Beats kneeling:
And
A breaking story now suggests a cover-up by Hillary, former Atty General Holder and even Obama about collusion regarding the sale of uranium to Russia.
As I have written from the git go I thought we would find that all of this collusion would boomerang on the Democrats once the facts came out and now it appears The FBI had information, known to others and possibly even involving Mueller, that Russia was paying off sums of money to The Clinton Foundation etc. (see A below.)
Finally
Yesterday, the FBI confirmed that disgraced former FBI Director James Comey drafted a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton two months before she was even interviewed.
Richard, the fix was in from the beginning, and this just proves the witch hunt to destroy Donald Trump and his America First agenda began well before he stepped foot in the White House.
Stay tuned because there is more to come.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More regarding Boy/Girl Scouts. (See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More regarding Trump and Obama's Iran Deal. (See 2 below.)
Between the radicalization of our Academies and everything else that is happening to our nation, because Obama wanted to transform it, his imposition of the Alinsky Model is happening before our very eyes.
If you think I am nuts just wait, (See 2a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is it beginning to dawn on certain European countries they are the ones who have been nuts? (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now the Academies are under attack and being radicalized. This is how it is done folks and what is happening with our academies is simply a microcosm of what is happening throughout our Republic.
Our institutions are being undercut and now the Boy Scouts has morphed into just another social experiment. The enemy is winning because we have become so divided and the chasm is being filled with radical garbage. If you challenge the anarchists you are cast as racially motivated and uncaring. (See 4 below.)
And
More on the Rapone/Heffington situation from a Cadet'perspective. (See 4a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Netanyahu is frank about Israel's intentions should Iran seek to enter Syria militarily. (See 5 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A)
Shocking New Developments in Hillary’s ‘Pay To Play’ Scheme
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reportedly buried evidence tying the Clinton Foundation to a Russian bribery scheme underway as the Obama administration decided whether or not to give Moscow control over U.S. uranium reserves.
FBI officials collected evidence of a Russian bribery scheme that started as early as 2009, including “an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow,” The Hill reported Tuesday.
The Clinton Foundation became a lightning rod for controversy during the 2016 election. Critics, including President Donald Trump, claimed the Clinton Foundation was engaged in influence peddling — trading donations for political favors. the Clinton's repeatedly denied these allegations.
On the campaign trail, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended her role in approving Rosatom’s, Russia’s state-owned nuclear energy company, acquisition of Canadian mining company Uranium One.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) The Androgynous Scouts of America
By Bruce Walker
It is not as if girls needed to join the Boy Scouts in order to participate in the sort of activities the Boy Scouts have engaged in for the last century. The Girl Scouts of America fulfilled that role completely, and, in fact, the Camp Fire Girls gave girls two choices while boys had only the Boy Scouts. What, then, is the motivation for opening up a private and wholesome organization to girls and transsexuals?
The motivation is the iron law of all totalitarians: extinguish all natural or chosen differences among people. So rather than create an organization that, from its inception, blended boys and girls together – like Future Farmers of America or 4H clubs – the leftist goal is to identify and effectively destroy the identity of any organization that does not conform and mash into unrecognizable mush. So the Boy Scouts of America have become, instead, the Androgynous Scouts of America.
Soon the Girl Scouts will feel compelled to admit boys as well, and all the historic values which these once good and decent organizations instilled will be nothing more than another appendage of the mindless beast of Leftist conformity. These once good organizations will become brainless mouthpieces of such macabre fetishes as Manmade Global Warming or gender equivalence or some other empty, dreary, dull and meaningless substitute for serious growth into manhood or womanhood which is what the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts once represented.
The only real option for sane people like conservatives is to disassociate themselves from all the institutions of society except for a select few, like traditional churches and synagogues that do not change with fashion, because the members of these groups grasp that fashion in values is a grotesque fraud deserving no more notice than a madman baking himself into a cake.
The de-institutionalization of America ought to be the highest, perhaps the only, real goal worth seeking in our land. Conservatives and other normal people ought to watch very closely every nuanced move or change in attitude by any organizations they associate with and then close all contact with that organization as soon as it moves into the legions of leftist conformity.
The irony, of course, is that a generation ago, the left opposed (with a dishonest heart) all efforts toward "conformity" and also opposed the "establishment" (which was, of course, always actually tilting left). It is the left that desperately needs more and more conscripted cannon fodder for its wars against normality and decency.
We see just a smidgen of the power of our disengagement with the odious NFL kneeling at the National Anthem. If all conservatives stopped watching the NFL, the income of the players would nosedive, and college football, almost as prostituted to political correctness as the NFL, would find itself with much less income and many fewer players.
What would happen if all conservatives pulled their boys out of the Androgynous Scouts of America and formed, instead, an organization of similar activities but explicitly dedicated to "seeing, cherishing, and supporting the natural differences between boys and girls and providing a wholesome environment for boys as boys to learn and grow into manhood"?
If enough conservatives got behind such an organization, and if that organization, tightly controlled by conservatives, blossomed, it could be the beginning of the end of the plague of leftism in our land. If conservatives do nothing, then our future and the future of our children is doomed.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)Use of Force: The Only Way to Stop Iran
BY EFRAIM INBAR
The author is president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies (JISS), Israel’s new conservative security think tank. Western hopes that Iran will moderate and “engage” with the international community following the faulty 2015 nuclear agreement (JCPOA) have been gradually replaced with apprehension. More voices in the international community are joining Israel in expressing growing concern about Iran’s policies.
While Iran seems to be abide by the JCPOA, it resists expanding the scope of inspections, continues its nuclear research and development (for example upgrading centrifuges) and continues to make progress on its long-range missile program. Recently it conducted a test of a missile designed to carry nuclear warheads.
Moreover, Iran’s involvement in the region attests to its hegemonic plans, defying the notion, propagated by its propagandists, that it is a status quo power acting defensively. Rather, Iran is following its Persian imperial instincts that are reinforced by Muslim jihadist impulses. It already controls four Arab capitals: Baghdad, Beirut, Damascus and Sanaa; its Shi’ite militias and proxies are fighting in Iraq, Syria and Yemen and engaging in ethnic cleansing; and it is on the verge of solidifying the Shi’ite corridor from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean. Israel tries to capitalize on the new widespread global apprehension about Iran and a new American president who is not committed to the JCPOA to bring about the cancellation of the 2015 nuclear accord or its renegotiation, and the reinstating of the sanctions regime. Yet, these goals are difficult to attain and not useful in preventing a nuclear Iran.
The international community, including the US, has little appetite to confront Iran. The belligerent tone of President Donald Trump might be pleasant to Israeli ears, but we should not forget that he has not yet dismantled the North Korean nuclear arsenal. Understanding very well the Western reluctance to take military action, Iran is emulating the North Korean scenario. Many states, Germany for example, were eager to renew business relations with Iran after the removal of the sanctions regime and to turn a blind eye to Iranian purchases of dual-use equipment. The world seems to prefer to wait until the agreement expires in 10 years or so without worrying about what will happen after. Iran signed the deal to gain legitimacy for its nuclear program without giving up the plan to go nuclear in the near future.
Iran, with its thousands of years of history, is patient, seeing the agreement as only a short delay on the road to achieving its ambitions. Israel cannot rely on the international community to stop Iran’s nuclearization. Unilateral cancellation of the nuclear agreement will only energize the Iranian nuclear program. Even if attempts to convince Iran to renegotiate the deal are successful, the Iranian talent for bargaining will prolong the negotiations for years, gaining it additional time to enhance its nuclear program. Similarly, putting in place a tough economic sanctions regime requires years of diplomatic struggle. Neither Russia nor China have a great interest in helping the US neutralize the trouble potential of an anti-American Iran. Moreover, the effectiveness of economic sanctions is limited.
Past sanctions were useful in bringing Iran back to the negotiating table, but not in changing its policy. The claim that a tougher deal could have been achieved in 2015 and therefore renegotiations could elicit a better one for the West is not credible. The JCPOA, with its loopholes, was the only agreement the Iranians were ready to sign when it became clear that the US under president Barack Obama would anyway be unwilling to use the military option.Despite the anti-Iranian rhetoric, the US under President Donald Trump seems to lack the strategic acumen needed to stop Iran from attaining regional hegemony. As a matter of fact, its Middle Eastern policies suit Iran. Trump continued the obsession with Islamic State (an anti-Iranian force) and is going along with the Russian and Iranian plans in Syria.
The US prefers the integrity of Iraq, an Iranian satellite, rather than supporting a Kurdish state that Iran opposes. The US did not side clearly with Saudi Arabia in isolating a Qatar that courts Iran. A nuclear Iran will be even more difficult to restrain. Nothing in the world can convince Iran to give up the nuclear dream. Only the use of force can stop Iran from fulfilling its ambitions. Israel is on its own in this. Nobody will deal with an Iran that is going nuclear.
Therefore, Israel must prepare its military for a strike against the main components of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. This will not be easily achieved, but with determination and creativity it is feasible. A successful attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would change the regional power equation and reverse Iranian advances. Most states would be happy for Israel to do the dirty work, and judging from past Israeli strikes on the Iraqi and Syrian reactors, would hardly create any difficulties for Israel on this account. It is true that Iran has ways to retaliate and exact costs from Israel. However, these would be easier to bear than the cost of allowing Iran to have nuclear weapons.
The author is president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies (JISS), Israel’s new conservative security think tank. He is professor emeritus at Bar-Ilan University and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.
2a)
Trump’s Iran speech finally sets facts of sham nuclear deal straight By Claudia Rosett,
Posted By Ruth King
Chief among these fictions is the notion that a nuclear program in the hands of Iran’s predatory, terror-sponsoring Islamist regime could ever be “exclusively peaceful.” This was a phrase repeated endlessly by President Obama’s diplomatic team during the negotiating of the Iran nuclear deal, and it is enshrined in the final text, as if saying could make it so.President Trump has not yet pulled America out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. But he just took a vital step toward doing so, in a landmark speech on Friday that in plain language dismantled the dangerous fictions on which the deal was built.
It should help focus their minds that Trump stipulated: “In the event we are not able to reach a solution working with Congress and our allies, then the agreement will be terminated.” He noted that, as president, it is his prerogative to cancel America’s participation in this deal “at any time.”Iran has already given the lie to this fantasy, most prominently by continuing to test ballistic missiles. These are delivery vehicles that are only likely to be of use if Iran employs its “exclusively peaceful” nuclear program as cover to acquire nuclear warheads.Citing the case of Iran’s longtime partner in missile proliferation, North Korea, Trump warned that it is folly to downplay Iran’s ambitions: “As we have seen in North Korea, the longer we ignore a threat, the more dangerous that threat becomes.”Ensuring that Washington will now pay attention, Trump announced in his speech that he will not recertify that Iran is in compliance with the agreement. Under the Corker-Cardin law, passed in 2015 and officially dubbed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, this decertification kicks the problem to Congress, where lawmakers will have 60 days to come up with solutions
But there’s a simple bottom line. President Obama promised that on his watch Iran would not get nuclear weapons. Obama achieved this by cutting a deal that effectively paid off Iran upfront to delay a nuclear breakout until after he left office. He did this at the cost of greatly fortifying Iran’s predatory, Islamist regime, without ending its nuclear program. That is what Trump has inherited. As he accurately summed it up: “We got weak inspections in exchange for no more than a purely short-term and temporary delay in Iran’s path to nuclear weapons.”Pulling America out of the deal would be the best course by far, and that is where any honest debate ought to end up. This signature foreign-policy agreement of President Obama, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, is a bargain so flawed that there is realistically no way to fix it. Haggled out with Iran by six world powers — Russia, China, France, Britain, Germany and the U.S. under Obama (in this instance leading from in front) — the JCPOA is thick with complexities that obscure the basic tradeoffs with which Obama enticed Iran to agree to this deal.
The JCPOA also came crammed with sunset clauses, set to eliminate restrictions on everything from commercial-scale enrichment of uranium, to the design and launch of ballistic missiles “capable of carrying nuclear weapons.” It is also full of loopholes, such as the wording in which Iran is not required, but merely “called upon,” to stop developing nuclear-capable missiles.The terms of this deal virtually ensure an Iranian nuclear breakout, on a scale and with a reach that will be even more dangerous when it comes. Without requiring any change in the nature of Iran’s terror-sponsoring regime, the deal dignified Tehran on the world stage, greatly eased global sanctions, allowed Iran access to more than $100 billion in frozen oil revenues, and topped that off with the related settlement from the U.S. of $1.7 billion, shipped secretly to Iran in cash.
Instead, Obama rushed the deal to the United Nations Security Council, where on July 20, 2015, six days after the final text was announced, it was approved as a set of annexes to Resolution 2231, before Congress had any chance to debate the substance (or discover, despite Obama’s promise of transparency to Congress, the secret side deals).To maneuver this unpopular deal past the American public and through the political mills of Washington, Obama’s White House skipped submitting it the Senate for ratification as a treaty — where it would almost certainly have been voted down.
Trump, in trying to counter this debacle, has begun with the expedient of laying out the truth. In his speech on Friday, he began by detailing the core problem, which is not Iran’s nuclear program per se, but the character of Tehran’s regime — world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism — which, having seized power in 1979, “raided the wealth of one of the world’s oldest and most vibrant nations, and spread death, destruction, and chaos all around the globe.”Directing U.S. foreign policy away from the perils and noxious commitments of this terrible deal is a daunting task. It is made all the more difficult because Iran’s oil-wealth is bait for lucrative business contracts — fueling the chorus from Europe in favor of the keeping the deal. And it is made yet more difficult by the lingering haze of talking-point narratives with which the Obama White House peddled this deal to the media, orchestrating the deal’s praises via the “echo chamber” bragged up early last year to the New York Times magazine by Obama’s former chief fabulist and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, Ben Rhodes.
None of this answers the question of what follows if America walks away from the Iran deal. But Trump has now opened the way to a robust debate, and begun clearing the road toward whatever it might genuinely take to avert the nightmare prospect of a Tehran regime armed with nuclear missiles. That’s a lot more promising for the security of America and its allies than relying — until it’s too late — on the sham of a rotten agreement annexed to a UN resolution.Trump clarified how the JCPOA “threw Iran’s dictatorship a political and economic lifeline,” noting that “Since the signing of the nuclear agreement, the regime’s dangerous aggression has only escalated.” He listed a number of Iran’s specific violations of the deal, in letter and spirit, as grounds for decertifying compliance. He announced that his administration was imposing new sanctions on Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which he described, accurately, as “the Iranian Supreme Leader’s corrupt personal terror force and militia.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
While US Is Silent, Belgium and Norway Act Against Palestinian Incitement
by Stephen M. Flatow
European countries are not exactly known for their love of Israel. Yet recent actions taken by the governments of Norway and Belgium suggest that, in at least one important respect, those two nations have gone much further than the US in confronting the problem of Palestinian incitement against Israel.
Belgium, which has been giving the Palestinian Arabs more than $20 million annually, announced this week that it “will put on hold any projects related to the construction or equipment of Palestinian schools.” This followed a report by Palestinian Media Watch that a Belgian-funded Palestinian school, the Beit Awwa Basic Girls School, has changed its name to the Dalal Mughrabi Elementary School.
For those who don’t recognize the name, Mughrabi was the leader of a squad of Fatah terrorists that landed on Israel’s shore, just north of Tel Aviv, on March 9, 1978. There was another young woman on the beach that morning.
Gail Rubin, an American Jewish nature photographer, was photographing rare birds near the water. Gail’s work had been exhibited at the Jewish Museum in Manhattan, and other major venues. She also happened to be the niece of Senator Abraham Ribicoff (D-Conn.).
One of the terrorists, Hussain Fayadh, later explained to a Lebanese television station what happened next: “Sister Dalal al-Mughrabi had a conversation with the American journalist. Before killing her, Dalal asked: ‘How did you enter Palestine?’ [Rubin] answered: ‘They gave me a visa.’ Dalal said: ‘Did you get your visa from me, or from Israel? I have the right to this land. Why didn’t you come to me?’ Then Dalal opened fire on her.”
As Gail lay dying on the beach, Mughrabi and her comrades strolled over to the nearby Coastal Road. An Israeli bus approached; they hijacked it. During the ensuing mayhem, they murdered 36 passengers, 12 of them children. Mughrabi was killed by Israeli troops. Hussain Fayadh, who survived, was sentenced to life in jail, but then released in a prisoner exchange — and was later hired as a senior adviser to Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas.
A spokesperson for the Belgian Foreign Ministry told The Algemeiner, “Belgium unequivocally condemns the glorification of terrorist attacks [and] will not allow itself to be associated with the names of terrorists in any way.”
Norway does not want to be associated with Mughrabi, either.
Earlier this year, the PA decided to name a women’s center in the town of Burqa after Mughrabi. The Norwegian government, which had contributed $10,000 to the center, demanded — and received — a full refund.
The US, however, has taken no such steps to restrict the aid that it provides to the PA.
The Trump administration gave the PA $344 million this year. Congress tried to pass legislation (the Taylor Force Act) to take away the portion of the aid that the PA gives to imprisoned terrorists and the families of suicide bombers. But the administration insisted on adding a bunch of loopholes that will render the legislation almost toothless.
I’m not aware of any Belgian or Norwegian citizens who were harmed by Dalal Mughrabi. Yet those governments have acted appropriately to oppose glorifying her. The US has much more reason to penalize the PA for honoring Mughrabi: she murdered the niece of a US senator. Yet America has done nothing on this issue.
If the murder of Gail Rubin is not reason enough, here’s another. Palestinian Media Watch reports that the PA not only has named five schools after Mughrabi (and 26 others after other terrorists), but it has also named three schools after the Nazi collaborators Haj Amin el-Husseini and Hassan Salameh.
That’s right, Nazi collaborators. From World War II. The war in which 405,399 American servicemen gave their lives. In other words, 405,399 reasons for the Trump administration to tell the PA: you won’t get another dime from American taxpayers until you stop honoring those who collaborated with America’s enemies in World War II.
Thank you, Belgium and Norway, for leading the way in the fight against honoring and glorifying Palestinian terrorists. I hope and pray my own country will follow your lead.
Stephen M. Flatow, a vice president of the Religious Zionists of America, is an attorney in New Jersey and the father of Alisa Flatow, who was murdered in an Iranian-sponsored Palestinian terrorist attack in 1995.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)This forwarded article by Ray Starman is sad but not surprising given the attitude of the Obama administration the previous eight years. Recently the story about 2 LT Rapone came to light and I believe the other shoe hasn’t fallen in his case nor with the West Point Superintendent. I am hopeful that the Trump administration will continue to refocus America’s military back to it’s traditional values which includes putting the right kind of leaders back in place over our military academies and in key command roles. We have a great core base to draw on in all the services consistent with the high pro-Trump vote in the last election. I believe a number of good leaders stayed in the service and bid their time to ride out the disgraceful run of the Obama administration with the hopes that it wouldn’t last forever. My thoughts. DD
Moscow on the Hudson – The Left’s Infiltration of West Point
By Ray StarmannThe United States Military Academy is being infiltrated and attacked by radical leftists, feminists and Islamists who are on a mission to transform West Point into a bastion of anti-American doctrine, feminist theology and Islamo-Marxist operations, just as they transformed the US Army into a leftist freak show in the last two decades.
The Long Gray Line is quickly becoming nothing more than an undisciplined, insubordinate mass of brainwashed, entitled social justice warriors more focused on the LGBT agenda and diversity than they are about putting cold steel down range.
After a summer of endless Navy misadventures and collisions at sea, that made McHale’s Navy look like a highly skilled U-Boot Wolf Pack, the focus switched to another service decimated by the Kenyan Commander in Chief, the US Army.Over two weeks ago, the story of US Army Second Lieutenant Spenser Rapone crackled through the media like a three alarm conflagration. Rapone, a former enlisted man was kicked out of the 75th Ranger Regiment, but then managed to finagle an appointment to West Point and subsequently graduate from the Academy, before being assigned to the 10th Mountain Division as a platoon leader. Rapone is a devout communist, a supporter of Antifa, a Che Guevara acolyte, who has called for violence and the sabotage of the US military on various online platforms, while referring to the Secretary of Defense as a vile f**k.It was also learned that Rapone’s instructors and other cadre and administrators at West Point knew about Rapone’s devotion to a political ideology responsible for the deaths of 100 million souls in the 20th Century.Yet, nothing was done to Rapone. In fact, his actions were defended by his Islamist professor, Rasheed Hoseini, a former professor, Lieutenant-Colonel (Ret.) Sean Cleveland, who now teaches at the Citadel and several students; one, a female artillery officer stationed at Fort Carson who essentially said Rapone’s Marxist-Leninism was known to everyone, no big deal and old vets needed to just shut up and let the army’s SJW’s win the day.Nothing to see here America. Move on…Apparently, Comrade Lieutenant Rapone is under investigation by the US Army. He will receive the due process his communist heroes would never have provided him.Rapone’s story was just the frosting on the cake according to Lieutenant-Colonel (Ret.) Robert Heffington, a 1997 graduate of West Point, and a former instructor there from 2006-2009 and 2013-2017, who had a run in with an extremely insubordinate Cadet Rapone in 2015 and who reported his conduct and communist ideology to West Point administrators who did nothing in response.Colonel Heffington penned an open letter this week concerning the many problems pervading the whole institution, from general apathy, to coddling of cadets, to leftist indoctrination.Heffington highlights some main points:“First and foremost, standards at West Point are nonexistent. They exist on paper, but nowhere else. The senior administration at West Point inexplicably refuses to enforce West Point’s publicly touted high standards on cadets, and, having picked up on this, cadets refuse to enforce standards on each other. The Superintendent refuses to enforce admissions standards or the cadet Honor Code, the Dean refuses to enforce academic standards, and the Commandant refuses to enforce standards of conduct and discipline.”“The cadet honor code has become a laughingstock. Cadets know they will not be separated for violating it, and thus they do so on a daily basis. Moreover, since they refuse to enforce standards on each other and police their own ranks, cadets will rarely find a cadet at an honor hearing despite overwhelming evidence that a violation has occurred. This in tum has caused the staff and faculty to give up even reporting honor incidents. To make matters worse, the senior leadership at West Point actively discourages staff and faculty from reporting honor violations.”“Academic standards are also nonexistent. I believe this trend started approximately ten years ago, and it has continued to get worse. West Point has stated standards for academic expectations and performance, but they are ignored. Cadets routinely fail multiple classes and they are not separated at the end-of-semester Academic Boards. Their professors recommend “Definitely Separate,” but those recommendations are totally disregarded.”“The plebe American History course has been revamped to focus completely on race and on the narrative that America is founded solely on a history of racial oppression. Cadets derisively call it the “I Hate America Course.” Simultaneously, the plebe International History course now focuses on gender to the exclusion of many other important themes. On the other hand, an entire semester of military history was recently deleted from the curriculum (at West Point!).”“Conduct and disciplinary standards are in perhaps the worst shape of all. Cadets are jaded, cynical, arrogant, and entitled. They routinely talk back to and snap at their instructors (military and civilian alike), challenge authority, and openly refuse to follow regulations. They are allowed to wear civilian clothes in almost any arena outside the classroom, and they flaunt that privilege. Some arrive to class unshaven, in need of haircuts, and with uniforms that look so ridiculously bad that, at times, I could not believe I was even looking at a West Point cadet. However, if a staff or faculty member attempts to correct the cadet in question, that staff/faculty member is sure to be reprimanded for “harassing cadets.”“This brings me to the case of now-2LT Spenser Rapone. It is not at all surprising that the Academy turned a blind eye to his behavior and to his very public hatred of West Point, the Army, and this nation. I knew at the time I wrote that sworn statement in 2015 that he would go on to graduate.”Rapone was allowed to graduate because the left-leaning administrators didn’t want to do anything to him. Just as nothing was done about the 16 African-American female cadets last year who decided to pose for a picture in uniform, while giving the black power salute. The female cadets were supposedly protesting how oppressed they are while attending the equivalent of an Ivy League college for free. Imagine all those racist, white nationalist men oppressing African-American female cadets by opening doors to a wonderful future for them.The curriculum calls for hating America, why wouldn’t the cadets also exhibit behavior hating the nation they serve as well?The women should have been charged with conduct unbecoming, but the whole subject was swept under the same rug with Rapone’s Leninist behavior. After all, the women represented the Marxist, Black Lives Matter values of some professors.Radical Islamist professors, communist cadets, professors who see nothing wrong with a cadet being a communist, cadets who idolize Black Lives Matter, apathetic, gutless administrators, cowardly instructors: West Point should heretofore be referred to as Moscow on the Hudson.Goodbye Ike, hello Markus Wolf.West Point no longer resembles West Point anymore, but rather some Santa Monica day school, concerned about nurturing children, where the teachers are all season ticket holders to the Bill Maher Show and card-carrying members of the Democratic Socialists of America.Duty, Honor and Country are anachronistic terms to the left. To the left, American values, American honor, American exceptionalism and American culture must be destroyed and replaced by some vile vestige of rotting Orwellian globalism.Sadly, West Point is indicative of the whole US military, which in 2017 is stocked with feminists, leftists and social justice warriors. Anyone who doesn’t support gays and transgenders on active duty and women in the Green Berets is looked upon as some type of Neanderthal.Leftist radicals are putting the country in peril. It’s time for a purge in the military to begin before the inevitable takes place, the inevitable defined as the US military getting its ass kicked in the air, on land and on the high seas.West Point must return to its old standards and it must have instructors and a curriculum which glorify the US military and America, not spit on it. The army and the US military as a whole must begin to RIF the perfumed princes, the SJW’s, the feminists, the radicals and anyone else who doesn’t understand what the mission of the US Army and the military is – to kill people and break things and to do it violently and swiftly.
4a)
A Cadet’s Perspective
The following post was penned by an anonymous cadet at the United
States Military Academy and represents an individual viewpoint on
an increasingly complex and volatile situation. The views expressed
here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
West Point, the United States Army, or the Department of Defense.
You’ve undoubtedly heard much about “The Point” in the media
recently, with much of that news negative. First, the world was
introduced to a former cadet, Spencer Rapone, whose images and
anti-American rantings on social media ignited a firestorm of
controversy. In short order, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Robert
Heffington, a former history instructor at West Point, released a
sworn statement documenting a bitter encounter with Rapone from
2015. This week, Colonel Heffington followed that statement with an
“open letter” to West Point graduates, in which he levied a stinging
series of accusations against the Superintendent, staff, and faculty of
the institution.
Unfortunately, I can’t really provide any personal context or
commentary behind the actions of Spencer Rapone; he was a
“Firstie” in another regiment during my Plebe year and we had no
interaction. His social media activity, however, is both disconcerting
and disturbing. Regardless of his military status, the fact that he finds
it necessary to blatantly violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice
is another issue entirely. I’ve heard rumors of current instructors
substantiating Colonel Heffington’s assertions from his sworn
statement; from Rapone’s demonstrated online behavior, it’s
probably not much of a stretch to assume that he was openly
disrespectful to instructors. Beyond the fact that no one here who
remembers Rapone seems to have a positive opinion of him, I can add
nothing to that discussion.
However, I have mixed feelings about Colonel Heffington’s open letter
to the “Old Grads.” A good deal of what he wrote is not necessarily
untrue, but several of his accusations rely on information to which he
was not privy on a regular basis. As I sit with his letter before me, I
want to address some of those accusations and provide context from
my perspective as a cadet.
“…2LT Spencer Rapone — an avowed Communist and
enemy of the United States…”
Honestly, I think this is a somewhat “over the top” statement. I
understand that Rapone is a “card-holding member” of whatever
analog to the Communist Party exists in our country, but I think that
we forget that he also deployed in support of military operations, and
(so far as we know) has not acted to sabotage those operations. Not to
minimize his actions on social media, but I’m not sure that the
“Better Dead than Red” mentality is a good enough reason to declare
him “an enemy of the United States.” Derelict in his duties? Probably.
But saying he is an enemy of the state is a bit much, I think. But,
that’s only my opinion.
“…standards at West Point are nonexistent.”
I completely disagree with this statement. Below a certain Grade
Point Average, cadets lose all privileges. Period. Civilian clothes,
passes, trip sections, sometimes even Spring Break. Fail to pass your
Indoor Obstacle Course Test? Same deal. Hell, even the classic Army
Physical Fitness Test (APFT) standards are not enough. APFTs are
evaluated for a letter grade: if I’m not mistaken, 180 is a “D” while a
perfect score of 300 only earns a cadet an “A-”. If you want an “A”,
you need to “superscore” the test. If cadets fail to meet the physical
minimums set for their class, they lose all privileges and are placed
on remedial workouts until meeting these requirements. And, just to
maintain privileges as a Firstie, you need to score a minimum of
250 on the APFT.
I could continue with a point-by-point rebuttal of the accusations
made in this paragraph, but it’s fair to say the majority of his sweeping
assertions are not supported by facts. I will say that our current
Commandant most certainly enforces the standards. He has been
known to bring in a cadet’s entire chain of command, to include the
TAC team and instructors, to explain why a particular cadet failed to
shave that day. The standards not only exist, they are routinely
enforced.
“Every fall, the Superintendent addresses the staff and
faculty and lies.”
Again, I can’t speak with authority on the admissions process, so
please take everything I say with a proverbial “grain of salt.” I am
unsure as to what role a three-star general assumes in admitting
individual cadets to this institution; Admissions is led by a colonel
with a number of field grade officers operating in support. With
respect to the assertion concerning sub-par standardized test scores
(for example, the ACT), I am led to believe that the academy believes
in the “whole-person” concept and cares about more than simply
academic endeavors. If West Point admits someone with scores in
those ranges, there are other accomplishments in consideration
(preparatory school, etc.) that assures the admissions team that the
prospective cadet can meet the academic standards.
I would very much like to meet the cadet Colonel Heffington refers to
as “illiterate.” Often, the textbooks we use are “custom made” and
riddled with small errors that may make them difficult to read. To
infer that there are people here so dumb they are unable to read is a
fanciful notion that, in my opinion, contradicts his claim that his
comments come from a place of “intense devotion and loyalty.”
“The Cadet Honor Code has become a laughingstock.”
Absolutely not. I think there is a misconception here that the Honor
Code is a tool used to separate cadets with character flaws at odds
with the code itself. The level to which we are expected to cite
academic documents is the stuff of legend here. If we forget a source
used in a cited work, we are subject to an Honor Board, one of the
penalties of which is separation from the Academy. Obviously, if
cadet is so morally odious, the Honor Code should be used as a
separation metric, though that is usually not the case. Ultimately,
cadet perception of the Honor code is at complete odds with the
picture painted by Colonel Heffington in his letter.
Every year, we hear about cadets unsure of their graduation status
because their case is being decided by the Superintendent the day of
graduation. It’s not uncommon for a cadet to learn on graduation day
that an Honor Code violation is preventing them from graduating
with their class. The Superintendent has to weigh the merits of
someone who, if part of an ROTC program not subject to the same
rigid Honor Code, might be a good officer, otherwise. This is not to
say that a cadet shouldn’t be held accountable for their actions, but
there is a reason we have certain event-specific punishments that
allow someone to “dig themselves out of a hole.”
“Academic standards are nonexistent.”
The main point of Colonel Heffington’s argument is that the
Academic Board process is flawed and doesn’t typically result in the
separation of cadets who routinely fail classes. I can attest to the fact
that the current Dean’s policy is to separate cadets who fail the same
class more than once. I have witnessed this with many cadets, so I am
not entirely sure of the basis for his assertion. If a cadet fails different
classes, each only a single time, their case still goes before the
Academic Board for review, after which the board submits a
recommendation to the Dean’s office. It’s worth noting that the
Academic Board is not usually capable of seeing the whole picture
when it comes to the individual life of a cadet, so the final decision
falls on someone with legal authority. Separating a cadet is not a
simple matter; many people are invested in the success of every cadet
here, and because someone is having a rough year academically is not
reason enough to separate them. In the end, however, the insinuation
that cadets can simply fail until they pass is simply untrue.
“Curriculum has suffered”
On this point, I have very little to contest Colonel Heffington’s
statement; this is his department. I think his deep personal passion in
this area is evident and, as such, might be somewhat overstated.
During my time at West Point, I took U.S. History and, while I might
not have received the greatest grade in that class, I certainly did not
come away thinking it was framed to be anti-American. Likewise, I
took a class in international history class focused on a region of the
world related to my assigned language. Latin American history taught
me about the volatile nature of governments in South America
between the 17th and 20th centuries, but I don’t remember learning
anything about gender and have absolutely no idea what Colonel
Heffington might have been referencing.
As far as removing a semester of military history, the faculty replaced
a 19th century military history course with one more focused on
modern conflict to accommodate the supplementary engineering
tracks non-engineering majors take. History majors are still required
to take both courses. Personally, I like this. I still get my World War II
fix, but also get to learn about Nuclear Engineering and Chemistry.
I don’t think I’m suffering all that much, considering that we still have
dedicated military science courses and summer field training pretty
much every year.
“Conduct and discipline are in the worst shape of all”
Boy howdy, is this one a doozy. I am unsure of the cadets with whom
Colonel Heffington interacted to leave him with such a strong
negative opinion on the current state of the institution. I have
NEVER seen a cadet snap or interact unprofessionally with an
instructor, to the extent he describes in his letter. To offer some
perspective on the issue of civilian clothes, we currently DO
enforce the requirement that 4th class cadets leave in the prescribed
duty uniform, as outlined in policy. It’s not a huge infraction, but it’s
punished accordingly, typically with a negative counseling for a first-
time offense. Sometimes — as was the case my Plebe year — this policy
is adjusted to account for security concerns, such as large numbers of
cadets gathering in highly public places like New York City.
In the case of cadets wearing civilian clothes in the barracks or around
post, we have specific policies that address who is authorized to wear
what type of clothing, and where. If the Firstie mentioned by Colonel
Heffington was in the state he described in his letter, I have no doubt
that he would be punished via his TAC team. But, if he was within his
privileges as a Firstie, Colonel Heffington would very much be in the
wrong. First- and Second-Class cadets (Seniors and Juniors) do not
need to observe Evening Study Period and have extra privileges with
respect to the wear civilian clothes. While Old Grads who did not
enjoy these privileges might be upset to read this, it is authorized. I’m
not surprised that the Brigade Tactical Officer (a colonel) would
address this with directly with Colonel Heffington; there are often
“differences” in expectations between officers working under the Dean
and those working for the Commandant. The officers serving under
the Commandant exercise command authority over cadets, which is
why they have the final word when it comes to administering
punishments (something they are not afraid to do).
“Senior leaders are intimidated by cadets”
I am not exactly sure who Colonel Heffington defines as a “senior
leader,” but I can assure you that the Commandant (a brigadier
general) is not at all afraid of cadets. Honestly, I am not sure if he has
any fears at all. He routinely spot checks cadets and, sometimes,
entire companies, to ensure they are doing the “right thing.” In my
time at West Point, I have never had the impression that any officer is
afraid to correct a cadet, much less a senior field grade officer. The
same can be said of the non-commissioned officers assigned here.
They very much are fearless when it comes to making corrections.
If you want my honest assessment of Colonel Heffington’s letter, here
it is: as a cadet, I disagree with most of it. I think that, as a whole, he
is upset with the administration and is using his newfound platform
to voice his opinion in hopes of incite some change in the direction he
sees as necessary. Much of what he writes can be attributed to the
fact that personnel assigned to academic roles are often oblivious to
cadet life outside the classroom. Teachers have subjects they need to
teach, and shouldn’t be bothered with an OPORD of an upcoming
weekend training operation. I doubt that Colonel Heffington, even at
his rank within the academic department, was privy to all of the
cadet-specific information regularly put out by the Brigade Tactical
Department and the Commandant’s Office. I don’t disagree that
oversight of cadet personal conduct is necessary, and actions need to
be taken to ensure that the behavior of a cadet (along the lines of
Spencer Rapone) should be corrected before it escalates to the level
we’re seeing today. But, to portray this as a systemic issue is a stretch.
While many of the cadets with whom I’ve spoken agree with some
portions of Colonel Heffington’s letter, most can’t shake the fact that
it reads like an Old Grad’s “The Corps Has” ramblings.
On a personal level, I think that Colonel Heffington’s letter further
exacerbates an already sensitive situation by striking at the credibility
of West Point in a way that can’t be addressed to any meaningful
degree. His status as a graduate and former professor elevate his
opinion above most others, which only amplifies the negative
repercussions. Colonel Heffington undoubtedly contributed a great
deal to our Army and our nation, and is deserving of his retirement
and his opinion. Despite this, I feel compelled to say that I disagree
with the majority of his letter.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5)
PM to Russian def. minister: We won't allow
Iran into Syria
As Sergey Shoygu visits Jerusalem to discuss security coordination in Syria, Netanyahu warns an unchanged
Iranian nuclear deal will result in nuclear arsenal in Tehran within 8-10 years; says 'Iran has to understand that
Israel will not allow' military entrenchment in Syria.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Russia’s Minister of Defense Sergey Shoygu Tuesday that Israel will
not allow Iran to entrench its military forces in Syria.
“Iran has to understand that Israel will not allow this,” Netanyahu said during the meeting in Jerusalem, which
was also attended by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman.
Also during the meeting, Lieberman and Netanyahu also discussed the Iran nuclear deal which president
Donald Trump refused to recertify last week.
Netanyahu warned the Russian defense minister that unless the deal is altered, Iran will be able to build up a
stockpile of nuclear weapons within 8-10 years.
(Photo: Haim Zach/GPO)
Prior to the meeting, Shoygu, as part of his two-day trip, was escorted by Lieberman around the Yad Vashem
Holocaust Memorial Museum.
(Photo: Haim Zach/GPO)
Shoygu arrived in Israel on Monday evening to kick off what is the visit in years by a Russian official in his
position to Israel.
His landing came against a background of an attack by the Israel Air Force on a Syrian aerial defense battery
on Monday morning, which earlier launched a surface-to-air missile towards IAF planes.
“This is his first visit, and as his first visit as defense minister, it is of extraordinary importance,” Lieberman said
on Monday.
(Photo: EPA)
“We greatly appreciate our relationship with Russia, especially the openness and frankness. We don't always
agree but we always speak frankly and openly. We believe that the moment there is open and frank dialogue,
any problems can be overcome.”
A day after Shoygu concludes his visit, Lieberman will take off for Washington to meet with US Defense
Secretary James Mattis, with Iran occupying the bulk of their focus and Trump’s announcement of a new policy
review of the US’s approach to the Iranians and the situation in Syria.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment