decade of Iranian resistance to IAEA attempts to probe the allegations of past weapons work at Parchin, there may be a willingness to settle for an agency report that is less than definitive — and methods that deviate from usual practices.
“The IAEA also appears to have recognized that Iran will continue to insist the allegations are lies, based on false U.S., Israeli and other intelligence. After a decade of stalemate it wants to close the books on the issue and allow the U.N. Security Council to do so as well.”
Importantly, after noting that the White House’s National Security Council has declared itself “confident” in this arrangement, Jahn adds, “Olli Heinonen, in charge of the Iran investigation as IAEA deputy director general from 2005 through 2010, says he can think of no similar arrangement — a country essentially allowed to carry out much of the probe of suspicions against it.”
All the reporting on the Iran deal since the Obama administration agreed to it last month has only increased public skepticism, as a new CNN poll shows.
“A growing majority of Americans are turning against the nuclear deal with Iran and believe Congress should reject the deal brokered between the U.S., five other world powers and Iran.
“And 6-in-10 Americans also disapprove of President Barack Obama's handling of the U.S. relationship with Iran, according to the poll.”
CNN also finds, “After a brief bump into positive territory, disapproval of President Barack Obama is on the rise amid dismal reviews of his work on several foreign policy issues and a sense that his policies would lead the country in the wrong direction.
“According to a new CNN/ORC Poll, Obama's disapproval rating has inched above 50%, with 51% now saying they disapprove of how he's handling the presidency and 47% approving. . . .
“Majorities also disapprove of the way Obama is handling the economy and foreign affairs, as 52% say the policies Obama has proposed would move the country in the wrong direction.
“Assessing Obama's handling of several issues, the President fares worst on his handling of ISIS, the Islamic militant group that controls some areas of Iraq and Syria, with 62% disapproving of how the President is dealing with the group. Nearly as many, 60% say they disapprove of his management of the U.S. relationship with Iran.
“On both issues, Obama earns notably higher disapproval ratings among Democrats than he does on other issues: 35% disapprove of his handling of ISIS, 30% Iran. His next highest disapproval rating among Democrats is 23% on his handling of foreign affairs generally.” Tags:#BadIranDeal, bad Deal, Iran Nuke Deal, Secret side deals, Iran, Take Action,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
. . . Huckabee op-ed in The Jerusalem Post -- "We should empower Iran's democratic opposition to topple the regime."
US Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee speaks in Shilo. (photo by Tovah Lazaroff, Jerusalem Post)
by Mike Huckabee: When I visited Israel in 1973, the first of dozens of trips I've taken to the Jewish state, the United States and Iran stood united against the enemies of Israel.
Few anticipated that just six years later, a revolution would transform Iran into an Islamic theocracy and the world's most dangerous sponsor of terrorism.
This week as I returned to Israel to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other key Israeli leaders, it's clear that Iran is ripe for another revolution. This time, with US support, Iran's democratic opposition could topple the Islamic Republic and put an end to the ayatollahs' threats to 'wipe Israel off the map' and bring 'death to America.'
The Iranian regime lost the confidence and support of its own people long ago. During the Green Revolution of 2009, the Islamic Republic faced the greatest threat of its 30-year existence at the hands of its own people.
Hoping for a nuclear deal with the ayatollahs, however, president Obama and then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton shamefully left these peaceful protesters without so much as a word of encouragement, and they were killed in the streets.
In its desperation for a deal, the Obama administration has showered the Iranian regime with diplomatic handouts. Sanctions relief has injected $150 billion into Iran's economy and military. These efforts have not resolved the nuclear crisis; they have exacerbated it by legitimizing and arming a terrorist state hell-bent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that the ayatollahs 'deny the Holocaust while planning another genocide against our people.' He is right. Prime Minister Netanyahu is a Churchill in a world full of Chamberlains.
An American president should stand with our ally Israel and never allow an evil regime to carry out its threat to annihilate Jews and kill Americans.
President Obama counters that the alternative to his disastrous deal is war with Iran. This is a false choice. Reagan said 'trust but verify.' Obama's approach is 'trust but vilify' - he trusts our enemies and vilifies those who disagree with him.
While I would not hesitate to use force against Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs if necessary, I believe that there is a smarter, more enduring solution to the Iran problem - regime change.
We should empower Iran's democratic opposition to topple the regime.
I would announce on my first day as president that the new policy of the United States is to support freedom in Tehran. I would double-down against Iran with tougher sanctions. Officials within the Iranian government, clerical establishment and military would face a clear choice: They can stay on a sinking ship, or abandon a regime that has outlived its shelf life.
To Iran's courageous dissidents and demonstrators, my administration would have a simple message: The United States is with you. Working with Congress and the Iranian opposition - both inside and outside the country - I would expose the regime's crimes and lay the groundwork for a democratic transition in Tehran.
Finally, we should bring Iranian officials to justice in international courts.
No longer would the United States stand by as international organizations berate Israelis for building bedrooms in Judea and Samaria, while ignoring Iranian threats to 'replace Israel' with a 'big Holocaust.' Iranian leaders must be prosecuted for inciting genocide and murdering countless innocent Jews, Christians and Muslims across the world.
There is no reason why the free world should tolerate a supremacist regime that threatens Israel's very existence. The current tensions with Tehran are not inevitable. Persians and Jews enjoy cultural ties dating back to ancient times. More than 100,000 Jews lived in Iran on the eve of the 1979 revolution.
A democratic Iran would present its own challenges, but it would go a long way in addressing one of the most serious threats Israel and America face. Let's remember that amid internal political change, many other countries have relinquished their pursuit of nuclear weapons and gotten out of the terrorism game. The same could happen with Iran. The ripple effects would be felt throughout the Middle East, where the Quds Force and other Iranian proxies currently run roughshod, destabilizing the region and threatening the US and its allies.
As the Obama presidency comes to a close, the United States and Israel have a new opportunity to rebuild relations and stand united against the Islamic Republic. By empowering Iran's opposition, the United States and Israel can address the Iranian threat at minimal cost, keep Israelis and Americans safe, and give meaning to our shared commitment: Never again!
------------------- Mike Huckabee is a former governor of Arkansas and a 2016 Republican candidate for president of the United States. Tags:Mike Huckabee, op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post, Regime change, Iran, Standing with Israel, United States, Israel, Arkansas, 2016 Republican candidateTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:Editorial Cartoon, AF Branco, Iran Nuke Deal, inspections, by IranTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
75%: The Most Important Number in American Politics
by Newt Gingrich: This past weekend political shows once again tried to come to grips with the rise of Sanders, Trump, Carson, Fiorina, and Cruz.
The consensus among several commentators was that there is often a flurry of interest in political outsiders during the summer but eventually voters become serious and begin to seek more traditional presidential candidates.
They may be right.
My hunch is they are profoundly wrong.
In a recent Michigan GOP poll, 55%, over half the voters, picked Trump, Fiorina, Carson, and Cruz — three non-officeholders and a Senator known for attacking his own party’s leadership.
So what is happening? One number may explain what is happening in both the Republican and Democratic primary races: 75%.
This number is stunning, frightening, and will likely lead to huge changes in the next few years.
Literally three out of four Americans, when asked the question by Gallup “is corruption widespread throughout the government in this country or not?” said they believe corruption is widespread.
If you want to understand the Trump-Carson-Fiorina-Cruz appeal, think about that number.
Only 25% of the American people say governmental corruption is not widespread. By comparison, in the Gallup world poll, only 38% of Germans say there is widespread corruption in their government.
Note that Gallup made it a tough question to say yes to. They didn’t ask is there a little bit of corruption. They asked if governmental corruption is widespread.
This pervasive belief in government corruption may help explain why traditional politicians are finding it more difficult to gain traction than they would have expected.
In 2008 and 2012, President Obama promised bold change to the American people. Obama could make a good case that he forced major changes in healthcare, same-sex marriage, and financial reform. Yet on the left there is enormous discontent. Who would have dreamed that seven years into the first African American presidency there would be a “Black Lives Matter” movement expressing rage and frustration? Who would have thought that after six years of blocking the Keystone Pipeline, the environmental movement would be increasingly angry with the former Secretary of State who kept it blocked within her department? From an anti-war activist viewpoint, the Obama Administration has the United States mired down even more than the Bush Administration.
Bernie Sanders is increasingly the recipient of the Left’s desire for a reliable, serious, and committed left wing candidate. He has grown from a nuisance to a very long shot. And, the summer is not yet over.
On the right, there is a very large block who loathe the leadership in Washington. These activists want to fight. They want an all out effort to stop Obama and the Left. They want dramatic efforts to force Washington to change. They cherish the confrontation of shutdowns and despise desperate efforts to avoid fighting the President.
This anger on the right goes back to Pat Buchanan’s primary campaign, Ross Perot’s third party campaign, the tea party movement, and now the Trump phenomenon.
What is making anti-Washington sentiments more powerful is the degree to which independents and moderates are increasingly disgusted with Washington and politics in general.
When 75% of Americans believe governmental corruption is widespread, there is a real appetite for bold and dramatic change.
Suddenly being a Governor or Senator can be interpreted as being part of a system that failed.
Suddenly having a business or medical background is seen as more qualifying than having won public office.
Furthermore, in cleaning up corruption, force of will is more important than position papers or details of policy debates.
People who think there is widespread corruption want someone tough enough and combative enough to root it out.
Trump’s force of personality and willingness to fight makes him a candidate for those who want the crooks out.
Carson’s calm, steady demeanor grows out of a lifetime of very serious, dramatic, life and death decisions in the operating room. While his temperament is the opposite of Trump, his underlying aloofness from traditional politics and disdain for political baloney is very similar to Trump.
Fiorina combines some of Trump’s aggressiveness with some of Carson’s calmness and intellectual toughness. Her years at Hewlett-Packard taught her to be calm, self-possessed, disciplined, and clear.
Cruz is the anomaly. He is a Senator but few think of him as an insider. He is so articulate, bold, and tough on the Washington establishment in both parties that he is clearly an outsider.
Those in Washington who are trying to understand what is happening would do well to look at Gallup’s 75%.
If three out of four Americans really believe governmental corruption is widespread, they will run over the old order and end politics as usual.
---------------------- Newt Gingrich is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. The above commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions. Tags:Newt Gingrich, 75%, most import number, American politics, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Nelson Hultberg, Contributing Author: The talking heads of the establishment are heaping scorn on Donald Trump like squawking crows defecate on those underneath the phone lines where they sit. The long knives are coming out of the sheaths of the New York-Washington literati. Everyone is attacking Donald Trump. But why is such animosity spewing from our media, our corporations, and our academic leaders toward this bodacious entrepreneur turned politician?
Why? Because Trump represents something untamed and untamable. He represents an outsider who refuses to play the game of "politics as usual" that the good ol' boys have been playing throughout the past 80 years. What the establishment fears about Trump is that he doesn't need to play the role of sycophant to their corporate-banking-bureaucratic combine that rules America.
Oh, the Donald makes use of the power elite combine when he sees that it is in his best interests to do so. But he does not need the corporate-banking-bureaucratic combine like the media sycophants and academic courtiers do. He is big enough to transcend the power elites that dominate the country. Thus he cannot be bullied. And this is why the major networks hate him so; it is why Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier were oozing hostility during the debates. Because they choose to live their lives as appeasers of power, sycophants despise those who do not bow and scrape as they do in front of power.
Can Trump Govern?
Donald Trump is independent and defiant; that is indisputable. But is he presidential material? Can he govern the nation in this time of immense trouble? We might just be about to find out; the man defies all naysayers.
His recently released immigration plan is sending shock waves through the power corridors of the establishment. Alabama Senator, Jeff Sessions, who is our most brilliant immigration hawk in Washington has stated, "This is exactly the plan America needs." And it is, indeed, a revolutionary set of policy proposals. Finally a presidential candidate who is willing to tell the voters the truth on immigration. Here are its basics: 1. Build a wall and make Mexico pay for it. Until they do, the U.S. will impound all remittance payments derived from illegal wages, increase fees on millions of Mexican visas, and if necessary enact tariffs on all Mexican imports.
2. Enact nationwide E-Verify, which will bar all illegals from employment in the U.S.
3. End birthright citizenship. No more automatic awarding of citizenship to babies of illegals because they were born inside our borders.
4. End welfare abuse by immigrants. Applicants for entry to the U.S. must certify that they can pay for their own housing, healthcare and other needs.
5. Enhance the penalties for overstaying a visa. Individuals who refuse to leave at the time their visa expires must be subject to criminal penalties.
6. Detain all illegal aliens apprehended crossing the border until they are sent home. No more catch-and-release.
7. Defund sanctuary cities by cutting off their federal grants.
8. Mandatory return of all criminal aliens to their home countries.There are other secondary features regarding the hiring of more ICE officers, cooperation with local gang task forces, treatment of H-1B visas, etc., but the above are the important features that need to be sold to the American people.
Flaws In the Plan
Unfortunately there still lingers Trump's intention to select those who are "good illegals" and allow them to remain in America. My god, what a fiasco that would turn out to be. The bureaucrats in charge of such a "retention board" would surely allow 90% of the illegals to stay. This is the reality of Washington and its corporatist ideologues. Wake up, Donald! There is only one stand to take on illegals: they all must go home and apply for entrance through the front door. Only by setting the bar at the most severe level can we hope to keep the leaks and exceptions at a minimal level.
In addition, Trump's welfare plank in the immigration plan mentions only the denial of welfare services to legal immigrants. But welfare services also need to be denied to illegal immigrants. Far more important.
The policy of allowing illegals to educate their children at taxpayer expense is not mentioned in the plan. Eventually a Trump administration will have to face this issue. But basically, the plan is an excellent start toward solving the alien invasion of America.
Skewering the Buffoons
The importance of Donald Trump can be found in the fact that through the sheer force of his personality, he has opened up gaping holes in the GOP establishment's credibility. He is skewering the buffoons of the GOP like John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, and the gaggles of big spenders that prance around Washington. He has declared the neocon hierarchy of the GOP to be what it is - a coterie of greedy, stupid statists who have no interest in the good of the country, only in more legislative controls and entrenchment of their power in Washington.
Unfortunately the war going on between Trump's camp and the establishment honchos smacks of the Mussolini-Lenin conflicts when the Fascists and the Communists were rising to power in early 20th century Europe. It is a conflict between rival gangs of collectivists to see whose vision of massive government control will prevail. It is not a fight between advocates of freedom and advocates of statism. At least so far it has not shown itself to be such. But there is still time. Trump, however, will have to follow up his very promising immigration plan with several policy positions on the side of freedom and constitutionalism as adverse to GOP business as usual.
For example, will Trump support elimination of progressive tax rates? Will he strengthen his stand against amnesty by abandoning his acceptance of "good illegals?" Will he endorse federalism? Will he propose the end of nation building in foreign policy? Or will he do what the GOP corporatists do, endorse privileges for the banks, unions, minorities, and welfare recipients while imposing democracy throughout the world with our military?
Red Flags In Foreign Policy
As reported in the Los Angeles Times of August 16, 2015, Trump says he wants to defeat Islamic State militants "by taking over a lot of the oil and certain areas of Iraq." When asked about sending U.S. ground troops to do that, Trump said, "That's OK."
This is frightening. Trump would drag us back into the quagmire of a guerrilla war in the guerrillas' home territory. These types of wars can only be won by becoming a permanent occupying force - perpetual war for perpetual peace as Orwell put it. Militant Islam does not threaten us militarily. The danger it represents to us must be fought, not by invasion of Islamic lands, but at our border by simply denying Muslims entrance to our country as immigrants.
Donald Trump is, indeed, a maverick. He has no trouble calling out the pygmies and exposing the charlatanry of the Democrats and Republicans. He has cajones as they say. But does he have the overall mindset to truly stand for freedom and the Constitution? Such a stand requires a certain level of perception in political-economy that identifies why statism is not just pragmatically lethal, but also morally wrong. Does Donald Trump have that level of perception? We are going to find out. The man is certainly defiant in face of the quislings, which is so needed these days. But is he a true patriot, or is he just another corporatist like George W. Bush?
--------------- Nelson Hultberg is a contributing author to the ARRA News Service. He is a freelance writer in Dallas, Texas and the Director of Americans for a Free Republic and author of The Golden Mean: Libertarian Politics, Conservative Values. Tags:Nelson Hultberg, Americans for Free Republic, Donald Trump, 2016 Campaign, Republican Nomination, President of United StatesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
The Saudi Future, The West And The War On Terrorism . . .
. . . Saudi Arabia: The Elephant In The Room
In Jan., 2015, President Barack Obama traveled to Saudi Arabia to pay homage to the new King. (White House photo)
CDHR Commentary: Despite its status as the epicenter of extremism, religious intolerance, corruption, an exporter of lethal dogma, violator of its citizens’ basic human rights and supporter of extremists and terrorists worldwide, the Saudi regime is not only spared Western governments’ admonitions, but enjoys their categorical support and exaltations as an ally in “The War on Terrorism” and a bedrock of regional stability.
No group would more vehemently disagree with the West’s public assessment of the Saudi regime’s good deeds than the Saudi people. If most Saudis (including some royals, old and young) are allowed to express their opinions without incurring forbidding punishments or losing their lucrative financial allotments, they would be the first to characterize the Western regimes, businesses, “experts” and mainstream media outlets’ reporters and commentators as hypocrites, to say the least.
Despite the exchange of frequent visits, appearances in a multitude of press conferences, business fora and elaborate state social events, Westerners (with the exception of former President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice , 70 members of US Congress and Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstroem) have been cowed into avoiding any public mention of human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, even when asked their opinion of or reactions to the Saudi government’s draconian domestic policies. Not only do Western officials genuflect to Saudi wishes, but businesspeople, reporters and educators disregard Saudi abuses of human rights, such as arbitrary arrests, incarcerations without charges and harsh punishment imposed on human rights and social justice advocates.
Many Saudis and others point to Western officials’ flagrant and discriminatory double standards regarding violations of human rights by the Saudi government. These groups argue that while Western officials never publicly mention the plight of prisoners of conscience, marginalization of women, minorities’ rights, religious freedom or freedom of expression in Saudi Arabia, the same officials openly and publicly chastise other governments for less egregious violations than those committed by the Saudi regime. A recent example of Western hypocrisy is evident in President Obama’s speeches and press conferences during his visit to Kenya and Ethiopia in July 2015.
While in Kenya, the President unabashedly condemned social injustices, including violations of human rights, corruption, marginalization of women, child marriage, gay rights, fraudulent elections, lack of economic opportunities for youth, lack of religious freedom and lengthy terms in office by some corrupt politicians, among other things. President Obama reiterated his critical message in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, when he met with 54 heads of states of the African Union (AU) on July 26, 2015. He admonished the heads of states of the AU for their failures to utilize their natural and human resources to advance their societies. President Obama attributed Africa’s political and economic stagnation to the marginalization of women. He forcefully stressed that ‘The single best indicator of whether a nation will succeed is how it treats its women. When women have health care and women have education, families are stronger, communities are more prosperous, children do better in school, nations are more prosperous. If you want your country to grow and succeed, you have to empower your women. Let’s lift up the next generation of women leaders who can help fight injustice and forge peace and start new businesses and create jobs -- We’ll all be better off when women have equal futures.’
Listening to President Obama rebuking the heads of African states for social injustices and bad governance while the US embraces the absolute Saudi regime not only fuels consternation among Saudis aspiring to freedom and social justice, but weakens their struggles for peaceful reforms. Continuing their current unconditional support for the Saudi monarchy is perilous at a time when Western governments, businesses and media should be realizing that the Saudi people are becoming more aware of their usurped rights and, like their counterparts in the Arab World, will rise against oppression, injustices, unemployment and inadequate public services.
Saudi citizens, of all orientations, are among the most active consumers and utilizers of social media in the world. More than at any time in their history, they watch and read uncontrollable and unfiltered information ranging from free speech, religious freedom, human rights, different lifestyles, elections, women’s rights, freedom of choice, checks and balances, corruption, accountability, and transparency to pornography. They are not only discovering that they are among the most disenfranchised people in the world, but they are realizing that they have become global pariahs due to their government’s and country’s roles in fueling extremism, terrorism and violations of basic human rights. For the first time in their history, more Saudis (of all races, genders, beliefs, regions and ages) are attributing the multitude of their social illnesses to the Saudi regime’s policies and practices domestically and globally.
Despite their knowledge that the West is a major contributor to the causes of their domestic subjugation, Saudis, including Western-bashers, admire the West, especially American freedom, lifestyle and technological advancements. Given this sentiment, many Saudis are attuned to Western policies toward their country, especially the West’s unconditional support for and defense of the absolute Saudi ruling family. Consequently, the Saudi people are dismayed by the titanic hypocrisy of the West. Large segments of informed Saudis argue that unconditional Western support for their repressive oligarchy is not only based on economic and strategic benefits, but on historical Western contempt for their culture, race and beliefs.
While the West’s, especially the US’s, interest in Saudi Arabia was originally predicated on oil exclusively, the relationship between the autocratic Saudi ruling family and Western democracies has evolved to include strategic, political and global financial concerns. While the Saudi people benefited from oil revenues (particularly in the areas of infrastructure and employment), their rights contracted as their rulers invested and continue to invest massive amounts of their country’s wealth in building one of the most ubiquitous and repressive security apparatuses in the world which the system uses primarily to suppress the population. When Saudis are engaged in discussions about their government’s draconian domestic policies, they are quick to point fingers at Western support for the Saudi regime, specifically the US. The Saudis are not alone in this finger-pointing. Additionally, some Saudis fault the West’s close ties and collaboration with the Saudi royals for the rise of religious extremism through which Al-Qaeda and other terrorists groups have been able to recruit young Muslims and attract mercenaries from around the world, including the West.
Given this historical assessment of the Western role in Saudi affairs and considering the current irreversible movement toward a new geographical and political order in the Arab World, Western powers, especially the US, have two risky choices to consider regarding the future of Saudi Arabia. They can continue to support and prolong the reign of a tyrannical regime in Saudi Arabia and risk a potential takeover by ISIS-like native zealots, or they can sternly encourage the new generation of the ruling Saudi princes to share real power with all of their increasingly restless citizens. The latter is less risky, because of two futurist aspiring segments of Saudi society, the educated and well-informed youth and women, including some outspoken members of the ruling family. These groups will work with the monarchy to reform and defend the country if they feel the future is theirs, not exclusively that of the Saudi princes and their lethal and backward-looking religious clerics.
------------- Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, CDHR, Washington DC. CDHR is a 501 (c) 3 tax exempt educational organization. H/TReligious Freedom Coalition Tags:Saudia Arbia, The Saudi Future, the West, The War on Terrorism, Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, CDHR, Religious Freedom CoalitionTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Star Parker: I continue to be impressed with the courage and clarity with which Marco Rubio, the conservative young senator from Florida and Republican presidential candidate, takes on the most difficult challenges facing our nation.
I love his pro-life clarity and his uncompromising stand to defund Planned Parenthood. I appreciate the clear logic with which he explains the folly of our nation making deals and concessions with tyrannical regimes in Iran and Cuba, in the naive hope that they will change their ways.
The other day Rubio appeared on Fox and was asked about the Black Lives Matter movement.
His analysis was on target.
The Black Lives Matter movement is fueled in large part by left-wing donors such as billionaire George Soros, whose Open Society Foundation donated $33 million to groups that engaged in Ferguson-related protests.
But the sentiments (which the Black Lives Matter movement taps into and exploits) are very real, as Rubio accurately points out.
This is a "legitimate issue," he said. "It is a fact that in the African-American community around this country, there has been for a number of years now a growing resentment toward how the law enforcement and criminal justice system interacts with the community."
It's "particularly endemic among young African-American males," he continued, "that ... have a much higher chance of interacting with criminal justice than higher education."
Rubio spoke with candor and realism about a personal friend of his — a professional black male — who had been stopped "in the last 18 months eight to nine different times" for no reason.
Many blacks will attest to this reality.
A new Gallup poll surveying perceptions on how racial minorities are treated by the police shows a world of difference in how blacks and whites perceive police activity.
Fifty-two percent of blacks, compared to 78 percent of whites, think racial minorities in their areas are treated "fairly" or "very fairly" by the police. Forty-eight percent of blacks compared to 19 percent of whites think the police treat minorities "unfairly" or "very unfairly."
Black Lives Matter is supported by politically savvy left-wing forces who angle to tap into these very real sentiments, exploit them, create disruption in our political processes and in the nation and institutionalize left-wing, anti-American attitudes and policies.
The mistake of conservatives over many years has been to ignore these very real problems and the destructive sentiments they produce, conceding minority turf to the left.
This has hurt both the country and these communities, as we have expanded government programs and spent trillions of dollars that have not solved problems in minority communities but worsened them. And in the course of it all, political operatives on the left have expanded their own power, wealth and influence.
"(There is) a significant percentage of our population that feels that they are locked out of the promise of this country," said Rubio. "There are a lot of different reasons ... not all have governmental answers."
The growth of government and moral relativism coincides with growing disillusionment throughout the country.
From 1952 to 1998, according to Gallup, over 80 percent of Americans agreed with the statement that "there's plenty of opportunity and anyone who works hard can go as far as they want." By 2013 this was down to 52 percent.
In 1998, 68 percent said the economic system of the country is basically fair. By 2013, this was down to 50 percent.
These trends take a particularly heavy toll in minority communities.
Without faith, hope, a sense of meaning, a sense that personal choices matter and that effort pays off, individuals won't strive to be free.
The Black Lives Matter movement, which wants to push America to the left, works to convince minorities that these factors for freedom are not available to them.
When a conservative senator such as Marco Rubio gives credence to minority grievances and frustration, he opens the door for delivering the conservative message they need to hear, which provides the only hope for solving their problems.
------------ Star Parker is an author and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education. CURE is a non-profit think tank that addresses issues of race and poverty through principles of faith, freedom and personal responsibility. Tags:Star Parker, Center for Urban Renewal and Education, CURE, Race, Ferguson, Black Lives Matter, Marco RubioTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru
#Conservative #Constitution #NRA #GunRights #military 22 yr #veteran #professor #Christian #ProLife #TCOT #SGP #CCOT #schoolchoice #fairtax Married-50+yrs #MAGA
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting the beliefs associated with the ARRA, this blog/site is not controlled by nor funded by the ARRA. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.