Tuesday, March 10, 2015
The GOP Likuds Force and the Ayatollahs
A new poll conducted by a Republican pollster with links to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s campaign suggests that a majority of Americans support his speech before Congress on the issue of Iranian nuclear negotiations.
Jerusalem Post
According the poll, which was conducted by McLaughlin & Associates and obtained by Politico, 50 percent said they support Netanyahu's controversial speech before Congress, 23% opposed it and 18% said they don't know.
Additionally, the poll, which was conducted from February 13th to 17th, found that 76% said that Iran must be prevented from ever getting a nuclear weapon, 79% said that any deal that could help Iranians get a nuclear weapon should require both the president's and Congress' approval.
Furthermore, 67% of those polled said they believed that if the Iranians obtain a nuclear weapon, they would use it against Israel or the US.
The poll has received some criticism for its question framing. For example, the main question of the poll is: "President Obama and some Democrats think it should be cancelled because it is 2 weeks before an Israeli election. Israeli Prime Minister wants to speak to the American Congress to try to stop a deal that would give Iran a nuclear weapon. These negotiations are set to conclude 3 weeks after the Prime Minister’s speech. Knowing all of this is true, do you support or oppose Prime Minister Netanyahu speaking to Congress on March 3rd?”
The phrasing of the question and line of reasoning it takes, seems to guide readers to supporting the speech.
Furthermore, the source of the poll is suspect. The CEO for McLaughlin & Associates John McLaughlin, is part of the advisory team for Netanyahu in the upcoming elections.
This poll comes in the wake of a CNN poll that had a contradictory conclusion. According to CNN's poll, 63% oppose the speech, while 33% believe it is proper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Questions of partisan division and immovable differences in policy between the United States and Israel have plagued the public profile of the relationship in recent weeks.
ReplyDeleteWhat can be forgotten is how deep the ideological differences are between the President and the Prime Minister, as well as the platform the President has tried to stick to since getting elected.
Professor Samuel Schneider of Yeshiva University, and expert in Hebrew language and political philosophy, emphasized that Prime Minister Netanyahu was in extremely good form in his words to Congress.
“The speech was perfect in structure – ma’aseh hoshev – as you would say in Hebrew in reference to the skills used to build the Biblical Tabernacle. His grammar and syntax were very good. It was a very well-delivered speech. Even his intonations were perfect. His opponents are even using that as a point of attack: his words were good but they were just words, but they masked a lack of substance.”
Professor Schneider thought his words were extremely convincing for those outside of Congress. Indeed, he sees this speech as generating a lot of debate about the Iran nuclear negotiations that might not have happened otherwise. He is less convinced the timing of the speech will help influence the final leg of negotiations with Iran, at least as far as it goes for American efforts in the talks.
“Barack Obama won’t be receptive to Netanyahu’s words. For everyone in his administration, they feel this is the best deal they can get out of Iran.”
In addition to that, Professor Schneider implied that with the President’s very clear “no boots on the ground” policy in the Middle East, it would be hard to see Obama being more assertive because Iran is perceived in the White House as too strong at this point. For Schneider, it represents a failure of the President’s personal political philosophy.
“He is a far leftist whose views are a product of the 1960s. It can be seen in his policies elsewhere: reluctance to ship arms to Ukraine, reluctance to ship arms to Nigeria and his reluctance to attack Syria in response to their use of chemical weapons.”
...But there is definitely a strong connection between the Republicans and Likud.”
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/192427#.VP-nX4upb5E
Vote for the GOP Likuds Force. You know where their heart is.
ReplyDeleteYES. O DO.
DeleteIt is not with the "Iranians fighting for civilization"
nor with the Hamas
nor is it against the Egypt with its new good President
nor is it with the Egyptian MB
YES
Vote Republican
Support Israel
The O's have it, or is that the NO's
DeleteNetanyahu was in extremely good form in raising the morale of the GOP Likuds Force in their rally in the US Capitol Building.
ReplyDeleteThese actions may be seen by allies abroad not just as a gesture of contempt for Obama, but also for the broader P5-plus-1 negotiating group that includes Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China.
ReplyDeleteLiberal bloggers were arguing that the GOP letter violated the Logan Act, named for a Pennsylvania politician’s attempt to meddle in President John Adams’ delicate negotiations with France in 1798. The language of that 216-year-old statute does sound eerily pertinent: “Any citizen ... who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government ... or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
The Obama administration surely isn’t going to take its GOP critics to court. But this latest act of congressional defiance should make reasonable Republicans wonder whether their party’s foreign policy agitprop has moved beyond being merely partisan to downright dangerous.
- Ignatius
Congress may well be taking the Obama Administration to court.
DeleteIf he does this on his own he is in direct violation of the Constitution.
No, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, the remedy, supplied in the Constitution, is impeachment.
DeleteIt is the only way.
The Courts will not interfere, to do so ... that would be unConstitutional.
Boehner’s lawsuit seems to be at a disadvantage according to legal experts, who cite countless historical examples of failed congressional lawsuits.
DeleteWhile the merits of this case are unlikely to hold up to legal challenge, more generally, Congress has a structural disadvantage with using the courts as a means to thwart executive action.
We outline the challenges that Congress faces when pursing legal challenges to executive actions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/11/20/when-congress-sues-the-president-its-likely-to-fail/
In the end, just like the 2014 election, the Republicans are inconsequential.
ReplyDeleteThe Imperial Presidency is not an aberration, but the result of bi-partisan cooperation over the past seventy years.
If one is opposed to an Imperial Presidency, one must support the Republican members of Congress in demanding that the Senate vote on this upcoming new treaty.
ReplyDeleteAny other position amounts to a sell out and an unconstitutional subversion and betrayal of our Republic.
I've learned over the years that the Daffys here, Deuce, Rufus, ratass, simply do not grasp the first principles of our laws.
No, because it was the Republicans that created the Imperial Presidency.
DeleteIf a citizen is opposed to the status que, supporting it will do no good.
If you oppose the status que, vote Librarian, or don't vote, at all.
Because, it is not unconstitutional behavior.
DeleteThe Law is quite settled, the actions of Mr Obama are quite legal.
If not, the House should and could impeach him.
That is the Constitutional remedy, and the Republican controlled House refuses to take that Constitutional action.
Instead, they take the unConstitutional course, and sue the President.
The Republicans are as guilty as the President, if he were guilty of anything.
The 47 Senators, violated the Logan Act, but will not be prosecuted.
DeleteThat disrespect for the Law, by both sides ... a reality.
The Republicans break it with impunity, the Democrats allow them that.
If the President has acted unConstitutionally, the House should impeach him. ... But they will not.
It's sad.
ReplyDeleteTo think that Quirk, who tried so hard back in his advertising days, could have made the Big Time if only he had hired Deuce as his product propagandist. The guy can make people who are pledged to kill us all sound like great folks.
The courts have made it evident through precedent that they do not want to settle inter-branch disputes that can be remedied through legislative action. Congress has to establish that it cannot stop or remedy executive actions through legislation. Additionally, Congress must show it has made a previous attempt to address the executive action (see Goldwater v. Carter and Kucinich v. Obama).
DeleteEvidence must be presented that any failures are not simply a result of an inability to overcome political opposition to potentially effective remedies.
I long for the days - so long ago - when threads on stuff like this were up for discussion here -
ReplyDeleteArts, Culture & Media
Why are van Gogh's paintings slowly turning white?
PRI's The World
March 09, 2015 · 2:00 PM EDT
Updated:
March 10, 2015 · 11:30 AM EDT
By Shefali S. Kulkarni (follow)
Two people sit in front of Vincent Van Gogh's Mountains at Saint Remy, Wheat Field with White Cloud (landscape from Saint Remy) and Enclosed Field with Rising Sun. Scientists in Belgium report that red lead, a semiconductor pigment, is the cause behind several discolorations of Van Gogh's work.
Credit:
Luke MacGregor/Reuters
Something's different about Vincent van Gogh's work.
It's been puzzling art curators and experts for a long time, but scientists at the University of Antwerp discovered the reason why some of van Gogh's most prized works of art are turning white.
It's the plumbonacrite!
Vincent van Gogh's Wheat Fields Under Cloudy Sky originally featured bold reds. But scientists at the University of Antwerp discoved that the red lead paint used to create the vibrancy contains a mineral compound that fades in the light.
Credit:
Courtesy of WikiCommons
Also known as red lead, plumbonacrite is suspected to be one of the first synthetically-made paints known to man, and van Gogh was a particular fan of the stuff. In many of his paintings he used bold colors — including the red hue — which apparently degrades like a Gobstopper candy when exposed to light.
Francesca Casadi, a conservation scientist with the Art Institute of Chicago, says "We have known for some time that some of the pigments that van Gogh used alter with time. But honestly I was quite surprised to find that the red lead the mineral pigment that typically is considered relatively stable also failed him."
Casadi says that at the time many artists like van Gogh were swept up my the insdustrial revolution and it's impact on the art world — like the manufacturing of paint............
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-03-09/why-are-van-goghs-paintings-slowly-turning-white
Wasn't van Gogh's nephew, or grandson or something, killed by a Moslem ?
DeleteThink I recall that.
ah ha -
THEO VAN GOGH - Murdered by terrorist in Amsterdam - filmmaker and journalist shot and stabbed by militant Islamist
Theo van Gogh - The only person in Europe who dared speak out and warn against the dangers of militant Islam
November 2, 2004
Theo van Gogh - murdered by Islamofacists on Nov.2, 2004
Fought the ' war on terror ' in Europe
Warned against the approaching "Dark Ages of Mecca"
Called America "The last beacon hope in a steadily darkening world"
Image: Theo van Gogh.
MIM: Theo Van Gogh, 47, was shot and stabbed this morning by a Muslim terrorist who approached him as he was bicycling to work on an Amsterdam street .
According to witnesses :" Van Gogh fell backward on the bicycle path and just laid there. The shooter stayed next to him and waited . Waited to make sure he was dead "
Theo was the great grandson of the painter Theo van Gogh . He has received death threats in connection with a recent movie but dismissed them saying that the movie "was the best protection I ever had".
Just last week Theo Van Gogh had written about Muslims intimidating native Dutch into leaving their neighborhoods and criticised the police and Amsterdam Mayor Cohen for not doing anything to stop the escalating agression by Muslim youths who were instilling fear into Dutch citizens .
As the editor of MIM and a friend of Theo Van Gogh, - it is my obligation to bring to the American public his work and his message warning of the dangers of militant Islam . MIM will continue to translate and publish Theo Van Gogh's work.
Theo's murder murder must be a wake up call for all of us .
In an article written a few days before his death Theo Van Gogh ended with the words :"I ask myself how long native Dutch will be welcome in Amsterdam". http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=rabinowitz%2Ehtm
http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/309
^^^^^^^^^^^
Bumped off by someone 'fighting for civilization', no doubt.
In their own degraded psychotic mind.......
G'Nite
and
Cheers !!
Robert "Draft dodger" Peterson yearns for threads that never were ...
DeleteAt the Elephant Bar.
Makes one wonder why he settled here, when the subjects he says he is enamored with, were never here.
Or he could post a link to it.
Which he can't do, because ...
He is delusional.
.
DeleteOnce again, rat, your lack of English skills betrays you.
Bob didn't say when 'this thread was up for discussion', he said 'when threads like this were up for discussion'.
.
He provides no examples of when they were, Legionnaire.
DeleteBecause they weren't.
Or he could have referenced them, or you can.
If you think you should fulfill your "Responsibility to Protect".
Just once, Legionnaire, you should reference your remarks on the past, with a time stamped example of what you are speaking of.
DeleteBut you never do. Your rhetoric is empty, the factual references are never available.
Not to Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, nor his protector.
Quirk Thu May 27, 02:16:00 AM EDT
DeleteBob, a tip.
Delete your post on the bank.
Try as you may, Legionnaire, the reality is that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson is his own man.
DeleteThe remarks he makes, are unsubstantiated, lies and libels.
Of Colin Powell, of the President ...
Deuce, Rufus ...
The wolves of Idaho.
His perfidy knows no bounds
.
DeleteHe provides no examples of when they were, Legionnaire.
Who gives a shit? Only a nitwit or a master baiter would bother to ask about it.
In the good old days before the subjects here were winnowed down to Israel, IS, and the GOP we used to discuss a lot of things, art and science being a couple of them. Deuce under one of the Bar's incarnations even had a link to an art blog that had some pretty interesting discussions on a weekly basis. I remember putting up posts regarding The Nut Gatherers and other art at the Detroit Institute of Art. There were discussions of Goya and his Disasters of War series. Evidently, that's not your cup of tea, rat.
.
.
DeleteIf you think you should fulfill your "Responsibility to Protect".
This has nothing to do with RTP, Bob doesn't deserve it, WiO is gone. I just got tired of the shit you have been putting up here over the past couple of years. Now every time I see you put up a lie, every time I see you put up an anti-Semitic remark, every time I see you doing a little master baiting just for the hell of it, well, I guess if I have the time, I'll probably respond.
.
Moshe Kahlon, head of the Kulanu party, clarified on Tuesday that he will not take into consideration which party has more seats after next week’s election when he chooses who to recommend for Prime Minister.
ReplyDelete...
“None of the party leaders in this election are willing to answer the difficult questions,” Kahlon said. “No one has an answer as to why there is no competition between banks, no one can tell us why there is no competition in the food industry.
They are stealing millions of shekels from the pockets of Israelis and no one says anything. All we hear about all day is Iran, ISIS, and Congressional speeches.”
ha ha ha ha
ReplyDelete:):)
I gotta say this -
Switched over to Fox News, and dropped in as Megyn Kelly was discussing Shillary and the e-mails.
One of the things Shillary said was something about being too old and not knowing how to do e-mails right......
Megyn "That's what we have young people around for....."
Ha ha
And then Chelsea came up.....
And some of you old farts are getting ready to actually vote for this old disgusting fraud......
Bwabwabwahahahaha
Gary Johnson: I'll Run in 2016 to Provide Libertarian Option
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/Gary-Johnson-libertarian-president-change/2014/11/03/id/604938/
Johnson revealed his interest in taking another stab to become the nation's commander-in-chief as he said he was not impressed with this year's midterm elections.
Delete"The whole election is a big yawn. Who cares who wins, because nothing's really going to change? It's like a debate between Coke and Pepsi. They're debating over which one tastes better," he said.
"They start talking about tax policy, Coke wants to reduce the corporate tax rate to 30 percent, and Pepsi wants to drop it to 28 percent.
"Where's the libertarian viewpoint, which says do away with it completely? Do away with income tax, corporate tax? Abolish the IRS. If you're going to replace it with anything, replace it with a national consumption tax. That's real meat on the bones. I just don't see any meat anywhere."
Johnson acknowledged that libertarian candidates have not resonated at the polls — but said some of their ideas are being used in Washington.
"It hasn't resulted in anyone winning an election as a libertarian, but if you look at the issues, military nonintervention. Here it was, Congress and the president," he said.
"They're ready to dot the i's and cross the t's on going into Syria, and low and behold, 80 percent of Americans said no way. Drug reform, drug policy, marijuana legalization; libertarians have been talking about this forever, and now it's finally here.
"Marriage equality, that's been a libertarian issue from day one. When you look at these issues and what's really changing in America in spite of the politicians, I'm going to argue that these have been libertarian issues for a long time."
"People are clamoring to hear good ideas as opposed to the lesser of two evils . . .
DeleteEither the Democrats are going to win or the Republicans are going to win, but the losers are all of us out here as citizens that really do want meaningful change, and none of it's happening.
There's no dialogue regarding meaningful change."
Are some some Republicans, inside of the GOP Likuds Force, having some second thoughts and buyers remorse on their dangerous obscene game of endangering ordinary Americans?
ReplyDeleteRepublicans Admit: That Iran Letter Was a Dumb Idea
A day after releasing a letter that potentially threatened the administration’s negotiations with Iran, some Republicans who signed on are realizing it was a bad call.
Behind the scenes, Republicans are wondering if sending an open letter to Iran’s leaders was the best strategy to keep a bad nuclear deal from being negotiated.
Earlier this week, 47 Republican senators signed a letter warning the Iranian government that many of them would remain in office long after President Barack Obama’s second term was over, meaning any deal reached between the U.S. and Iran could be easily reversed by the next president.
But even among Republicans whose offices have signed the letter, there is some trepidation that the Iran letter injects partisanship into the Iran negotiations, shifting the narrative from the content of the deal to whether Republicans are unfairly trying to undercut the president.
“Before the letter, the national conversation was about Netanyahu’s speech and how Obama’s negotiations with Iran are leading to a terrible deal that could ultimately harm U.S. national security. Now, the Obama administration and its Capitol Hill partisans are cynically trying to push the conversation away from policy, and towards a deeply political pie fight over presidential and congressional prerogatives,” said a Senate Republican aide whose boss signed the letter.
However, while some on the Republican side are now rethinking the wisdom of sending a letter, none of the 47 Republican signatories are recanting their support for it or signaling an intent to do so.
Republican Sen. Bob Corker, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, did not sign the letter.
“I didn’t think it was going to further our efforts to get to a place where Congress would play the appropriate role that it should on Iran,” Corker told The Daily Beast. “I did not think that the letter was something that was going to help get us to an outcome that we’re all seeking, and that is Congress playing that appropriate role.”
The open letter, organized by freshman Sen. Tom Cotton, was first sent around by Senate staffers in early March. Last Wednesday, with a handful of senators already committed to the letter, Cotton brought up the issue in one of the Senate GOP’s regular weekly luncheons.
“I didn’t think it was going to further our efforts to get to a place where Congress would play the appropriate role that it should on Iran,” Sen. Bob Corker said.
{...}
{...}
ReplyDelete“I immediately knew that it was not something that, for me anyway, in my particular role, was going to be constructive,” Corker said. “I didn’t realize until this weekend that it had the kind of momentum that it had.”
Sen. Jeff Flake was another Republican who declined to sign the letter, telling reporters Tuesday that there was already “a lot of animosity” between Congress and the White House, and that the Iranian nuclear threat was “too important to divide us among partisan lines.”
“I just didn’t feel that it was appropriate or productive at this point. These are tough enough negotiations as it stands, and introducing this kind of letter, I didn’t think would be helpful,” Flake said.
Republican aides were taken aback by what they thought was a light-hearted attempt to signal to Iran and the public that Congress should have a role in the ongoing nuclear discussions. Two GOP aides separately described their letter as a “cheeky” reminder of the Congressional branch’s prerogatives.
“The administration has no sense of humor when it comes to how weakly they have been handling these negotiations,” said a top GOP Senate aide.
Added a Republican national security aide, “The Senate should have a role. It would make any agreement have some sort of consistency and perpetuity beyond the president. And it would also be buy-in for the American people. Right now it’s just an agreement between the President of the United States and whoever the final signatory to the agreement is.”
Supporters of the White House’s ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program pushed back hard against the letter, with some even citing a law written in the 18th century (and not applied since 1803) to say that the senators engaged in illegal conduct by communicating with a foreign government to undermine the U.S. government’s foreign policy.
Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson said he was “appalled and saddened” by the open letter.
“What it sends is a message to the rest of the world that we are not united,” Nelson said.
No, it sends a message that the US GOP Likuds Force is a skank of skunks.
DeleteThere is a recognizable strata of an appalling political stupidity that borders on criminal negligence. Ignorant bastards may not be strong enough. The entire charade starting with Netanyahu and AIPAC’s testicular hold on the US Congress is reminiscent of a college fraternity that is in need of being disbanded.
ReplyDeleteThese ignorant pricks have gotten enough Americans killed and maimed, but never learn a lesson. They never learn because they never pay. They have set the perfect scam, a game of lies with no consequences. Voting them out is insufficient. They never leave Washington. It is a political recurrent, chronic STD, Congressional Chlamydia.
Meanwhile, personal freedoms and the paranoid state security agency apparatus continues to constrict ordinary Americans with hardly a bleat to be heard :
ReplyDeleteWASHINGTON—The Central Intelligence Agency played a crucial role in helping the Justice Department develop technology that scans data from thousands of U.S. cellphones at a time, part of a secret high-tech alliance between the spy agency and domestic law enforcement, according to people familiar with the work.
The CIA and the U.S. Marshals Service, an agency of the Justice Department, developed technology to locate specific cellphones in the U.S. through an airborne device that mimics a cellphone tower, these people said.
Today, the Justice Department program, whose existence was reported by The Wall Street Journal last year, is used to hunt criminal suspects. The same technology is used to track terror suspects and intelligence targets overseas, the people said.
The program operates specially equipped planes that fly from five U.S. cities, with a flying range covering most of the U.S. population. Planes are equipped with devices—some past versions were dubbed “dirtboxes” by law-enforcement officials—that trick cellphones into reporting their unique registration information.
The surveillance system briefly identifies large numbers of cellphones belonging to citizens unrelated to the search. The practice can also briefly interfere with the ability to make calls, these people said.
Some law-enforcement officials are concerned the aerial surveillance of cellphone signals inappropriately mixes traditional police work with the tactics and technology of overseas spy work that is constrained by fewer rules. Civil-liberties groups say the technique amounts to a digital dragnet of innocent Americans’ phones.
The CIA has a long-standing prohibition that bars it from conducting most types of domestic operations, and officials at both the CIA and the Justice Department said they didn’t violate those rules.
DeleteThe cooperation began a decade ago, when the CIA arranged for the Marshals Service to receive more than $1 million in gear to conduct such surveillance, said people familiar with the program. More than $100 million went into research and development of the devices.
For years, the U.S. Marshals’ Technical Operations Group worked with the CIA’s Office of Technical Collection to develop the technology. In the early days it was the CIA that provided the most resources, said the people familiar with the matter.
The CIA gave the Marshals Service the ability to conduct what officials called “silent stimulation” of cellphones. By using a device that mimics a cell tower, all phones in its range are compelled to send identifying information. When the device finds a target phone in that sea of information, the plane circles overhead until the device can locate it to within about 3 yards.
Some versions of the technology also can be used to intercept signals from phones, these people said. U.S. military and intelligence agencies have used the technology in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere to hunt terrorists, and map the use of cellphones in such places, according to people familiar with the work.
The cooperation between technical experts at the CIA and the Marshals Service, which law-enforcement officials have described as a “marriage,” represents one way criminal investigators are increasingly relying on U.S. intelligence agencies for operational support and technical assistance in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Many Justice Department officials view the joint effort with the CIA as having made valuable contributions to both domestic and overseas operations.
A CIA spokesman declined to comment on whether the CIA or any other agency uses the devices. Some technologies developed by the agency “have been lawfully and responsibly shared with other U.S. government agencies,” the spokesman said. “How those agencies use that technology is determined by the legal authorities that govern the operations of those individual organizations—not CIA.” He also said the relationship between the Marshals Service and CIA tech experts couldn’t be characterized as a marriage.
DeleteThe Justice Department, which oversees the Marshals Service, would neither confirm nor deny the existence of such technology, saying that doing so would tip off criminals.
A Justice Department spokesman said Marshals Service techniques are “carried out consistent with federal law, and are subject to court approval.” The agency doesn’t conduct “domestic surveillance, intelligence gathering, or any type of bulk data collection,” the spokesman said, adding that it doesn’t gather any intelligence on behalf of U.S. spy agencies.
To civil libertarians, the close involvement of America’s premier international spy agency with a domestic law-enforcement arm shows how military and espionage techniques are now being used on U.S. citizens.
“There’s a lot of privacy concerns in something this widespread, and those concerns only increase if we have an intelligence agency coordinating with them,” said Andrew Crocker of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which has filed a lawsuit seeking more details about the program and its origins.
The Marshals Service program is now the subject of congressional inquiries. The top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee have raised concerns about possible invasion of privacy and legal oversight of the operations. Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) said the Justice Department must provide answers about its use of the technology, “including the legal authority agencies obtain prior to deploying these tools, the specific information they are giving to judges when requesting to use them, and what policies are in place to ensure the civil liberties of innocent Americans are protected.”
DeleteConcerns about how the Marshals Service uses the equipment grew among some officials last year after an incident in the Sinaloa area of Mexico. In that operation, several U.S. Marshals personnel were dressed as Mexican marines and carrying Mexican weapons as a Marshals plane circled overhead, searching for a suspect’s cellphone signal, according to people familiar with the operation.
As the men on the ground moved toward their target, they were fired on by drug-cartel suspects, and one of the Americans was badly wounded and airlifted to a hospital. The incident underscored for some law-enforcement officials the risks of such operations—that their personnel could be killed or possibly imprisoned while doing something that could be viewed as a crime in a foreign country. People familiar with the work say the agency conducts such operations roughly every few months, though each one is based on specific intelligence and needs.
The CIA and Marshals Service began field-testing one version of the device in 2004, said people familiar with the early years of the cooperation. That device worked on AT&T and T-Mobile phones, as well as most cellphones outside the U.S. As part of the joint work with the CIA, the Marshals Service received more than one of the devices at no cost. At the time, each unit had a price tag of more than $300,000, these people said.
DeleteIn 2005, the CIA gave the Marshals Service technology to conduct “silent stimulation” of those types of cellphones, both for identifying them and, with a court order, intercepting the communications, these people said. The following year, the CIA and Marshals Service began field testing a way of cracking a different cellphone system used widely in the U.S., giving them the ability to identify phones on the Verizon and Sprint/Nextel networks. A Sprint spokeswoman declined to comment while the other phone companies didn’t respond to requests for comment.
In 2008, the CIA arranged for the Marshals Service to receive without charge one of the new devices, which cost about $500,000 each, these people said. That year, they began field testing a new version that would work against the next generation of cellphones, according to people familiar with the work.
Write to Devlin Barrett at devlin.barrett@wsj.com
.
DeleteYou worry about the GOP as if there is any difference.
.
.
DeleteMenendez
Mark Warner
Schumer
Ben Cardin
Blumenthal
Chris Coons
Cory Booker
Mike Bennet
Manchin
Donnelly
Gillibrand
Dems all
.
.
ReplyDeleteJust once, Legionnaire, you should reference your remarks on the past, with a time stamped example of what you are speaking of.
Just once?
Normally, I wouldn't bother with your silly games, rat. There didn't really seem to be a need. Everyone here, er, everyone here but one, knows the things I have accused you of are true. This is your usual MO. Pull some shit out of your ass, if you are called on it deny it, and then demand posted documentation. I assume you do it because you know no one wants to be bothered digging through the archives looking at thousands of post searching for a single one that proves their point. Well, no one but you I guess. I mean what type of pathetic little twerp spends days, probably weeks, going back years into the archives, reading thousands of posts, to find something he feels is negative about someone else or positive about himself for...what...to build up his self-esteem, to make himself look clever instead of some pathetic loser. Hmm.
Just once?
Well OK.
Let's take the case of you saying that WiO said that Israel lost the last Gaza war.
Here is the WIO post we are talking about. I've bolded the key part.
What is "Occupation"Mon Jul 21, 09:33:00 PM EDT
Social media war? I concede that Israel is losing that war....
However 50% of Hamas's rockets are used or destroyed.
I don't know the exact number, but I bet a good number of tunnels are destroyed.
And I don't know the exact number but I bet a huge number MORE of Hamas fighters are dead than Israeli fighters.
And of course, Hamas and Iran spent a very nice billion or two investing in both those tunnels and missiles and to what avail?
After 1,800 terrorists fired rockets at the CIVILIANS (both arab and jews) of Israel Hamas can claim they KILLED two. Now of course having rockets rain down hundreds a day on all parts of Israel is a war crime but who cares? Hamas is the darling of the Jew hating/Israel denying crowd...
I(n) the end, Hamas and it's supporters will claim victory.. No matter reality...
If there is one Hamas member still alive and spitting? Israel lost...
reminds me of Monty Python's "its a flesh wound" skit...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4
(continued below...)
.
.
Delete(continued...)
But here is the version we saw posted by the rat,
Jack HawkinsSun Oct 05, 10:13:00 AM EDT
But time and again, the truth leaks out of you.
What is “Occupation”Mon Jul 21, 09:33:00 PM EDT
If there is one Hamas member still alive and spitting? Israel lost…
This post illustrates everything I have been saying about you, rat. First, you take a partial quote, truncating the original and removing all context. You lie by omission. Then when WiO calls you on your deceit, you ignore him and continue reposting the same lie. Allen also pointed out your deceit as did I. Yet, you continued repeating the lie...what...ten times? A dozen? More.
Here's another example of that repetition.
Jack HawkinsThu Oct 02, 10:47:00 AM EDT
If the incursion of the Israeli proxy force, the Daesh, into Iraq unifies that country’s disparate political groups, instead of further fragmenting it ...
The Israeli will have suffered another defeat.
What is “Occupation”Mon Jul 21, 09:33:00 PM EDT
If there is one Hamas member still alive and spitting? Israel lost…
You lied and in pushing your anti-Semitic baiting you continued to lie. Then as we've seen today you lie again by denying that you lied.
Pathetic.
.
There was no lie, there was sound bite editing.
DeleteThe exchange has nothing to do with Semites, nothing to do with anyone but little "O"rdure.
It was an attempt to incite him, using his own words.
Which it did. It drove him to distraction. Rather than claiming that he was a war criminal, a murderer and such, without even a scintilla of evidence.
I used some of his writing, to incite a reaction, but there was no lie.
"O"rdure deals in lies. I dealt in selective editing of his own words.
Neither he, nor the draft dodging Robert "Bank Fraud" Peterson even try to do the same.
They make up false claims, whole clothe, and push on.
As to the threads that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson said he yearned a return to ...
You failed to perform, again, Legionnaire.
Yup, Quirk has rat down pat.
ReplyDeleteExactly right.
>>>I mean what type of pathetic little twerp spends days, probably weeks, going back years into the archives, reading thousands of posts, to find something he feels is negative about someone else or positive about himself for...what...to build up his self-esteem, to make himself look clever instead of some pathetic loser<<<
When he is doing this he's not out on that Panama job, that's for certain.
Couple of hours, was all it took.
DeleteInstead of going to the casino and spending welfare money, like Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson does ...
I merely looked at some of the time frames where I remembered that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson defamed better men than himself.
Where I recalled him making his outlandishly bigoted statements about blacks in the United States.
Recalling when he called Colin Powell a "black piece of shit".
Quite a derogatory statement, from a draft dodger that ripped off a bank.
This admission by Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson that he had "Ripped off a bank", now finding that one was pure happenstance. I had never seen it, before.
DeleteIf Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson had heeded your advise, Legionnaire Q, that would have been lost to us, forever ...
But it did not happen. Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson ignored your sage advise.
He never did admit that his libels of desert rat were just that, libels and lies.
Created whole clothe from his and "O"rdure's imagination.
Maybe they do not use this expression in Detroit City, Legionnaire, but ...
Payback is a Bitch
or, as was said back in the day ...
Payback is a Medevac
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete
Delete"If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly."
Looks like 'Happy Days Are Here Again' -
ReplyDeleteDISASTER: Hillary said she emailed with Bill...
BUT spokesman claims he only has sent two in his life...
BOTH while president...
SHE 'DID IT FOR CONVENIENCE'...
'NEVER EMAILED CLASSIFIED MATERIAL'...
DEFIANT: 'SERVER WILL REMAIN PRIVATE'...
Staff 'Handpicked' Questions At Press Conference...
The circus is back in town...
Media Demons Return To Haunt...
ISSA: NO TRUST...
HURT: 'She was everything she has ever been, always was and ever will be'.......Drudge
D E L E T E...
HARD DRIVE DESTROYED?.....Drudge Headline
I suppose everyone has some one politician they just can't stand.
DeleteFor me, it's Hillary Clinton, a loathsome toad.
Who Will Keep The Cap On Hillary's Sewer Pipe?
DeleteGeoffrey P Hunt
Forty years of unseemly, unethical, and illegal effluent, effortlessly and unabashedly discharged by both Bill and Hillary may have finally splashed over the manhole covers on their political septic tank.
More
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/03/who_will_keep_the_cap_on_hillarys_sewer_pipe.html
>>>Forty years of unseemly, unethical, and illegal effluent, effortlessly and unabashedly discharged by both Bill and Hillary may have finally splashed over the manhole covers on their political septic tank, clogged the leach field, and now backing up into the house threatening to splatter their live-in coterie. No mere journeyman plumber can fix these breaches; only operating engineers with a commercial grade backhoe, and a few tons of hydraulic cement might have a chance.
Is Hillary Clinton’s sleaze factor and plumber’s license inherited or acquired? What difference at this point does it make? Her genome map is unlikely to ever be revealed. Nonetheless the presentation of her ethics deficit, and her defense of all that is tawdry and disreputable, is hardly new.
While Hillary Clinton’s ideology was inspired by Saul Alinsky, her tactical politics were acquired from watching Richard Nixon.
Hillary first displayed her predilection for deceit, cover-up, obstruction, and lying while on the job as a staff lawyer to counsel for the US House Judiciary, Watergate Select Committee. She had ample opportunity to absorb the lessons of the disgraced 37th president.
Hillary’s one-time boss Jerome Zeifman, chief of staff of counsel to the Committee, when interviewed by Dan Calabrese in 2008 had this gem to unveil on the occasion of recalling Hillary’s staff tenure:
"Because she was a liar, She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality." <<<
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/03/who_will_keep_the_cap_on_hillarys_sewer_pipe.html#ixzz3U4191tES
ReplyDeleteThey have set the perfect scam, a game of lies with no consequences.
For Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson the game is over.
There are consequences to his "Game of Lies".
His own words will haunt his presence at the Elephant Bar.
His daddy would be so proud of him, no?
bob Thu May 27, 12:52:00 AM EDT
But I did rip off the bank for $7500 hundred dollars, when I was on my knees, and fighting for my economic life, on my aunt's credit card. But that wasn't really stealing, just payback. …
Just like a meth head, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, tries to justify his crime by saying that the loot was owed him, by the people or institution he ripped off.
You are going to get a lesson, in payback, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson.
DeleteIt is just about time to "Fire for Effect"
Or, then again, there is that other option available to you.
“Never ruin an apology with an excuse.”
― Benjamin Franklin
Baghdad, Iraq (CNN)Joint Iraqi forces have started what they believe will be the conclusive push to retake the Iraqi city of Tikrit from ISIS, a paramilitary force participating in the offensive said Tuesday.
ReplyDeleteThe forces have started "the decisive operation" to liberate Tikrit just over a week after the overall operation began, advancing toward the city from several directions, according to a statement from the predominantly Shiite paramilitary force Hashd Al-Shaab.
ISIS wasn't making it easy, however. The Sunni extremist group blew up a key bridge near Tikrit, preventing the joint Iraqi forces from using it to cross the Tigris River to approach the city from the east.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/world/iraq-isis-tikrit/
ReplyDeleteIraqi soldiers and Shiite militiamen have entered Tikrit, the hometown of Saddam Hussein and one of the largest ISIS-held cities in the country, an Iraqi official and a witness said Wednesday.
The local official in Iraq's Salaheddin province said allied Iraqi forces entered Tikrit through its northern Qadisiyya neighborhood. He said hidden bombs and snipers slowed the troops' progress.
Video obtained by The Associated Press showed troops and militiamen marching alongside Humvees flying Iraqi military and Shiite miltia flags in the city.
Tikrit, the capital of Salahuddin province, lies about 80 miles north of Baghdad. It is one of the largest cities held by Islamic State militants and lies on the road connecting Baghdad to Mosul. Retaking it will give Iraqi forces a major supply link to retake Mosul.
Iranian military advisers have been helping guide Iraqi forces. The U.S. says its allied coalition carrying out airstrikes targeting the extremists has not been involved in the Tikrit offensive.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/11/iraqi-forces-enter-isis-held-city-tikrit-officials-and-witnesses-say/
Jack,
ReplyDeleteI must say that my experience with your writings is in line with Quirks. So much so I simply scroll by the vast majority of your posts.
My recent need to correct Rufus of his mistaken assertions (or was he lying?) is but one example. When he first made the claim I tried to correct him and you chimed in with 'rufus is correct I just read the exchange'. When Rufus made the assertion yet again and I went back to find the actual discussion and linked to it you pulled edited sections of it to try to buttress your support for his claim which puts you firmly in the category of lying (I can't attest to the state of Rufus' mind but your actions reveal yours). I finally had to post the complete exchange to shut you up.
By doing shit like this you destroy your credibility. You've become laughable - a stooge just like your dopple-ganger bob.
Does not matter, Ash.
DeleteYou recent ned to correct Rufus backfired, on you, the posts that you referenced profed Rufus to be correct, and you wrong.
You then told us that there were other posts, post you did not reference which we should have read.
The entire exchange, you may have posted, but that was not seen by me, and did not 'shut me up".
You were wrong, as to what was said in the thread you referenced.
DeleteYou stated, succinctly, that you would not have supplied support to save those folks on the mountain.
Rufus said you had said that, Rufus was correct.
Your recent need to correct Rufus backfired, on you, the posts that you referenced proved Rufus to be correct, and you wrong
DeleteYou are a funny guy Jack. Rufus maintained I objected to humanitarian aid in the discussion which, he asserted, took place before the event.. Both assertions were wrong but you carry on as you wish making shit up. Maybe if you write it enough times someone else besides yourself will believe it too.
DeleteYou stated, unequivocally, that the US should not have supplied the support required to get those people off the mountain.
DeleteYour equivocation, now, is humorous.
Without military support, there could not be any humanitarian support delivered.
DeleteWithout military support those folks would not have gotten the humanitarian relief.
You were against the support that was delivered.
You said the US should not choose the "Winners & Losers".
Rufus was 100% correct in what he wrote about your position
DeleteOn the thread that you referenced.
DeleteYou may have written something else, somewhere else ...
DeleteBut what was written on the thread you referenced, that validated Rufus's statements.
Jack, it is really quite simple, bombing is not humanitarian aid. I object to the bombing.
DeleteYou can argue that bombing was necessary in order to deliver the humanitarian aid but you can also argue that you have to destroy a village in order to save it - a different argument entirely. In fact the bombing wasn't necessary to save the Yazidis on the mountain top. You guys want to argue about that go at it but that still does not support the claim that bombing is humanitarian aid.
Ash, Rufus asked the question, twice.
DeleteYou answered him, twice.
Each time you state, unequivocally, that the US should not have provided the support required to save those folks.
That you did not support the US actions.
That is what Rufus stated you said, Rufus was correct.
He is only correct if you accept that bombing counts as humanitarian aid, which, obviously, it doesn't.
DeleteJack you've become a caricature of Desert Rat.
Yep, those Russian Mi-24s are in the Tikrit fight.
ReplyDeleteThe army and militia fighters raised the national flag above a military hospital in the section of Qadisiya they had retaken from the militants, security officials said.
After pausing while helicopters attacked Islamic State snipers and positions, the ground forces were progressing steadily, taking "one street every 30 minutes" the security official said. He said there was fierce fighting around Tikrit police headquarters just south of Qadisiya.
For those of you that are not familiar with Russian aircraft ...
Mi-24 HIND: The Flying Russian Crocodile Can Fight and Flee
The Mil Mi-24 is a dual-role helicopter gunship designed as both a attack helicopter and 8-troop/4-litter transport. The Soviet Union produced more than 2,500 HIND variants at the Mil Moscow Helicopter Plant beginning in 1972 and used them extensively through out the Soviet War in Afghanistan. The concept of a multi-mission gunship was quite revolutionary at the time of its inception and even today, the HIND has no direct NATO equivalent and is only roughly recreated in the American Sikorsky S-67 Blackhawk.
The HIND is heavily fortified against small and medium arms fire, able to shrug off .50 caliber shots—even to its rotor blades—and withstand 20-mm cannon hits thanks to ballistic-resistant windscreens and a titanium-wrapped cockpit tub. What's more, the cabin interior is over-pressurized in the event of a NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) attack. This heavy armor earned the Mi-24 the unofficial nickname "the flying tank" though many Soviet pilots also referred to it as the "Crocodile" thanks to its camouflage pattern.
The Mi-24 didn't just fly around taking it on the nose mind you—this is a proper assault chopper. It relies on a 1,470-round 12.7 mm Gatling gun, a pair of twin-barrel GSh-30K autocannons, and window-mounted machine guns in the cabin. The Hind is also outfitted with a pair of stub wings that not only provide up to a quarter of the aircraft's lift when travelling at speed but also provide three attachment points for a variety of external weapons, depending on whether the mission calls for air support, troop insertions, anti-tank operations, or aerial combat. These external stores can include 3M11 Falanga anti-tank missiles, various general-purpose bombs (up to 500kg in weight) and rockets.
http://gizmodo.com/mi-24-hind-the-flying-russian-crocodile-can-fight-and-507543530
A sensitive leak investigation of a former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has stalled amid concerns that a prosecution in federal court could force the government to confirm a joint U.S.-Israeli covert operation targeting Iran, according to current and former U.S. officials.
ReplyDeleteFederal investigators suspect that retired Marine Gen. James E. “Hoss” Cartwright leaked to a New York Times reporter details about a highly classified operation to hobble Iran’s nuclear enrichment capability through cyber-sabotage — an effort not acknowledged by Israel or the United States.
Prosecutors will have to overcome significant national security and diplomatic concerns if they want to move forward, including pitting the Obama administration against Israel if that ally were opposed to any information about the cyber-operation being revealed in court.
The United States could move forward with the case against Israel’s wishes, but such a move might further harm relations between two countries, which are already frayed because of a disagreement over how best to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
Administration officials also fear that any revelations could complicate the current negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program.
“There are always legitimate national security reasons for not proceeding in one of these cases,” said John L. Martin, who handled many sensitive espionage investigations as a former Justice Department prosecutor.
The case captures the tension between national security concerns and the desire of prosecutors to hold high-ranking officials to account for leaking classified secrets. The Obama administration has been the most aggressive in U.S. history in pursuing those suspected of leaking classified information.
"Hoss". looks to have been pissed for being passed over.
ReplyDelete>>Stuxnet was part of a broader cyber campaign called Olympic Games that was disclosed by the New York Times last year as one of the first major efforts by the United States to use computer code as a destructive weapon against a key adversary.
Cartwright, who helped launch that campaign under President Bush and pushed for its escalation under Obama, was recently informed that he was a “target” of a wide-ranging Justice Department probe into the leak, according to the senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.
Justice Department officials declined to comment on the case, as did Marcia Murphy, a spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland, which is in charge of the investigation.
Neither Cartwright nor his attorney, former White House counsel Greg Craig, responded to requests for comment.
The revelation, which was first reported by NBC News, means that an administration that has already launched more leaks prosecutions than all of its predecessors combined is now focused on one of its own. Since Obama took office, the Justice Department has prosecuted or charged eight people for alleged violations of the Espionage Act.
Cartwright was a regular participant in meetings of top national security officials at the White House and was thought to have significant influence with Obama before being passed over as a possible candidate to become chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.<<
Marine Gen. James E. “Hoss” Cartwright...........now there's a guy with the name of a 'real American' !!
Heading for work.......grrrrr
I see the ratass has been 'working' since about 4:00am this day.
And that Noble Ash has joined Q in calling him a liar.
Have a great day......
Cheer !!
"Hoss" should have kept his mouth shut.
Delete.
DeleteAnd that Noble Ash has joined Q in calling him a liar.
The noble Ash also included you in the same indictment.
You've become laughable - a stooge just like your dopple-ganger bob.
Two of a kind. Two kids playing 'gotcha'.
The difference is that kids usually grow out of it.
.
.
ReplyDeleteThere was no lie, there was sound bite editing.
:o)
Laughable, rat.
lie1
[lahy]
Examples
Word Origin
noun
1.
a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
Synonyms: prevarication, falsification.
Antonyms: truth.
2.
something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture:
His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.
3.
an inaccurate or false statement; a falsehood.
4.
the charge or accusation of telling a lie:
He flung the lie back at his accusers.
verb (used without object), lied, lying.
5.
to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.
Synonyms: prevaricate, fib.
6.
to express what is false; convey a false impression.
verb (used with object), lied, lying.
7.
to bring about or affect by lying (often used reflexively):
(to lie oneself out of a difficulty; accustomed to lying his way out of difficulties.)
There is no denying you lie, rat. That you deny it, another lie. Your rationalization fools no one except possibly yourself. It's hard to pin down the reasons for the rationalization maybe it falls under the examples in 7 in the definition above. It just comes naturally to you, a sad pathology.
.
.
DeleteThe exchange has nothing to do with Semites, nothing to do with anyone but little "O"rdure.
It was an attempt to incite him, using his own words.
I said nothing about Semites, rat. I said you were anti-Semitic. Your comment once again points out the difficulty you have with the English language. And of course you are anti-Semitic. Your body of work here proves it, the constant refrain of inane bullshit you post on Israel and Jews. I don't argue against your legitimate posts here arguing against Israeli government policy or the silly 'facts' presented by the Lobby. In fact, I join in the criticism. However, you constant stream of bullshit on issues not even tangentially related to the subjects under discussion proves, at least to me, your anti-Semitism.
Your other comment that you are merely attempting to incite merely validates my description of you as a master baiter.
.
.
DeleteI used some of his writing, to incite a reaction, but there was no lie.
"O"rdure deals in lies. I dealt in selective editing of his own words.
Neither he, nor the draft dodging Robert "Bank Fraud" Peterson even try to do the same.
They make up false claims, whole clothe, and push on.
The comments illustrate your pathology. You justify using the editing process to lie and think nothing of it. You fool yourself like some addict trying to rationalize his actions, blaming it all on everyone but himself.
Yours is the victim mentality. Hanging on to insults like some five year old, too insecure to laugh them off.
That is not to absolve WiO or Bob. I've criticized them too. To continue to throw out the charges against you when they have no proof and no one else believes it is childish and petty. They mimic you, three puerile dicks who act like 6 year olds in a pissing contest.
Worse, if they actually believe the charges they offer against you, I blame them for their stupidity. Why in the world would they ever believe anything you have to say? In your own words, you prove yourself a liar.
.
.
DeleteCouple of hours, was all it took.
Ridiculous. You forget I went through and extended review of a year's worth of posts when I did the 'Bosco Awards'. It's time consuming. When you are citing posts from back in 2008 as you said you did, it tells me the talk about polo, and planes, and nights spent in Cave Creek are more 'editing for effect', sad reflections of a cut and paste life spent typing away at the keyboard.
.
>>Worse, if they actually believe the charges they offer against you, I blame them for their stupidity. Why in the world would they ever believe anything you have to say? In your own words, you prove yourself a liar.<<
DeleteThis is a good criticism. I have mentioned it myself.
All WiO and I know, and we do now it, is what he said.
There are three people here who know what he said, WiO, myself, and ratass.
And we all agree.
I know he deleted the comments, as he was rationalizing for awhile (I never killed anyone) and then suddenly it became 'prove I said that'.
I recall his change of attitude to the issue very distinctly.
And yes it was I quoted Trish below, Couldn't help myself, before the shower.
She really did say that. rat can go look it up if he wants.
Showered, I am now gone......
Here is a current list of people who say rat is a liar:
WiO
Bob
allen
Quirk
Ash
The Jews and the Gentiles agree.....
Cheers !!
There is something really wrong with you, rat.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete