The Clintons' Feel Your Pain While Conducting Their Successful Money Raising Canard From Fat Cats! Hillary Depends On You Suckers! No New Crisis Is Obama On the Job?

ISIS is building busy building its Caliphate. (See 1 and 1a below.)

The Clintons' already have built theirs.

They did it, mostly legally, by setting up a foundation and laundering speaking and fundraising money through it in order to support their political ambitions - buying The White House!

This is the way it is done these days.

In the case of the Clintons', they  raised a large portion of their money from American Corporations and Wall Street Fat Cats, like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, all the while attacking these entities with a wink and nod so they could appeal to the little guy whose pain they feel.

It is a successful canard and the Clintons' have fine tuned it into a political art form.

Unlike presidents like Truman, Reagan, both Bushes,even Carter, who did not go about selling their time in office as the Clintons' have.

If you believe America is for sale and should go to the highest bidder then vote for Hillary, should she run, because 'what difference does it make!'

Happy Fourth sucker! Hillary is depending upon you!

===

My sentiments.  Israel, quit turning the other cheek. Disregard those who preach restraint only to you.  Go and destroy Gaza's infrastructure and factories.  Bring Hamas to its knees and if the Palestinians continue to support them then that is their problem so make it a big one! (See 2 below.)

===

David Perdue. Jack Kingston's opponent, sounds like Obama!  (See 3 below.)

My candidate for Jack's vacated seat, as you know, is Dr. Bob Johnson.

I would be the first to acknowledge Bob is a Jeffersonian citizen and therefore,  not a slick and polished politician. Yes, Bob is rough around the edges but he has a good heart, is intelligent, has a record of achievement in two critical areas - military and medicine - and has been treated to similar scurrilous charges by his opponent as has Jack Kingston.

I do not expect Bob's opponent to change.  In fact I expect him to double down as July 22, approaches.

===

No surprise here.  (See 4 below.)

===

Stop and think about it, we have not had a new crisis in a week.  Does this mean Obama is not doing his job?

At least we have three 'smidgens of scandals' to carry us through:: IRS, Borders and ISIS.

===

Dick

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1) What Does an 'Islamic Caliphate' in Iraq Mean?

Author(s):  Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi
Source:  JCPA, Vol. 14, No. 22 July 1, 2014.     

The newly declared “Islamic State” is trying to reinforce its battlefield achievements in Syria and Iraq by creating a new Sunni Muslim religious entity to overturn the prevailing regional political order rooted in the Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916).

The military capability of the “Islamic State” in Iraq to expand the territories under its rule is limited. Therefore, its leaders are directly appealing to Muslims all over the world to support the caliphate and to rebel against existing governments.

The declaration of the caliphate escalates the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites and is likely to impact the Muslim communities in the West as well.

As a new regional reality emerges in the Middle East, Israel faces new and more complex security challenges than in the past.  These threats, once again, sharply focus the issue of defensible borders west of the Jordan River.

On the first day of the month of Ramadan (29 June 2014), the day on which World Pride Day was celebrated as a marker of social and cultural progress, the reestablishment of the Islamic caliphate (state) was declared in Iraq and a caliph was appointed to lead it.

The declaration of the establishment of the caliphate was transmitted via audiotape by Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, spokesman of ISIS – the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Greater Syria) – which changed its name to “the Islamic State.”

Initial Implications of the Declaration of the Islamic Caliphate

The Islamic State is trying to reinforce its battlefield achievements in Syria and Iraq by creating a new Sunni Muslim religious entity that threatens to overturn the prevailing regional political order rooted in the Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916) which set the borders and carved up the Middle East into European spheres of influence. The rule of the caliphate is applied to the territory under its control. This rule, however, does not accept the existing borders or the division of the Muslims into different states on a national basis. In the view of the Islamic State, the primal sin that led to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, which was a continuation of the rule of the caliphate, lies in nationalism and in the adoption of Western ideologies, such as democracy, that are foreign to Islam. Hence, the jihad is aimed at overturning the existing order and enabling the expansion of the boundaries of the caliphate to encompass all territory where Muslims live.

The main objective of the Islamic State is to entrench its rule (imposing its authority and defeating local militias such as that of the Kurds) and repel the counterattack by the armies of Iraq and Syria, which are fully backed by Iran and Russia.

The Islamic State’s military capability to expand the territories under its rule is limited. Therefore, its leaders are trying to attain force multipliers by directly appealing to Muslims all over the world to support the caliphate and calling on the Muslim population to rebel against existing governments and thereby accelerate the worldwide Islamic revolution.The timing of the declaration at the beginning of the month of Ramadan is of supreme importance in this context. The organization Hizb ut-Tahrir (which also has branches in the West) has already hastened to welcome the declaration of the caliphate.1 Fear of the Islamic State is evident in Saudi Arabia (the crown jewel in the Islamic State’s vision of conquest), in Jordan (the weak link), and in other countries (Lebanon has learned of the appointment of the leader of the Islamic State).2 The danger of regional instability is greater than ever.
The Caliphate Threatens the Muslim Brotherhood

The declaration of the caliphate poses a challenge to the rival Islamic organizations and particularly to the Muslim Brotherhood, which has tried to promote the concept of a “political Islam” that combines Islam and democracy (according to the Islamic interpretation) and is aimed at achieving the ultimate goal of global Islamic rule in stages. Over the past year the Islamic State has made clear that it sees no room for compromises with organizations that do not fully and unquestioningly accept its authority, as was well evident in the bloody war it waged against the Al-Qaeda-backed Jabhat al-Nusra organization in Syria until it extracted a declaration of loyalty from this group.

The declaration of the caliphate escalates the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites and is likely to impact the Muslim communities in the West as well. In the Sunni Muslim context, the sense of identification with the caliphate creates conditions for expanded activity by groups associated with radical Islam in the West, including both the recruitment of mujahideen for combat and the perpetration of terror attacks.

Israel, which was not directly mentioned in the speech declaring the establishment of the Islamic caliphate, is included among the enemies that the Muslims are commanded to destroy so as to implement Islamic rule in the world. As a new regional reality emerges in the Middle East, Israel faces new and more complex security challenges than in the past. These challenges include the rise of radical Islam, increasing Iranian military involvement in Israel’s vicinity, direct threats to the stability of the Hashemite Kingdom in Jordan, and the strengthening of elements that support the Islamic State in the Palestinian territories. These threats, once again, sharply focus the issue of defensible borders west of the Jordan River.

Below are the main points in the “declaration of the caliphate,” which is titled “This Is Allah’s Promise.”3

Establishment of an Islamic caliphate: The rule of the caliphate extends over the territories under the Islamic State’s control in Syria and Iraq (“from Aleppo to Diyala”). The Shura Council (Consultative Council) of the Islamic State has appointed Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as the caliph.

Implementation of Islamic law (sharia): The Islamic State has fulfilled conditions for the establishment of the caliphate. These include, among others, the practical implementation of sharia law in territories under its rule, with Islamic courts set up that mete out sentences in accordance with Islam (executions, crucifixions, amputations, whipping, etc.); mosques taking responsibility for instilling the ethos of the next generation; and enactment of the principles of “the cross is shattered” and “the graves are destroyed.”

Fortification of the rule of the Islamic caliphate: The Islamic State has denied the validity of independent Islamic organizations and frameworks, demanding that all the organizations accept the new government and fully subjugate themselves to it.

The supremacy of the Muslims over the peoples of the world and the goal of an Islamic takeover of the world: The Muslims are the best among the nations, and on them Allah has bestowed his promise of leading the world on condition that they worship him and do not incorporate any other god into the belief in Allah or adopt any ideology in addition to that of Islam. This is the time of jihad and of taking the path of the Prophet Muhammad, after whose death the Muslim nation was able to achieve battlefield victories over the Byzantine Empire and the Persian Empire with its leaders becoming kings and rulers of the world (implying that the Islamic nation of today is capable of overcoming the infidel empires).

Representation of the Muslims all over the world: The authority of the Islamic caliphate is not limited to the geographic territory under its direct control; instead the Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is the legal ruler of all the Muslims in the world, and it is their duty to express loyalty to him and obey his instructions.

The rejection of democracy, secularism, and nationalism: The Islamic State commands the Muslims to renounce any worldview that is opposed to Islam, particularly democracy, secularism, and nationalism, and to return to the religion of Islam and thereby fulfill the conditions for Allah’s promise regarding the subjugation of the entire world to Islamic rule.

Ongoing jihad everywhere: In a message to the mujahideen, the Islamic State called for continuation of the holy war in light of the fact that Allah has blessed the Muslims with the jihad and victory that led to the establishment of the caliphate, developments that sow enormous fear in the West and the East.

*     *     *

Notes
1. https://www.facebook.com/notes/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%B9%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%8A/%D8%AD%D8%B2%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D9%86%D8%B9%D8%B7%D9%81-%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%AE%D9%8A-%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%81%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AF%D8%A9/215216751831683
2. http://www.akhbarlelnasher.com/item.php?id=4613&page=2#.U7ESmvldX9o
3. http://myreader.toile-libre.org/uploads/My_53b039f00cb03.pdf (English) http://justpaste.it/bushra_khelafah (Arabic)
Publication: Jerusalem Issue Briefs

Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is a co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd.

1a)Undaunted ISIS Begin Building Their New Caliphate Into a State

Recruiting not just fighters but doctors, engineers, secretaries and translators as Washington still assessing.

 Since establishing their Islamic state, the terrorists who obliterated the border between Iraq and Syria have set about the business of turning their caliphate into an actual state.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, head of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) — now, since Sunday, known as the new caliph — issued a message Tuesday to the mujahidin and Muslim community chock full of Quranic verses and calls to arms.

“Muslims’ rights are forcibly seized in China, India, Palestine, Somalia, the Arabian Peninsula, the Caucasus, Shām (the Levant), Egypt, Iraq, Indonesia, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Ahvaz, Iran [by the rāfidah (shia)], Pakistan, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria and Morocco, in the East and in the West,” al-Baghdadi, or Caliph Ibrahim, said. “So raise your ambitions, O soldiers of the Islamic State! For your brothers all over the world are waiting for your rescue, and are anticipating your brigades.”

“Soon, by Allah’s permission, a day will come when the Muslim will walk everywhere as a master, having honor, being revered, with his head raised high and his dignity preserved. Anyone who dares to offend him will be disciplined, and any hand that reaches out to harm him will be cut off,” he continued. “So let the world know that we are living today in a new era. Whoever was heedless must now be alert.”

“Whoever was sleeping must now awaken. Whoever was shocked and amazed must comprehend. The Muslims today have a loud, thundering statement, and possess heavy boots. They have a statement that will cause the world to hear and understand the meaning of terrorism, and boots that will trample the idol of nationalism, destroy the idol of democracy and uncover its deviant nature.”

But in addition to the standard battle cry, the new caliph also got down to the brass tracks of trying to stock his new state with the necessities and infrastructure beyond just a dusty lot roped off for terrorist training.

“O Muslims everywhere, whoever is capable of performing hijrah (emigration) to the Islamic State, then let him do so, because hijrah to the land of Islam is obligatory,” al-Baghdadi said. “…We make a special call to the scholars, fuqahā’ (experts in Islamic jurisprudence), and callers, especially the judges, as well as people with military, administrative, and service expertise, and medical doctors and engineers of all different specializations and fields.”

On Twitter, where ISIS-affiliated accounts have grown like weeds, there was a call for translators to come and join the new Islamic state: “Speakers of #Urdu, #Hindi, #Bengali and other languages will be welcome.”

“Is their any other nation on earth that cares enough 4 its citizens to burn $100 000′s worth of cigarettes, rather than reap the profits?” tweeted another ISIS-affiliated account.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2)  The Time for Meaningful Action Has Come

Author:  David Soloway
S

The response to the murder of the three abducted Israeli teens, Eyal Yifrah, Gilad Shaar, and Naftali Fraenkel, has been predictable in its call for restraint and moderation. Left-wing organizations like the Israeli political party Meretz, the New Israel Fund, and J Street, wedded to nebulous and self-serving concepts like “social justice,” ramble on about calm, measure, reconciliation, and the larger interests of communal peace — as if avowedly vicious and homicidal entities like Hamas and its offshoots will feel humbled and ashamed of their murderous practices and will experience a benign change of heart.

In fact, they are busy celebrating what they regard as a revanchist victory — indeed, candies were handed out to mark the abduction and the ambulance ferrying the bodies of the slain teens was pelted with stones and spray-painted by Palestinian villagers — and will not be deterred from carrying out further atrocities in the future if they are allowed to get away with them. Perhaps the principals of our conciliatory organizations would feel differently if their own children had been kidnapped, tortured, and killed. But one thing is certain: for all their “prayers for the suffering families” and “calls for peace,” they are incapable of imagining what their own people endure and are barren of genuine feeling, while full of empathy and concern for their assailants, who wish only for their speedy death and the subsequent extinction of the Jewish state. There is only one word for such flaccid, self-righteous and ultimately self-immolating appeasers: idiots.

As for the Israeli leadership, it’s a mixed bag. Outgoing president Shimon Peres is a grande fromage who over the years has grown gamy and rancid, with a soft European rind. Benjamin Netanyahu should be cut a little slack given the intense pressures, domestic and international, that he labors under — but he is not his father, who was cut in the mold of the pragmatic and unyielding patriot Ze’ev Jabotinsky. (See Benzion Netanyahu, The Founding Fathers of Zionism.)

With only a few exceptions, like Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, Foreign Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman, and Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, the Israeli leadership comprises a motley crew best left to their often lucrative but generally undistinguished careers, prone to log-rolling and corruption, devoid of segulah (Hebrew for virtue or inner treasure), more preoccupied with their American holdings and European vacations than with the security of their beleaguered nation.

The theory, of course, that presumably governs their behavior is that diplomacy and treating with perennial enemies or political adversaries — e.g. acceding to American bullying, glad-handing Turkey, subsidizing the PA, victualing Gaza, engaging in outrageously disproportionate prisoner swaps, giving a hostile and often traitorous Israeli media and academy a free pass, etc. — is a way of ensuring the ultimate security of the country. On the contrary, Israeli citizens are rendered increasingly unsafe by the prosecution of such measures.

When it comes to Israel’s Muslim belligerents, anyone with more than an ounce of common sense knows that working with murderers and ideological maniacs is counter-productive. As Caroline Glick has pointed out, exchanging one kidnapped soldier for over a thousand Muslim terrorists is the height of folly. “In every instance, these terrorist releases have led to the murder and abduction of other Israelis.” The result is that Israeli policies “have placed targets [on] the backs of every citizen of Israel.” How, then, should Israel have responded to Hamas, the abductors of Gilad Shalit? The terrorist organization should have been given three days to return its captive, or risk its total destruction, which Israel has the power to accomplish. There is, really, no other effective way of dealing with a musteline pack of jihadist predators and barbarians than to credibly threaten it with extinction. Gilad Shalit would have been back home in record time, and the three Israeli teens would not have been abducted and killed. The thousands of Israeli citizens murdered and maimed in the various intifadas would still be alive and hale.

The time for temporizing, fruitless negotiations, so-called realist politics, and tolerance of an active and toxic fifth column that diligently and indefatigably strives to undermine the safety of Israeli citizens and the security of the state, is demonstrably over.

The heinous events that have just occurred should be change accelerators in Israeli thinking to redeem the political and moral parvitude too many of its leaders have exhibited for so many years. If the IDF doesn’t smash utterly the terrorist infestations that have wrought so much harm on the country and will continue to do so, then there is no forgiving, international opinion and diplomatic pressures notwithstanding. At the same time, every left-wing media outlet and treasonous university department in the country should be rigorously monitored and in some cases, if necessary, shut down. Much of the Shomron must be annexed. Now may be the time for the imposition of martial law in order to evade the insidious complicities of the Supreme Court. Without these determined initiatives, such events as we have just witnessed will inevitably keep happening — rocket attacks, abductions, killings, the disruption of ordinary life, the whole ball of filthy wax. For such a sensible if aggressive policy of vigorous, comprehensive, and meaningful retaliation, rather than tit-for-tat reprisals, is nothing less than a kind of mitzvah with social, ethical, and national implications.

David Solway is a Canadian poet and essayist. He is the author of The Big Lie: On Terror, Antisemitism, and Identity, and is currently working on a sequel, Living in the Valley of Shmoon. His new book on Jewish and Israeli themes, Hear, O Israel!, was released by Mantua Books. His latest book is The Boxthorn Tree, published in December 2012.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3)

David Perdue owes us an apology. In an interview with the Macon Telegraph editorial board, he criticized Americans for “seeing the world through the ugly American’s eyes,” and agreed that we are the “arrogant teenagers” of the world while, “the rest of the world gets it.” If you agree with me that there’s nothing ugly about taking pride in our country or arrogant about promoting our values, this is just one more of the many reasons the choice is clear in the July 22Republican Runoff Election. Jack Kingston has a record of supporting a strong national defense and fighting for our troops, their families, and veterans. On the Defense Appropriations Committee, he’s worked to ensure our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines are the best equipped, most well trained, and highly cared for in the world.   David Perdue likens this effort to pork barrel spending. Jack Kingston has represented five of Georgia’s eight major military installations, knows military issues, and has pledged to seek a seat on the Senate Armed Services Committee to continue Georgia’s leadership on national defense issues. Jack Kingston has fought the outrages at the Veterans Administration, worked to hold those responsible accountable, and has helped open four new Veterans’ clinics in Georgia to make care more accessible to those who served. In recent years, President Obama’s pursuit of international popularity over American strength has greatly weakened our ability to address the world’s problems.  Georgia should not send him a Senator that thinks less of our country than the rest of the world. Please join me in voting for Jack Kingston for United States Senate. Sincerely, Major General Rick Goddard, USAF Ret --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4)  Quinnipiac: Obama Worst President Since World War II, Reagan the Best By Sandy Fiitzgerald President Barack Obama is the worst president since World War II, and the United States would have been better off if his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, had won the election in 2012, a new Quinnipiac University national poll released today reveals. The best president? Ronald Reagan. "Over the span of 69 years of American history and 12 presidencies, President Barack Obama finds himself with President George W. Bush at the bottom of the popularity barrel," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.?  "Would Mitt have been a better fit? More voters in hindsight say yes," Malloy said. Out of 1,446 registered voters surveyed nationwide from June 24-30, 33 percent deemed Obama as the worse president, while another 28 percent picked former President George W. Bush as the worst, Quinnipiac reported Wednesday. In addition, 45 percent of the voters said the country would be better off if Romney won in 2012, and 38 percent said the country would be worse off. The choice was sharply divided among party lines, with Republicans choosing Romney by 84 percent to 5 percent and Democrats choosing Obama by 74 percent to 10 percent. Independent voters came in with a 47 percent to 33 percent nod to Romney.  Overall, Reagan topped voters' pick for the best president since World War II, with 35 percent of the voters choosing him. Trailing Reagan were former presidents Bill Clinton at 18 percent, 15 percent for John F. Kennedy and just 8 percent for Obama. Among Democrats, 34 percent picked Clinton as the best president, followed by 18 percent each for Obama and Kennedy.  Meanwhile, among the Republicans polled, an overwhelming 66 percent chose Reagan as the best president. He was followed distantly by former President George H.W. Bush and Kennedy, with 6 percent each, and Obama and Dwight D. Eisenhower, who tied at 4 percent each.  George W. Bush and Obama, compared side-by-side, came out very closely matched among the voters polled. Thirty-nine percent said Obama has been a better president than Bush, while 40 percent said he was worse. Obama has been a better president than the junior Bush, 39 percent of voters say, while 40 percent say he is worse. Obama fared better with women voters, with 42 percent-38 percent saying he has been a better president than Bush. With men, 43 percent said Obama is worse worse than Bush, while 36 said he is better.  The Bush/Obama comparison fell mainly along party lines. Republicans said Obama is worse than Bush by 79 percent to 7 percent, while independent voters said Obama is worse by 41 percent to 31 percent. Meanwhile, the Democrats polled said Obama is better than Bush was by 78 percent to 4 percent. The voters did say, by 37 percent to 34 percent, that Obama is better for the economy than Bush. Voters say by a narrow 37 - 34 percent that Obama is better for the economy than Bush.  American voters say 54 - 44 percent that the Obama Administration is not competent running the government. The president is paying attention to what his administration is doing, 47 percent say, while 48 percent say he does not pay enough attention.  The poll showed Obama's job approval rating is stalled at a negative 40 percent to 53 percent.  His rating hit an all time low in December 2013 of 38-57 percent, Quinnipiac reports, and an April 2 national survey put the presidents rating at a negative 42-50 percent. President Obama's job approval rating, inching up since a negative 38 - 57 percent in December, 2013, his all-time low, is stalled at a negative 40 - 53 percent. This compares to the president's negative 42 - 50 percent job approval in an April 2 national survey.  Obama netted negative scores of 10 percent to 88 percent from Republicans, 31-59 percent from independents, 37-57 percent from men and 42-49 percent from women. But Democrats approve of him by 79-13 percent, the poll said. Obama got mixed grade for his character, with voters split 48-48 percent on his being honest and trustworthy and 51-47 percent that he cares about their needs. But as far as his leadership qualities, Obama got a negative 47-51 percent. The president gets mixed grades for character as voters say 48 - 48 percent that he is honest and trustworthy and 51 - 47 percent that he cares about their needs and problems. He gets a negative 47 - 51 percent for leadership qualities.  The president also got negative grades for how he handles most key issues, including 40-55 percent for handling the economy; 37-57 percent for foreign policy; 40-58 percent for healthcare; and 44-51 percent for terrorism. He netted a positive rating of 50-4 percent for how he handles the environment. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------