Are cops perfect? No. Perfection is an unattainable goal. However, countless officers strive for, and reach excellence every single day. In this week's video, Former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke explains why, unlike what you may have heard, cops are not the problem.
|
The U.S and Israel partnership and relationship as explained by Amb. Yoram Ettinger. (See 1 below.)
I post this because of the other article by Tom Friedman.
I seldom agree with Friedman but I do believe he is right this time. Iran will be stopped by Israel because Israel will not allow Iran to establish a forward base and be in a position to militarily encroach, at will, on Israel's security.
I have been pessimistic when it comes to another war in The Middle East coming sooner than later.
Meanwhile, Israel is doing what it can to reveal reality to those in The U.N who lean in their direction in hopes of building greater respect for their situation.Jerusalem Post: ONE-FIFTH OF ALL AMBASSADORS TO U.N. CURRENTLY IN ISRAEL
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ross Rants. (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
This sent from a dear Marine friend and fellow memo reader. (See 3 below.)
And:
From the same friend: (See 3a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When you have laws on the books and ignore them because they are in opposition to current attitudes should one ask what is going on?(See 4 below.)
More Democrat hypocrisy? (See 4a below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is Islam getting a bad name? You decide. (See 5 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disgusting treatment of Amy Wax continues. (See 6 and 6a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
They don't call it "Eataly" for nothing: Eating In Italy
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) UCI EXCLUSIVE: Israel and the US – A Dynamic Partnership – Part 1 and 2 of an Interview with Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger
The Unity Coalition for Israel has long been a fan of the work of Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger. He is an author and columnist and has served as Ambassador and Minister for Congressional Affairs at Israel's Embassy in Washington D.C. He is an internationally respected insider on US-Israel relations, mideast politics and overseas investments in Israel's high tech arena.
CEO and Founder of the Unity Coalition for Israel spoke with Ambassador Ettinger on the wisdom of US investments in Israel which return many more times the monetary and security value to the United States than US taxpayers pay out. Following is a transcript of the Ambassador expounding on the topic which presents Israel in a most positive light not often seen in the mainstream media.
Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger:
Thank you. I view it as a privilege to communicate with the Unity Coalition for Israel in general, but especially with Esther Levens who I’ve known for many years and highly respected and admired for your contribution for enhanced US-Israel relations. You have made a difference for which I’m grateful.
When it comes to US – Israel relations, there is the reality of conventional wisdom on one hand and the state of affairs on the other hand. The conventional wisdom is that the US extends foreign aid to Israel, which is absolutely not the case.
Certainly, the Jewish state is not foreign to the United States which, when established by the founding fathers, viewed themselves as the people of the modern day covenant and they followed in the footsteps of the early Pilgrims who considered the newly found land to be the modern day promised land.
So the Jewish state is not foreign to the American ethos, to American history, American morality.
Keeping to this ethos, Israel is not an entity that is looking for “aid.” We have been partners of the US and, admittedly, a very much junior partner, to the senior partner, the US. But the significance of the reality of US-Israel relations is that we are not talking about a one-way street where the United States give and Israel receives, but, increasingly, it is a two-way street, mutually beneficial to the US and to Israel.
In fact, Israel has transformed itself into a very unique producer of national security for the US unlike other state recipients of foreign aid who are simply consumers of national security. Unlike other nations, Israel is not a burden on the US budget or US economy but, rather, has been a very resourceful contributing asset to the US budget and economy.
I will share examples of this from my personal experience.
A number of years ago, I paid a visit to the Lockheed Martin plant in Fort Worth, Texas, which manufactures the F-16 combat plane and also recently started producing the F-35 combat plane. The plant manager who took me around introduced me to a small team and referred to them as the “Ace” of the plant. I asked him, why are they the “Ace?” And he said, “Well, this is an Israeli team composed of Israeli Air Force men and they are here 24-7. And their duty is to receive feedback from the Israeli Air Force as far as the F-16 (and, now, the F-35) used by the Israeli Air Force. And the feedback has to do with operation, maintenance and repairs and that feedback enhances the future generation of the F-16 and F-35.”
I asked the plant manager how many upgrades of the current generation of the F-16 are attributed to the feedback from the Israeli Air Force and the response was well over 600 moderations or upgrades! And he gave me examples:
50% of the cockpits are the result of the Israeli input.
75% of the firing control – another outcome of the Israeli feedback.
50% of the cockpits are the result of the Israeli input.
75% of the firing control – another outcome of the Israeli feedback.
And, in fact, this (Israeli) work has been the most unique aspect of that laboratory of the US defense industry. When I asked the plant manager if he could quantify those 600-plus upgrades resulting from the Israeli feedback in terms of American dollars his response was, and I quote, “A Mega-Billion-Dollar Bonanza” to the manufacturer. I can assume, logically, that similar benefits are accrued by the manufacturer of the F-15, which we fly in Israel, manufactured by McDonnell Douglas, and, once again, every day they receive Israeli feedback.
There are hundreds, if not over one thousand, American military systems employed by Israel and each one benefits from, what I call, services of that unique battle-tested laboratory otherwise known as Israel.
I even visited to the office of one of the Congressmen from Tennessee of the Chattanooga district and he told me that, in his district, there is a Northrup Grumman plant which manufactures special robots identifying explosives. A few years ago Israel decided that that robot would be best for Israel in its day-to-day battle against Arab terrorists – their car bombs and improvised explosive devices (I.E.D.s), etc. – and the Congressman told me, in the aftermath of the Israeli decision to buy that robot, there was a huge benefit to his district and the Northrup Grumman plant there because the impact of the Israeli decision was identical to the impact of a triple-A store joining a newly-constructed shopping mall. Once a triple-A store joins the shopping mall, more and more stores wish to come into the fold and more and more customers come to frequent the stores in the mall. He gave me examples of the benefits saying that every other week there is a telephone conference between the manufacturers and the users in Israel. The users provide feedback to the manufacturers in Northrup Grumman and that is equivalent, according to the Congressman, to between 10 and 15 years of research and development which is provided free of charge by Israel. And that benefit of Israeli feedback has enhanced the competitiveness of that particular robot in the global competition. It further increased exports out of Chattanooga district and has obviously expanded the employment base of that district in Tennessee.
PART 2 – In part two of this two part series, founder and CEO of the Unity Coalition for Israel, Esther Levens, interviews Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, a leading Israeli consultant to members of Israel’s Cabinet and Knesset. He regularly briefs US legislators and their staff on Israel’s contribution to vital US interests, on the root causes of international terrorism and on other issues of bilateral concern.
“According to the late General Alexander Haig, the benefit or savings to the US defense budget was anywhere between 15 to 20 billion dollars every single year!” – Amb. Yoram Ettinger
Esther Levens, CEO and Founder, Unity Coalition for Israel:
The Unity Coalition for Israel has long been a fan of the work of Ambassador Yoram Ettinger. He is an author and columnist and has served as Ambassador and Minister for Congressional Affairs at Israel's Embassy in Washington D.C. He is an internationally respected insider on US-Israel relations, Mideast politics and overseas investments in Israel's high tech arena.
CEO and Founder of the Unity Coalition for Israel spoke with Ambassador Ettinger on the wisdom of US investments in Israel which return many more times the monetary and security value to the United States than US taxpayers pay out. Following is part two of a transcript of the Ambassador expounding on the topic which presents Israel in a most positive light not often seen in the mainstream media.
Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger:
Thank you. I view it as a privilege to communicate with the Unity Coalition for Israel in general, but especially with Esther Levens who I’ve known for many years and highly respected and admired for your contribution for enhanced US-Israel relations. You have made a difference for which I’m grateful.
When it comes to US – Israel relations, there is the reality of conventional wisdom on one hand and the state of affairs on the other hand. The conventional wisdom is that the US extends foreign aid to Israel, which is absolutely not the case.
Picking up where we left off, one can move from defense industry manufacturing to a totally different area and that is day-to-day military operations.
Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, the intellectual “mecca” of the US military and, as I was told by a former commander of the US Army, who was involved in battle tactic formulation, that that which was formulated in Leavenworth, in terms of tactics, was based on the Israeli experience. They study Israeli wars and they apply it to future challenges which will be faced by the US. And one such challenge is battle tactics.
During one of my visits to Alabama, I met a major who serves as a specialist in urban warfare. He told me that on their base there is a platform that serves their urban-warfare-specialized soldiers. And that model was built by Israeli Defense soldiers as a result of Israel’s experience in urban warfare in Lebanon, the West Bank and in Gaza. And, once a year, that major joins other urban-warfare-specialized US forces and they fly to Israel to get training and updates on the latest Israeli lessons in training as far as urban warfare is concerned.
Another experience, much more critical, has to do with the threat of nuclear war.
Going back to 1991, there was a major event in Washington DC in the aftermath of the first Gulf War and the key note speaker was Dick Cheney, then Defense Secretary under George Bush Senior. The first sentence uttered by Dick Cheney was, “Thank you Israel, for bombing Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981 which spared us in the US a nuclear confrontation in 1991.”
Now, how does one assess such a contribution which, by the way, was provided by an Israeli bombing of the nuclear reactor in defiance of a most egregious, most brutal American pressure to refrain from that bombing. If one goes back to the chronicles of 1981, Israel was severely punished by the US for the bombing. But sometimes it takes more than a few months or even a few years for leaders to realize the Israeli contribution and Dick Cheney’s statement made clear that, finally, the US realized the depth and extent of the Israeli contribution in that instance.
In 2007, Israel bombed and destroyed the Syrian nuclear reactor. Can one imagine the face of Syria with nuclear capabilities in the hands of either Assad – or Hezbollah? – or ISIS? – or the Iranians? All of this was spared by an Israeli action.
I could go on and on. But, to give a more personal example, I spoke about that issue 2 years ago with a major Christian conference of 400 participants and, at the end of my presentation on “What Has Israel Done Lately for the US?”, some people came to share with me their feedback. One of them, a retired combat pilot, said, “Mr. Ettinger, I would like to add another item to your inventory of Israeli contributions to the United States. As a retired combat pilot I can tell you that the most beneficial time for American pilots is joint maneuvers with the Israeli Air Force.”
And my response to him was that I loved hearing that but had difficulty accepting it because of the fact that Israel is using American hardware and, certainly, the I.Q. of the Israeli pilots is not higher, maybe lower, than the I.Q. of the American pilots… why would the American pilots benefit so much from the joint maneuvers with the Israeli pilots?
And his response was this: “The Israeli pilots always fly – training or operationally – under a ‘do-or-die’ state of mind which we in America rarely experience. Whether it’s training or operations, Israeli pilots always fly within enemy radar and within range of enemy surface-to-air missiles, therefore you have to fly more audaciously and more creatively – which Americans rarely, if at all, experience. And the only time for Americans to realize how much more audacious and creative they can become is when they train with Israeli pilots that do fly with American hardware but through that do-or-die state of mind. They stretch the capabilities of the American hardware to a much, much larger distance than is done daily by American pilots.”
Last and not least, I’ll refer to the late General Alexander Haig, the Secretary of State under President Reagan. I was told by his chief of staff that General Haig was one of the most excited supporters of expanded and enhanced US-Israel strategic cooperation. Whenever he was asked why it was he was so excited about joining forces with Israel, General Haig formulated a standard response which was as follows:
“Israel constitutes the largest American aircraft carrier
– which does not require a SINGLE American on board…
– which is deployed in the most critical area for regional and closed stability as well as American interests…
– which is an unconditional ally of the US…
– and which can never be sunk.”
– which does not require a SINGLE American on board…
– which is deployed in the most critical area for regional and closed stability as well as American interests…
– which is an unconditional ally of the US…
– and which can never be sunk.”
And, if there would not be an Israel, in the western flank of the Middle East or the eastern flank of the Mediterranean, then the US would have to deploy more military divisions to the Middle East, more REAL aircraft carriers to the Indian Ocean AND the Mediterranean – all of which is spared by one, Jewish state.
And, according to the late General Alexander Haig, the benefit or savings to the US defense budget was anywhere between 15 to 20 billion dollars every single year!
That, by itself, is 600-700 percent annual rate of return on what is misperceived as “foreign aid” to Israel. It is, in fact, an investment in the state of Israel yielding to the US Taxpayer a unique level of rate of return.
And I haven’t discussed yet what Israel is doing as far as intelligence for the US.
Former head of the US Air Force Intelligence, General George Keegan was also a MAJOR supporter of expansion with Israel and used to refer to Israel unabashedly and repeatedly stated publicly during his life that, “Israel is worth five CIAs.” Because, according to George Keegan, the scope of intelligence shared by Israel with the US – and, especially, when it comes to Islamic terrorism – “equals what would be produced by 5 CIAs.”
What’s the dollar sign next to such a contribution?
And, again, there’s no doubt, Israel is, by far, the junior partner.
But we are partner with the US! We are not a greedy entity looking for foreign aid.
We are involved in a very busy, highly-mutually-productive two-way street rather than the much more common one way street afforded almost every other country in the world that receives US foreign aid of any sort.
Esther Levens, CEO and Founder, Unity Coalition for Israel:
I’m really so elated that the US is recognizing Israel as such a wonderful partner. You’ve given us such an articulate statement of how they have literally helped the United States. Thank you so much…
Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger:
If you will let me give one more example before we sign off…
In 2018, the US is rightly very concerned about the survival of its Arab allies in Saudi Arabia, Dubai and Abu Dabi, U.A.E., in Kuwait, in Amman, Jordan and Egypt. All of the regimes in those countries could experience very tenuous reality. And, you never know, in the unpredictable violent Middle East – how long will they last?
The fact is that the US is limited in its ability to extend support to those regimes and Israel has collaborated with the US in bolstering those regimes. As a result, we have seen unprecedented strategic contacts between Saudi Arabia and Israel, between Kuwait and Bahrain and Abu Dabi and Israel, between Jordan and Israel, etc.
And, by the way, the enhancement of bilateral relations between Israel and every one of the 12 Arab countries goes on and is expanded, irrespective of the Palestinian issue which does not cast concern so much in those Arab regimes. Contrarily, again, to the Arab talk. When it comes to Arab walk, they value relations with the US and Israel much more than the Palestinian issue.
Here again, it’s Israel on the scene in a critical area making sure that friendly pro-US regimes in Amman, Jordan, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in Cairo, Egypt, in Kuwait City, Kuwait, etc. are with us rather than replaced by anti-American, radical forces which would make the threat of Islamic terrorism to the US that much closer to home and all of which is averted by the collaboration between the US and Israel. And, again, Israel, by far, the junior partner and the US, by far, the senior partner.
Esther Levens, CEO and Founder, Unity Coalition for Israel:
I’m so grateful for your wonderful interview and we wish you just nothing but good health and success. And let’s continue to “pick your brain,” as you will. I appreciate it so very much. Thank you.
Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger:
I consider it a privilege. And let me know, any time. Thank you for everything you have done through the Unity Coalition and on a personal level. Thank you very much.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)
What is interesting to me is that with so much potential crisis going on, the stock market has not moved net very much in a month. We are about where we were weeks ago depending on the day you look. Syria, Russia, Mueller, Cohen, China, tariffs, deficit, rising rates, higher oil prices, immigration, Irfan deal, or whatever you choose, there is something that might rattle the market, but in the end not much happens to stock prices now they have reset to a somewhat lower level than they had been at the end of January. It is only down 2% since year end. That seems to be because most people realize the real world economy is still doing very well, unemployment is closing in on a record low, and consumers are feeling good. Capex is being invested, or planned to be soon. Take home pay is rising and inflation is still well under control. There will be more peaks and valleys as the missiles fly, Mueller goes on some other tangent, or some new things happen, but earnings are about to start being released, and unless there are real earnings disappointments, it is likely they will beat and the current PE will be around 16.5 x, which is a reasonable valuation. Depending on what happens after we blast Syria, it is likely the stock market will rise again, and bonds will decline. You just need to wait this out.
If you are concerned that rising rates bode bad for corporations and stocks, keep in mind that most companies have low long term fixed rate debt now and those using floaters have likely used swaps, caps or other derivatives to protect against rising rates. Bottom line, corporate earnings and REIT earnings will not be very impacted by rate rises for quite awhile, and as I have mentioned before, it is the spread over the index that matters and for some sectors the spread has narrowed as there are plenty of lenders and plenty of available capital. As an example, the financing for my Bayonne deal, which is pure development with land development a major part, was readily available from several nonbank sources at surprisingly good pricing.
Result of tax law: the bottom 40% pay a lesser share of total taxes by actually getting money back so they are about -2% of total taxes paid, the top 20% will pay 87% of all taxes and the top 1% will pay 43% of total taxes vs 38% under the old tax code. The top .1% will pay 22% vs 18% before. So all the claims that the wealthy benefited is not true, the bottom 40% did benefit relatively and pays nothing, and the very top is now covering almost 25% of all tax revenue. How can the Dems claim this is not fair and the wealthy need to pay more.
Claims that the tax reform is the cause of potential huge deficits misses the whole point. Just as with any private company, the issue is not revenue, it is controlling costs. You need to relate costs to revenue, and not revenue to costs. If a company is struggling to pay its bills, it cuts costs, and maybe runs a sale, or just lowers prices—Amazon- to generate revenue, and to attract new customers. Trump lowered taxes (prices) to attract new customers (companies) —both US and foreign companies who had been investing abroad where taxes were much lower and regulation was less. In private industry we invest up front to create revenue and then cash flow, but the government with entitlements and other useless programs is not investing, it is wasting money to some degree. Old, useless programs never die, and people who should be at work, are instead just collecting entitlements they do not deserve because they are shirking work. That is a negative growth program that would drive any private company to bankruptcy. Investing for the government should be in infrastructure and R&D that private industry is not able to afford. The combination of lower prices (taxes), reduced operating costs (deregulation), and investment in infrastructure, is what can drive the economy to over 3% sustained growth. If combined with entitlement reductions, then the deficit can actually be reduced.
We do not know what was the basis for the raid on Cohen, but maybe they have something related to the taxi medallions which is a dirty business at best, or that he was not fully honest on a bank loan application, Apparently it does not involve Trump. However, this is far from over, and Cohen may be able to get the records returned to him. Some say they had a right to void attorney client if there is a belief records were to be destroyed, or if a lawyer is a party to a crime. Alan Dershowitz sees it differently. He states in an article that it is not just the Fifth Amendment that is being violated, but the Fourth and Sixth are even more important here, and they have already been violated by the raid. He says attorney client is protected by those amendments, and having a clean team at FBI which keeps the attorney client files away from prosecutors is not sufficient. He says the government had no right to seize the records at all. Just the fact that the FBI has seized these records and will look at them in any way, is a violation of the 4th and 6th amendments. That is there so the rest of us can rely on attorney client, and not worry the FBI might someday seize our records and use them to come after us, thereby making talking to your lawyer far more worrisome, which is the exact things the 4th and 6th are meant to protect against. Cohen was cooperating and never hid the payment to the stripper. So they should not be able to claim he was hiding the issue. It is Dershowitz view that there was no justification for the raid and the pertinent facts could have been gotten with a subpoena. We wonder why Hillary’s lawyers were not raided over the missing emails since they decided which to destroy supposedly, or why weren’t Bill’s lawyers treated this way when it was clear he lied. We wonder what is Rosenstein doing here by authorizing this. The whole raid should scare everyone that the government can grab an attorney’s records this way, no matter what you think of Trump. Maybe this is just about the medallions or election law, but it probably has nothing to do with Russia or Trump, or Mueller would have kept it to work in his group. This is why special counsels are so dangerous. They spin off into places they do not belong and to justify their existence they go after someone to charge, just as happened with Scooter Libbey.
Now Nunes has the info that he sought in the form of the original memo that launched the whole Trump investigation. The Horowitz report is coming soon. Nunes will continue to go after the other 1.2 million docs the FBI and DOJ are hiding. The whole coverup is going to collapse and when it does, along with Horowitz, it will lead to many more releases of information about the conspiracy to get Trump at FBI, DOJ and the Obama White House. Now we have the first report from the IG showing McCabe should be charged. This is just the first drop of a series of them as the IG reveals how widespread the conspiracy really was. The Comey book is a disgrace coming from the former director of the FBI ragging on Trump’s tie, his hands etc and using the adjectives d he did, when he is guilty of lying under oath and usurping the AG authority. The one thing he said that matters is that Trump has not done anything illegal. We are far from all of this coming together and blowing up the Dems. Wait until May and June.
Ignore all the headlines that banks made loans to Kushner. Kushner is often a very minority partner in these deals and they were done with the lead developers in the normal course.
Now the Brits, and the French, have joined us to destroy major assets of Assad. We don’t know if anything else is going on with the Saudis and Israel. It is likely that we are using not just weapons, but also massive cyberattacks, and shut downs of communications capacity of the Russians and Iranians. We also have proved that the Russians cannot stop us with what they claimed were effective anti-air missiles. Putin will look weak and unable to protect his major client. That is a huge setback for Putin. Maybe Israel will use the incident to blow up the Iranian base near its border. Nobody knows, but this will be a major turning point in Syria and with Russia. It is certainly going to reset the entire world geopolitical power situation. We are at a major turning point away from the Obama weakness, unwillingness to act, and withdrawal. It is very unfortunate that Obama decimated the military and we are not able to really do this attack as well as we should be able to, and will be able to in 2-3 years. This is also a massive message to N Korea, Russia, Iran and China, that there really is a new sheriff in town and he will not hesitate to shoot to kill if pushed. The policy of weakness is gone. Every time in history the US disassembled its military, very bad things happened. Probably if we were in full fighting form, instead of so weakened by Obama cut backs, Syria would have been different, although with Obama in office, Putin and Assad and Iran knew they had nothing to worry about. They knew Obama would fold and go away. Trump has completely changed that mindset now. This will change everything. The left cannot complain about this without siding with a mass murderer.
Joel Ross
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)Firearm Refresher Course
3)Firearm Refresher Course
1. "Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for
those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson
2. "Those who trade liberty for security have neither." ~ John Adams 3. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms. 4. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject. 5. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them. 6. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control. 7. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for. 8. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety. 9. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive. 10. Assault is a behavior, not a device. 11. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday. 12. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved. 13. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians
ignore the others.
14. What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you NOT understand? 15. Guns have only two enemies; rust and politicians. 16. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you
create slaves.
17. The American Revolution would never have happened with
gun control.
"I love this country, it's the government I'm afraid of"
3a)WHY ATHLETES CAN'T HAVE REGULAR JOBS:
1. Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model: "I wan' all dem kids to
do what I do, to look up to me. I wan' all the kids to copulate me."
2. New Orleans Saint RB George Rogers when asked about the upcoming
season: "I want to rush for 1,000 or 1,500 yards, whichever comes first.."
3. And, upon hearing Joe Jacobi of the 'Skin's say: "I'd run over my own mother to win
the Super Bowl," Matt Millen of the Raiders said: "To win, I'd run over Joe's Mom, too."
4. Torrin Polk, University of Houston receiver, on his coach, John Jenkins: "He treat us
like mens. He let us wear earrings."
5. Football commentator and former player Joe Theismann: "Nobody in football should
be called a genius. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein."
6. Senior basketball player at the University of Pittsburgh : "I'm going to graduate on
time, no matter how long it takes.." (Now that is beautiful)
7. Bill Peterson, a Florida State football coach: "You guys line up alphabetically by
height..," And, "You guys pair up in groups of three, and then line up in a circle."
8. Boxing promoter Dan Duva on Mike Tyson going to prison: "Why would anyone
expect him to come out smarter? He went to prison for three years, not Princeton ..."
9. Stu Grimson, Chicago Blackhawks left wing, explaining why he keeps a color photo of
himself above his locker: "That's so when I forget how to spell my name, I can still find
my clothes."
10. Lou Duva, veteran boxing trainer, on the Spartan training regimen of heavyweight
Andrew Golota: "He's a guy who gets up at six o'clock in the morning, regardless of
what time it is."
11. Chuck Nevitt , North Carolina State basketball player, explaining to Coach Jim
Valvano why he appeared nervous at practice: "My sister's expecting a baby, and I don't know if I'm going to be an uncle or an aunt. (I wonder if his IQ ever hit room temperature in
January)
12. Frank Layden, Utah Jazz president, on a former player: "I asked him, 'Son, what is it
with you? Is it ignorance or apathy?' He said, 'Coach, I don't know and I don't care.'"
13. Shelby Metcalf, basketball coach at Texas A&M, recounting what he told a player
who received four F's and one D: "Son, looks to me like you're spending too much time
on one subject."
14. In the words of NC State great Charles Shackelford: "I can go to my left or right, I am amphibious."
15. Former Houston Oilers coach Bum Phillips when asked by Bob Costas why he takes
his wife on all the road trips, Phillips responded: "Because she's too ugly to kiss good-
bye.
+++++++++++++++++++ 4)TO BAD OUR CONGRESS AND FEDERAL JUDGES DON'T KNOW THE LAWS THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS!
4a) 4 Areas Where Democrats OnceBacked Trump Immigration AgendaA politician stood on the U.S.-Mexican border in San Ysidro, California, declaring, “The day when America could be the welfare system for Mexico is gone.”
“Whether the space is a job, the space is a home, a place in a classroom, it’s becomes a competition for space. This is a country that’s based on immigration, and we all know that,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., continued during an August 1993 speech, adding, “We’ve got to, for the time being, enforce our borders.”
President Donald Trump in late January offered to grant amnesty to 1.8 million young illegal immigrants brought to the country as minors—more than twice the number protected under President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive action—in exchange for tougher immigration enforcement that included a border wall, adopting a merit-based immigration system, and cracking down on sanctuary cities—issues many Democrats had either voted for or voiced support for previously.
The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>
However, the Senate rejected four compromise bills in February, including one backed by the president, which got just 39 votes. A bill co-sponsored by Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, garnered 54 votes, but was short of the 60 votes needed to pass.
Now, a deal on codifying Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the 2012 Obama policy, into law appears dead.
The president made the assertion on Easter Sunday, in response to the Pueblo Sin Fronteras (People Without Borders) group leading more than 1,200 migrants from Honduras and others from El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and Nicaragua to the U.S. The organization has told members its numbers can overwhelm Mexican and then U.S. immigration officials.
“A lot of people are coming in because they want to take advantage of DACA, and we’re going to have to really see,” Trump said Sunday. “They had a great chance. The Democrats blew it. They had a great, great chance, but we’ll have to take a look, because Mexico has got to help us at the border. They flow right through Mexico. They send them into the United States.”
Here are four examples of prominent Democrats previously taking a harder line, more in keeping with Trump’s position now.
1. Comprehensive Reform Bills
In 2013, 52 Democrats voted for the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. The bipartisan “Gang of Eight” bill backed by Obama included provisions to stop immigration based on family reunification immigration, also known as chain migration; to create merit-based visas; and to expand the border fence.
However, the bill also granted amnesty—or what proponents call a “pathway to citizenship”—for at least 11 million illegal immigrants in the country.
President George W. Bush backed amnesty legislation in 2006 and 2007 that gained broad support from Democrats in Congress, but mixed reaction from his fellow Republicans.
Among the supporters who touted border security elements that included a border fence was Obama, then a senator from Illinois, in October 2006. He praised the legislation for “better fences and better security along our borders,” which he said would “help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.”
During debate over 2007 legislation, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., raised concernsabout the economic impact of importing more immigrants.
“I think this Senate should be spending much more of its time making it easier to create decent-paying jobs for American workers, instead of allowing corporate America to drive down wages by importing more and more workers from overseas,” Sanders said.
2. Chain Migration
Chain migration is the existing system, which focuses on family reunification. It provides preference for legal entry to relatives, often distant relatives, of people already in the country legally.
Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chairwoman Michelle Lujan Grisham, D-N.M., has called merit-based immigration a “poison pill,” while Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., rejected the term “chain migration,” insisting on calling it “family reunification.”
However, when advocating a 2007 version of the DREAM Act, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., expressed problems with chain migration, saying, “The DREAM Act would not lead to ‘chain migration.’ DREAM Act beneficiaries would have very limited ability to sponsor family members.”
Liberal icon Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., helped establish aspects of the current system. However, in 1996, he acknowledged problems with chain migration.
“This way, we address the concern raised by many about chain migration, the ability of a citizen to bring in a brother, for example, who in turn then brings in his wife and children,” Kennedy said in a floor speech in April of that year. “Once his wife is a citizen, she can then bring in her parents and other family members in a virtual endless chain of immigration.”
3. ‘Illegal’ vs. ‘Undocumented’
Today, Democrats across the board only use the term “undocumented” and avoid the word “illegal” to describe someone who is in the country illegally.
That wasn’t always the case.
Schumer once lectured supporters of immigration reform to use the term “illegal.” He also stressed there is a difference between legal and illegal immigration. However, that was in 2009, long before he became party leader in January 2017.
“When we use phrases like ‘undocumented workers,’ we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose,” Schumer said in a June 2009 speech at the Immigration Law and Policy Conference at Georgetown University. “If you don’t think it’s illegal, you are not going to say it. I think it is illegal and wrong, and we have to change it.”
4. Sanctuary Cities
In January, Feinstein and Sen. Kamala Harris, both California Democrats, challenged the Trump administration’s crackdown on sanctuary cities.
After a young woman, Kate Steinle, 32, was fatally shot in San Francisco in July 2015 by an illegal immigrant who was previously arrested and deported, it was Feinstein, California’s senior senator, who demanded stronger action by local authorities in cooperating with the Department of Homeland Security.
“I strongly believe that an undocumented individual, convicted of multiple felonies and with a detainer request from ICE, should not have been released,” she said. “We should focus on deporting convicted criminals, not setting them loose on our streets. As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I am looking at whether additional federal legislation may be necessary.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5)The first countries to ban Islam:
See how the world is acting fast on the threat posed by
Islam and its barbaric Sharia Law.
Japan has always refused Muslims to live permanently in
their country and they cannot own any real estate or any
type of business, and have banned any worship of Islam.
Any Muslim tourist caught spreading the word of Islam will
be deported immediately, including all family members.
Cuba rejects plans for first mosque. The African nation of Angola and several other nations
have officially banned Islam.
Record number of Muslims, (over 2,000) deported from
Norway as a way of fighting crime. Since these Muslim
criminals have been deported, crime has dropped by a
staggering 72%. Prison Officials are reporting that nearly
half of their jail cells are now vacant, Courtrooms nearly
empty, Police now free to attend to other matters, mainly
traffic offenses to keep their roads and highways safe and
assisting the public in as many ways as they can.
In Germany alone in the last year there were 81 violent
attacks targeting mosques.
Austrian police arrested 13 men targeting suspected jihad
recruiters.
A Chinese court sends 22 Muslim Imams to jail for 16 to
20 years for spreading Islam hatred and have executed
eighteen jihadists; China campaigns against Separatism
(disallowing Islamist to have their own separate state).
Muslim prayers banned in government buildings and
schools in Xinjiang (Western China). Hundreds of Muslim
families prepared to leave China for their own safety and
return back to their own Middle Eastern countries.
Muslim refugees beginning to realize that they are not
welcome in Christian countries because of their violent
ways and the continuing Wars in Syria and Iraq whipped
up by the hideous ISIS who are murdering young children
and using mothers and daughters as sex slaves.
British Home Secretary prepares to introduce 'Anti-social
Behavior Order' for extremists and strip dual nationals of
their Citizenship. Deportation laws also being prepared.
The Czech Republic blatantly refuses Islam in their
country, regarding it as evil.
And in the U.S.....Alabama - A new controversial
amendment that will ban the recognition of "foreign laws
which would include Sharia law".
16 other States have all Introduced Legislation to Ban
Sharia Law.
North Carolina bans Islamic "Sharia Law" in the State,
regarding it now as a criminal offense.
The Polish Defense League issues a warning to Muslims.
Many Muslims in Northern Ireland have announced plans
to leave the country to avoid anti-Islamic violence by Irish
locals. The Announcement comes after an attack on
groups of Muslims in the city of Belfast, Groups of Irish
locals went berserk and bashed teenage Muslim gangs
who were referring to young Irish girls as sluts and should
be all gang raped, according to Islam and ''Sharia Law.
Even hospital staff were reluctant to treat the battered
Muslim patients, the majority were given the Band-Aid
treatment and sent home with staff muttering ''Good
Riddance''.
Dutch MP's call for removal of all mosques in the
Netherlands. One Member of the Dutch Parliament said:
"We want to clean Netherlands of Islam".
Dutch MP Machiel De Graaf spoke on behalf of the Party
for Freedom when he said, "All mosques in the
Netherlands should be shut down. Without Islam, the
Netherlands would be a wonderful safe country to live in,
as it was before the arrival of Muslim refugees''.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
6)
Darkness at Penn, take 2
Professor Amy Wax is of course the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at the University of
Pennsylvania Law School. She earned an M.D. degree from Harvard in addition to her J.D. degree
from Columbia Law School. She holds an endowed chair at the law school. She must be one of the
most prominent members of the faculty. Yet she is the subject of a campaign of vilification and
stigmatization for violating the reigning academic taboos. In the world of 1984, she is guilty of
thoughtcrime.
Those of us following the saga of Amy Wax have drawn on literary metaphors to capture the heart of
the story. I wrote about Professor Wax’s saga most recently in “Darkness at Penn.” I drew on Arthur
Koestler. Roger Kimball retells the story so far in the New Criterion editorial “Fahrenheit 451
updated.” Roger draws on Ray Bradbury, Charles Dickens and George Orwell as he puts his
knowledge of the academic and cultural issues to good use. He not only rises to the defense of
Professor Wax, he also calls out Theodore Ruger, the sniveling Dean and Bernard G. Segal Professor
at Penn Law School.
Toward the end of his editorial Roger alludes to Richard Sander’s pioneering 2004 Stanford Law
Review article “A systemic analysis of affirmative action in American law schools.” Professor Sander
incorporated his research on the effects of law school affirmative action in chapters 4 and 5 of
Admit It, the outstanding book he wrote with Stuart Taylor, Jr.
Sander describes himself as a former community organizer. He is now a professor of law at UCLA. He
became interested in the subject of “affirmative action” in law schools when he joined the UCLA Law
School faculty. Sander and Taylor each contributed his own preface to the book; in his preface,
Professor Sander refers to “the culture of secrecy and double-talk” with which the subject of the book
is enshrouded in academia.
Sander himself wrote chapters 4 and 5 of the book. Chapter 4 discusses Sander’s research on the
effects of “affirmative action” (racial preferences) in law schools. Chapter 5 of the book is Sander’s
extraordinary account of the lengths to which supporters of law school “affirmative action” went to
suppress the publication of his Stanford Law Review article in which his research first appeared. It is
worth the price of admission to the book.
The book came out to wide acclaim in October 2012. You might want to pick up a copy before it
becomes a collector’s item, or (to take up Roger’s allusion to Ray Bradbury) the “firemen” get to it.
What we have in the case of Professor Wax here is another episode illustrating the true meaning of
“diversity,” or the ideology of “diversity,” with which we have all become familiar. As a wholly
owned subsidiary of “multiculturalism,” the ideology of “diversity” adheres to certain tenets:
(a) outcomes must be equal among racial and ethnic groups, except when they accrue to the advantage
of a racial or ethnic “minority” (including women); (b) disparate outcomes among racial and ethnic
groups represent some form of institutional bias to be rectified by the authorities; (c) all cultures are
equal, except for that of the United States, which is eternally guilty of racism under (a) and (b) above;
(d) the expression of views disagreeing with (a) through (c) must be suppressed or, if it cannot be
suppressed, must be stigmatized as “racist.”
6a)From an April 6 letter by Paul S. Levy, the founder and managing director of JLL
Partners, to University of Pennsylvania president Amy Gutmann :
After years of engaged and fulfilling involvement with Penn, I am resigning as Trustee
Emeritus and a Law School Overseer with this note. I am truly sorry to do so, but the
treatment of Amy Wax is unacceptable. Dean Ted Ruger has mismanaged the situation badly.
Unnamed “university officials,” one of whom may have been you, had advance notice of
Ruger’s intention to terminate her first-year teaching assignments and permitted Ruger to
proceed. . . .
Wax co-authored an off-campus editorial in a publication unaffiliated with Penn expressing
her views about “bourgeois values.” For her colleagues to gang up on her in a letter of outright
condemnation without giving any reasons demolishes the façade of open intellectual debate at
the Law School. . . . Ruger authorized an official law school statement dissociating the school
from her views (as if anyone under the circumstances would have thought the op-ed was the
Law School’s position). Then he criticized her directly in an op-ed, while piously pretending
to protect her by hiding behind the banner of free speech. An associate dean, Polk Wagner,
also publicly criticized Wax, undoubtedly with Ruger’s permission if not outright
encouragement.
Such actions make it rather hard for him to represent all faculty in this or any future debate.
Will those with unpopular views express them? If tenured, maybe, if they can take the heat
from the gang and the dean; if not tenured, I doubt it. Ruger failed to lead, corral, jawbone,
assuage and otherwise manage his faculty. Mike Fitts did that so well. I don’t want to support
Ted Ruger nor such un-collegial faculty any longer. . . .
We’re now debating Wax’s view of affirmative action, and how students admitted under that
program have fared, its impact on them, and its place in our society. . . . Ruger has said that
Wax is wrong about her affirmative action students’ performance, but won’t give data to back
up his views. One of the Overseers keeps saying to me: “Paul, Amy is wrong!” I say: “Well, I
hope she is, but what are the facts?” He says: “Well, Ruger said she’s wrong; that proves it.”
Really? Privately, faculty members have told me that their experiences match those of Wax. . . .
The claim that Wax is a racist is now ubiquitous at the University. Ruger is quick to criticize
Wax, but where are his public condemnations of those who make such baseless, besmirching
claims about his colleague with no factual underpinning? . . .
As you launch Penn’s next campaign for ever-more funds in the near future, I hope you bear in
mind what universities like Penn are essentially about. Their highest goals are the pursuit of
knowledge through debate and discussion and the defense of the ideal of free expression.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
No comments:
Post a Comment