Ocasio's have become popular.And:
Today we heard Mea Culpas from a host of Democrat candidates who have announced they are seeking to become presidents or might at some future date.
It is interesting how running for president causes one to admit what voters already knew. In other words politicians believe catching up with the truth is a good way to capture votes.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There comes a time when you would think the mass media would learn from their constant bias which causes them to lose more of their audience. On the other hand perhaps they do not care and purposefully want to report fakes news because their ultimate goal is to destroy Trump, rewrite American history and castigate white males. . (See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Does Russia's S-300 work and if not why? (See 2 below.)
And:
Who is winning regarding Iran? (See 2a below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Walter Williams highlights how Black Americans have been taken for a ride by Democrats.(See 3 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Leaving for Board Meeting of GMOA tomorrow in Athens, returning late Friday evening.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Beating the Drum
By Seth Barron
The story of a group of white parochial school kids wearing MAGA hats
heaping racist abuse on a dignified Native American Vietnam veteran sparked
an inferno of indignation across mass and social media. The incident was
depicted as an iconic example of toxic white smugness, as well as a
recapitulation of the history of European conquest of the American continent
from its earlier inhabitants. Respected journalists and public figures
responded to the images of a "smirking" teenager with calls for violence
against him, his classmates, and their parents. Even after the story was
debunked, many commentators kept their outrage burning, and pointed to photos
taken years before, involving none of the participants in the recent event,
as evidence that the school- Covington Catholic High School, in Park Hills,
Kentucky-is infected by a virulent racism that can be cured only by closing
it, razing it, and sowing salt in the ground.
Oddly, the media had learned nothing from its previous rush to judgment.
Just days before the Covington story broke, the national media gave blanket
coverage to a BuzzFeed report that President Trump ordered his lawyer to
perjure himself regarding Trump's business dealings in Russia. Commentary
became so fervent, with members of Congress talking on Twitter of preparing
articles of impeachment, that the special counsel broke his two-year silence
to refute the report.
Poorly sourced, slanted reporting has become the new standard among prestige
media. Three weeks ago, a little girl, black, was shot and killed in a
Houston parking lot; initial reports that the shooter was white turned a
local police item into national news. The New York Times ran stories on the
case for days, exploring the implications of targeted, race-based murder in
an age of intolerance. When it emerged that the child was killed by two
black gang members gunning for their enemies, coverage of the story ceased.
Reporters have always made errors, but mistakes should occur independent of
ideology. What we're seeing instead is a pattern-media miscues always occur
in the same direction, in favor of the liberal perspective.
Houston parking lot; initial reports that the shooter was white turned a
local police item into national news. The New York Times ran stories on the
case for days, exploring the implications of targeted, race-based murder in
an age of intolerance. When it emerged that the child was killed by two
black gang members gunning for their enemies, coverage of the story ceased.
Reporters have always made errors, but mistakes should occur independent of
ideology. What we're seeing instead is a pattern-media miscues always occur
in the same direction, in favor of the liberal perspective.
Over the last two years, countless "bombshell" reports have signaled grave danger for the
Trump presidency, up to and including impeachment or resignation. Trump's
son got an early look at the Wikileaks pages; Anthony Scaramucci was tied to
a dodgy Russian hedge fund; Michael Cohen met Russians in Prague; Paul
Manafort met Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London; James Comey
would testify that Trump was under investigation; and so on. As outrage ebbs
from each discredited story, it is relegated to the memory hole in time for
the next one to emerge.
Trump presidency, up to and including impeachment or resignation. Trump's
son got an early look at the Wikileaks pages; Anthony Scaramucci was tied to
a dodgy Russian hedge fund; Michael Cohen met Russians in Prague; Paul
Manafort met Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London; James Comey
would testify that Trump was under investigation; and so on. As outrage ebbs
from each discredited story, it is relegated to the memory hole in time for
the next one to emerge.
Ever since Trump's arrival on the national stage, the media have devoted
themselves to destroying him, and, by extension, the ideologies that
supposedly account for his popularity-white supremacy and toxic masculinity.
Major media outlets have shed any pretense to rigor or probity, even as they
make ostentatious shows of "fact-checking" the president's statements.
Obsession with white privilege focuses maximal scrutiny on any incident that
tracks with the right narrative. Over the last year, we've seen a spate of
cellphone videos capturing petty disputes amplified across social media and
reported in the national media-as long as the footage depicts a white person
complaining to or about a black person doing something relatively minor.
Whether the incidents in question have anything to do with race is
unimportant. Pushing the narrative that Trump has ignited a firestorm of
white racism across the country requires a continual flow of stories making
that point, regardless of accuracy or context. The relentless search for
Trumpian villainy has precast the meaning of every story. All that remains
is to fill in the blanks.
Seth Barron is associate editor of City Journal and Project Director of the NYC Initiative
at the Manhattan Institute.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)Why Hasn't Syria Used the S-300?
Russian and Syrian media emphasized that Syrian air defense "repelled" the attack by Israel on Sunday. According to a spokesman for Russia's national defense management center, the Syrians used the Pantsir and Buk air defense systems. Israel struck at a Pantsir defense system in retaliation on Monday. But why wasn't the S-300, which Russia supplied to Syria in September, used by Damascus?
However, in the past Syrian air defense projectiles have strayed toward Israel. In March 2017 an S-200 reportedly was fired and intercepted over the Jordan valley by an Arrow missile. An F-16 returning from an air strike was pursued by an S-200 missile in February and crashed in northern Israel. A Syrian missile heading for Israel was targeted by Israeli air defense on December 26.
3)
2)Why Hasn't Syria Used the S-300?
Russian and Syrian media emphasized that Syrian air defense "repelled" the attack by Israel on Sunday. According to a spokesman for Russia's national defense management center, the Syrians used the Pantsir and Buk air defense systems. Israel struck at a Pantsir defense system in retaliation on Monday. But why wasn't the S-300, which Russia supplied to Syria in September, used by Damascus?
The continuing quiet among the S-300 gunners is a perplexing mystery that underpins the shadowy and deadly conflict unfolding in Syria's skies. In late September, Russia announced it would give the Syrian regime the S-300 system in the wake of Syrian air defenses mistakenly shooting down a Russian Il-20. The Syrians had used an S-200 to hit the Russian plane, mistaking it for an Israeli warplane during an Israeli raid in Latakia.
On October 2, Russia announced they had completed the delivery of the S-300. 49 units of "equipment, including radars, control vehicles and four launchers," were sent, according to Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.
New electronic warfare systems were also sent to Syria, including systems designed to control a "near zone" 50 km. from the system and a far zone "200 km." away that would guard against Israeli attacks, according to a report at Janes.
Since the deployment of the S-300, there was a hiatus in attacks between October and late December. However, Syrian air defense was on alert, saying that its radars were jammed on November 30. This has led to speculation that Syrian air defense was tested several times between October and December.
An air strike on December 25 and then on January 12 were reported by Syrian media. Syria says it was able to shoot down Israeli missiles on January 12. Yet the three batteries of S-300s have apparently remained dormant. Part of the story with the S-300 can be realized from Russian media reports, which have emphasized that the system was not used or have pointed to other, older systems being used.
Is this because the Syrians are not trained on the system? All three battalions of S-300 PMU-2 systems were active by early November, Syrian media indicated. "Russian technical specialists completed the reconfiguration of the system to replace the Russian codes and letter frequencies to the letter codes and radars of Syrian ones," a report noted.
OBSERVERS OF Syria note that the issue is not that the S-300 is ineffective. One expert who tweets under the name Tom Cat (@TomTheBasedCat) notes "the priority [of Syrian air defense] is to intercept the majority of the projectiles to minimize risk to civilians in the surrounding suburbs." In this analysis, Syria's goal isn't to use air defense to strike at Israeli jets.
However, in the past Syrian air defense projectiles have strayed toward Israel. In March 2017 an S-200 reportedly was fired and intercepted over the Jordan valley by an Arrow missile. An F-16 returning from an air strike was pursued by an S-200 missile in February and crashed in northern Israel. A Syrian missile heading for Israel was targeted by Israeli air defense on December 26.
With the S-300 now in Syria, the question is why it hasn't been used. Tom Cat argues that "the S-300 is for Theater Defense against air-breathing targets like ballistic missiles and enemy planes, not for Point Defense like tonight [January 11] and the previous times." In this analysis Syrian air defense doesn't use the S-300 because it's not the right system to stop the kind of threat involved. "The game will change when the S-300 is moved southwards because then they can actually track and target the jets," the expert tweeted on January 13.
Others have speculated that the S-300 operators are not fully trained and that they will be ready by February of this year. This joins accusations online that the S-300 has not been effective or that it hasn't been used because of fears that if it doesn't work as planned then it will be an embarrassment for the Syrian regime and its Russian ally which has staked some of its pride on providing the system to help deter air strikes.
Another important aspect of the S-300 discussion is the public relations value of having the system work and also deterring air strikes.
AFTER THE December air strike, there was an apparent hiatus in such strikes. But then Israel took credit for the January 12 and January 20-21 air strikes. Former IDF chief of staff Gadi EIsenkot even said in an interview that "thousands of targets" had been hit and "in 2018 alone, the air force dropped a staggering 2,000 bombs" on Syria, according to The New York Times. This appears to raise serious concerns about Syrian air defense and its inability to deter the strikes, interdict them or use its more sophisticated new technology.
Syrian state media repeats claims again and again that it has intercepted Israel's missiles. Russian media plays this up as well, with TASS claiming on January 20 that seven Israeli guided aircraft missiles were intercepted. The point here is to show that the Buk and Pantsir systems are doing their job, and the Pantsir S-1 is providing the point air defense it was designed for.
Nevertheless, the question mark about the S-300 remains. When it was deployed it was portrayed as a game changer. But Reuters had reported in 2015 and again in October 2018 that Israel had trained against the S-300 system in Greece.
Regional countries are watching, as well as world powers, because the Syrian conflict is not just a conflict but a test of two different defense and combat systems, one in Israel that is linked to Israel's advanced technology and defense industry and the West, and one supplied by Russia. Echoes of the Cold War – when Western-supplied technology rolled into battle with Israeli forces against the Syrian army in 1967, 1973 and 1982 – overshadow what comes next.
Seth Frantzman is The Jerusalem Post's op-ed editor, a Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum, and a founder of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis.
2a) Is the American and Israeli strategy on Iran succeeding?
Between renewed U.S. sanctions and IDF airstrikes in Syria, Iran is feeling the pressure. But will it be enough to roll back its nuclear program, regional aggression and support of terrorism?
Israel appears to be on the same page with the Trump administration regarding Iran, with the United States focusing on reimposed economic sanctions and overt diplomatic stances while Israel handles covert and military components.
Airstrikes by the Israel Defense Forces on Iranian targets and proxies, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, in neighboring Syria and elsewhere in the region are meant to keep Tehran’s forces in check.
Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Iran that it will face consequences for attacks, both verbal and physical, beginning with Israeli airstrikes on Syria on Monday.
“We are operating both against Iran and against the Syrian forces that are abetting the Iranian aggression,” said Netanyahu, according to Reuters.
However, on Wednesday, Russia warned Israel not to carry out additional “arbitrary” airstrikes in Syria on Iranian targets. It remains unclear how far Russia is willing to go to confront Israel over its actions in Syria.
Nevertheless, Emily Landau, director of the Arms Control and Regional Security Program at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, told JNS that the U.S. pressure campaign is the “correct approach.”
“Empirically, pressure is the only strategy that has given the powers facing Iran any leverage and has thus had an impact on Iranian decision-making in the nuclear realm.”
She said “the poor result of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [JCPOA] negotiation was not due to lack of leverage [thanks to the biting sanctions of 2012], but rather to very poor negotiating by the P5+1 and their inability to use the leverage to get a much better result.”
While success of the U.S. strategy at this late stage is far from guaranteed, especially due to the unfortunate opposition of European nations and their determination to set up a sanction-evading system, “this is the only strategy that has a chance,” she added.
Along these lines, the summit scheduled for mid-February to discuss Iran’s destabilizing activities is both a good idea and a welcome initiative to get the message across to Iran that its nuclear, missile, regional and terror-supporting activities are unacceptable, continued the Israeli expert.
The United States is planning to host an international summit next month in Poland to focus on Iran’s regional influence.
Asked about reports of some European responses about their reluctance to participate in what critics are calling an “anti-Iran event,” Landau responded that they “are disappointing, especially from France, whose president [Emmanuel Macron] went the furthest last year in recognizing some of the dangerous flaws in the JCPOA and the need to pursue new strategies, regardless of whether Trump leaves the nuclear deal.”
The refusal of European Union foreign-policy head Federica Mogherini to take part is no surprise, said Landau, going on to point out that the United States is creating a framework for necessary discussion, while some Europeans countries have chosen to reject the opportunity.
“One of the most pressing issues right now on the Iran nuclear front is to pressure the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] to conduct immediate inspections at Iranian facilities that appear in the Iran nuclear archives,” said Landau, referring to the intelligence presented by Netanyahu last April on Iran’s past and possibly future efforts to build a nuclear weapon.
“It has been almost nine months since the archives were first revealed by Netanyahu, and as of yet no inspections have taken place, although the material was turned over to the IAEA. This is unacceptable.”
Andrea Stricker, a senior policy analyst at the Institute for Science and International Security, told JNS that the summit is a good opportunity for the United States to gain agreement from its allies that the IAEA should act on the information in the Iranian nuclear archives.
“The IAEA should conduct inspections to verify that Iran’s military nuclear activities have ended,” she said. “Our analyses of the archive information show that Iran was trying to hide some of these activities in 2003. What their status is today is a particularly urgent question since the JCPOA limits will start to end in five more years.”
A push in Poland for nations to be on the same side
Behnam Ben Taleblu, an Iran expert and research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, said that the Trump administration’s maximum pressure strategy on Iran will soon face an important diplomatic test.
Next month in Warsaw, the United States will gather members of the international community to ask them to join in a campaign to change Iranian behavior. “The challenge, of course, will be to make sure such a conference does not replicate the failings of the U.N., where all talk and no action dominates,” said Taleblu.
While the E.U. just recently listed two Iranians and one section of the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence on its terror list, it sadly took two assassinations—one in 2015 and one in 2017—and two thwarted terror attacks in 2018 on the European continent to respond, he continued.
And while many European governments have condemned Iran’s increasing frequency of ballistic-missile flight tests and transfers, the last major E.U. batch of nuclear and missile sanctions came more than half a decade ago.
But there are signs that some Europeans are getting fed up with Iran. In a meeting in Tehran earlier this month with French, British, German, Danish, Dutch and Belgian diplomats, Iranian officials walked out on them.
“There’s a feeling of frustration among Britain, France and Germany, and others after the first phase of diplomacy with Iran,” a senior E.U. diplomat told Reuters.
On the regional file, continued Taleblu, the Trump administration has spent considerable political capital re-conceptualizing the Iran threat as more than just nuclear-only. “However, the decision to pull the plug on the U.S. force presence in Syria at a time when America needs to send the strongest signal of resolve against Iran undercuts its own framing of the Iran threat, as well as its larger Iran policy.”
In the nearly eight months since the United States left the Iran nuclear deal, the power of American unilateral sanctions has become perfectly clear.
“But as Iran digs in to resist and find ways to offset American pressure,” noted Taleblu, “the U.S. must work overtime to globalize its maximum pressure campaign.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
How Liberals Have Given Blacks Little for Their Loyalty
By Walter E. Williams
In 1976, Gerald Ford won 15 percent of the black vote. That’s the most of any recent Republican presidential candidate. In most elections, blacks give Democrats over 90 percent of their votes. It’s not unreasonable to ask what have blacks gained from such unquestioning loyalty to the Democratic Party.
After all, the absolute worst public safety conditions and other urban amenities for blacks are in cities that have been controlled by Democrats for decades. Let’s look at it.
What cities are the deadliest for blacks? The Trace, an independent nonprofit news organization, answers that question.
Using 2017 data from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program, The Trace listed the 20 major U.S. cities with the highest homicide rates—factoring in both the number of people murdered in cities and their populations. Chicago, with 589 murders in 2018—one murder every 15 hours–is often called the nation’s murder capital. But that’s dead wrong.
The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>
In 2017, St. Louis had the nation’s highest murder rate, at 66.1 homicides per 100,000 residents. Baltimore came in second, with 55.8 murders per 100,000 people. Detroit was third, with 39.8 murders per 100,000 people.
Other cities with high murder rates included New Orleans; Kansas City, Missouri; Cleveland; Memphis, Tennessee; and Newark, New Jersey.
With 24.1 murders per 100,000 residents, Chicago ranked ninth in the nation. It was followed by Cincinnati and Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C., was 17th.
Now here’s the kicker. Of the 20 most dangerous major cities, all but one had a Democratic mayor. In many of these cities, the Democratic Party has ruled for a half-century or more. Only Tulsa, Oklahoma, with 17.3 murders per 100,000 residents, had a Republican mayor.
Who knows what conclusion can be drawn from the finding that the most murderous cities have been controlled by Democrats—and often black Democrats?
I am not suggesting that Democratic control causes murder and mayhem. What I am saying is that murder, mayhem, and other violent crime are not reduced by the election of black or white Democrats to run our cities.
That means one cannot dismiss out of hand a question then-candidate Donald Trump asked black Americans in a 2016 campaign speech in Michigan: “What do you have to lose by trying something new like Trump? … What the hell do you have to lose?”
Violent crime is not the only problem for blacks in our major cities. Because of high crime, poor schools, and a less pleasant environment, cities are losing their economic base and their most productive people in droves.
When World War II ended, Washington, D.C.’s population was about 900,000; today it’s about 694,000.
In 1950, Baltimore’s population was almost 950,000; today it’s around 612,000.
Detroit’s 1950 population was close to 1.85 million; today it’s down to 673,000.
Camden, New Jersey’s 1950 population was nearly 125,000; today it has fallen to 75,000.
St. Louis’ 1950 population was more than 856,000; today it’s less than 309,000.
A similar story of population decline can be found in most of our formerly large and prosperous cities. In some cities, the population decline since 1950 is well over 50 percent. In addition to Detroit and St. Louis, those would include Cleveland and Pittsburgh.
During the 1960s and ’70s, academic liberals, civil rights advocates, and others blamed the exodus on racism—”white flight” to the suburbs to avoid blacks. However, since the ’70s, blacks have been fleeing some cities at higher rates than whites.
The five cities whose suburbs have the fastest-growing black populations are Miami, Dallas, Washington, Houston, and Atlanta. It turns out—and reasonably so—that blacks, like whites, want better and safer schools for their kids and don’t like to be mugged or have their property vandalized. And just like the case with white people, if they have the means, black people can’t wait to leave troubled cities.
Bobby Hesley—a Catholic speaker, writer, and conservative political commentator—writes, “Black people are finally starting to wake up and unplug themselves from the Liberal Matrix that has ruled their reality for over a half a century.”
I say good! It’s unwise to be a one-party people in a two-party system.
COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM
No comments:
Post a Comment