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: firstname.lastname@example.org (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, April 22, 2016
Obama Earth Day Again . . .
. . . President Obama to make huge carbon footprint to sign Paris climate agreement in order to reduce your greedy lifestyle . Obama also looking for ways to criminalize any disagreement. Note: this present so-called "agreement" was a treaty that was NOT ratified by Congress!
Tags:President Obama, Earth Day Again, makes huge carbon footprint, to sign, Paris climate agreement, reduce greedy lifestyle, criminalize any disagreement, treaty, not ratified by CongressTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
A tunnel system under Capitol Hill connects the House and Senate to various congressional office buildings. State flags had been displayed on the tunnel walls, but they came down during recent renovations. Now that the renovations are complete, the flags are back up, right?
Nope. That's where Rep. Miller comes in.
She was concerned that someone might actually notice the state flag of Mississippi, which includes the Confederate battle flag in the top left corner.
"I am well aware of how many Americans negatively view the Confederate flag, and, personally, I am very sympathetic to these views," Rep. Miller said. "However, I also believe that it is not the business of the federal government to dictate what flag each state flies."
Evidently she does believe it is the federal government's business -- and hers -- to ban visitors from seeing the Mississippi flag. In her capacity as chairman of the House Administration Committee, Miller decided that none of the state flags would go back up on the tunnel walls.
Some people might laugh at a story like this. But it is all part of the left's intolerant agenda to determine what you can talk about and what you can believe.
If someone walks past 50 state flags and is offended by one, all 50 must come down. But if your wife goes into the ladies' room and is offended by seeing a man there, her offense is bigotry and cannot be tolerated.
A statue of Robert E. Lee is an offense and must be taken down. Bathing the White House in the colors of the homosexual rights movement is progress, and anyone who objects is a Neanderthal.
You can go on ESPN and compare the Tea Party to ISIS, and ESPN will defend free speech. But if you suggest that men should use the men's room, that is grounds for termination.
If you write an essay in your student newspaper defending Israel, your professor can send you a letter expressing his desire that you fail in every endeavor of life. Yes, this really happened -- and nothing was done to the professor.
The culture war is real, my friends. The intolerant left must be stopped. It can be, but the hour is late.
------------- 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, Fool of the Week, Rep. Candice Miller, R-MI, state flags, tunnel system, Capitol Hill To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
. . . Navy Secretary Ray Mabus And The Cultural Evisceration Of The U.S. Navy
Dr. Craig Luther: President Obama came into office in 2009 promising "transformation" and he has delivered on that promise. Over the past 7 1/2 years we've witnessed billion dollar deficits and the establishment of a highly politicized and inexorably failing health care system ("Obamacare"); the "weaponization" of government agencies (think, IRS, EPA, DOJ) to intimidate and attack his political opponents; the calculated and feckless decline of American power and influence throughout the world; relentless redistributionist policies; and the president's support (often with a wink and a nod) of thuggish (and sometimes violent) radical groups like "Occupy Wall Street" and "Black Lives Matter." As a result, America is "on edge" -- socially, racially, economically -- as it hasn't been for decades. Indeed, many have reached the sobering insight that America's best days may now be behind her.
Overlooked by most in Obama's relentless efforts to "remake" America has been his ongoing and dangerous transformation of our military. Here I am not going address the dozens of weapon systems cut, or the tens of thousands of troops given their "pink slips." What I want to speak to is his administration's systematic destruction of the 200+ year-old culture of the U.S. military. This "multicultural makeover," happening right before our eyes, threatens to undermine the very fabric of our armed forces. The forced acceptance of open homosexuality and the burgeoning hostility toward Christianity; the gratuitous degradation of our troops (e.g., forcing ROTC cadets to march in red high heels to experience what it's like to be a woman; making male soldiers wear simulated lactation devices, or lecturing them on "white privilege," dare I go on?); the "full-court press" to make our forces more diverse, most alarmingly by opening up combat positions (even special forces) to female soldiers; and the relentless purging from the ranks of dozens of fine general officers whose only "offense" was their failure to "get with the program" -- all of this, like some nightmarish "progressive" Blitzkrieg, is now wreaking havoc with our reluctant service members, the objective being that of a complete and irreversible cultural transformation. What's next, I wonder -- weaponized hair and nail salons on wheels?
One of those leading the charge in the radical mutation of our military culture is Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus. The former Democratic governor of Mississippi has enthusiastically spearheaded our president's plan to weaken -- and, ultimately, tear asunder -- the bonds of brotherhood that have served our nation so well from Valley Forge to Iwo Jima and Fallujah. To the Bolsheviks now running the show in Washington, D.C., the U.S. military signified the final frontier -- the last bastion of (white, heterosexual) alpha male institutional domination that they still needed to extirpate "root and branch" to complete their bewilderingly successful 40-50 year march through our cultural institutions. And Ray Mabus is the president's point man. Or so it seems. His most damaging contribution to the deep and disturbing social changes rocking our military has been his full-throated support for the integration of women into all -- and I mean all -- combat positions in the U.S. Marine Corps. Infantry, armor, artillery, recon, special forces -- women are now to serve in all these combat branches and not simply in token numbers. This despite the fact that, according to surveys of military women, over 90% have absolutely no desire to serve in combat positions. Yet this is of no consequence to the small cabal of radical feminists and their enablers -- they are in control and they will do just what they want to do, for whatever nefarious purpose. In all honesty, do you think that Ray Mabus and his ilk believe a 5'4" female, weighing 110 pounds, will be able to meet the highly rigorous requirements of combat that today is the sole domain of much larger, much stronger men? Has anyone even considered the hygienic effects of having women serve in the field for weeks on end? And if anyone wants to further explore the history of mixed-gender combat units, simply look at the Israeli example. A catastrophe it was.
When the Marine Corps leadership produced a study making unequivocally clear that all-male units performed significantly better than mixed-gender units, Mabus would have none of it. He "savaged officials who ran the study, accusing them of bias and not wanting women to succeed." (Source: Jonah Bennett, "Navy Secretary Ray Mabus to Step Down," 3 March 2016.)
A paragon of political correctness -- that evil, sinister twin of Marxist multiculturalism -- Mabus is also supported the elimination of that loathsome word "man" from all job titles in the U.S. Navy. There are 21 job titles in the Navy which include the word "man" (e.g., "fireman"), and Navy officials were to report to Mabus by 1 April on what was to be done to efface such "sexist" titles from the vernacular of the Navy. Wonder how that went.
Navy recruiters will now be forced to push diversity at all costs -- women and minorities are in, white males are out, regardless of the impact such a policy may have on morale and mission effectiveness. Yet the impact on morale, on fighting qualities, is of little concern to Mabus and his merry band of Bolsheviks, as they turn our armed forces into a lunatic laboratory for the New Marxism -- an experiment which may well wreck the Marine Corps (and other service branches) as currently configured, as the final white alpha-male bastion in American society is expunged once and for all. And all in the name of "diversity" -- diversity ueber alles.
Not too very long ago, the thought of handing machine guns or grenades to young women and telling them to fight for us would have been met with derision -- horror even; indeed, no sentient human being would have entertained such a barbaric thought. Would America have been a greater, a more just nation had several hundred young women -- some no doubt pregnant -- been among the 1500 American G.I.'s who died on Omaha Beach on 6 June 1944? And, today, any female Marines captured by Islamic State would be systematically tortured, raped and killed; that would be the inevitable result of the gender policies promoted by preternatural fools such as Ray Mabus.
In a larger sense, the cultural evisceration of our military on the altar of multiculturalism, diversity, whatever you want to call it, should surprise no one. At its very core, multiculturalism seeks to destroy -- to crush all that is Good, Decent, Moral and Just in our fading Judeo-Christian society. As I said, this sinister process has been underway for decades, yet only now, under Barack Obama, have the Bolsheviks been let loose on our armed forces. Sadly, our military brass have, for the most part, simply stood by and watched as Mabus and his ilk wielded their wrecking balls. I cannot recall the case of a single general who, in an act of moral courage, resigned from the service in protest. Yet there is a fundamental difference between physical and moral courage, is there not?
In recent days, Russian fighter-bombers have done barrel rolls within ca. 30 feet of our planes and ships inside international waters. Such reckless behavior (no doubt part of Putin's plan to ratchet up the level of intimidation) leaves little to no room for error and focuses one's mind on the possibility of a tragic international incident, even war. But as the Army chief-of-staff testified recently before the Senate Armed Services Committee, if it ever came to war with Putin's Russia, we'd most likely get the short end of the stick.
Shiny Objects Distract Us From Making Our Mark On History
by Tom Balek, Contributing Author: Many people today think that our time in history is oh, so important. They believe that life today is more dangerous, more difficult, more demanding than ever. By the very definition of evolution, we must be the smartest people who ever lived. We are the result of human progress. The Western world is now "progressive", so our collective decisions about how we live and what we do must be better than ever before. We are the current revision level. The latest. The best.
Maybe it's time to think honestly about our place in history.
Sometimes when I catch myself whining about what a rough day I had, I think of the guys who stormed the beachhead at Normandy in the face of withering machine gun fire. Or the men who charged the enemy at Khe Sanh. Or Verdun. Or Gettysburg. Or Lexington. Or Fallujah.
I think of the frontier families who left all their comforts behind to travel west on a wagon, taking a life-or-death chance to find peace and prosperity in a new, untamed land.
I think of the kids who went to work at the age of 9 in a coal mine or sweat shop because they knew the family had to eat. And the people who face disability, disease, and injury and keep on working.
Our grandparents worked harder every day than we will on our best day. And knowing the challenges they overcame, they were probably smarter than most of us, too. Throughout history people have endured tremendous hardships, and have accomplished remarkable achievements. Many gave their lives to protect others from evil. How do we stack up against our predecessors?
The news pundits tell us that the 2016 presidential election is the most important one ever, to the exclusion of all other topics and events. With seven months until the election, there is nothing else on planet Earth worth reporting other than what our presidential candidates have to say about the most critical topics.
Sadly, the most critical topic right now seems to be whether the few hundred transgendered individuals who exist in our country should use a bathroom labeled "men", "women", or "other".
We may not be fighting for our existence in a global war, but it's not like there aren't still serious challenges facing today's world. Poverty still exists. Genocide continues. Despots and ideologues threaten peaceful citizens. Unborn children are slaughtered. But these big, historic issues are kicked aside by academic, media and political leaders who distract us with frivolous, fraudulent shiny-object issues, and our candidates are only too happy to join them in changing the subject: Climate change. Women's rights. Safe rooms for college students who fear "white privilege". Perceived police brutality. Gay wedding cakes.
Frankly, life in these United States is pretty good for most of us. We can preserve the qualities we inherited. We can make life even better, both at home and around the world. But it won't happen unless we find and elect political leaders who have learned from history, who have a vision of what our place in history can be, and who don't get distracted by shiny objects.
--------------- Tom Balek is a fellow conservative activist, blogger, musician and contributes \ to the ARRA News Service. Tom resides in South Carolina and seeks to educate those too busy with their work and families to notice how close to the precipice our economy has come. He blogs at Rockin' On the Right Side Tags:Tom Balek, Rockin' On The Right Side, shiny objects, distract us, making our mark, history, Conservatives, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Liberals, Media Bias, Economic Mess transgender, bathroomsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Rassmussen Reports: The Trump train appears to be back on track following his big win in Tuesday’s New York primary.
The latest Rasmussen Reports weekly Trump Change survey finds that 83% of Likely Republican Voters now believe Donald Trump is likely to be their party’s presidential nominee, up from 76% a week ago. Perhaps more significantly the latest finding includes 49% who say a Trump nomination is Very Likely, a view held by just 38% of Republicans last week.
Perhaps more significantly the latest finding includes 49% who say a Trump nomination is Very Likely, a view held by just 38% of Republicans last week.
In mid-March, 87% of GOP voters said a Trump nomination was likely, with 59% who considered it Very Likely. Both were the highest weekly findings since Rasmussen Reports began the Trump Change survey last August. But after building for months, expectations of a Trump nomination began falling in the face of candidate gaffes, $70 million in anti-Trump advertising and his loss of the Wisconsin primary. That downward momentum stabilized a bit last week and now seems to have been reversed.
Among all likely voters, 71% see a Trump nomination as likely, with 39% who think it is Very Likely. Last week at this time, those findings stood at 67% and 30% respectively. . . .
Just 23% say Trump is not likely to win the nomination, with nine percent (9%) who say it’s Not At All Likely. Only 13% of Republicans feel Trump’s nomination is not very or Not At All Likely at this point. . . .
Next Tuesday’s primaries in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Maryland, Delaware and Rhode Island all appear much friendlier to Trump than to his two remaining rivals, Texas Senator Ted Cruz and Ohio Governor John Kasich. If Trump keeps winning primaries and adding delegates, it’s difficult to imagine the GOP elders denying him the nomination at the party’s national convention in July even if he’s a few votes short of the 1,237 total needed to claim victory.
Men remain more confident than women that Trump is the likely nominee. Those under 40 aren’t as convinced as their elders are. . . . [Read More] Tags:Rassmussen Reports, Trump Change, 83% GOP Voters, Donald Trump, Likely nomineeTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:Hot n' Spicy, Hillary Clinton, Pandering to African Americans, running as, first black female president, 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 Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: Lots of people lately have been giving their opinion about tax avoidance. The president criticized corporate “inversions” and told these companies to stop “gaming the system.” Lynn Woolley says that the recent Panama Papers scandal proves that tax avoidance is the American Way. Merrill Matthews says tax avoidance is patriotic.
First, let‘s start with some definitions. The IRS says that avoidance of taxes is not a criminal offense. It is what anyone tries to do to avoid paying more taxes than he or she might owe. That is different from tax evasion, which is a deliberate attempt to evade paying taxes you owe by the use of “deceit, subterfuge, camouflage, concealment” or other means.
People spend lots of time and money each year trying to avoid paying more taxes. The scandal of the Panama Papers is that we found out that many of the leaders of other countries who demand high taxes from their citizens used other means to keep from paying those same taxes by setting up offshore accounts.
Corporations try to limit the amount of taxes they pay by going offshore. Individuals also try to avoid taxes by using various creative strategies. Daniel Henninger writing in the Wall Street Journal reports that most Europeans spend a significant amount of time on tax avoidance by using cash-only transactions, bartering, and using off-the-books accounting. Some are legal. Others are not. But the goal is to keep from paying high personal taxes in Europe.
Merrill Matthews argues that tax avoidance should be considered patriotic. The federal government is limited to those powers enumerated in the Constitution. Tax avoidance is one way to stop feeding the problem of the overgrown government. Also, tax avoidance might actually force Washington to make the 74,000-page tax code simpler. That is why you can consider tax avoidance a patriotic act.
----------- Kerby Anderson is a radio talk show host heard on numerous stations via the Point of View Network endorsed by Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service Tags:Kerby Anderson, Viewpoints, Point of View, tax avoidance, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
I certainly am. Ms. Tubman was a great hero of freedom. President Jackson has a more . . . mixed legacy.
The original plan to rotate Alexander Hamilton off the ten spot met with pushback as a result of his rising popularity from the Broadway play, Hamilton. Besides, Hamilton deserves blame—er, placement on the nation’s official paper money. Hamilton devised the first national banking system. Andrew Jackson, decades after Hamilton’s death, nixed that insider-mercantile scheme by refusing to re-authorize the central bank of the day, setting up a very different system for the Treasury and America’s banks.
Less than a century later, Hamilton’s idea was revived in the form of the Federal Reserve. Which we benefit/suffer from to this very day.
But in a bizarre twist, Jackson was not simply replaced. He was demoted. Tubman is to be placed on the note’s obverse, and Jackson moved to the back of the bus, er, note. The reverse.
I would have preferred to revive Old Hickory years from now, after the Federal Reserve dissolved, to be featured on a private bank’s note. After all, private banks did that for years between Jackson’s time and the modern period.
Bank notes don’t need the imprimatur of government.
That would allow us to place, on the flip side of the sawbuck, a more suitable image — of the Big Dipper, which served escaped slaves as a direction, to go north: “follow the Drinking Gourd.”
Additionally, the Big Dipper suggests bailouts, doesn’t it?
We’ll have plenty more before the system is changed.
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, The Drinking Gourd, Treasury Plan, change bills, Andrew Jackson, Harriet Tubman, A;exander HamiltonTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
The Castros Are Getting Everything They Want From Obama
Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro, left, and President
Raul Castro at the Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba.
by Mike Gonzalez: The White House decision to disinvite a Grammy-award winning jazz legend who is a strong defender of democracy in Cuba was nothing short of contemptible.
The fact that it has now embarrassingly backtracked and re-invited him proves it had acted like corporations that are only too happy to ignore human rights violations in exchange for future profits with Cuba until public pressure gets too intense.
In other words, engagement with the Castros is not changing them, as promised, it’s changing us—as many of us predicted. It bears repeating it: The Castros, like all dictators, are bacterial. You touch them and you become contaminated. We are diminishing ourselves, and for what? The Castros have rendered Cuba a pauperized state, with no money.
Paquito d’Rivera is National Endowment for the Arts Jazz Master; holds honorary doctorates from the Berklee School of Music and University of Pennsylvania; is a Living Jazz Legend of the Kennedy Center and has won the Presidential Medal of the Arts. He’s already had the honor of playing at the White House, which belongs to all of us.
In other words, not a piker.
Months ago, he was invited to play at the White House on April 30 for International Jazz Day, in an event to be hosted by President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama. There would be other greats at the concert, including Sting, Chick Corea, Aretha Franklin, Diana Krall, Pat Metheny and Chucho Valdes. He felt honored, cleared his schedule, and prepared.
Then, earlier this month, d’Rivera received a call from the organizers telling him that he “had not passed the vetting process by the White House.” The invitation had been withdrawn.
But suddenly this morning, Thursday, April 21, Telemundo is reporting that the White House has called d’Rivera and said it had all been an error, the invitation is back on.
D’Rivera did not take things lying down but penned a public letter to Obama that bears reading because of its clarity and its defense of American values. The letter was dated April 11, but the White House did nothing until it began to get attention yesterday, Wednesday, April 20.
As d’Rivera put it, “I fear that this ‘not passing the vetting process’ may have to do with my decades-long vocal position against the dictatorship that oppresses Cuba, my country of birth, and my support of human rights and democratic values that you defended so well a few weeks ago in Havana.”
This last point is important, because it puts a lie to the Obama administration’s contention that shunning the Castros had not worked, but its new policy of engaging the Western Hemisphere’s worst human rights offenders and only dictatorship would somehow magically produce results.
That it has. Just this week Carnival Cruise suddenly embarrassingly had to backtrack from its just announced launch of a cruise to Cuba that would comply with Castro regulations by excluding Cuban-born Americans. As happened to the White House, the “Hate Boat” proved a public relations nightmare.
Google, too, has cozied up to the Castros by teaming up with Fidel’s favorite artist in a gallery where 20 Cubans (out of a population of 11 million) are promised free and fast Internet asset. Only that “Google+Kcho” is 100 percent monitored, so not even those 20 can read stuff the regime frowns upon. It’s turned into “Google+Fidel’s Best Friend.”
The administration itself has already compromised democratic values because of Obama’s new “Man in Havana.” Secretary of State John Kerry shunned pro-democracy figures — not their tormentors, as principle should have dictated — at the ceremony opening our embassy in Havana last year. The State Department, too, meted out rough treatment to the daughter of a murdered Cuban dissident because Castro government goons had complained about her presence at a press conference.
At the just concluded bi-decennial communist party congress the entire leadership was pretty much “re-elected” by the 1,000 cadre in attendance. Raúl himself received 100 percent of the vote (popular chap he is) and will now remain head of the party, and thus head of Cuba, till 2021, when he will be 90 years old, if he lives that long.
Enjoy the letter.
Note to teachers, throw away the Howard Zinn material and tell your students to read this:Dear Mr. President:
A few months ago, the prestigious Thelonious Monk Institute informed me that they had proposed that I participate in International Jazz Day, an event organized by UNESCO that will take place at the White House on April 30th, and will have you, Mr. President, and first lady Michelle Obama, as hosts. This concert will feature many loved and admired colleagues of mine such as Chick Corea, Aretha Franklin, Jimmy Heath, Dave Holland, Al Jarreau, Diana Krall, Christian McBride, John McLaughlin, Pat Metheny, Wayne Shorter, Esperanza Spalding, Sting, and even my former Cuba-based colleague Chucho Valdés. I was delighted and put the rehearsal schedule and dates on my calendar.
I regarded this invitation as recognition of my contribution to American culture that, throughout the years, has earned me the appointment as NEA Jazz Master, honorary doctorates from Berklee School of Music and University of Pennsylvania, Kennedy Center Living Jazz Legend, and the Presidential Medal of the Arts, among other awards. So imagine my surprise when, a couple of days ago, I received a phone call from the Monk Institute informing me, without any further details, that my participation did not pass the vetting process by the White House. That is all the information that was given.
If the matter at heart here were my cultural contribution to Jazz and American culture, I wouldn’t take the time to write you this letter, Mr. President. I have played the White House before. However, I fear that this “not passing the vetting process” may have to do with my decades-long vocal position against the dictatorship that oppresses Cuba, my country of birth, and my support of human rights and democratic values that you defended so well a few weeks ago in Havana. This wouldn’t be the first time that I have suffered discrimination instigated by the Cuban dictatorship, due to my democratic convictions, even in the United States. And still, this occasion strikes me as particularly troublesome, given that it is an event in which you, Mr. President, will be the host. You, who just a few days ago defended in my native-land the principle that “citizens should be free to speak their mind without fear, to organize and to criticize their government and to protest peacefully,” and praised the accomplishments of the Cuban exile, of which I am a proud member.
Mr. President, I write to you because it concerns me that your genuine goodwill gestures towards the Cuban people could be understood as a call to be complacent towards the demands of the dictatorship that oppresses it; that these gestures may be taken as a pretext to marginalize, even on American soil, Cuban exiles who defend the right of the Cuban people to express freely and to decide their destiny democratically. It is telling (and I pray that I’m wrong) that if the Cuban regime is willing to exert this level of spite and pressure against a public figure in another country—and not just any other country, but the United States—one can only imagine the level of impunity with which the Castro regime acts against Cuban private citizens at home.
It concerns me, that if this is an act of political discrimination against me, it will take place in your house—which is the house of all Americans, given its symbolic weight. It concerns me because it is easier to bear individual discrimination against my person—no matter how painful and humiliating it may be—than the idea that in the name of coexistence with other governments, regardless of their repressive nature, there will be a violation of the basic principles of free speech that so many generations of Americans have fought for over centuries — principles that are a model and a beacon of hope for a considerable part of humankind.
I suppose that this decision to “veto” my presence was made without your knowledge, but my exclusion from the show will be made public. It is my civic duty as a citizen to warn you that even an event celebrating a musical genre that embodies the aspiration of freedom could be used precisely to do the opposite. Because of my respect towards you — which has only increased recently due to your performance in my native country—I believe it is my duty to inform you that your status as host is possibly being manipulated by the very people who deny the very principles that allowed you to become the president of this country, and which allow me to address the most powerful man on Earth with absolute freedom and without fearing repercussions.
Paquito D’Rivera--------------- Mike Gonzalez (@Gundisalvus) is a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and is a widely experienced international correspondent, commentator and editor who has reported from Asia, Europe and Latin America. He served in the George W. Bush Administration first at the Securities and Exchange Commission and then at the State Department. Tags:Cuba, The Castros, Getting Everything They Want, President Obama, Mike Gonzalez, The Heritage FoundationTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
President Obama Violates The Constitution By Not Submitting Climate Treaty to Senate
by Senator Mike Lee & Rep. Mike Kelly Today at United Nations Headquarters in New York City, Secretary of State John Kerry and representatives of over 130 nations will sign the Framework Convention on Climate Change agreement that was negotiated in Paris last December.
According to President Obama, this “historic agreement” will “hold every country accountable” if they fail to meet its carbon emission targets.
The White House has also acknowledged that the agreement contains “legally binding” provisions designed to create a “long-term framework” that will force the United States and signatory countries to reduce carbon emissions for decades to come.
Despite these facts, President Obama has already announced he will not submit the Paris Climate Agreement to the Senate for advice and consent. Instead, the White House claims the signature environmental achievement of the president’s tenure is just an “international agreement” not meriting Senate attention.
If the stakes weren’t so high, this claim would be laughable on its face.
Not only was this agreement’s predecessor, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, submitted to the Senate and approved as a treaty, but when the Senate ratified that treaty, the Foreign Relations Committee specifically reported that any future emissions targets agreed to through the Convention “would have to be submitted to the Senate for its advice and consent.”
President Obama has chosen to ignore this directive.
He has also chosen to ignore the State Department’s eight-factor test that is used to determine “whether any international agreement should be brought into force as a treaty or as an international agreement other than a treaty.”
Those eight factors are:1) The extent to which the agreement involves commitments or risks affecting the nation as a whole (the agreement’s carbon reductions will inflict costs on every American who consumes energy).
2) Whether the agreement is intended to affect state laws (the agreement will force states to meet emission targets).
3) Whether the agreement can be given effect without the enactment of subsequent legislation by the Congress (Congress will have to appropriate money for the agreement’s Green Climate Fund).
4) Past U.S. practice as to similar agreements (the agreement’s predecessor was submitted as a treaty).
5) The preference of the Congress as to a particular type of agreement (Congress wants to vote on this agreement).
6) The degree of formality desired for an agreement (the agreement is a highly detailed 31-page document).
7) The proposed duration of the agreement, the need for prompt conclusion of an agreement, and the desirability of concluding a routine or short-term agreement (the agreement sets emissions targets decades in advance).
8) The general international practice as to similar agreements (there are many, but the 1985 Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer is just one example).The only reason President Obama is not sending the Paris Climate Agreement to the Senate as a treaty is that he knows the Senate would handily reject it.
This is an unacceptable breach of Article II Section 2 of the Constitution, and Congress must do something about it.
That is why we have introduced a concurrent resolution in the House and Senate expressing the sense of Congress that the Paris Climate Agreement must be submitted to the Senate as a treaty for its advice and consent.
If President Obama fails to do so, then Congress must prevent its implementation by forbidding any payments to the agreement’s “Green Climate Fund,” an international slush fund included in the Paris agreement to induce developing nations to sign the agreement.
If Congress fails to specifically prohibit taxpayer money from being spent implementing the Paris Climate Agreement, then they will be complicit in President Obama’s subversion of the Constitution.
------------ Mike Lee is a Republican U.S. Senator from Utah. Mike Kelly is a Republican U.S. Representative for the the third congressional district in Pennsylvania. Tags:Obama, Violating the Constitution, Not Submitting Climate Treaty to Senate, Senator Mike Lee, Rep. Mike KellyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:PC Gender Offender, Transgender bathroom rights, over everyone else’s rights, safety, privacy, AF Branco, editorial cartoonTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by IR Editors: Today practically every Republican candidate rushes to proclaim himself or herself a “Reagan conservative.” But what exactly does that mean? Or what should it mean?
Ronald Reagan suggested the answer when he described modern conservatism as “a vigorous new synthesis of traditional and libertarian thought.” The president credited a “great thinker” with “fashioning” this synthesis: National Review editor Frank S. Meyer.
“It was Frank Meyer,” Reagan said, “who reminded us that the robust individualism of the American experience was part of the deeper current of Western learning and culture. He pointed out that a respect for law, an appreciation for tradition, and regard for the social consensus that gives stability to our public and private institutions, these civilized ideas must still motivate us even as we seek a new economic prosperity based on reducing government interference in the marketplace. . . . Because ours is a consistent philosophy of government, we can be very clear: We do not have a separate social agenda, separate economic agenda, and a separate foreign agenda. We have one agenda.”
Meyer the great conservative thinker was actually a Communist Party member as a young man. In fact, he became so active as a Communist leader that he was expelled from the London School of Economics.
Meyer began to reassess his beliefs during World War II, especially after reading that celebrated work on classical liberalism and free-market economics, F. A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom. By 1956, when he joined William F. Buckley Jr.’s National Review, Meyer was an avowed anti-Communist and a leading conservative intellectual. Until his death in 1972, he stood at the fore of the effort to bring libertarianism and traditionalism—freedom and virtue—into harmony. This synthesis is often called “fusionism”; to Reagan and many others, it was simply “conservatism.”
Today, as threats to freedom and the moral order abound, we could do worse than turn to Meyer to be liberated from what he called the “intellectual bankruptcy of . . . collectivist Liberalism.”
Freedom and Virtue
"Truth withers when freedom dies, however righteous the authority that kills it; and free individualism uninformed by moral value rots at its core and soon brings about conditions that pave the way for surrender to tyranny.”
— What Is Conservatism?, 1964
What Are We Conserving?
"Conservatism is no more, nor less, than devotion to the restoration and renewal of the spirit of Western civilization.”
— Remarks on the tenth anniversary of National Review, 1965
The Bulwarks of Civilization
"The first victim of the mobs let loose by the weakening of civilizational restraint will be, as it has always been, freedom—for anyone, anywhere.”
— “Libertarianism or Libertinism?,” 1969
"The essence of civilization . . . is tradition: no single generation of men can of itself discover the proper ends of human existence.”
— “Libertarianism or Libertinism?,” 1969
"I would be, if there were not an armed enterprise determined on our destruction, an isolationist.”
— Conversation with R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., 1969
-------------- The Intercollegiate Review (IR) is published by Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) and is dedicated to advancing the principles that make America free, virtuous, and prosperous. ISI shared this article with the editor of ARRA News Service. Tags:Frank Meyer, Communist, Reagan Conservative, Intercollegiate Review, Intercollegiate, Studies InstituteTo 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: Obama's Travesty
Barack Obama said he wanted to fundamentally transform America, and he has in many ways. From health care to energy policy, even the meaning of marriage -- much has changed since 2008. But he has also fundamentally transformed America's foreign policy -- largely to the benefit of our enemies.
Under the Obama/Kerry/Clinton foreign policy, the world has become unmoored. That is the conclusion of Lee Smith's latest column at The Weekly Standard.
Smith reminds us that at the end of the day, it is Obama who is calling the shots, fundamentally transforming America's foreign policy and, in the process, the world. Lee writes:". . . it's the president who is giving Iran concession after concession. . . while Obama lets critics at home and abroad stick Kerry with the charge of appeasement. But it's not really appeasement -- it's an Obama reeducation program. He's correcting American foreign policy. . .
"Obama offers a different kind of thinking: Publicly insulting American allies is honorable. The only way to avoid war is to consort with a state sponsor of terror. Peace and security is the result of giving tens of billions of dollars to a regime that is making war across the Middle East.
"It's a travesty."I agree.
Think about the beneficiaries of Obama's foreign policy: Obama relaxed restrictions on Cuba. He "reset" relations with Russia. He removed sanctions on Iran.
He allowed the Arab Spring to turn into a nightmare. In fact, Obama is in the Middle East this week answering for the chaos he largely created.
For the first half of his presidency, Hillary Clinton was the architect of Obama's unraveling of American leadership in the world. Now she wants to finish the job. I think we've had enough of his foreign policy travesty. The change we need in the White House is leadership the world can rely on!
ESPN -- Shilling For The Left
ESPN, the Disney-owned sports network, fired baseball legend Curt Schilling yesterday for expressing his views, on his personal Facebook page, about the ongoing bathroom battles. His firing is yet another example of the intolerance of the left.
In a statement announcing its decision, ESPN bizarrely claimed that it was "an inclusive organization." That Orwellian statement is clearly contradicted by reality. ESPN is not inclusive when it comes to mainstream opinions about men using women's restrooms.
Most Americans share Schilling's views. But ESPN apparently has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to common sense.
By the way, isn't it amazing how anti-science the left has become?
Anyone who has a high school textbook can look up how sex is biologically defined. It's not just being born with certain organs. Every cell has a chromosome that determines your gender.
You can remove certain body parts and wear different clothing. But you can also give a cell from your body to a scientist and he can determine your gender at birth without ever looking at you. Having surgery will not make you a woman any more than grafting a horn on your head will make you a unicorn.
------------- 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, President Obama, Travesty, ESPN, Shilling For The Left To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Immigration Failure -- By Design: Doing The Bidding Of Open Borders Anarchists.
by Michael Cutler: The Obama administration's immigration policies, including outrageous executive orders and other such directives, have hobbled all efforts at immigration law enforcement. “Surges” of unaccompanied minors across our nation's southern border, the release of thousands of illegal aliens who have serious criminal convictions -- for crimes of violence, including rape, weapons possession, drug offenses and even homicide -- have made it clear that the term “immigration law enforcement” is now a virtual oxymoron.
Now the Obama administration, to the consternation of Americans across the United States, is preparing to admit at least 10,000 Syrian refugees into the United States with less scrutiny than ever before. This was the focus of my April 15, 2016 article for FrontPage Magazine, “How Obama's Refugee Policies Undermine National Security: Obama orders 'shields down' in the wake of a succession of deadly terror attacks.”
Furthermore, the huge quantities of heroin and cocaine present in towns and cities across our nation lay waste to the administration’s absurd lie that our borders have never been more secure.
On June 27, 2015, CAPS (Californians for Population Stabilization) posted my article, “Heroin Epidemic: The Real Metric for Determining Border Security.” In my judgment, the failures of our immigration system, while devastating to America and Americans, is actually a twisted “success story” for organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a laundry list of other organizations and individuals that are intent on flooding America with huge numbers of foreign workers, tourists and students to maximize profits at an extraordinary price: obliterating the “American Dream” and even, all too often, costing Americans their very lives.
Clearly the Obama administration has done more than any other administration to undermine the integrity of the immigration system and hobble any efforts at immigration law enforcement. The immigration crisis is a long time in the making. Indeed, prior administrations of both parties also bear responsibility for the immigration crisis that now threatens national security, public safety and the future of our nation and our citizens.
Back on May 5, 2005, I participated in a hearing that was conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims. The topic of the hearing was, “New "Dual Missions" Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.” My prepared testimony for that hearing begins on Page 12 of the transcript of the hearing. What I said then absolutely applies today. I was accompanied at the witness table by three other witnesses: Mr. T.J. Bonner, President, National Border Patrol Council; Ms. Janice Kephart, former September 11 Commission Staff Counsel; and Mr. Richard Stana, Director of Homeland Security and Justice Issues, U.S. Government Accountability.
The hearing was convened approximately 44 months after the attacks of 9/11 to determine how the newly created Department of Homeland Security was dealing with the immigration issue, an issue that was central to the ability of the terrorists to carry out that deadly attack.
The coincidence that we must not ignore is that it took the United States and our allies 44 months after the attack at Pearl Harbor to successfully wage war against the Axis Powers (principally Japan and Germany) to bring that war to a successful end. We must also not lose sight of the fact that the 19 terrorists of the 9/11 attacks inflicted more casualties on the United States mainland than did the entire Japanese navy at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
In response to that attack at Pearl Harbor and to the attacks by the Nazi war machine in Europe, the United States quickly mobilized to join with its allies to defeat our common enemies by building fleets of thousands of a wide variety of aircraft and thousands of ocean-going vessels, including Liberty Ships, battleships, submarines and aircraft carriers. We created brand new weapons systems, including the completion and deployment of nuclear weapons. No task was too daunting for the “Greatest Generation.”
I strongly urge you to watch an excellent documentary, “WW2 from Space HD-Full Documentary,” posted by Armed Forces Videos, about the true magnitude of the success America and her allies scored back then.
Now let's contrast the grit and resolve of the Greatest Generation with where we are today and our current “leaders” by considering this statement from Richard Stana's prepared testimony at that hearing:Our work showed that ICE and CBP have made some progress, but much confusion still exists about roles, mission, responsibilities, performance measures and accountability. Reorganizing the bureaus now before the mission and strategic plans are fully developed and operational could further disrupt the mission and operation of these bureaus. More needs to be done to ensure that each element of the framework is put in place. If it isn't done in proper sequence, mission, then planning, then structure, this could result in a case of ready, shoot, aim.Now consider the exchange between Congressman Steve King and Mr. Stana:Mr. KING. And Mr. Stana, you referenced in your testimony that the mission for ICE is national security and not immigration enforcement. And can you reference a policy statement that establishes that?
Mr. STANA. I wouldn't say it is either/or. What I would say would be immigration in the context of national security. I would just reference that to the DHS strategic plans and then the ICE—well, ICE doesn't have a strategic plan in final form yet, but in their interim plans and CBP plans, they mention the nexus to national security. It doesn't preclude immigration efforts.
Mr. KING. And is there any directive on the part of Congress that you know of that DHS would be reacting to in order to promote that kind of a policy, or do you believe that is an internal conclusion?
Mr. STANA. I think what they are doing is taking the mission that was given to them statutorily and interpreting it in that way. I would point out, though, that of all the agencies that are mentioned in the homeland security legislation in 2002, only one was abolished, and that was INS, for whatever reason. And I know some of us have been in hearings for years and years and years, it goes back past the Jordan Commission—talking about how to deal with INS, and apparently one solution was just to dissolve it.I can still recall sitting at that hearing and fuming that 44 months after this nation's worst terror attack, formulating a finalized strategic plan for immigration law enforcement was beyond the reach of our “leaders” at the DHS -- an agency that is so dysfunctional that I have come to refer to it as the "Department of Homeland Surrender."
I was thunder-struck by the response Richard Stana provided when he said that of all of the federal agencies, for “whatever reason,” after the attacks of 9/11, only the INS was abolished. As it turned out, I did not have long to wait to voice my anger and frustration. Rep. King then asked me about attrition issues where ICE agents were concerned and I began by talking about the issue of loss of institutional memory, but then asked to be able to address the statements made by Stana. I explained how it was foolhardy to ignore the importance of routine immigration law enforcement to enhance national security. I strongly suggest you take the time to read the transcript of the hearing.
In my judgment, the Bush administration, in creating the DHS, seized the opportunity to abolish the INS and slice it into various components, adding in other agencies and responsibilities and placing managers at the top if each chain of command who had little or no immigration experience to hobble any efforts to enforce immigration laws.
The push for globalization and the importation of cheap labor apparently provided the motivation for Bush and others.
Today, all too many politicians are guided by greed and avarice, not their oaths of office or commitment to our nation or its citizens. In order to curry favor and campaign contributions, they must “deliver.”
While the 9/11 Commission made it clear that the visa process, which the terrorists easily exploited, needed to be tightened up, because of the pressures exerted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its affiliated members, the “Discover America Partnership,” the Visa Waiver Program, which included 26 countries on September 11, 2001 has been incrementally expanded to currently include 38 countries.
Our immigration laws, it must be noted, make absolutely no distinction whatsoever about the race, religion or ethnicity of aliens who seek to enter the United States. The laws were enacted to protect the safety and well-being being of America and Americans. As the title of my March 23, 2016 Frontpage Magazine stated, “Immigration Law Enforcement Is Not About Xenophobia But Commonsense.”
The abysmal failures of the immigration system are hardly a secret. Politicians from both political parties frequently declare that the immigration system is broken -- yet most of their proposals to “fix” the broken system would actually greatly exacerbate the problems. Their “solutions” and carefully parsed statements were deviously concocted to create the illusions of solving these problems, while actually doing nothing to impede the flow of cheap foreign labor, foreign tourists and foreign students.
Such a massive legalization program would do irreparable damage to national security. While the southern border must be made secure, the entire immigration system must have integrity -- yet this is an issue that is almost never discussed by anyone. None of the terrorists of 9/11 ran the border. Most terrorists entered the United States through international airports.
The lack of integrity to the immigration system enabled terrorists to enter the United States and commit immigration fraud - enabling some to be granted political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even, in some instances, United States citizenship just months before carrying out terror attacks.
Fairfax, VA — Americans for Limited Government Foundation today issued a special report on the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), "ICANN Do What I Want."
ICANN is poised to take sole control over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions when its contract with the U.S. Commerce Department expires on Sept. 30, leaving ICANN as the world's only resolver of website IP addresses and domain names.
The report asks "why the organization, despite having obtained tax-exempt status under Sec. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, is engaged in quite a bit of lobbying. It told the IRS it would not lobby when it filed for exempt status," Americans for Limited Government Foundation President Nathan Mehrens wrote in a synopsis of the report.
And, "despite originally telling the IRS that its board would not be compensated other than reimbursements, ICANN has since changed course and the board is well compensated," Mehrens added.
"If ICANN is pushing the boundaries and thumbing its nose at the Congress now, imagine how it will behave if the U.S. government oversight role is relinquished. This is not an outcome we can afford as there are no do-overs once the relinquishment occurs," Mehrens concluded. Tags:ICANN Special Report, The internet Giveaway, Americans for Limited Government, Nathan Mehrens, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and NumberTo 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< mistaken identity, GOPe for HillaryTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Washington, D.C. – Today, for the 45th consecutive year, the American Conservative Union Foundation (ACU) released its ratings of members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate based on their votes on key measures of importance to conservatives. This year's rankings may be the most consequential yet as American voters prepare to elect a new president in a tumultuous political year, and conservative American voters are intent on holding accountable their elected congressional representatives.
At an event to be held April 26th in the U.S. Capitol, ACU will present awards to those members of Congress who scored 80% or above, reflecting a strongly conservative voting record.
In addition to its annually anticipated congressional ratings, this year ACU has produced the nation’s first 50-state comprehensive legislative rating guide with scores for more than 7,500 individual state legislators.
"Our comprehensive scoring covers all issues of interest to conservatives, seeking to balance President Ronald Reagan's three-legged stool of economic, national security, and cultural conservatism," said ACU Chairman Matt Schlapp. "Members of Congress with the highest scores voted most consistently with the ideals articulated in the U.S. Constitution: limited and transparent government, individual rights, and personal responsibility."
House and Senate Averages:
Combined Senate average: 44% (up from 39% in 2014)
Senate Republican average: 79% (down from 81% in 2014)
Combined House average: 45% (no change from 2014)
House Republican average: 77% (up from 76% in 2014)
Lifetime Ratings for Presidential Candidates:
Senator Ted Cruz: 100% (3 years in Senate)
Governor John Kasich: 88% (18 years in House)
Secretary Hillary Clinton: 8.13% (8 years in Senate)
Senator Bernie Sanders: 6.31% (25 years in House and Senate)
[Notable - President Barack Obama: 10% (4 years in Senate)]
---------------- The American Conservative Union (ACU) for over fifty years, ACU has served as an umbrella organization harnessing the collective strength of conservative organizations fighting for Americans who are concerned with liberty, personal responsibility, traditional values, and strong national defense. ACU promotes a conservative vision on issues before Congress, the Executive Branch, State Legislatures, the media, political candidates, and the public. Tags:IACU, American Conservative Union, released its ratings, members, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. SenateTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
His New York Times op-ed, yesterday, “The Danger of Single Story,” builds on a good premise: “each individual life contains a heterogeneous compilation of stories. If you reduce people to one, you’re taking away their humanity.”
Brooks puts a political edge on what otherwise might sound like a lesson in manners with his next sentence: “American politics has always been prone to single storyism — candidates reducing complex issues to simple fables. This year the problem is acute because Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are the giants of Single Storyism.”
Brooks then asserts that Trump and Sanders share a similar story that they beat to death, “the alien invader story.”
You can see how it applies to Trump, a staunch opponent of illegal immigration. Aliens invade!
But Brooks recognizes that Sanders’s story is about “the evil entity called ‘the banks.’” Not exactly alien. This menace is home-grown.
Then our pundit moves on to issues not in the single-story vein of Trump and Sanders, and how what seem to be opposite stories (incarceration prevents crime; too much incarceration is a moral horror) can both be true.
Crime is low right now, but Brooks devotes most of this putative paean to multiple crime stories. The third Bernie story he takes a bite of, the $15 minimum wage, belies the Single Storyism charge. That is, the point of his essay.
Way to go, sophisticate.
He also draws a complete non sequitur: “Raising the minimum wage to $15 may make sense in rich areas.” Nothing he wrote gives any credibility to that. At best the hike would do nothing.
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, David Brooks, story, Single StoryismTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Media Uses Obama's Hillary Defense in Order to Unseal "Classified" Court Files
President Barack Obama & Then Sec. of State Hillary Clinton
Judicial Watch: President Obama recently downplayed the importance of Hillary Clinton's classified emails floating around in her private server and now a journalist is seizing the moment in an effort to unseal the secret court documents of an Al Qaeda leader involved in the 9/11 attacks. The operative's name is Abu Zubaydah and he lives at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo, Cuba along with a few dozen of the world's most dangerous terrorists.
In 2008 Zubaydah, a Saudi national, legally challenged his detention in federal court and all documents associated with the case-such as motions and court orders-have been sealed by the Obama administration. All these years later the motions filed by his "human rights" attorney haven't even been ruled on and pretty much anything to do with the case has been kept from public view. "The systematic, open-ended denial of access to the court records in this proceeding plainly violates the public's First Amendment right of access," according to a lengthy motion filed this week in federal court on behalf of the journalist, who works at a mainstream newspaper. It adds that the government has failed to demonstrate that a proper basis exists to keep the records from going public.
Indeed, the government is simply asserting that all the information is "classified" as it often does when it refuses to make inconvenient material public. Just days ago President Obama seemed to admit that sometimes information is classified when it shouldn't be. The commander-in-chief was downplaying the fact that his own secretary of state jeopardized national security by exclusively using a private, unprotected server to exchange classified information. "What I also know, because I handle a lot of classified information, is that there are - there's classified, and then there's classified," Obama said during a nationally televised interview. "There's stuff that is really top-secret, top-secret, and there's stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state, that you might not want on the transom, or going out over the wire, but is basically stuff that you could get in open-source."
In the motion the reporter's lawyer refers to Obama's statement, writing that it amounts to a concession that some data is improperly classified. The court document also points out that "instances of classification made in excess of authority to conceal unlawful behavior or prevent embarrassment are well documented." Zubaydah's case in particular involves allegations that the government engaged in illegal actions and therefore has a motive to misuse classification to prevent embarrassment, the motion states. "Because preventing embarrassment and concealing violations of law are invalid reasons for classification, this Court should scrutinize the Government's claims of the need for secrecy in this proceeding with extreme care, and release all records for which the Government has not met its constitutional burden," the motion says.
Judicial Watch previously uncovered government documents-once marked "Top Secret"-that reveal the U.S. obtained valuable intelligence after Zubaydah was subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. In fact, Zubaydah identified Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) as the mastermind of the September 11 terrorist attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans. Before Zubaydah identified KSM, also incarcerated at Gitmo, the 9/11 mastermind didn't even appear in the intelligence community's file of key Al Qaeda operatives or associates. KSM, in turn, provided valuable intel about another Al Qaeda jihadist, Majid Khan, who, in turn, identified a terrorist named Zubair who was subsequently captured. Zubair later provided information that led to the arrest of Al Qaeda's South Asia leader.
-------------- Judicial Watch a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency. Tags:Judicial Watch, meida, uses, Obama, Hillary Defense, to unseal, Classified court filesINSERT TAGSTo 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.