Would not be the first time he and his corrupt Justice Department has broken the law. (See 1 below.)
===
Krauthammer on Syrian refugee situation. (See 2 below.)
===
Muslims in Denmark. (See 3 below.)
===
In a recent conversation I suggested Netanyahu needed to tell the Palestinians for every attack, by one of theirs, he would randomly destroy 5 homes. Until those not involved feel the pain of those committing these terrorist acts they will continue.
Well Netanyahu is beginning to get the message. (See 4 below.)
==
PC'ism and its destructive consequences.
All initial concepts that made sense, were overdue and more than justified. However, when they are allowed to gather momentum they can, and generally do, spill over their banks and become dangerous and/or counterproductive.
This is now true of PC'ism , is the case with Affirmative Action and even can even be said about overboard demands pertaining to Civil Rights.
Yes, good things can be stretched out of shape and come back to haunt! (See 5 below.)
===
Tale of two cities. (See 6 below.)
Over the Thanksgiving Holiday I had a discussion with a family member about the problems our nation faced. I mentioned big government and the race issue involving Black members of our society.
He said the basic problem was not related to culture or color but to forced immigration.
He was of the opinion, people forced to immigrate versus those who have the desire, get up and leave
voluntarily for the purpose of immigrating eventually make better citizens. He cited country after country in South America and the Caribbean where Blacks were forced to immigrate and the problems that ensued.
He believes eventual intermarriage will go a long way towards correcting much of
the problem.
I admit, I find his argument persuasive.
===
Lose the war Obama will not admit is occurring but save the atmosphere. (See 7 below.)
Meanwhile, Kerry dreams! (See 7a below.)
So if you feel gloomy just click on this: Click here
===
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
No News is Bad News in the Bergdahl Case
Perhaps the most obvious sign that the Bowe Bergdahl desertion case has been irrevocably corrupted by President Obama’s improper (and illegal) command influence is the unexplained and inordinate delays in processing and completing the case. As I explained here, military justice generally differs from the civilian model in its alacrity, because the military’s mission requires that criminal cases be handled honestly but swiftly, lest good order and discipline disappear. This is especially true in the case of pure military offenses, like those against Bergdahl.
It has been over a month since Bergdahl’s attorneys leaked the results of the Article 32 hearing in his case (this being the military version of a grand jury.) The recommendation went to General Robert Abrams the convening authority for disposition. Although the Bergdahl case is actually a relatively simple affair on the charges (desertion and misbehavior before the enemy) and the facts, Abrams has yet to make a decision on the matter. This follows a disturbing pattern wherein this case has featured long delays at every step, as Army officials obviously try to square Obama’s stated preferences (and ego) with military justice.
Long after Bergdahl was ransomed from the Taliban in a controversial exchange with terrorist leaders, the Pentagon ordered an investigation of the circumstances of his apparent desertion. The investigating officer, Major General Kenneth Dahl, interviewed Bergdahl and evidently bought the soldier’s improbable self-serving story that he left his post without the intent to desert or aid the enemy, but to hike nearly twenty miles to the closest friendly Army post and turn in his superiors for incompetence. Dahl recommended leniency to his superior at the time, General Mark Miley, the current Army Chief of Staff.
After another very long and unexplained delay, Miley surprisingly threw the book at Bergdahl, formally charging him with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, and sent the case to the Article 32 hearing. Miley’s decision was puzzling, as noted here, but with the results of the Article 32 known, and the case now languishing before General Abrams, it’s possible to draw a very probable conclusion about what is, and has been going on in the case.
After Dahl came out with his recommendation of leniency, the Army and Bergdahl’s attorneys led by the very capable Eugene Fidell, entered plea negotiations. It’s hard to say what the Army wanted in a plea at this juncture, but I have a good idea what Fidell demanded -- that Bergdahl plead guilty only to a 24-hour AWOL (which he admitted to Dahl), be punished by some limited term of restriction (which would count as time served) and then be discharged honorably. An honorable discharge would not only preserve the Obama administration’s fiction that Bergdahl served “with honor and distinction” but ensure he receives back pay and benefits, and also allow Bergdahl and his representatives to make a much stronger pitch for the lucrative book and movie deals which are no doubt in the works. The Army might have wanted Bergdahl, as part of a plea agreement, to give up profiting from such deals, but it would have been hard to argue for that, if it also agreed to discharge him honorably. The Army evidently was unwilling roll over on the issue at that time, I hope at least in part because it saw that giving Bergdahl an honorable discharge would devalue the discharges issued to millions of proud veterans living and deceased. When negotiations broke down Miley sought to increase the Army’s leverage by throwing the maximum (and fully justified) charges at Bergdahl, and then having rid himself of the burden personally, took his position as Chief of Staff.
That strategy backfired when the Article 32 hearing turned disastrous for the Army. With the Article 32’s relaxed rules of evidence, Fidell called Dahl to testify and was able to present Bergdahl’s testimony to the court without subjecting the soldier to cross-examination. The prosecution for its part put on a bare-bones and tepid case, and the result was another recommendation of leniency by the Article 32 hearing officer, who suggested that Bergdahl be essentially tried in misdemeanor court (Special, not General Courts Martial) and not face jail time. The one piece of leverage the Article 32 officer retained for the Army is that a Special Courts Martial can issue a bad conduct discharge to a convicted soldier (a punitive discharge not as severe as a dishonorable discharge), or less harsh general discharges (under honorable or other-than-honorable conditions.) So Bergdahl would still be at risk on that critical issue if the Army went forward on the recommendation. General Abrams is not bound to accept the recommendation of the Article 32 officer, but it is unusual for a convening authority not to do so.
The situation as it stands is that Bergdahl and his attorneys have almost certainly not backed down from their demands that the soldier plead only to AWOL, receive back pay and benefits plus the honorable discharge. I doubt that the Army much cares about jail time, pay or benefits, but giving Bergdahl an honorable discharge would severely damage the credibility of the military justice system, and would probably stick in the craw of even the most sycophantic and politically sensitive officers.
The Army can easily solve its problem by simply trying Bergdahl on the charges (at a Special or General Courts Martial) and leave the case to a military judge or jury. It is not a particularly complex case, and the evidence against Bergdahl, absent his potentially exculpatory testimony is strong. Fidell would then face the dilemma of seeing his client go down, or putting him on the stand to suffer a potentially destructive and embarrassing cross-examination (assuming the Army can find a decent prosecutor to do it.) Up to this time Fidell has managed to get his client’s version of the facts out without subjecting him to cross-examination, but he cannot do that at an actual trial.
The problem for the Army, as Fidel plainly knows, is that it is loath to bring Bergdahl to trial, much less humiliate and convict him of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, because that would also humiliate and embarrass President Obama. So the case is in abeyance, in a Mexican standoff of sorts. The Army can cut the Gordian knot simply by going forward with the charges, but Fidell knows that is the last thing it wants. And as long as Fidell is confident of that, there is no reason for him to back off his maximum demands in the case, which no doubt includes an honorable discharge for his client. It is in sum, a dishonorable state of affairs, and for that, as for much else that currently ails the country, we can thank the president.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2)
The Syrian immigration cul-de-sac
The Syrian refugee debate has become a national embarrassment. It begins with a president, desperate to deflect attention from the collapse of his foreign policy, retreating to his one safe zone — ad hominem attacks on critics, this time for lack of compassion toward Syrian widows and orphans.
This, without a glimmer of acknowledgment of his own responsibility for these unfortunate souls becoming widowed and orphaned, displaced and homeless, in the first place. A quarter-million deaths ago, when Bashar al-Assad began making war on his own people, he unleashed his air force and helicopters. They dropped high explosives, nail-filled barrel bombs and even chemical weapons on helpless civilians. President Obama lifted not a finger.
In the earliest days, we could have stopped the slaughter: cratered Assad’s airfields, taken out his planes, grounded his helicopters and created a nationwide no-fly zone. (We successfully maintained one over Kurdistan for 12 years between 1991 and 2003.)
At the time, Assad was teetering. His national security headquarters had been penetrated and bombed. High-level aides were defecting. Military officers were forming a Free Syrian Army.
Against the advice of his top civilian and military aides, Obama refused to intervene. The widows and orphans he now so ostentatiously champions are the product of his coldhearted refusal to do anything that might sully his peacemaking image.
Obama has also charged the Republicans with cowardice, afraid to grant admittance to “3-year-old orphans.” He gave zero credit to the very real concern of governors and other officials that terrorists could be embedded amid the refugees. This is no theoretical proposition. At least one of the Paris attackers came to France by way of Greece.
Obama’s own officials have admitted that the absence of thorough data makes it nearly impossible to properly vet Syrian refugees. In response, many Republicans (and some Democrats) called for a pause in admitting Syrians until alternate vetting procedures are developed. In my view, it would have been better to differentiate among the refugees: Admit women, children and the elderly under the current procedures, while subjecting young men of fighting age to a new regime of far stricter scrutiny.
The concerns of GOP officials were quite reasonable. But there was no need for the Republican candidates to allow the Syria debate to be derailed into a cul-de-sac on immigration — as if the essence of the Middle East issue is a relatively small number of potential refugees rather than the abject failure of Obama’s policies.
Terror is rising around the world — Sinai, Beirut, Mali, Paris. Brussels was shut down by fear itself. The president, in denial about the collapse of his Syria policy, denounced those demanding a change in course. His secretary of state actually acknowledged a rationale (if not legitimacy) for the machine-gunning of a room full of Charlie Hebdo cartoonists for offending Muslim sensibilities with a drawing.
Beyond that is the strategic surrender of the Middle East, for 40 years dominated by the United States, to Russia and Iran, who now dictate the terms. Which is why, for example, we dare not impose a protective no-fly zone. It’s too dangerous. Russia has filled the Obama vacuum.
Facing a massive failure of seven years of Democratic foreign policy stewardship, the GOP candidates have instead tried to outbid each other in being tough on Syrian refugees. This descent into xenophobia was led, as usual, by Donald Trump. Amid bushels of word salad, he concurred with registering American Muslims, raised alarms about Arab American treachery (“thousands and thousands” on TV cheering the World Trade Center collapse) and promised not only to deny entry to Syrian refugees, but to send back the ones already here.
Can you see it? Packing them into his 757, the one with gold-plated seat belts, then dumping them — orphans, widows, the lot — into a war zone to await the next barrel bomb.
Other GOP candidates have issued Trumpian echoes. The Muslim registry had no takers. But some have advocated shutting out all the refugees or taking Christians only. They are chasing the polls showing strong anti-refugee sentiment.
How deeply shortsighted. It may work in the GOP primaries. But Trump-like anti-immigrant, anti-foreigner, now anti-Muslim, anti-Arab rhetoric — and don’t forget those cunning Chinese stealing our jobs and ruthless Mexicans raping our women — will not play well in a general election.
Politically, it will be fatal. John Kasich has forcefully denounced this slide into the swamp. Where are the others?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)- Muslims in Denmark
SALUTE to Denmark .. This could very well happen in AUSTRALIA. NEW ZEALAND Or ELSEWHERE......
Susan MacAllen is a contributing editor for FamilySecurityMatters.org
Salute the Danish Flag - it's a Symbol of Western Freedom By Susan MacAllen
In 1978-9 I was living and studying in Denmark. But in 1978 - even in Copenhagen, one didn't see Muslim immigrants.
The Danish population embraced visitors, celebrated the exotic, went out of its way to protect each of its citizens. It was proud of its new brand of socialist liberalism one in development since the conservatives had lost power in 1929 - a system where no worker had to struggle to survive, where one ultimately could count upon the state as in, perhaps, no other western nation at the time.
The rest of Europe saw the Scandinavians as free-thinking, progressive and infinitely generous in their welfare policies. Denmark boasted low crime rates, devotion to the environment, a superior educational system and a history of humanitarianism.
Denmark was also most generous in its immigration policies - it offered the best welcome in Europe to the new immigrant: generous welfare payments from first arrival plus additional perks in transportation, housing and education. It was determined to set a world example for inclusiveness and multiculturalism. How could it have predicted that one day in 2005 a series of political cartoons in a newspaper would spark violence that would leave dozens dead in the streets -all because its commitment to multiculturalism would come back to bite?
By the 1990's the growing urban Muslim population was obvious - and its unwillingness to integrate into Danish society was obvious. Years of immigrants had settled into Muslim-exclusive enclaves. As the Muslim leadership became more vocal about what they considered the decadence of Denmark's liberal way of life, the Danes - once so welcoming - began to feel slighted. Many Danes had begun to see Islam as incompatible with their long-standing values: belief in personal liberty and free speech, in equality for women, in tolerance for other ethnic groups, and a deep pride in Danish heritage and history.
An article by Daniel Pipes and Lars Hedegaard, in which they forecasted, accurately, that the growing immigrant problem in Denmark would explode. In the article they reported:
'Muslim immigrants constitute 5 percent of the population but consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending.' 'Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5..4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially Combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes.'
'Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane.'
'Forced marriages - promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death - are one problem'
'Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark's Muslim population grows large enough - a not-that-remote prospect.. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim.'
It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and laws. An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries and Canada: some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in fear for their lives.. Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by Muslim leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to Sweden - before the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend Elsa - who. as a teenager. had dreaded crossing the street to the bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers - and I wonder what she would say today.
In 2001, Denmark elected the most conservative government in some 70 years - one that had some decidedly non-generous ideas about liberal unfettered immigration. Today Denmark has the strictest immigration policies in Europe. (Its effort to protect itself has been met with accusations of 'racism' by liberal media across Europe - even as other governments struggle to right the social problems wrought by years of too-lax immigration.)
If you wish to become Danish, you must attend three years of language classes. You must pass a test on Denmark's history, culture, and a Danish language test ..
You must live in Denmark for 7 years before applying for citizenship.
You must demonstrate an intent to work, and have a job waiting. If you wish to bring a spouse into Denmark , you must both be over 24 years of age, and you won't find it so easy anymore to move your friends and family to Denmark with you.
You will not be allowed to build a mosque in Copenhagen . Although your children have a choice of some 30 Arabic culture and language schools in Denmark , they will be strongly encouraged to assimilate to Danish society in ways that past immigrants weren't.
In 2006, the Danish minister for employment, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, spoke publicly of the burden of Muslim immigrants on the Danish welfare system, and it was horrifying: the government's welfare committee had calculated that if immigration from Third World countries were blocked, 75 percent of the cuts needed to sustain the huge welfare system in coming decades would be unnecessary. In other words, the welfare system, as it existed, was being exploited by immigrants to the point of eventually bankrupting the government. 'We are simply forced to adopt a new policy on immigration'.
'The calculations of the welfare committee are terrifying and show how unsuccessful the integration of immigrants has been up to now,' he said.
A large thorn in the side of Denmark's imams is the Minister of Immigration and Integration, Rikke Hvilshoj.. She makes no bones about the new policy toward immigration, 'The number of foreigners coming to the country makes a difference,' Hvilshoj says, 'There is an inverse correlation between how many come here and how well we can receive the foreigners that come.' And on Muslim immigrants needing to demonstrate a willingness to blend in, 'In my view, Denmark should be a country with room for different cultures and religions. Some values, however, are more important than others. We refuse to question democracy, equal rights, and freedom of speech.'
Hvilshoj has paid a price for her show of backbone.. Perhaps to test her resolve, the leading radical imam in Denmark, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, demanded that the government pay blood money to the family of a Muslim who was murdered in a suburb of Copenhagen, stating that the family's thirst for revenge could be thwarted for money. When Hvilshoj dismissed his demand, he argued that in Muslim culture the payment of retribution money was common, to which Hvilshoj replied that what is done in a Muslim country is not necessarily what is done in Denmark.
The Muslim reply came soon after: her house was torched while she, her husband and children slept. All managed to escape unharmed, but she and her family were moved to a secret location and she and other ministers were assigned bodyguards for the first time - in a country where such murderous violence was once so scarce.
Her government has slid to the right, and her borders have tightened.. Many believe that what happens in the next decade will determine whether Denmark survives as a bastion of good living, humane thinking and social responsibility, or whether it becomes a nation at civil war with supporters of Sharia law.
And meanwhile, Canadians clamor for stricter immigration policies, and demand an end to state welfare programs that allow many immigrants to live on the public dole. As we in Canada look at the enclaves of Muslims amongst us, and see those who enter our shores too easily, dare live on our taxes, yet refuse to embrace our culture, respect our traditions, participate in our legal system, obey our laws, speak our language, appreciate our history .. we would do well to look to Denmark, and say a prayer for her future and for our own..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)
No comments:
Post a Comment