More than one way to skin a cat particularly in nations where labor is cheap and abundant.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Several days ago I read an article about how American school districts have been consolidated throughout the nation and thus why it is easier to influence and control local boards today with radical ideas. This happened by design and occurred over many decades.
As a result of this educational Trojan Horse, the attack on America's public school system is serious, for real and one more reason why the American Bull's neck muscles have been softened by the radical picadors who have so weakened them it will be easier when the matador (China) makes his last pass and the bull's neck is in a much lower position. The matador strikes from the top down..
This metaphor is happening in order to make CRT, Wokeness and culture change effective, all to America's detriment and ultimately survival as a thriving republic. This might sound strange but a bright woman from Illinois, whoes last name was Cannon and who had a PHD, gave an insightful lecture over 25 years ago on the Campus of Rollins College in Winter Park, Florida.
Lynn and I were attending a parent's day function. and Cannon spoke under the auspices of the Local Jewish Federation. Her entire presentation was focused on the growing influence of America's radical Muslim population and how their members were running for public office, ie. school boards, libraries, the media etc.
Cannon was no nut case and as I looked around the room I noticed many of the few attendees were not impressed. I was and will never forget that evening but then I am drawn to such thinking because of my cynical and distrusting nature.
I believe the enemy is always awake while their brain dead protagonists sleep. This is why I fear Soros, Holder, Abrams, Obama and their ilk. The Rev. Wright's of the world are serious threats and must not be taken lightly.
When I constantly hark on CRL, Black "Lies" Matter, Wokenss, liberal and progressive nonsense, the burning of cities, the collapse of higher education and the decline in campus free speech, the various attacks on American institutions etc. I sound like a "Johnny One Note" but events are proving me correct. The level of concern does not make me paranoid. There are others who hawk the same message but do not get the traction to which they are entitled because the mass media has become part of the enemy class as have the social media billionaire oligarchs and crooked manipulative politicians who have taken over the Democrat Party.
WOE IS US.
And:
What about replacing JOE?
Replace Joe Biden’s Foreign Policy Now
Republicans need to offer an alternative now to the U.S.’s national-security vacuum.
Taliban fighters pose for a photograph in Kabul, Aug. 19.
Photo: Rahmat Gul/Associated Press
Both Antony Blinken, President Biden’s secretary of state, and national security adviser Jake Sullivan have said there will be plenty of time when the evacuation is over to assess what happened. They are wrong. The time to come to grips with the long-term meaning of Kabul is now.
Since the Trump presidency, Republican thinking on foreign policy has been hibernating—hostage to whether Donald Trump is in or out as the party’s candidate in 2024. Sorry, time’s up. We can’t wait three years for GOP presidential hopefuls to gauge which way the base is blowing. After the Kabul debacle, the U.S. and the world desperately need prominent Republicans to articulate an alternative to the Biden doctrine, whatever’s left of it.
The stark reality is that effectively there is no Biden foreign policy. We are in a foreign-policy vacuum because of a conscious political choice about priorities. The real Biden doctrine is in the goal that Nancy Pelosi this week staked her speakership on—passing Mr. Biden’s $3.5 trillion domestic spending bill.
This is not just a bill about spending numbers. It is a do-or-die effort by the now-progressive party to enact four new lifetime entitlements—universal prekindergarten, universal child care payments, universal paid family and medical leave, and two years of community college. No one has been clearer about the stakes than Mrs. Pelosi, who describes it as a “once in a generation” effort. She’s right.
The long-term effect of enacting these entitlements—atop Social Security and Medicare, already under fiscal pressure from the cohort of baby boomers—could not be more clear: U.S. spending on defense and national security will go flat or fall indefinitely.
The key word inside the Biden foreign-policy argument is “limited.” The implicit Biden doctrine is that it is refocusing limited national-security resources onto the threats from China and climate change. This is a shell game. There is no chance that Democratic national-security specialists—the best of them marginalized in their own party—will be able to shuffle spending inside a flat defense budget consistent with the need to modernize the U.S. military or deter the next generation of threats from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and now, incredibly, the Taliban.
Since at least the end of the Vietnam War, many liberal Democrats have wanted to defund defense to pay for domestic spending priorities. (Yes, this is the worldview that led to “defund the police.”) Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War in the 1980s by reversing that policy goal. Reagan replaced rhetorical bows to “defending America’s interests” with dollar commitments that convinced the Soviet Union its strategy of external aggression was unsustainable.
Kabul has revealed a dangerous void in U.S. foreign policy that Republicans have to fill. Without the world able to see a strategic American lodestar for guidance, dangerous confusion spreads everywhere, among allies and adversaries.
The idea that partisanship ends at the water’s edge died after 9/11. Still, if over the next, very long three years President Biden somehow gets to the right place on China, Taiwan or Russia, Republicans should support him.
But just as Reagan offered an alternative to President Jimmy Carter’s foreign-policy myopia, Republicans should do the same to Mr. Biden. For that, they will have to get past the assumed but paralyzing Trump veto on Republican foreign policy.
There is no Trump doctrine to replace. The Trump administration correctly identified China and Iran as adversaries, gave mixed or capricious signals on Russia and elsewhere, and misfired by negotiating with the Taliban. Running in the background through the Trump term were doctrinal arguments among conservatives about “globalization” and America first.
What might be called the Kabul effect is making it clear that globalization, like it or not, means Americans are everywhere, including thousands of civilians in Afghanistan. A disorganized world—destabilized as a strategic goal by China, Russia and Iran—is not in U.S. interests, meaning the security and economic interests of Americans who work not just inside the U.S. but the world over.
The neoisolationism of Mr. Biden’s “rebuilding at home,” cited repeatedly this week as justification for the abrupt Afghanistan pullout, is an explicit decision to transfer resources out of defense into unlimited domestic outlays. Conservatives who believe the U.S. can “come home” and still maintain national security are living in a world of buzzword sentiment, not achievable policy. Our enemies know that.
The baseline for a Republican foreign policy should be a recognition that the future is not about avoiding “endless wars” but about the U.S. showing the world it will spend what’s needed to create a credible deterrent against wars and acts of terror. The Taliban’s refusal to extend the Biden Aug. 31 deadline proves we do not have that now.
The past two weeks make clear that the responsibility of providing long-term protection for the U.S. in an unfriendly world has defaulted to Republicans. It’s a dirty job, but someone has to do it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Congress generally a day late and many dollars short.
Where are those Congressional women dressed in white now?
Why Is Congress on the Sidelines as Afghanistan Burns?
by Pete Hoekstra
Congratulations to the two members of Congress, Peter Meijer (right) and Seth Moulton (left), who had the exceptional courage to pay an unannounced visit to Kabul. The situation in Afghanistan is screaming for immediate congressional oversight. (Moulton image by Greg Nash-Pool/Getty Images; Meijer image by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Congratulations to the two members of Congress, Peter Meijer (R-Mich.) and Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), who had the exceptional courage to pay an unannounced visit to Kabul. The situation in Afghanistan is screaming for immediate congressional oversight. Right now, before it's too late, Congress might still be able to exercise an influence over, and perhaps help change, the disastrous Afghanistan policy of the Biden administration. Americans should applaud Meijer and Moulton for bucking the corrupt Washington system, despite intense pressure to bow to it.
When I heard about this "unauthorized" trip yesterday I knew exactly what would happen. The bureaucracy, congressional leadership, and the media would all strongly criticize the effort. Washington scorns and derides those who disrupt the system and don't play by its rules. I felt that same pressure for 18 years as a member of Congress. The Washington elite consider themselves the ruling elite. They dedicate immense effort to controlling the story line in DC. They keep members of Congress in the dark, like mushrooms. They tell the elected representatives of the people as little as possible, and only divulge information when necessary.
During my congressional tenure, I visited Iraq ten times and Afghanistan five times. Let me share one incident that typifies how the elites skirt congressional oversight in any way they can. On one trip to Iraq, we members of Congress were told that we would have to stay in Jordan and fly into Iraq each day. Ensuring our safety would just be too difficult if we stayed overnight in Iraq. Besides, there was no room for us in country. The result? The trip to and from Iraq would take approximately five hours each day. Our time on the ground to exercise congressional oversight would be severely limited.
During our initial meeting with the military and State Department leadership I asked them about this. Why were planes, helicopters and all kinds of other vehicles available to transport us each day into Iraq, yet no tents were on hand for us to sleep in? Their response was simply, "Nope, no resources in country. Sorry about that." I had heard differently, however, so I asked them, "Ok, how did you find resources for the Washington Redskins (now Team) cheerleader squad to stay in country for a multiple-night visit?" They laughed off the idea that NFL cheerleaders would be visiting a war zone, but I told them I had an inside source who'd told me that they were in country at that very moment. The leadership all looked at their staff, who confirmed that the cheerleaders were in Iraq, and staying in Iraq overnight.
Of course, I understand: cheerleaders make far more pleasant guests than a congressional delegation. But the oversight -- the real-world exercise of the constitutional separation of powers, checking and balancing each other -- that is what our host leadership wanted to avoid.
This might be the most amusing example of the often appalling arrogance of the military bureaucracy, the State Department, and the intelligence community, but unfortunately it wasn't the only instance. This was an attitude that I faced over and over again. Importantly, it was the leadership--not those who served under them, often on the front lines--who resented the very thought of oversight and resisted at every turn. The troops and embassy staff were always thrilled that we took the time and ran the risk to see first-hand what was happening. But their leadership believed that they were the professionals. Members of Congress, on the other hand, were just everyday people who knew nothing about what needed to be done or how to do it.
The most pressing questions before us now are: Why did Meijer and Moulton have to sneak into Afghanistan? Why haven't Senator Schumer and Speaker Pelosi organized oversight trips into Afghanistan? Why is Congress on the sidelines as Afghanistan burns?
People are dying. America is suffering humiliation. And the president and the bureaucracy are trying to get away with it. Hats off to Meijer and Moulton, both military veterans, by the way, for showing us all that Congress is an equal branch of government -- and for refusing to let the Biden administration cover up its catastrophic failure in Afghanistan.
Pete Hoekstra is a former Representative in Congress from Michigan. He served as the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. More recently he was U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
++ +
ASHLYN DAVIS
Taliban’s Regulations For Women
It will send chills down your spine.
Conventional media have put all their resources into whitewashing the brutalities of the Taliban and giving them an image makeover, so as to make them acceptable to the modern world and perhaps win these mountain savages a seat at the United Nations. They tell us that Taliban 2.0 is a whole different entity and is not comparable to the Taliban that had wreaked havoc in Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. After all, the Muslim group has promised to honor women rights and allow them to continue to work as usual. Little girls could receive education as well.
We are a little confused by the Taliban’s commitment to permitting girls to go to school, because quite recently, Taliban jihadis were going door-to-door hunting down girls as young as twelve years old, to take them as sex slaves. We have learned of a woman being lashed for wearing revealing slippers and another burka-clad woman being shot dead for not covering her face enough. And these atrocities have happened under the rule of the moderate, women’s-rights-acknowledging Taliban 2.0.
Leaders of the Muslim outfit have clarified their views on women’s rights in the country: “The rights of women will be under the Sharia law,” affirmed Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, during their first press conference since conquering Kabul.
And what are the rights granted to women by this esteemed Islamic law? Let’s look at the “rights” Afghan women enjoyed during Taliban 1.0 from 1996 to 2001; or shall we call them impositions?
Women were not allowed to walk out of their homes without a burqa covering every inch of their skin, including their feet, hands and face. Most women during that period opted for the shuttlecock burqa that covered them from head to toe; there was a little gap for the eyes, but with a net or mesh covering the gap so that their eyes couldn’t be seen. It was mandatory for every woman to be accompanied by a male family member – a blood relative – while she was out on the street.
No man should be able to hear the footsteps of a woman, hence, high heels or any kind of footwear that produced a sound while walking were banned from use by women.
A woman’s voice must not reach the ears of a man who is not related to her. Hence she must watch the level of sound she was producing while talking. Would it be “Islamophobia” if we said that the Taliban had perfected the textbook version of silencing a woman?
Again, as women were prohibited from being viewed by men who were not related to her by blood, it was mandatory that the windows of all ground floors be painted in a dark tint, covered, or shut at all times, just in case a woman passed by and became visible to a man in the ground floor.
Also, women were barred from standing at the balconies of their houses, as that could allow men on the streets or male neighbors to catch a glimpse of them.
The word “woman” was removed from all public places or names of public places.
Women were precluded from having their pictures taken or being filmed. No images of women could be printed on the pages of books or newspapers, or kept at stores or in homes.
It goes without saying that women were not allowed to be in movies or on television, or to work at radio stations. They were forbidden from forming groups outdoors or holding public gatherings.
Women have never been allowed to work in offices under the Taliban. They cannot work as journalists, bankers, teachers, nurses, doctors or hold administrative positions, as these jobs would land them amidst male colleagues who are not related to them. Office jobs held by women were subsequently passed on to their male family members.
Little girls were banned from going to school. Numerous schools imparting education to girls have been bombed or burned down by the Taliban, not only in Afghanistan, but in several countries where they have gained the slightest foothold.
No woman under the Taliban rule in Afghanistan ever enjoyed the basic human right of speaking her mind or dressing as she liked. Women who flouted any of the above commandments were subjected to harsh, undreamed-of and ruthless punishments by the religious police. They could be stoned to death, mutilated, or given hundreds of lashes with a meter-long metal lash. Many of these women perished in the midst of receiving their penalty.
Afghanistan in 1996 witnessed a young woman’s finger being chopped off by the Taliban; she had dared to paint her nails. A woman named Bibi Aisha was forced into a nightmarish marriage as a trade-off to settle a family dispute. When she tried to escape the violent and abusive marriage, the Taliban, to shame her for her act of disobedience and to set a warning example for the other young women in the community, severed her nose and ears.
One must be an absolute ignoramus living in denial to even begin to trust that the Taliban will leave the Afghan women alone this time.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Derek Hunter
+++
|
|
The Taliban's Anti-Colonial War 
+++
Dinesh D'Souza +++ Plans for Newsom Campaign Event Perfectly Summarize Biden-Harris Administration
Rebecca Downs +++ Pomerantz on Jerusalem:
Upgrading Jerusalem’s Infrastructure Badly By Sherwin Pomerantz
Anyone who drives through Jerusalem these days can only come away with one assessment of the situation and that is that the entire city is under construction. There does not seem to be a street or a neighborhood that is not undergoing significant change.
One would think that if the city’s leadership made the decision to reconstruct the streets in every neighborhood, that the result would be something better, something more practical or something that serves the residents better. Sadly, that does not seem to be the case. Often the situation is worse than before the “upgrades.”
One need only look at Rechov Chopin for proof. While only one long block in length, one side of the street houses the Jerusalem Theatre, the Ohel Nechama Synagogue and the Jerusalem Bar Association as well as a large park plaza that sits between the theatre and the synagogue. On the other side of the street are a number of apartment buildings as well as the yet to be opened Theatron project, which will have luxury apartments and a hotel along with a parking garage for the public, the hotel guests and the apartment owners. The public parking section of the garage is already open. Before reconstruction of Rechov Chopin the street supported two-way traffic with opposing lanes of traffic separated by a dividing island. While parking during theatre events was always a problem, at other times cars could park legally on the entire length of the street along four parallel curbs (one on each side of each opposing lane of traffic). In addition, the traffic lanes themselves were of sufficient width so that even if people parked in a sloppy manner (as Israelis tend to do) with either their front or rear ends sticking out into the traffic lanes, there was still no problem getting past them.
The reconstruction of Rechov Chopin resulted in a major widening of the pedestrian sidewalks on the theatre side of the street, the addition of bike lanes and the reduction of traffic lanes to one lane in each direction effectively eliminating half of the previous available parking spaces. This supposedly beautifying project created a series of problems:
· The two traffic lanes themselves are considerably narrower than the ones they replaced. The standard width of traffic lanes on through streets is 370 cm. The traffic lanes on the newly opened Rechov Chopin vary from 316 to 330 cm, or 11-15% narrower than the standard. That means that if a car parks with its front or rear partially in the traffic lane, cars traveling in that lane must enter the opposing lane of traffic to get by the parked vehicle, creating a driving hazard.
· Because the number of parking spaces have now been reduced by 50%, both the residents of the apartment buildings as well as people wanting to attend the synagogue or events at the Bar Association simply have no option but to use the pay garage at the end of the street.
· One might think the garage is a reasonable solution but, in fact, that is true only for healthy people. The synagogue, for example, has a high percentage of its members with mobility issues. For them, it is simply not an option to park at the end of the street and then walk back “uphill” to get to the synagogue. Yes, there are five spaces near the theatre for people with “neche” tags, but that is nowhere near enough for all of the people who frequent these public venues.
· For the people living on Rechov Chopin the situation is even worse. They now have to battle visitors for a parking space, even though the city had promised at one point to make spaces on the apartment side of the street available only to those who live there. But that has not happened.
· For some time it was possible for people attending the 6:15 AM minyan at the synagogue to actually park on the sidewalk for the 30 minutes required for services. However, this week the city installed barriers there, which now basically eliminates that option as well. As well, this means that delivery vehicles of caterers and others who serve the synagogue are also challenged to get close enough to the building to comfortably deliver their goods.
In a word, the city has created a mess in carrying out its expressed desire to make things better for the residents and drivers. In addition, this situation repeats itself in other places as well.
On Rechov Hanassi the street in front of the L.A. Mayer senior citizens residence has been narrowed as well. When a bus stops in front of the residence to let people off it is impossible to pass the bus without entering the opposing lane of traffic
On Derech Ruppin near the Israel museum, the street has been reconfigured once again with the narrower traffic lanes. Moreover, as on Chopin, if someone parks carelessly it is quite easy to slam right into a parked car in order not to enter the next lane of traffic where other cars may be passing.
In addition, don’t even ask about the full reconstruction of Rechov haPalmach, which has created a situation worse than what existed before the “improvements” were made. Narrower sidewalks, fewer parking spaces and narrower traffic lanes.
The obligation of government is to work as diligently as possible to ensure the health and comfort of the citizens who have placed their faith in their elected representatives to carry out this task to the best of their ability. The massive “upgrading” of the streets of Jerusalem that continues as I write this, seems to be a sad example of how elected leaders can fail to fully understand the obligations they promised to uphold. The result is not an “upgrading” of our surroundings but a sad “downgrading” made even more egregious given the financial resources foolishly expended.
Sherwin Pomerantz is a 37-year resident of Jerusalem, CEO of Atid EDI Ltd., a Jerusalem-based international business development consulting firm, past National President of the Association of Americans and Canadians in Israel, President of Congregation Ohel Nechama and the immediate past Chair of the Israel Board of the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chalk up another win for China and Xi, thanks to Hunter and "POP."
Today's Top Stories From the Breitbart News Desk China scored a major economic and foreign policy victory this week because of the Biden administration's mismanagement. Surprisingly, we're not talking about the catastrophe of Afghanistan. Although that looks to be playing out in a way that favors China, the Taliban's victory in Kabul was ten days ago.
This week's China triumph comes in the form of news that the Biden administration has reportedly approved license applications for Chinese telecom giant Huawei to purchase chips for its auto component business. Reuters reported the approvals, citing two unnamed sources. So our government is apparently secretly approving sales to Huawei, one of the national champions that is central to China's plan to dominate high tech manufacturing, in the midst of a global chip shortage that has hampered U.S. manufacturers of cars and appliances.
This also counts as another blow to U.S. credibility in the world. We have spent years trying to convince our allies to cut ties with Huawei. Canada is holding the company's former CFO, the daughter of its CEO and founder, under house arrest as she fights extradition to New York to face charges of bank fraud. How can we expect allies to continue to keep the heat on Huawei when we conveniently fold to help our chipmakers?
Meanwhile, we got more evidence of the U.S. economy slowing from the Atlanta Fed's survey of business uncertainty. While uncertainty declined in early August, so did expectations for sales growth. So businesses are more confident that they are going to sell less. On the upside, it appears that some of the tightness of the labor market is lifting as companies raised their expectations for hiring.
The durable goods orders figures released by the Census Bureau Wednesday showed that orders for communications equipment and appliances declined in July, while orders for computers, machinery, and other capital equipment used by businesses rose. That suggests that consumers have pulled back a bit in July, confirming the worse than expected retail sales figures that hit last week. Businesses, on the other hand, continue to invest. So the question going forward will be whether business investment will pull households along to a faster pace of growth or whether households will drag business growth down.
– Alex Marlow & John Carney Breitbart News Network ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment