Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Archive for the ‘America’s Past’ Category

CAN WE SUCCEED IN AFGHANISTAN?

In Afghanistan, we’re the Redcoats. And for a substantial portion of the country’s ethnic-Pashtun majority, the Taliban, however cruel and odious we find them, are the Minutemen.

The stock response you’ll get from any US general is that “the Afghans hate the Taliban.” If that is so, how is it that, after 16 years of US and NATO expenditure of blood and treasure, the ragtag Taliban, backed only by Pakistan, dominate or contest half the country?

Even our politically correct counterinsurgency doctrine — which has not achieved enduring success anywhere — acknowledges that insurgencies require the support of the population to succeed. Since 2001, the Taliban have faced as many as 140,000 US and NATO troops (the peak number in 2011). And no one supplied the Taliban with helicopters, artillery, armored vehicles and training, as we did for the Afghans.

Yet, the Taliban continue to defeat the Afghan National Army, on which we have lavished so much money and training. They could not do this without active support and passive tolerance from the population. Nor can we insist that the population only cooperates because they’re afraid.

Pashtun sons still join the Taliban, despite the heavy casualties we’ve inflicted.
One of our most-revered generals has told me repeatedly over the years that the Taliban are inept on the battlefield. Mimicking his Vietnam-era counterparts, he misses the point. No, Taliban fighters can’t compete one-on-one with US troops. Yet, they keep on fighting, against terrible odds, while the Afghan forces we back seek to avoid battle.

Isn’t it time to stop lying to ourselves?
Now President Trump must decide whether to send several thousand more US troops to Afghanistan to serve as trainers and facilitators (we currently have 8,400 troops in the country). Shouldn’t we ask ourselves how a total of 14,000 US troops (plus a few thousand allies) will achieve what 140,000 US and NATO troops could not?

Consider just a few of the problems we face:
* Our military leadership clearly doesn’t grasp the principle of “sunk costs,” that you can’t redeem a failed investment by investing more.

* While fighting the Taliban we continue to raise the prospect of bringing Taliban elements into a unity government. Is that what our troops died for over 16 bloody years? We’re failing, and we’re desperate.
* Then there’s the complaint that “If we leave, we’ll have to go back.” Well, going back and whacking terrorists every decade or so would have proven a lot cheaper than trying to turn Kabul into Denver. Strategic raids work — precisely what we initially did in Afghanistan in 2001. Nation-building in traditional cultures doesn’t work — what we tried from 2002 on.

* Knowing the risks, young Afghans volunteer to fight for the Taliban but are reluctant to serve in the Afghan National Army — where officers sell ammunition to the enemy and steal the money intended to feed their troops. Meanwhile, we defend a shamelessly corrupt elite whose thieving of billions we enabled out of expedience. Why would Afghans fight for a government that robs them?

* If Afghans won’t unite to save their own country, we cannot do it for them, no matter how many troops we send, how much we spend or how long we stay.

* Horrid though the Taliban are to us, we must accept that many Afghans just don’t want what we want them to want. We won’t accept that people choose to live in devotional squalor and torture their women, but they do.

Sending a few thousand more troops to Afghanistan sounds like small change, but it would tie down many more. That matters because Afghanistan is strategically worthless to us, even as we face a grave challenge from North Korea, an all-but-inevitable clash with the Revolutionary Guards holding Iran and the Middle East hostage, and a civilizational threat from Russia’s reinvigorated barbarism.

What should we do? A reasonable compromise would be to reduce US troop numbers in Afghanistan to those essential for targeting Islamic State in Khorasan (the local ISIS franchise) and al Qaeda. Use contractors to train Afghan forces. Continue to equip those forces — but under strict anti-corruption guidelines.

And if Afghans won’t fight for their own country, be ready to leave completely.
During our Revolution, the wealthy Tories of Manhattan supported the Crown because it served their interests. Today, corrupt Afghans in Kabul whom we have enriched support our presence and tell us everything we want to hear. But the ill-armed, shabby rebels are out there, determined to win.

DHS: More than 700,000 foreigners overstayed US visas last year

Nearly 740,000 foreigners who legally entered the U.S.  overstayed their visas and remained in the country at the end of 2016, the Department of Homeland Security reported Monday.

Those visa overstays — a total of 739,478 — represented only 1.47 percent of the more than 50 million visitors who arrived in the U.S. through the country’s airports and seaports, and were expected to leave last year, the DHS reported. The government’s analysis does not account for those who arrived in the U.S. through a ground or vehicular point of entry.

According to government estimates, foreigners remaining in the country after their visa expired make up close to half — 40 percent — of the United States’ illegal population, which is estimated to be somewhere near 11 million people.

During his campaign for president, Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio highlighted the issue of visa overstays, telling Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” in 2015: “We have a porous border, meaning not just the border with Mexico, but 40 percent of people in this country, illegally, are overstaying visas.”

Homeland Security started collecting data on visa overstays in 2015, making this latest report the agency’s second analysis of the issue. In the report released Monday, the department said it maintains a database of arrival and departure information for all foreign nationals and sends a daily updated list of people who overstay their visas to Customs and Border Protection, which is tasked with enforcing the nation’s immigration laws.

“Identifying overstays is important for national security, public safety, immigration enforcement, and processing applications for immigration benefits,” the new report said. “[D]HS will continue to annually and publicly release this overstay data, and looks forward to providing updates to congressional members and their staff on its ongoing progress.”

Of the approximately 45 million foreigners in the U.S. whose visas expired in 2015, roughly 416,500 remained in the country illegally. However, between the two reports, the DHS changed the visa categories it used to calculate the number of overstayed visas, so the total number of overstays cannot be compared.

House Votes On Whether Or Not To Allow Sharia Law In America….Here Is The HUGE Decision

Former president Barack Obama and his Democrats wanted us to believe that Muslims are good and kind, that they’re just a bunch of unfortunate people forced to leave their homelands.

Obama wanted you to think that these poor people are just here to assimilate and leave the American dream. No, they don’t want to live the American dream, but take it. Most Muslims come to this country to shoot and run over innocent people just because they want.

America went through hell during Obama’s presidency, because the former president didn’t fight against terrorists. Moreover, he armed them. Have you ever seen Obama do anything to blast terrorists? No, he supported Muslims and gave them more rights than Americans will ever have.

Now Muslims are trying to plant their Sharia law in every institution across the country. Is this what Obama referred to when he said that “Muslims are here to assimilate?”

This law is the most terrible of them all. According to this law, you can get killed for being a gay, and rape victims can’t do anything to punish rapists. Can you believe this? President Donald Trump will never allow anything like this, and he was clear about this during his presidential campaign.

The good news is that the House passed a new bill that bans “the application of foreign law.” Democrats and Muslims aren’t quite happy about it, and they complain that the new bill only targets Muslims, and approves xenophobia and racism. Really?

“We’ve heard a lot of discussions about this being a religious law and specifically directed at preventing Sharia law and I just don’t read it that way,” explained Republican Theresa Hamilton.

Sandy Montgomery had a similar opinion. “We have allowed legal immigrants, illegal immigrants and now refugees to take advantage of our law and culture to take up their own agendas. They have no intention to abide by our laws, nor are they interested in assimilating to our culture,” she said.

 

Snowflake

House Votes On Whether Or Not To Allow Sharia Law In America….Here Is The HUGE Decision

Former president Barack Obama and his Democrats wanted us to believe that Muslims are good and kind, that they’re just a bunch of unfortunate people forced to leave their homelands.

Obama wanted you to think that these poor people are just here to assimilate and leave the American dream. No, they don’t want to live the American dream, but take it. Most Muslims come to this country to shoot and run over innocent people just because they want.

America went through hell during Obama’s presidency, because the former president didn’t fight against terrorists. Moreover, he armed them. Have you ever seen Obama do anything to blast terrorists? No, he supported Muslims and gave them more rights than Americans will ever have.

Now Muslims are trying to plant their Sharia law in every institution across the country. Is this what Obama referred to when he said that “Muslims are here to assimilate?”

This law is the most terrible of them all. According to this law, you can get killed for being a gay, and rape victims can’t do anything to punish rapists. Can you believe this? President Donald Trump will never allow anything like this, and he was clear about this during his presidential campaign.

The good news is that the House passed a new bill that bans “the application of foreign law.” Democrats and Muslims aren’t quite happy about it, and they complain that the new bill only targets Muslims, and approves xenophobia and racism. Really?

“We’ve heard a lot of discussions about this being a religious law and specifically directed at preventing Sharia law and I just don’t read it that way,” explained Republican Theresa Hamilton.

Sandy Montgomery had a similar opinion. “We have allowed legal immigrants, illegal immigrants and now refugees to take advantage of our law and culture to take up their own agendas. They have no intention to abide by our laws, nor are they interested in assimilating to our culture,” she said.

Bill Nye Turns Crybaby When Global Warming Hoax Exposed by ACTUAL Scientist on CNN

by Andrew west

If there’s one thing that Bill Nye the “Science” Guy knows, it’s how to keep his name on the tip of the liberal media’s tongue.

The engineering school graduate, who has magically become an expert on complex scientific issues such as climate change, has recently been on a tear throughout the press as his new Netflix-only series premieres this week.

Nye, who is riding a millennial wave of nostalgia into a second chance at an entertainment career, has fallen victim to the same bunk science that propelled liberal colleagues Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore into lucrative global warming hoax films.  Now, when confronted with an actual scientist who refutes the left’s stance on climate change, Bill Nye has been forced into the same pattern of behavior that has permeated the liberal movement:  Whining and crying.

Bill Nye on Saturday accused CNN of doing a ‘disservice’ to viewers by bringing a climate change skeptic onto the network for a panel discussion.

“‘I will say, much as I love CNN, you’re doing a disservice by having one climate change skeptic, and not 97 or 98 scientists or engineers concerned about climate change,’ Nye said during an appearance on CNN’s ‘New Day.’

“Nye was participating in a panel discussion on the network with May Boeve, the executive director of the environmental group 350.org, and William Happer, a physicist and climate change skeptic.”

Much like the liberal rioters of Berkeley, California, Bill Nye would rather bemoan and censor those who he disagrees with than be confronted with a differing opinion.  This, my friends, is no way to effect change in our great nation.  The First Amendment will always win out.

Bill Nye, your revolution, and likely your career, is over.

Fox News Has Decided Bill O’Reilly Has to Go

  The Murdochs have decided Bill O’Reilly’s 21-year run at Fox News will come to an end. According to sources briefed on the discussions, network executives are preparing to announce O’Reilly’s departure before he returns from an Italian vacation on April 24. Now the big questions are how the exit will look and who will replace him.

Wednesday morning, according to sources, executives are holding emergency meetings to discuss how they can sever the relationship with the country’s highest-rated cable-news host without causing collateral damage to the network. The board of Fox News’ parent company, 21st Century Fox, is scheduled to meet on Thursday to discuss the matter.

Sources briefed on the discussions say O’Reilly’s exit negotiations are moving quickly. Right now, a key issue on the table is whether he would be allowed to say good-bye to his audience, perhaps the most loyal in all of cable (O’Reilly’s ratings have ticked up during the sexual-harassment allegations). Fox executives are leaning against allowing him to have a sign-off, sources say. The other main issue on the table is money. O’Reilly recently signed a new multiyear contract worth more than $20 million per year. When Roger Ailes left Fox News last summer, the Murdochs paid out $40 million, the remainder of his contract.

According to sources, Fox News wants the transition to be seamless. Executives are currently debating possible replacement hosts. Names that have been discussed include Eric Bolling, Dana Perino, and Tucker Carlson, who would move from his successful 9 p.m. slot and create a need for a new host at that time. One source said Sean Hannity is happy at 10 p.m. and would not want to move. Network executives are hopingto have the new host in place by Monday.

The Murdochs’ decision to dump O’Reilly shocked many Fox News staffers I’ve spoken to in recent days. Late last week, the feeling inside the company was that Rupert Murdoch would prevail over his son James, who lobbied to jettison the embattled host. It’s still unclear exactly how the tide turned. According to one source, Lachlan Murdoch’s wife helped convince her husband that O’Reilly needed to go, which moved Lachlan into James’s corner. The source added that senior executives at other divisions within the Murdoch empire have complained that if O’Reilly’s allegations had happened to anyone else at their companies, that person would be gone already.

Spokespersons for 21st Century Fox and Fox News did not respond to requests for comment, nor did O’Reilly’s agent, Carole Cooper.

NOW WE KNOW! CIA Director John Brennan Targeted General Flynn and Sean Hannity For Surveillance

Yesterday, we reported on a breaking story by GotNews that Sean Hannity and Blackwater founder, Erik Prince were also spied on and unmasked by the Obama administration.

GotNews has just revealed that it was Obama’s CIA Director, John Brennan who was targeting them and other Trump supporters for surveillance.

From The Gateway Pundit

Via GotNews:

Barack Obama‘s CIA Director John O. Brennan targeted Trump supporters for enhanced surveillance, intelligence sources confirm to GotNews’ Charles C. Johnson.

The surveillance took place between Trump’s election on November 8 and the inauguration in January, according to White House and House intelligence sources.

The focus was on General Mike Flynn, billionaire Erik Prince, and Fox News host Sean Hannity — all of whom had close ties to Trump before and after the November election and had helped the future president with managing his new diplomatic responsibilities.

Hannity was targeted because of his perceived ties to Julian Assange, say our intelligence sources. Hannity was reportedly unmasked by Susan Rice at Brennan’s behest thanks to his close relationship with Trump and Julian Assange.

Blackwater founder Erik Prince, a former CIA covert asset, has long criticized the CIA’s bloat and incompetence, including the Brennan-run CIA drone program’s failure to properly target terrorists rather than Afghan civilians. Prince has repeatedly called for restructuring the CIA and argued against Brennan’s tenure.

GotNews’ Chuck Johnson went on to explain the feuding history of Brennan and General Flynn…

The motivations for Brennan’s dislike of Flynn date back years. The two had publicly feuded during Flynn’s time as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Flynn was producing intel documents that showed how the supposed Syrian moderates were actually assets of Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Brennan also brought in disgraced Syria analyst Elizabeth O’Bagy to brief the CIA. O’Bagy was outed by this reporter for manufacturing her credentials and for being paid by the Syrian rebels. O’Bagy worked for the defense industry funded Institute for the Study of War, a neocon think tank headed by the Kagans, a controversial family which advised David Petraeus. Petraeus was brought down. Intel sources I’ve spoken to believe Brennan was behind his ousting.

California: The Physical Collapse Of A Social State

Welcome to California.  It is a state of a perfect set of laws – at least in the minds of those wedded to the legislative pursuit of social justice.  Under the one-party Democrat rules, spending on fairness tops $100 billion every year. Meanwhile, the basic infrastructure of the state, so necessary for the economy long and short term, is collapsing.

The California legislature has been busy making the news these days.  They are determined to fight President Trump tooth and nail – and they are putting the taxpayers’ money where the legislature’s mouth is.

California Democrat after Democrat has decried President Trump. The day after the election, a “Joint Statement from California Legislative Leaders on Result of Presidential Election,” issued in part by California Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de León (formerly Kevin Leon), stated:

“While Donald Trump may have won the presidency, he hasn’t changed our values. America is greater than any one man or party. We will not be dragged back into the past. We will lead the resistance to any effort that would shred our social fabric or our Constitution.”

The legislature hired former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder as legal counsel for their fights with the federal government.  Their new state attorney general, Xavier Becerra, was appointed “to protect California’s economy and our sensible policies on climate change, health care, civil rights and immigration,” – so said Governor Brown who made the appointment.

 California, of course, is the front-line for Sanctuary Cities – so many of which have also pledged to fight Trump.  Cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Sacramento prohibit law enforcement from cooperating with immigration authorities – Kate Steinle notwithstanding. They are all willing to risk millions of dollars in federal funds for their current residents essentially to provide social justice for those here now illegally and in the future.

Long before all of that, of course, California has led the way for its brand of social justice on social issues as well.  When they have, they do more than talk about it – they spend money on it, including in the schools.

Finally, we cannot forget that California has the most stringent and expensive regulations in the world as part of its effort to fight “climate change.” Estimates run to over a billion dollars spent in California each year to change the world’s climate – or at least to prevent it from changing any more. Now Mr. de León wants to prevent the use of any fossils fuels in the state by 2045.

Of course, it is no small irony in an epic year of rain, those same Democrats continue to claim that because of a lack of social justice in the hearts of Americans, climate change is real and will result in prolonged droughts in California. Indeed, taxpayer funded NASA climatologist Bill Patzert predicted last year that “We are in a drought forever.”

Mother Nature, of course, does not listen to politicians or predictions.

California has indeed had an epic amount of rain this year – far, far greater than anyone predicted. So much so that California infrastructure is being exposed for what it has been – ignored.

The biggest non-social justice headlines have gone to people fleeing Oroville Dam, which holds back Lake Oroville, the second largest man-made lake in California.  For over a decade, despite many warnings, the social justice warriors have not only refused to build new water infrastructure to feed a population growing with the immigrants and now refugees they want to protect, they have also refused to spend money to protect the infrastructure they have.

It is said that California has over $77 billion in deferred road, highway and bridge maintenance.  It showed this week with a sink hole in LA because of the rain they didn’t predict.  There is also the collapse of part of one of its main highways in the North, Highway 50, from the rain they didn’t predict – not to mention the Oroville dam, the break in a Central Valley levee and over-flowing dams causing flooding in places like the southern part of Silicon Valley.

Of course, there is the whole issue of the lack of water infrastructure in California.  There is not enough of it to store and supply the water needed for its industry and residents.  Indeed, the system was designed for half those living in California today. Keep in mind that, three years ago, even the EPA said California needs $44.5 billion to fix the infrastructure that it has.

 Those numbers, as this last winter of damaged infrastructure, roads and dams have proven, are understated.  All of which brings us to . . .

High Speed Rail.  Gov. Jerry Brown wants to spend at least $70 billion to build high speed rail that really no one outside of a construction union and Sen. Diane Feinstein’s husband (his company “won” one of the construction contracts for $1 billion) wants.  Jerry Brown doesn’t want the spending train to stop there, however.

Brown also wants to spend $15 billion to $25 billion (yes, the estimate range is that wide) on water tunnels of unknown value because they will be tied up in courts for years. Keep in mind that it would be far cheaper to simply direct water to the Central Valley instead of releasing so much of it to ocean, which global warming enthusiasts say is rising anyway.

So, what is an impoverished California to do?  It’s not an academic question.  California leads the nation in poverty when cost of living is factored into the equation.

According to Brown and the Democrats, the answer is: fight for future immigrants, refugees, sanctuary cities, social issues and global warming. Social justice for all – in other words – served on high speed rail.

Perhaps one day, the Brown and his Democrat friends will understand as Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan did that there is no social justice without a job – but don’t count on that any time soon.

”There simply is so much at stake today. As a result, our governments that benefit so many, employ so many, and tax so widely–in short our governments that pick so many winners and losers–are understandably subject to an intense competition for their control.” So writes author Thomas Del Beccaro in this fascinating study of the history of political unity and division in the US, from the Revolution to the adoption of the Constitution, the Civil War through Reconstruction, The Gilded Age to our present Divided Era.

Susan Rice Is FINISHED! New Surveillance Logs Reveal SHOCKING Data That Proves She Is Guilty!

Democrats are going to have difficulty trying to explain Susan Rice’s actions involving intelligence on the Trump team.

They apparently wouldn’t be able to argue it didn’t happen.

From Young Conservatives

Why?

Because the NSC has logs of of every time she looked at the information.

From Washington Examiner:

The National Security Council has uncovered computer logs that detail the instances former national security adviser Susan Rice requested and viewed records that included President Trump and his campaign staffers’ names in intelligence reports from July through January, according to a report published Monday.

Hence, the reason now that some are trying to justify her actions as ‘normal’ despite the fact that she denied even knowing about any of it.

Yup, perfectly normal for her/Obama administration to be unmasking names and spying on Trump and even his family members for at least a year.

But there is more, and if this report is true, she is in deep trouble.

From Daily Caller:

Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.

“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.

Where was the warrant?

Michael Doran, former NSC senior director, said there “was a stream of information that was supposed to be hermetically sealed from politics” but that somehow the Obama administration “found a way to blow a hole in that wall.”