“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Friday, December 05, 2014

" Nobody in Washington is going to help you." - Dirty Stinking US Cops - The disgusting outrage continues

NYPD Publicly Executes Eric Garner for trying to make a living breaking up packs of cigarettes selling them one at a time to poor people - Don't believe your lying eyes, the cop, as usual, is found not guilty: 


  1. Couldn't happen in a nicer place. Those rioters (and Mr. Garner) thought their savior Obama was gonna make everything better. Chumps one and all.

    But let me ask you, why is this death any different than the poor Mexican pregnant girl lying dead in the Sonoran Desert?

    Why is one front page news and the other isn't?

  2. IInexplicable, but what is your beef with Garner?

  3. Replies
    1. I imagine Garner voted for Obama if he voted. I cannot thing of why he would have voted for Romney or McCain.

      For what it is worth, I value your participation and comments.

  4. The woman dying in the deserts of Arizona, is not being choked to death by thos who took an oath to Serve and Protect the citizenry of the country.

    The death of Mr Garner, a death by commission, the migrant dying in the desert, a death by omission.

    If you cannot see that, you are being purposefully obtuse.

    1. It was a simple question, moron, not an opinion.

    2. Th answer to the question was not obtuse.
      If you cannot see the difference, you are an ignorant fool, looking for any lever for your agitprop.

    3. Oh, that was so hurtful, I'm just devastated, oh my gosh, the pain! I'm an ignorant fool! The resident troll has put yet another poster in his place. Hooray! No wonder only 3 people a day visit this site.

    4. Well, at least you know your place, in the scheme of things ....

    5. If you really think that comment was hurtful, well then, you have confirmed your status.

  5. But, don't worry; they indicted the real evil-doer - the guy that took the video.

  6. Oh, and the policeman was not found Not Guilty.
    There was no trial, there was not enough evidence against the policeman to even support an indictment.

  7. .

    If you cannot see the difference, you are an ignorant fool, looking for any lever for your agitprop.


    This coming from the rat.


    1. Rat remains a figment of your imagination, QuirkFri Dec 05, 09:33:00 AM EST



    2. Stories happen in the mind of a reader, not among symbols printed on a page.

  8. The FBI was too busy to indict even one bankster for 6,000,000 cases of mortgage fraud that led to the last financial crisis. But the FBI found the resources to infiltrate and breakup the Occupy movement. Some crimes cannot be tolerated in the land of the free.


    1. The new era in banking is characterized by a rigorous enforcement of sanctions. As of September 2014, the cumulative litigation costs for EU and U.S. banks since the onset of the financial crisis has reached some $178 billion.

      Most of the costs originated with U.S. regulators' mortgage-related claims, and the remaining litigation costs are divided among claims focused on misselling, violations of U.S. sanctions, improper conduct, market manipulation, tax evasion and misrepresentation. Litigation costs of banks headquartered in the U.S. leapt higher in 2011, driven by mortgage-related claims, which continue to dominate. EU bank costs were kick-started in 2012, beginning with redress payments for misselling payment protection insurance in the UK, followed by market manipulation issues-for example, those related to the London Interbank Offered Rate scandal-as well as improper-conduct litigation, such as anti-money-laundering cases.

      The current wave of litigation cases has not yet been settled, and potential-still hidden-litigation risks are substantial. Meanwhile, regulators have shifted their view toward more unified and sanction-based supervision, adopting regulations with a stronger focus on business conduct.

      All of these developments reflect the persistent character and future burden of litigation-a new cost of doing business.


      Just how many bankers have ended up in prison in the past 6 years?

    2. The Occupy Movement died out of its own accord.

      It was supported by O'bozo.

  9. .

    There was no trial, there was not enough evidence against the policeman to even support an indictment.

    Close but not quite exact.

    There was not enough evidence 'presented' by the prosecutor in a 'manner' that would convince the grand jury to issue an indictment.

    We have no idea what went on in that grand jury. Normally, the prosecutor would be the only one presenting a case not the defense. This raises a lot of questions. Why was the accused officer allowed to speak in his own defense? Why were the other officers involved granted immunity? After all, the coroner classified the death as homicide caused by the choking and the the chest compression. Officer P wasn't the only one involved. What charges were being presented by the prosecution? Seeking a murder charge would have guaranteed no indictment. Negligent homicide? Who knows. Was there medical testimony presented to the grand jury other than the coroner's verdict?

    There are a lot of questions we will not know the answers to unless more transcripts of the proceedings are released.

    There are a lot of things we will not know unless the prosecutor decides to use prosecutorial discretion and take it to trial without a grand jury indictment. [Or, if the FEDS prosecute, which is probably unlikely.]


    1. The Grand Jury did not see enough evidence to indict, there was no trial.
      Blame the DA, or the lack of evidence or any other combination of factors.

      It matters not at all to the core of the matter, the policeman was not found Not Guilty, there was no trial.
      There was no indictment, there was no homicide.

    2. Blame racism, slavery, the banks or Mr Obama.
      It matters not at all.

      What does matter ...
      The policeman was not charged with a crime.
      There was no homicide, no prosecutable crime committed, by the police.

      The "Law" being what it is.
      and homicide being a legal term.

    3. What does matter ...
      The IDF was not charged with a crime.
      There was no homicide, no prosecutable crime committed, by the USA.

      The "Law" being what it is.
      and homicide being a legal term.

    4. There was a homicide, Jack, whether or not the policeman was indicted is irrelevant to that fact.

    5. Ash is correct.

      Even though the guy died on the way to the hospital, and not at the scene.

      He'd be alive, most likely, if there had not been an altercation.

      Ash, d.rat is just a very slow learner.

  10. The NYPD looked like a bunch of thuggish street enforcers from a meth biker gang. The EMS babe, the most incompetent first responder I can recall seeing. The guy was trying to make a living breaking up a pack of cigarettes and selling them piecemeal. It is a common transaction in almost every third world country and in every poor part of most cities. Why were the police even involved and look at those cops. They are a disgrace. If a civilian did the same thing to a cop, everyone around the person would be in jail and we would have a five hundred car parade for the dead cop with pipers whaling on with Amazing Grace.

    This is not an isolated incident. American cops are far worse than they were a generation ago and some of the worse in the civilized world. In these case, they are lesser men than the guy they choked to death on the street. First class bastards.

    1. The NYPD works very closely with the Israeli government.

      Cross training to combat terrorism is everything - and everything is terrorism.

    2. The FAT FUCK of a street criminal was know to the NYPD as the same.

      He died of a HEART ATTACK.

      The FDA under Obama specifically listed the illegality of selling "LOOSIES", it a tax avoidance issue.

      Than Obama.

    3. Jack HawkinsFri Dec 05, 10:05:00 AM EST
      The NYPD works very closely with the Israeli government.

      Cross training to combat terrorism is everything - and everything is terrorism.

      Then why did they not simply double tap the perp? Israeli style?

  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

  12. Deuce ☂Fri Dec 05, 03:08:00 AM EST
    97.6% of the World is stupid. Israel, as always is superior in all possible ways.

    The US political class, the castrado of the Israeli Lobby, supposed to be representing the American Public, a previous victim of an Israeli military assault with conventional weapons, a smaller scale sneak attack similar to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, but proportionately more lethal to the American military victims, which killed and maimed “American Warriors” causing them to become “Dead Warriors” and “Wounded Warriors”, sides with Israel.

    Explain to us about which part of this is farcical, worse than a farce.

    Ah back to the USS Liberty.

    Now Israel is being compared to Japan and it's sneak attack on Pearl Harbor...

    newsflash. The USS Liberty was spying on Israel, in international waters, so close for the crew to heard the shelling of Gaza.

    That is a fact.

    Israel says it was a mistake. Others say it was intentional.

    Either way Israel apologized and pay reparations.

    But one must ask. Why was a US spy ship in the area when all US ships were ordered to be 220 miles away?

    We understand that "friendly fire" has NEVER occurred EVER in the history of warfare so we MUST conclude it was intentional.

    That it BEING intentional, what proof do we have that the IDF KNEW it was an American ship?

    A large flag and some guys waving on the deck?

    is that PROOF?

    No, there is no possibility that nations hostile to Israel would ever try something like subterfuge.

    But what matters not at all to the core of the matter, the IDF was found Not Guilty, there was no trial.
    There was no indictment, there was no homicide.

    1. When one discusses the "Law" as if it were sacrosanct, that is the truth.

      But ... is there a higher law, than man's?

      A higher authority than the government of Israel?
      Some folks think so, some don't.

      That is part of the challenge, when accusing others of 'crimes', not all jurisdictions are the same.
      Not all investigations are equal.
      Not all Courts are unbiased.

      But crime is a legal construct and the law is not without perversity.

      Israel's 'equality under law' doesn't apply to Palestinians
      Israel's pretention to be a country with a just legal system appears ridiculous in the face of the other justice system that applies to juveniles that are not Palestinian.

      Haaretz Editorial

    2. .

      ...there was no homicide.

      Rat, explain the definition of homicide to WiO.


    3. Israel paid $12 million in reparations to the families of the servicemen killed, and to those injured on the Liberty. It paid $6 million to the United States for the damage to the ship but didn’t admit liability in the incident.

    4. Rat remains a figment of your imaginationFri Dec 05, 10:32:00 AM EST

      ... deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder. ...

      "What your government did abroad yesterday, it does at home today."

    5. ... the ever handy Liberty ... Yes, it is sickening.

  13. .

    I haven't really thought about the grand jury system much until the death by cop of the kid in Ohio, the death in Ferguson, and this latest death in NY. What we do know is that other than at the federal level it is very inconsistent throughout the US. Only about half the states use it at all. Many of the requirements and the procedures vary from state to state. Even in a single state it is up to the prosecutor to decide whether he will use it or not. The secrecy of the grand jury is there for a purpose. However, that same secrecy guarantees we know little of what goes on there. There is no way of knowing whether the process is being used to judge the sufficiency of evidence or as an excuse for the prosecutor not to take to trial a case he doesn't really want to take to trial. The latter has been alleged in both the Ferguson and the NY incidents.

    It would be difficult to change the system in a consistent manner; however, I am coming to the belief that in the case of the police or government officials it might require some sort of ombudsman in the process to review the evidence and how it was presented to assure it meets its purpose, or better yet, to assign an independent special prosecutor to the case.


    1. abolish the grand jury system!

    2. Astonishingly, that would be worse. That would allow any prosecutor to go after anyone for anything. That happens already. It would be better to have a professional grand jury half elected and half selected but paid and set some level of education and experience.

    3. A layer of politicians will make the system work better.

      What is infuriating to me is a law that wastes precious time and makes possible the loss of human life over the sale of a single cigarette or some number of single cigarette sales. I notice that the mayor, the Feds, and the media are not demanding a change in that law.

    4. I believe that the US is the only country in the world who has the British Legal system history that has retained the Grand Jury system. It appears there are other ways...

    5. Allen,
      elected judges and prosecutors renders the thing political by definition.

    6. Ash,

      True. I should have added "another".

    7. .

      Astonishingly, that would be worse.

      I disagree.

      That would allow any prosecutor to go after anyone for anything. That happens already.

      I don't see your point. You don't like it because it perpetuates something you say the prosecutors have the power to do right now. Doesn't make any sense to me.

      That would allow any prosecutor...

      A special prosecutor would be assigned to a particular case of police or political malfeasance.

      An ombudsman monitoring the system would act as the people's advocate to assure the system works as originally designed.

      Better to have a professional grand jury half elected and half selected but paid and set some level of education and experience.

      Each state sets its own rules as to how a grand jury is organized and I am sure that the grand jury is paid just as a regular jury is paid. The rest of the proposal to me is impractical.


    8. A grand jury may not be the problem. If the prosecution does not or will not make case that supports indictment, the grand jury cannot render any other finding.

      I do not think it surprising that prosecutors (political animals) have a sorry track record of getting indictments against police officers. They do not want to. Furthermore, the public, which would include grand jurors, are reluctant to criminalize police misconduct.

    9. collective nouns ... Hm ... The jury is out.

  14. The feds should get involved with this and the shit birds in DC that militarized the cops with all the instigated paranoia that goes along with the dual role of cops and firemen double dipping by serving in the National Guard and reserves should rethink the damage that they are doing. Bin Laden and the Saudis really accomplished their mission.

    1. You should be happy then, after all the Palestinians are big time embracers of Bin Laden and received billions from the Saudis..

      your new peeps..


    2. America and the Saudis are attached at the hip, you folks claim that Israel is a vassal of the USA.

      Don't like it?

      Blame the USA

  15. Jack HawkinsFri Dec 05, 09:57:00 AM EST
    The Grand Jury did not see enough evidence to indict, there was no trial.
    Blame the DA, or the lack of evidence or any other combination of factors.

    It matters not at all to the core of the matter, the policeman was not found Not Guilty, there was no trial.
    There was no indictment, there was no homicide.

    That's Jack's line about the folks he killed in central america.

    Those bodies burned and then buried in the jungle will tell no LEGAL tale...

    So Jack is not guilty since those bodies were not discovered with evidence pointing to him..

    1. When you can unearth even a name, a locale or a country where these supposed deaths took place.
      A time, a year or any iota of evidence to support your delusions, bring it forward.
      It would make for an interesting fiction.

    2. Fiction?


      So are you now admitting you are not the war hero "rambo" you told us you were?

      Just another case of stolen valor...

      BTW still can't remember what UNIT you served in?

  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

  17. The Feds have no jurisdiction in the Garner case because there is not a shred of evidence to substantiate racial facticity.

  18. Replies
    1. One day you are out screaming that a chicken is a human; the next your are stuffing your maw at KFC... the world in need of a cause...

  19. These "dead men walking" did not get the memo or do not care. The US hasn't the stomach to kill enough of these guys to change the reality of the situation: IS is not leaving the building.

    IS fighters besiege crucial Syrian air base

    1. U.S. training of Syrian rebels still months away: coalition chief

      For those who have forgotten, it was the massive use of air-power that led to the American victory in Vietnam.

  20. .

    Just watched the additional footage on the Garner incident again. It is obvious that he is unconscious and doesn't appear to be breathing as he lay on the sidewalk for about 5 minutes with no one doing anything. When the tech arrives, she takes her time but eventually takes his pulse. I have yet to hear if he had one. She didn't bother to check his chest or heart with a stethoscope before they threw him on the stretcher and put him in the ambulance.

    At a minimum, everyone involved deserved to be indicted for felony stupidity.


    1. Re: felony stupidity

      I give thanks daily that there is no such law.

    2. They could have tased him, but I suppose that might cause a heart attack too.


      Who knows what to do for sure.

      The incident I thought was terrible was the little six year old kid with a realistic looking plastic pistol on the playground.that got blown away.

      The orange stripe around the barrel had come off......

  21. Re: Garner

    "Tell me what happened when the guy is saying he can't breathe," said Savage. "Did they pull back? Did the jackals pull back? Did the big cop Daniel Pantaleo with the big muscular tattooed arms, did he release his chokehold?"

    Instead, said Savage, "another low-life schmuck jumped on the guy and ground his face into the pavement while he was almost half dead."

    Michael Savage: Garner Chokehold 'Was Murder'


  22. Don't get down on me, I'm just playing he Devil's Advocate -

    11 Facts About the Eric Garner Case the Media Won’t Tell You
    December 5, 2014 by Jim Meyers 118 Comments

    Print This Post Print This Post

    garReprinted from

    Sources in the mainstream media expressed outrage after a grand jury declined to indict a New York City policeman in the death of Eric Garner, but there are 11 significant facts that many of them have chosen to overlook:

    1. There is no doubt that Garner was resisting an arrest for illegally selling untaxed cigarettes. Former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik put it succinctly: “You cannot resist arrest. If Eric Garner did not resist arrest, the outcome of this case would have been very different,” he told Newsmax. “He wouldn’t be dead today.

    “Regardless of what the arrest was for, the officers don’t have the ability to say, ‘Well, this is a minor arrest, so we’re just going to ignore you.’”

    2. The video of the July 17 incident clearly shows Garner, an African-American, swatting away the arms of a white officer seeking to take him into custody, telling him: “Don’t touch me!”

    3. Garner, 43, had history of more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny.

    4. At the time of his death, Garner was out on bail after being charged with illegally selling cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession and false impersonation.

    5. The chokehold that Patrolman Daniel Pantaleo put on Garner was reported to have contributed to his death. But Garner, who was 6-foot-3 and weighed 350 pounds, suffered from a number of health problems, including heart disease, severe asthma, diabetes, obesity, and sleep apnea. Pantaleo’s attorney and police union officials argued that Garner’s poor health was the main cause of his death.

    6. Garner did not die at the scene of the confrontation. He suffered cardiac arrest in the ambulance taking him to the hospital and was pronounced dead about an hour later.

    7. Much has been made of the fact that the use of chokeholds by police is prohibited in New York City. But officers reportedly still use them. Between 2009 and mid-2014, the Civilian Complaint Review Board received 1,128 chokehold allegations.

    Patrick Lynch, president of the New York City Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, said: “It was clear that the officer’s intention was to do nothing more than take Mr. Garner into custody as instructed, and that he used the takedown technique that he learned in the academy when Mr. Garner refused.”

    8. The grand jury began hearing the case on Sept. 29 and did not reach a decision until Wednesday, so there is much testimony that was presented that has not been made public.

    9. The 23-member grand jury included nine non-white jurors.

    10. In order to find Officer Pantaleo criminally negligent, the grand jury would have had to determine that he knew there was a “substantial risk” that Garner would have died due to the takedown.

    11. Less than a month after Garner’s death, Ramsey Orta, who shot the much-viewed videotape of the encounter, was indicted on weapons charges. Police alleged that Orta had slipped a .25-caliber handgun into a teenage accomplice’s waistband outside a New York hotel.

    Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

    Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

    1. 10. In order to find Officer Pantaleo criminally negligent, the grand jury would have had to determine that he knew there was a “substantial risk” that Garner would have died due to the takedown.


      This is not meant personally, but if it is against the regs to use this hold because of its danger, then, the officer knew he was placing the victim at risk, even under the best of circumstances. That said, I appreciate that physical combat can get rapidly out of hand. Nevertheless, just as the officer had no grounds for shooting Mr. Garner, he had no good cause for placing his life at risk with a chokehold.

  23. Good jobs report, but then it is the Holiday Season.

    1. On the other hand -

      92,447,000 Americans Not Working...
      Labor Force Participation Remains at 36-Year Low...
      11,918,000 Have Dropped Out Since Obama...
      Media Cheers 321,000 New Jobs...............drudge

  24. Jack HawkinsFri Dec 05, 10:05:00 AM EST

    The NYPD works very closely with the Israeli government.


    Heh, wouldn't we know it, folks.

    The Jews responsible.


    Jack's a dumb ass.

    1. Bob,

      The NYPD has been trained by Mossad.

      Not a sparrow shall fall without a Jew being somehow at fault.

      At some point, Jews quit paying attention, at least in Israel. That is why a conservative government will be formed in March, whatever role, if any, Netanyahu plays in it. The Obama administration will impose sanctions. See how that works out.

    2. I've been reading it will probably result in a more conservative government, too.

    3. The Jews of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are not the Jews of NY and LA. The Jews of Israel are not going to leave and they are not going to die quietly. Watch Netanyahu's speech given upon the occasion of Lt. Col. John Henry Patterson's ashes being buried in Israel. It can be readily retrieved from YouTube. Whether you like him or not, Netanyahu captures the spirit of the Israeli Jew, the sabra, in this eulogy.

    4. IF Obama invokes sanctions on Israel for construction?

      Israel should formally declare Oslo dead, recognize the State of Palestine in the lands that the State of Palestine CONTROL and unilaterally annex any and all specific lands it chooses to keep, then it should del ace that any and all rockets, bombings, shootings, stabbings or any acts of violence coming from the newly recognized state of Palestine are considered to be a declaration of war.

      If the Nation of Palestine sends out students to protest, mentally retarded suicide bombers or anything, Israel will respond by attacking and driving Palestine national borders back to a more manageable place. Any and all palestinian residents of said areas will be expelled back into the new state of Palestine.


  25. The English are using professional juries in some cases now, but I don't know if it is in criminal cases or just complex civil cases.

    There are points to be made on each side of the Grand Jury issue.

    We don't use them at the state level here anymore that I know of........what you get is a preliminary hearing and the judge decides if there is enough evidence to bind the person over to a formal trial.

    And I have seen cases where the judge lets the person walk, though it is rare.

  26. December 4, 2014
    Reducing the Republic to Political Ruins
    By Michael L. Grable

    Here's the one Ferguson video that sort of says it all:

    We've run up an $18-trillion national debt to feed, house, clothe, and recreate generations of these "unarmed teenagers" so they may have the time, energy, and deconstructed culture to do this whenever one of their thug brothers tries to shoot a police officer with his own pistol while he's patrolling in his police cruiser trying to maintain public order in a state-subsidized urban murder jungle?

    And these "unarmed teenagers" will be enfranchised with a command of the nation's political future fully equal to the votes of the productive and law-abiding citizens upon whom they prey?

    A political future that will eventually include 20-30 million equally enfranchised scofflaw peons from failed Latin American nations, whose votes will cancel those of an ever diminishing pool of overtaxed birthright nationals?

    And the keepers of the culture continue assuring them all they're the blameless victims of an unearned "white privilege" whose only salvation is worshiping the golden calves of diversity, multiculturalism, and social justice?

    Someone once said insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.

    If reducing the American Republic to political ruins isn't an act of national insanity, then it can only be the act of a historically criminal governing class.

    Perhaps, perversely, extreme affluence is as great a cause of one species of ignorance as profound poverty is of another – a prospect we now seem culturally destined to discover.

    At any rate, a prodigal America seems hell-bent on squandering the political heritage of its founders.

    Our children and grandchildren will surely rue our folly.

    1. Both the 1% and the thugs believe that their finite realities are the norm. Nothing in European or American history suggests this is the case.

      Look to the French for historic parallels. The French Revolution took care of the French 1%. The Paris Commune et al took care of radical misfits. Somewhere on the internet you can find photos taken of the "revolutionaries" of the Commune propped up neatly in their wooden coffins -- buried in the condition in which they fell to the forces of the norm.

      When I hear fools calling for a race war, I laugh. They have failed, obviously, to check the demographics of the military and firearms ownership. For several years, now, the best selling firearm has been the AR frame. There is a reason for that.

      Whether the US has reached the point of no return I do not know. Viscerally, I feel that is the case.

    2. To the extent that a grand jury is not an effective means of determining the fate of a police officer, I follow Quirk's lead. Some other system needs to be implemented to prevent a perversion of common sense and law. Just as all blacks are not bad, all police officers are not good.

  27. This is not a white against black argument, it is about cops against all of us. This has been brewing for some time, but it is a problem, a big problem and we have to slap it down.

  28. allenFri Dec 05, 02:24:00 PM EST
    The Jews of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are not the Jews of NY and LA. The Jews of Israel are not going to leave and they are not going to die quietly.

    Nor will selected Jews of Atlanta or Ohio....

    1. Allen one of the reasons I love this site?

      Watching those that hate us simply melt down on a daily basis over things that Jews or Israelis do that they ignore (or doesn't register) around them.

      It's amazing how Israel, which I know I have pointed out at least 2 times, sits on 1/900th of the arab occupied middle east.

      A fact never rebutted or proven inaccurate. There may be a slight mathematical error however if you look at the map of the arab occupied middle east and Israel the point is made.

      The Israel - Arab conflict has been going on (in modern times) since the late 1800's

      The energy those that hate Jews and Israel put to ending it is amazing and it's staggers the mind how much better the "Palestinians" would or could have been if some of the energy to destroy Jews and Israel were simply put to BUILD up their own lands..

      Not once has Rat or Deuce or anyone else from that "camp" spoken of the good things that the Arab world is doing to better mankind... Not once.

      It's always the evil Israelis, the zionist swine, the Jews... All negative all the time.

      Maybe there is a positive side to all of this...

      israel IS.

      Israel is growing, it's people are vibrant, alive, love life and cherish all sorts of people.

      From Druze to Christian, B'Hai to Russian Jew all have flourished in Israel. And yes, even the 20% ARAB!!!! HUSH you say!!!

      Yes Arabs of Israel are the freest arabs in the world and if it was so horrible? Why would any arab that lives in 1/900th of the arab controlled middle east not simply take a taxi to the Allenby crossing and liberate themselves from living under Jews?

      Don't hit your ass on the way out Achmed,,,, Oh what you say? They DONT WANT TO LEAVE?????

      The schools, universities, the medical care, the jobs, the food,the technology?


      For all the bitching about how evil and bad Israel is? people are DYING to get there

      can't say that about any other of the 899/900th of the middle east...

      So watching Deuce and Rat and others attempt to smash, slander and bash Israel?

      reminds me of grapes being thrown at a stone wall...

      Jews have been in the homeland for 3000 plus years, whether others like it or not?

      We are there (and here) and we will not take their shit anymore...

  29. Another party bears some responsibility in Garner's death - an out-of-control nanny-state government attempting to enforce a prohibition on the sale of untaxed cigarettes.

    "For someone to die over breaking that law, there really is no excuse for it," Kentucky Senator Paul said on MSNBC Wednesday night. "But I do blame the politicians. We put our police in a difficult situation with bad laws."

    Reason magazine's A Barton Hinkle explains how New York's high state and city cigarette taxes - totalling $5.95 a pack - have created a thriving black market on the city's streets.

    "A pack of smokes in New York City costs $14 or more," he writes. "That creates a powerful incentive to smuggle smokes in from states such as Virginia, where you can buy a pack for a third of that price. Fill a Ford Econoline van with a few hundred cartons, and you can make a nice five-figure profit in a weekend. Some people do."

    It was participation in this underground economy that brought Garner to police attention and, according to Mr Paul's logic, ultimately led to his death.

    Politicians passed the taxes, he said, and politicians told police: "Hey, we want you arresting people for selling loose cigarettes."

    Mr Paul isn't alone in these views, either.

    "We have a poor guy who died because of a tax collection issue," conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show.

    Governments condemn cigarette use on one hand while relying on cigarette taxes to fund their operations, Mr Limbaugh and others contend.

    “Garner died because he dared interfere with government reach and government muscle that didn't want to lose tax revenue to independent operators," Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass writes.


  30. $14 Dollars ??!!!!!

    I could make a good living running smokes from the Nez Perce Indian Reservation, dropping them off to Quirk The SuperCigaretteSalesMan, and splitting the profits with him !

    1. $5.00/pack out here where some sanity still prevails.

      By the way, I think this ordinance against selling you own cigarettes ought to be declared unconstitutional by some court.

    2. The smokes have already been taxed once have they not ? which ought to be enough.

  31. Numbers Game

    ISIS Fighters Are Killing Faster than Statisticians Can Count
    The jihadists’ advance has prompted a murder spree so massive that some groups have stopped publishing their death counts for fear of misleading the public.

    ERBIL, Iraq — In any war, it’s the wanton acts of barbarism that grab the headlines and reel in the news teams. But when it comes to showcasing the true measure of a conflict’s horror, there are few statistics starker than a sky-high civilian death toll.

    In Iraq, where hostilities have raged in fits and starts for over a decade since the US-led invasion of 2003, non-combatants have been particularly hard hit by the violence. Many were caught up in the “Shock and Awe” aerial campaign that marked the beginning of the war, some succumbed to disease as the country’s infrastructure collapsed, and still others died in the brutal bouts of tribal in-fighting that marred the years following the toppling of Saddam Hussein.

    Through it all, an eclectic band of organizations, ranging from a multinational team of anti-war activists to the UN’s local office, maintained scrupulous records of the dead. They logged every incident and released depressing day-by-day accounts of the carnage.

    The emergence of the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL) jihadist group has, however, plunged Iraq into a period of turbulence so debilitating that, for the first time, these death counts can no longer keep up with the killing........................

    President O'bozo certainly opened the Gates of Hell when he brought the troops home too soon.

    Romney would not have made this mega-mistake.

  32. By the way, I was pleased beyond measure to see Quirk thinking politically the other day.

    He always says 'they're all dicks'.

    Yet he has so soured on ObamaCare that he is thinking of - hold your breath - voting for a Republican for President.

    They may all be dicks in a way, but there was no Republican that voted for ObamaCare.

    So not all dicks are equal.

    One doesn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    Good thinking there, Quirk.

  33. The picture of Hillary on Drudge right now makes one think of a fat nut stuffed chipmunk.

    1. A chipmunk that has lost its mind -

      December 5, 2014
      MSM blackout on Hillary's 'empathize' with our enemies remark
      By Thomas Lifson

      You can tell how damaging the remarks made by Hillary Clinton at Georgetown University Wednesday are by the total blackout they have received from the mainstream media. Here is Google’s listing of the keywords "Hillary+empathize" revealing that only conservative media have found her doctrine newsworthy.

      The former secretary of state, reading from notes (this was no slip of the tongue), expressed some thoughts that will not go down well with the electorate when they consider who ought to be the next commander in chief. The video is embedded below, and Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard provides a summary:

      "This is what we call smart power," Clinton said to a small audience at Georgetown. "Using every possible tool and partner to advance peace and security. Leaving no one on the sidelines. Showing respect even for one's enemies. Trying to understand, in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view. Helping to define the problems, determine the solutions. That is what we believe in the 21st century will change -- change the prospects for peace."

      I think Mrs. Clinton was trying to do some damage control on the standing joke that "smart diplomacy" has become in the wake of the chaos sown by her tenure as SecState. She was at Georgetown, home of th School of Foreign Srvice, after all, attempting to add some sophistication. But this is an amazingly tin-eared thing to say, and it ought to discredit her as a politician, much less a diplomat. It is a vulgarization of some useful advice on how to deal with adversaries, getting inside their heads, avoiding underestimation, and other commonsensical notions about fighting smart. But the blanket way she went about this, in effect calling on us to respect and empathize with the beheaders of ISIS and the kidnappers of Boko Haram, is just plain clumsy.

      I have to wonder if the medical problems Mrs. Clinton suffered earlier have affected her mind. Seriously, I don’t mean this as a slam; I am at a loss to understand how she could have come to the conclusion that it would be a good thing to say something like this in a very public forum.

      The MSM can bury this all they like. It won’t go away, and it will be available for any GOP opponent, or even for a Democrat primary opponent (Jim Webb comes to mind). Imagine the clips of this cut with images of beheadings.

    2. Update: Carol Brown adds:

      If only we could go back in time and offer our respect, our understanding, and our empathy to Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and all the rest, things could have turned out differently. Oh what fools we were to label any of them as enemies or as evil. And how outrageous that we dared put up a fight.

      But that’s all in the past.

      Now it’s the 21st century and we have a chance to finally get it right by using “smart power.” The time has come when we can take the culmination of decades of brainwashing, politically correct thinking, multiculturalism, moral equivalence, and even common core math (because, hey, even 2 plus 2 doesn’t have to equal 4 anymore as long as you can explain your answer) and apply it to foreign policy. Or anything else, for that matter. Now we can, and apparently should, indulge evil in the world. According to progressives, from there all good things will flow.

      Sadly, the view Clinton expressed has become deeply rooted in our society. The sickness that is The Left has taken hold and is evident just about everywhere, in big ways a small – all cut from the same cloth of sheer madness. Here are a few examples that echo Clinton’s sentiments:

      Georgetown University law professor Paul Butler claimed Officer Wilson only saw Michael Brown as a threat and failed to see him as a human being. Ah! So there you go. One must understand and respect their assailant because that would truly be “smart power.”

      Read more:
      Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    3. Hillary is not going to be President.

      When you've lost Quirk, you've lost the whole ball game.

  34. December 5, 2014
    Sweden's left-wing government collapses over immigration policy
    By Thomas Lifson

    The left-of-center government of Prime Minister Stefan Lofven has been forced to call new elections less than three months after taking office. Unable to pass a budget through the Rikstag (parliament), Lofven faced a choice of either resigning or calling snap elections, slated for March 22, 2015. Although the budget was the trigger, most observers believe that immigration policy is at the root of the fall. David Crouch of the U.K. Guardian explains:

    Sweden’s far right plunged the country into unprecedented political upheaval on Wednesday by forcing the government to gamble on fresh elections in the spring after the centre-left coalition failed to push through its budget.

    The anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats, the country’s third largest party with 13% of the vote, portrayed the new elections in March as “a de facto referendum” on immigration, currently at near-record highs as refugees flee conflict in Syria, Iraq and Somalia.

    “We will focus entirely on the issue,” said Mattias Karlsson, the Sweden Democrats’ parliamentary group leader.

    The far right forced the crisis to a head when they broke with established tradition and voted with the centre-right opposition instead of abstaining after their own budget proposal had fallen, ensuring the government’s defeat on this key legislation. In bitter remarks aimed at the centre-right, who had refused to compromise, prime minister Stefan Löfven admitted the Sweden Democrats now had a veto over Swedish politics, leaving him no choice but to call elections just six months after the country went to the polls in September.

    Lofven, who earlier decided to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state, has pushed a left-wing agenda.

    The Sweden Democrats are a rising force in Swedish politics, having picked up 29 seats in elections earlier this year, for a total of 49 seats in the 349-seat Rikstag, making the party the third-largest of the eight in the body. Immigration has been a polarizing issue in Sweden, once ethnically homogeneous, peaceful, and prosperous, but now hosting a substantial Muslim minority that accounts for a disproportionate share of crime. The southern city of Malmö is estimated to have a 25% Muslim population and has seen such horrendous anti-Semitic crime that Jews have been fleeing, and police stay out of certain neighborhoods considered no-go Sharia zones.

    Recently, the flood of refugees from Syria and Iraq has intensified the immigration pressure on Sweden.

    Al Jazeera quotes several Swedish pundits:

    Political scientist Marie Demker wrote on Twitter: "This has never happened in my lifetime. We live in a strange time. Sweden is a new country."

    Lena Mellin of tabloid Aftonbladet wrote in a column that Sweden has not faced political chaos of this dimension earlier - at least not in modern times.

    "Stefan Lofven is playing a very risky game, you can almost compare it to Russian roulette," she wrote, stressing that the outcome of the early election is impossible to predict.

    1. She had previously predicted that Lofven rather than calling for early elections would seek to form a new government by getting rid of its coalition partner, the Green Party - a move that could have made deals with the opposition easier.

      Next March could be a pivotal moment for Sweden. We can expect a lot of demonization of the Sweden Democrats, something that has been common ever since the party was born:

      Eric Erfors of tabloid Expressen, who wrote that "bullying of SD" had paved the way for early elections.

      He argued that the party’s decision to trigger a parliamentary crisis by supporting the opposition budget was probably caused by a desire to "teach the established parties a lesson".

      "When SD were elected into parliament in 2010 the party was treated like something the cat had dragged in," Erfors wrote, mentioning that the Left Party protested over having to share a corridor in the parliament building with SD and that the possibility of shrinking committees to block the party from all practical assembly work was discussed.

      "Such an anti-democratic attitude laid the foundation for revenge in SD."

      We’ll be keeping our eyes on Sweden.

      Hat tip: Breitbart

      Read more:
      Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

      Good. Swedish women are tired of being raped by moslems.

      And most Swedes don't give a damn about a Palestinian 'state'.

  35. There you have it.

    Le us ignore the Israeli connection to the militarization of the civilian police in the US, because it is not politically correct to discuss Israel in anything but glowing terms.

    As to what unit of the US Army I served in, it is none of your business.
    If you want to think I did not serve, then the claims that Jack Hawkins, desert rat or any other character is a 'war criminal' are absurd.
    If you wish to claim that US military personnel committed 'war crimes', then document those claims, substantiate those claims.
    Provide a reference to those claims.

    But, once again, that will not occur.
    Though claims that Israel precipitated the genocide in Guatemala, easy to quantify, there are Israelis who were there, and who have documented their experiences. There is testimony in Guatemalan courts which substantiate Israeli involvement as do the quotes of Rios Mont, himself.

    As has been said before ...

    "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts.
    If you have the law on your side, pound the law.
    If you have neither on your side, pound the table."

    Our little "O"rdure, he continues to pound sand.

  36. You do yourself well with this type of post. With a high degree of confidence, I can tell who was in the military and who was not by what they say, how they say it and what they don’t say. I am hardly unique. Anyone who was actually in the military has the same ability. Rufus nailed Allen with it and everyone saw it. Wio demanding to know your unit name is amusing. However everyone is bored with your feud with him.

    As the Israeli complicity in Central America, it was a dutiful side show to the US role, and I doubt that the Saudis, the Japanese, the Israelis and the Taiwanese would have been there without the US goading them into it. The Israelis were there, but their role was modest.

    1. d. rat bragged about leading a hit squad in Central America.

      I have no idea if he did, or not, but he said he did.

      I have no idea if he every had any cattle. He said he did, then they were gone.

      He has said he works in publishing, but I don't know if he does. He spends so much time here I don't see how he could get much done.

      I think he is totally full of shit. He was spot on when he said he was a professional asshole though.

    2. It Costa Rica and Nicoland, the Israeli influence was next to none.
      In El Salvador, they headed the death squads for General Adolfo Blandón under the direct control of Roberto d'Aubuisson.

      In Guatemala, the Iraeli wre an integral part of Rios Mont's coup de etat, and the organization of his military. Rios Mont having subsequently been convicted of genocide, in a Guatemalan court.

      As for Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, he is correct, he has no ideas.

    3. The feud with "O"rdure is quite one-sided.
      He continues to disparage Jack Hawkins, with accusations of war crimes and murder. Drug dealing and bestiality.

      He is answered with quotes from the Talmud, news and archived stories from the JPost and Haaretz.
      With the history of Israel.

      Chances are that if he ended the deluded accusations, the Talmud would no longer be mentioned, although the JPost and Haaretz would still be referenced.

    4. Yup, a self admitted asshole.

      Yup, a self admitted moron.

      Yup, a self admitted war criminal.

      Yup, d. rat aka Jackshit Hawkins is a piece of living human excrement.

  37. December 6, 2014
    First Job for the Zumwalt Coming Up
    By David Archibald

    The pace of island-building in China’s so-called “Blue Territories” is frenetic. Janes has reported that the island at Fiery Cross Reef is now 3,000 metres long. There are five dredges going at once to dig out the harbour and provide material for the island-building. So Fiery Cross Reef will be the site of an airfield which can enforce an ADIZ over the southern end of China’s claim to the South China Sea. Page 248 of the recent Report to Congress of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has the following map of current Chinese base-building in the South China Sea:

    But what are the other islands being dredged into existence for, and why those particular islands? The answer is provided by the base the Chinese built on Subi Reef. It has a large, elevated radome, probably hosting a surface wave radar. These radars can see around the curvature of the earth and are good for up to 200 km, as per this graphic:

    The radars will provide early warning of cruise missiles and stealth aircraft. The Chinese would have tested the utility of this radar type on Subi Reef. No doubt each of the islands being built will have them as well, along with HQ-9 medium to long range surface-to-air missiles as well as point defence surface-to-air missiles. The HQ-9 has a range of 200 km.

    That explains the choice of reefs being converted to islands. China is building a defensive box around the new airfield at Fiery Cross Reef approximately 600 km long and 500 km wide. The reefs chosen for conversion provide overlap in the system.

    The U.S. Navy has long declared right of passage with respect to the South China Sea. Once China declares an ADIZ over the South China Sea and ships and aircraft crossing the area have to ask China’s permission to do so, a test of wills might become a trial by battle. U.S. practice has been to begin by firing off a volley of cruise missiles at a cost of $1.6 million each. Most of these might be batted down by the cheaper HQ-9 missiles.

    1. If enough cruise missiles get through to knock out the Chinese surface wave radars, then other combatants can approach. The most suitable of these would be the USS Zumwalt, a DDG-1000 destroyer launched in late 2013. This class of vessel is optimised on shore bombardment with two 155 mm guns that can hit targets up to 116 km away. The Zumwalt has a store of 900 rounds of long-range projectiles for her 155 mm guns. Using these will be much cheaper than bombardment by cruise missile.

      The Chinese plan to scrape the Filipinos, the Vietnamese and the Malaysians off their bases in the South China Sea. For a dark future to be avoided, the Chinese will have to be scraped off their artificial islands instead. It would be a good idea to start building the war stocks to achieve that and not waste cruise missiles and JDAMs on fighting ISIS. Another good idea would be to inspect and upgrade airfields on Palawan Island in the Philippines, 400 km east of the future war zone. The strip at Bugsuk Island, at the southern end of Palawan, will be particularly useful (if it is sealed).

      Anyone who doubts the necessity for making plans for war in the South China Sea should read the views of William Reinsch, one of the commissioners, in the Report to Congress. On page 556 he says:

      I have always been an optimist about the relationship, but that view is becoming increasingly untenable, as China asserts itself in ways that are inevitably going to bump up against our interests in the region and in multilateral fora. It is common knowledge that there is no shortage of people in each country who believe the other is an existential threat, and I have thought for some time the fundamental policy goal for each country should be to keep those people out of power. I have not changed my view about that, but it does not appear to be happening in China, which will only make it harder to prevent it from happening here.

      On page 557 he says:

      Finally, close readers of this year’s report will notice that it is less nuanced and less temperate with respect to China’s military activities. That is deliberate, and while it is not my style, I did not object to it. It appears the Chinese have embarked on a path intended to push the U.S. to choose between confronting them militarily or abandoning our friends and allies in the region, gambling that we will choose the latter. That is a dangerous path, and the Commission is right to note it.

      The sadness in Commissioner Reinsch’s tone is apparent. China has chosen the path to war. Much blood and treasure will be lost pointlessly. As the Chinese have chosen this path of their volition, nothing can be done about it. Putting it off will only make the outcome worse in terms of scale and cost and blood.

      David Archibald, a visiting fellow at the Institute of World Politics in Washington, D.C., is the author of Twilight of Abundance (Regnery, 2014).

      Read more:
      Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    2. The name of that stretch of ocean, not in dispute ...

      It is the South China Sea

      No where is the United States mentioned, nor is America part of the nomenclature used to describe the ...
      ... South China Sea

    3. That's what it is called.

      The United States is between the Pacific and the Atlantic, not the American Sea.

      God damn you are a dumb fuck.

    4. Say what, "Draft Dodger" Peterson?

      What is the US doing, challenging a Chinese presence, in the South China Sea?

    5. What is the difference between challenging the Chinese, in the South China Sea and challenging the Vietnamese in Vietnam?

      Why did you not support the US in its military campaign in Vietnam, but think US soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines should fight China in the South China Sea?

    6. While, if your advise was followed, the US would be simultaneously invading Iraq.
      Bombing Iran and reinforcing our military position in Afghanistan.

      When did the "Draft Dodger" transform into a "War Monger"?
      Was it when Robert Peterson was no longer applicable to be one of the combatants, because we all know that when you were on the list, you did all you could do, to dodge the responsibilities of citizenship.

    7. When did he say we should fight in the South China Sea?

      He merely posted the article concerning the issue.

      You are a dumb fuck and can't read.

      You put words in the mouths of others.

      And deny your own.

      What a low life slum bucket you are, Jack Hawkins.

  38. I think Archibald is out of his wretched mind and the visiting fellow would be wise to visit a psychiatrist.

    I will be leaving for Berlin tomorrow and spend most of the next week in Estonia and Poland. Posts may be a little light. All depends.

  39. GOP lawmakers highly critical of Petraeus’ Benghazi explanation, testimony shows

    Newly declassified testimony shows at least five Republican lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee suggested former CIA Director David Petraeus provided bad information, or even misled them, after the 2012 Benghazi attack when he blamed an obscure Internet video and downplayed the significance of mortar attacks that night.

    The testimony comes from a Nov. 15, 2012, closed, classified session. The committee heard testimony from the nation's most senior intelligence officer, James Clapper; then-head of the National Counterterrorism Center Matt Olsen; Under Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy; and then-acting CIA Director Michael Morell, who stepped in after Petraeus resigned, citing an extramarital affair.

    The testimony shows lawmakers, including the chairman, recalling how Petraeus stressed protests over an anti-Islam video as the impetus -- an explanation that would later unravel -- while brushing off concerns that mortar attacks indicated a planned terror attack.


  40. About 150 people marched peacefully to Phoenix police headquarters Thursday night to memorialize and protest the fatal shooting of 34-year-old Rumain Brisbon earlier this week by a police officer.

    The protesters focused on similarities to cases that have sparked outrage and activism nationwide: Like Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., and Eric Garner in New York, Mr. Brisbon was black and unarmed, and the officer responsible for his death was white.

    To the police – and to Brisbon’s mother – the case was not racially motivated. But the picture police paint of him is starkly different from the one his family and attorney put forward. Some witnesses have emerged with testimony contradictory to the police version of what happened during the Tuesday evening incident that left him dead.
    Recommended: Infographic Race equality in America: How far have we come?

    In one version, Brisbon was a suspected drug dealer who fled and then got into a struggle with the officer, who thought Brisbon had his hand on a gun in his pocket. In the other version, he was a loving father innocently delivering fast food to his children.
    Infographic Race equality in America: How far have we come?
    Photos of the Day Photos of the day 12/05

    Such different perceptions play into so much of the contact that minorities have with police that the demand for change has reached a sort of critical mass and will likely endure, says Tracie Keesee, a veteran police officer and co-founder of the Center for Policing Equity at the University of California in Los Angeles, which helps police apply social science research to improving their work.

    “Nationally, there is exhaustion with this type of event,” Ms. Keesee says. “The community is saying, ‘We get your job is dangerous … but are you doing everything in your authority to make sure you don’t exacerbate the situation?.... When engaging communities of color are you doing it objectively?”

  41. .

    As Michael Baden, a former chief medical examiner of New York City, told The Times: “Obese people especially, lying face down, prone, are unable to breathe when enough pressure is put on their back. The pressure prevents the diaphragm from going up and down, and he can’t inhale and exhale.”

    Which is exactly what Mr. Garner was trying to tell the officers who were on top of him.

    Mr. Garner’s death recalls a similar tragedy involving a less familiar name: Robert Ethan Saylor, a 26-year-old man with Down syndrome who was killed last year in a struggle with three off-duty county sheriff’s deputies at a movie theater in Frederick County, Md. Mr. Saylor was overweight. The officers who killed him were just as inept as Officer Pantaleo and his gang, though with one key difference: When they realized that Mr. Saylor was in distress, they tried to save him. Still, their efforts came too late, because mere moments in a facedown arrest can be deadly.

    First, Officer Pantaleo should be seen for what he is. This man is an overly aggressive, abusive thug, rather than a police officer. The...
    casual observer

    Garner killing must lead to major changes in policy, particularly in the use of “broken windows” policing — a strategy in which Officer Pantaleo specialized, according to a report in September by WNYC, which found that he had made hundreds of arrests since joining the force in 2007, leading to at least 259 criminal cases, all but a fraction of those involving petty offenses. The department must find a better way to keep communities safe than aggressively hounding the sellers of loose cigarettes.

    And while defenders of the police like to point to thousands of nonfatal misdemeanor arrests as evidence that officers are acting in a way that is reasonable and safe, there can never be a justification for any lethal assault on an unarmed man, no justification for brutality.

    The outrage in New York, echoed by anguished protesters in Ferguson, Mo., and in Cleveland, where the Justice Department has found a pattern of excessive force by the police, is based on a genuine fear of aggressive, abusive cops.

    The results of such abuse can be seen in the final, quiet minutes of the horrifying video of the Garner assault. This is well after the chokehold, when Mr. Garner lies on the ground as officers and paramedics — who were later disciplined for their behavior — ignore him and bystanders ask: Why is no one giving him CPR?


  42. A man who police say was carrying a knife has died after being shot by law enforcers in Hollywood, Los Angeles. He was taken to hospital but, did not recover from his injuries. A witness who took a video of the incident says the man was unarmed.

    Police say they were responding to a report of an assault with a deadly weapon on Friday night. On arrival they were met with an “armed man,” CBS Los Angeles reported. According to Detective Meghan Aguilar, the man was carrying a knife.

    “When he saw the officers, he approached them and an officer involved shooting occurred,” ABC News reported Aguilar as saying.

    A witness speaking to Eyewitness News that she heard officers with guns drawn yelling, “He’s still got a knife.”

    The suspect was critically injured and taken to hospital but later died from his injuries, a Los Angeles Police Department spokesman said.

    Police say they found a combination knife, similar to a Swiss Army Knife, at the scene.

  43. FBI Can't Deny Investigating Michael Hastings Before Crash

    “We’re getting slammed with inquiries regarding what appear to be conspiracy theories surrounding Michael Hastings car crash.”

  44. Mexico City's police chief, Jesus Rodriguez Almeida, has resigned after strong criticism of his handling of protests in the city.

    A largely peaceful march on 20 November over the disappearances of 43 students in Guerrero state ended with riot police dispersing the crowd.

    Mr Rodriquez gave no reason for his departure and the city mayor said he had stepped down immediately.
    Earlier this week President Pena Nieto announced new justice and police plans.

    After the 20 November protest, Mr Rodriquez Almeida said he had "congratulated his personnel for their work," in particular for "restoring public order, no matter whether others like it or not".

    Lawyers for 11 people who were arrested on the day called for his resignation.
    They said the protestors were arrested with no proof of criminal action and arbitrarily taken to a high security prison.

    They were freed a week later due to a lack of evidence provoking accusations of abusive police practices.
    Human rights groups also accused the police of indiscriminate violence during the protest against activists, journalists and bystanders.

  45. .

    Eric Garner and the Legal Rules That Enable Police Violence

    ERIC GARNER was not the first American to be choked by the police, and he will not be the last, thanks to legal rules that prevent victims of police violence from asking federal courts to help stop deadly practices.

    The 1983 case City of Los Angeles v. Lyons vividly illustrates the problem. That case also involved an African-American man choked by the police without provocation after he was stopped for a minor offense — a burned-out taillight. Unlike Mr. Garner, Adolph Lyons survived the chokehold. He then filed a federal lawsuit, asking the city to compensate him for his injuries. But he wanted more than just money. He also asked the court to prevent the Los Angeles Police Department from using chokeholds in the future. The trial court ordered the L.A.P.D. to stop using chokeholds unless an officer was threatened with death or serious injury, and to institute better training, reporting and record-keeping.

    The Supreme Court overturned this order by one vote. The court explained that Mr. Lyons would have needed to prove that he personally was likely to be choked again in order for his lawsuit to be a vehicle for systemic reform. Without that, he could win compensation only for past injuries.

    This is the legal standard when a plaintiff asks a federal court for an injunction — or a forward-looking legal order — in order to stop illegal practices that could harm him in the future. It makes some sense in the abstract: If someone can’t show he will be harmed in the future, why should a court try to prevent the harm? But even though Mr. Lyons couldn’t prove that the L.A.P.D. would choke him again, he could be confident that the police would eventually choke someone else. When the stakes are this deadly, federal courts should step in.


  46. .

    John Kerry suggests the Diane Feinstein consider ISIS, and hostages, and other foreign policy issues when deciding on the timing for releasing the summary report on past US torture policies. The report was expected to be released next week.

    Kerry says it is of course Feinstein's decision and he is not trying to interfere.

    Right, John. Right.


  47. One of Hillary Clinton's new found strong points is that she has been wrong so badly so many times it has "tempered her judgement".

    1. I mean this sincerely.

    2. December 6, 2014
      An unflattering portrait of Hillary Clinton by the NYT
      By Ed Lasky

      The New York Times published on Saturday a somewhat scathing portrayal of Hillary Clinton by Peter Baker and Amy Chozik, focusing on her time as First Lady. Anger, paranoia, temper-tantrums, ego, ambition -- all there and more. The paper points out that she has been peddling a line to her presidential bid that flatters herself as a working mom, juggling the demands of a young daughter and a career while championing women’s rights, supporting her husband during periods of economic growth and enduring withering personal attacks. The reality is far more complicated -- and interesting. She was, from an early time, very calculating, and nursed resentments, gaving into her anger. Apparently, those stories about temper tantrums were not just the creation of fabulists after all.

      Lest we forget before here was Obamacare there was HillaryCare.


      Now carefully controlled at 67, then she was fiery and unpredictable, lobbing sarcastic jabs in private meetings and congressional hearings. Now criticized as a centrist and challenged from the left, Mrs. Clinton then was considered the liberal whispering in her husband’s ear to resist the North American Free Trade Agreement and a welfare overhaul. (snip)

      She was an independent force within the White House, single-handedly pushing health care onto the agenda and intimidating into silence those who thought she might be mishandling it. She was prone to bouts of anger and nursed deep resentment toward Washington. She endured a terribly complicated relationship with her philandering husband. And yet she was the one who often channeled his energies, steered him toward success and saved him from himself.

      “She may have been critical from time to time with temper tantrums and things like that,” said Mr. Nussbaum, who went on to become Mr. Clinton’s first White House counsel. (snip)

      But the Clintons were fiercely protective of each other, acting at times as if it were just them against the world. “I remember one time in one of these meetings where she was blowing up about his staff and how we were all incompetent and he was having to be the mechanic and drive the car and do everything — that we weren’t capable of anything, why did he have to do it all himself,” said Joan N. Baggett, an assistant for political affairs.

      She also is framed as a political partner of Bill Clinton who was so confident of his and their future that she introduced him to her boss in the early 70s as a future president. She may not have baked cookies at home as she put it back in 1992, but she was forcefully defending him and their joint political future when his worrisome women issue hit the airwaves again and again. The article certainly gives us insights into a politician who is farther to the left than Bill Clinton, who has an inclination to seethe and to vent when confronting critics and opposition. No wonder Barack Obama might have felt some kinship with her.

      Well worth reading as her non-campaign campaign gears up for 2016.

      Thomas Lifson adds: I see this as the Times realizing she would be a lousy candidate, and signaling Elizabeth Warren, Bill deBlasio and other Dems that she can be Obama’d again in 2016, as she was in 2008.

      I mean this even more sincerely than I meant before, which wasn't very sincerely.

      Hillary is a dick.

  48. It's 'Bury Mary Time' -

    Landrieu v Cassidy

    Polling Data
    Poll Date Sample MoE Cassidy (R) Landrieu (D) Spread
    RCP Average 11/20 - 12/4 -- -- 57.0 36.8 Cassidy +20.2
    Rasmussen Reports 12/2 - 12/4 1000 LV 3.0 56 40 Cassidy +16
    WPA Research (R) 11/24 - 11/25 500 LV 4.4 57 33 Cassidy +24
    JMC Analytics 11/20 - 11/20 754 LV 3.6 55 40 Cassidy +15
    IWV/GEB International (R) 11/20 - 11/20 850 LV 3.4 60 34 Cassidy +26


  49. Health Care

    What Everyone’s Missing By Focusing On NYPD Chokehold Of Eric Garner

    Eric Garner was able to make desperate pleas. But every time he did, his time grew shorter and shorter.

    By Marc Fitch
    December 5, 2014

    Eric Garner’s death was ruled a homicide due to a chokehold and chest compression. However, while most media outlets have been focused on the chokehold, many have ignored the dangerous, yet overlooked, chest compression known as Restraint-Related Positional Asphyxia. This has largely been a concern of mental health care workers throughout the United States, who have to occasionally restrain patients who have become a danger to themselves or others. It came to the national light several years ago after a number of deaths during restraints at hospitals and police departments.

    I’ve worked in mental health for six years and I teach verbal and physical crisis prevention to both behavioral health staff and emergency department personnel. It occurs, not from a “chokehold,” as seen in the video. Indeed, it doesn’t appear that the officer held onto Garner’s throat long enough to directly cause his death. Rather, restraint-related positional asphyxia is the result of the patient being face down on the ground or having someone put his weight on the individual’s chest, leaving the patient unable to expand his or her chest to inhale. In this way (and if this is truly the case), the death could be ruled a homicide (death caused by another human being) without being intentional murder. Officer Daniel Pantaleo is seen in the video first putting Garner in a chokehold and the group of officers wrestling him to the ground. However, once face-down on the concrete to put the cuffs on, Pantaleo is kneeling on Garner’s upper back and head. It was at this point that Garner began to say he couldn’t breathe........

  50. September 21, 2012

    5 Things You May Not Know About Lincoln, Slavery and Emancipation

    By Sarah Pruitt

    September 22 marks the 150th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, in which he declared that as of January 1, 1863, all slaves in states in rebellion against the Union "shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free." To commemorate the occasion, we invite you to consider some surprising facts about Lincoln's views on slavery, and the complex process that led him to issue the document he later called "the central act of my administration, and the greatest event of the 19th century."
    Lincoln, Slavery and Emancipation

    Depiction by Francis Bicknell Carpenter of Abraham Lincoln’s first reading of the Emancipation Proclamation, in July 1862. It hangs in the U.S. Capitol.

    1. Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist.
    Lincoln did believe that slavery was morally wrong, but there was one big problem: It was sanctioned by the highest law in the land, the Constitution. The nation’s founding fathers, who also struggled with how to address slavery, did not explicitly write the word “slavery” in the Constitution, but they did include key clauses protecting the institution, including a fugitive slave clause and the three-fifths clause, which allowed Southern states to count slaves for the purposes of representation in the federal government. In a three-hour speech in Peoria, Illinois, in the fall of 1854, Lincoln presented more clearly than ever his moral, legal and economic opposition to slavery—and then admitted he didn’t know exactly what should be done about it within the current political system.

    Abolitionists, by contrast, knew exactly what should be done about it: Slavery should be immediately abolished, and freed slaves should be incorporated as equal members of society. They didn’t care about working within the existing political system, or under the Constitution, which they saw as unjustly protecting slavery and slave owners. Leading abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison called the Constitution “a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell,” and went so far as to burn a copy at a Massachusetts rally in 1854. Though Lincoln saw himself as working alongside the abolitionists on behalf of a common anti-slavery cause, he did not count himself among them. Only with emancipation, and with his support of the eventual 13th Amendment, would Lincoln finally win over the most committed abolitionists.

    2. Lincoln didn’t believe blacks should have the same rights as whites.
    Though Lincoln argued that the founding fathers’ phrase “All men are created equal” applied to blacks and whites alike, this did not mean he thought they should have the same social and political rights. His views became clear during an 1858 series of debates with his opponent in the Illinois race for U.S. Senate, Stephen Douglas, who had accused him of supporting “negro equality.” In their fourth debate, at Charleston, Illinois, on September 18, 1858, Lincoln made his position clear. “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races,” he began, going on to say that he opposed blacks having the right to vote, to serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites. What he did believe was that, like all men, blacks had the right to improve their condition in society and to enjoy the fruits of their labor. In this way they were equal to white men, and for this reason slavery was inherently unjust.

    Like his views on emancipation, Lincoln’s position on social and political equality for African-Americans would evolve over the course of his presidency. In the last speech of his life, delivered on April 11, 1865, he argued for limited black suffrage, saying that any black man who had served the Union during the Civil War should have the right to vote.

    1. 3. Lincoln thought colonization could resolve the issue of slavery.
      For much of his career, Lincoln believed that colonization—or the idea that a majority of the African-American population should leave the United States and settle in Africa or Central America—was the best way to confront the problem of slavery. His two great political heroes, Henry Clay and Thomas Jefferson, had both favored colonization; both were slave owners who took issue with aspects of slavery but saw no way that blacks and whites could live together peaceably. Lincoln first publicly advocated for colonization in 1852, and in 1854 said that his first instinct would be “to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia” (the African state founded by the American Colonization Society in 1821).

      Nearly a decade later, even as he edited the draft of the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation in August of 1862, Lincoln hosted a delegation of freed slaves at the White House in the hopes of getting their support on a plan for colonization in Central America. Given the “differences” between the two races and the hostile attitudes of whites towards blacks, Lincoln argued, it would be “better for us both, therefore, to be separated.” Lincoln’s support of colonization provoked great anger among black leaders and abolitionists, who argued that African-Americans were as much natives of the country as whites, and thus deserved the same rights. After he issued the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln never again publicly mentioned colonization, and a mention of it in an earlier draft was deleted by the time the final proclamation was issued in January 1863.

      4. Emancipation was a military policy.
      As much as he hated the institution of slavery, Lincoln didn’t see the Civil War as a struggle to free the nation’s 4 million slaves from bondage. Emancipation, when it came, would have to be gradual, and the important thing to do was to prevent the Southern rebellion from severing the Union permanently in two. But as the Civil War entered its second summer in 1862, thousands of slaves had fled Southern plantations to Union lines, and the federal government didn’t have a clear policy on how to deal with them. Emancipation, Lincoln saw, would further undermine the Confederacy while providing the Union with a new source of manpower to crush the rebellion.

      In July 1862 the president presented his draft of the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation to his cabinet. Secretary of State William Seward urged him to wait until things were going better for the Union on the field of battle, or emancipation might look like the last gasp of a nation on the brink of defeat. Lincoln agreed and returned to edit the draft over the summer. On September 17 the bloody Battle of Antietam gave Lincoln the opportunity he needed. He issued the preliminary proclamation to his cabinet on September 22, and it was published the following day. As a cheering crowd gathered at the White House, Lincoln addressed them from a balcony: “I can only trust in God I have made no mistake … It is now for the country and the world to pass judgment on it.”

    2. 5. The Emancipation Proclamation didn’t actually free all of the slaves.
      Since Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation as a military measure, it didn’t apply to border slave states like Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, all of which had remained loyal to the Union. Lincoln also exempted selected areas of the Confederacy that had already come under Union control in hopes of gaining the loyalty of whites in those states. In practice, then, the Emancipation Proclamation didn’t immediately free a single slave, as the only places it applied were places where the federal government had no control—the Southern states currently fighting against the Union.

      Despite its limitations, Lincoln’s proclamation marked a crucial turning point in the evolution of Lincoln’s views of slavery, as well as a turning point in the Civil War itself. By war’s end, some 200,000 black men would serve in the Union Army and Navy, striking a mortal blow against the institution of slavery and paving the way for its eventual abolition by the 13th Amendment.

    3. The purpose of the Proclamation was to keep Britain and France out of the war. Lincoln knew that once the war pivoted on the issue of slavery rather than differing interpretations of the Constitution that neither the British nor French publics would support alliance with the Confederacy.

  51. Good Video

    Even the State Department Spokeswoman Thinks What She’s Saying is Ridiculous

    December 5, 2014 by Daniel Greenfield

    Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.

    Jen Psaki’s main job is to come out on stage and say ridiculous things to explain the ridiculous things that her bosses are doing. But even she thinks that they’re ridiculous.

    That’s not my term for it. It’s her term for it.

    U.S. State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki was seemingly caught on a hot mic calling one of her prepared statements on one of America’s policies on Egypt “ridiculous” following a press conference.

    When reporters, including the Associated Press’ Matt Lee, pressed her to comment on the acquittal of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, she provided a pre-written response.

    “Generally, we continue to believe that upholding impartial standards of accountability will advance the political consensus on which Egypt’s long-term stability and economic growth depends,” she said. “But beyond that, I would refer you to the Egyptian government.”

    She refused to say anything further on the matter.

    Psaki ended the conference and the lights dimmed. When she seemingly figured her mic was dead, she went off script.

    “That Egypt line is ridiculous,” she appears to say.

    Psaki doesn’t believe that the Egypt line is ridiculous because she’s sensible, but because she wants a crackdown on Egypt. But while she gets to bash Israel all day long, Obama has bowed to Egypt and mostly given up the effort to put the Muslim Brotherhood terrorists back into power again. That apparently irks Psaki who would like to blast Egypt, but cooler heads have decided that the US is already really low on allies and alienating a major power in the region would be unwise.

    Obama wanted to EMPOWER THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD in Egypt.

    Presumably to empower women everywhere. What other reason could he have?.....cough cough cough

  52. Jordan: Despite government efforts, support for Islamic State grows

    Jordanian MP: “I hate the Jews. I hate the Jews. I hate the Jews.”

    See: Jihad Watch

    Jordanian MP: “I hate the Jews. I hate the Jews. I hate the Jews.”

    December 6, 2014 12:17 pm By Robert Spencer 9 Comments

    Attieh calls the Israeli ambassador “that pig, the descendent of apes and pigs.” That is from the Qur’an, which says that Allah transformed disobedient Jews into apes and pigs (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166). Anyway, note the irony: Westerners who agree with Attieh’s perspective consider themselves to be loving and tolerant, while branding those who oppose this […]

    ISIS graffiti Jordan
    Jordan: Despite government efforts, support for Islamic State grows

    December 6, 2014 1:50 pm By Robert Spencer 1 Comment

    While Western leaders confidently and repeatedly assert that the Islamic State is un-Islamic and has nothing to do with Islam, Islamic State jihadis present themselves as the exponents of “the real Islam,” and make recruits among peaceful Muslims by doing so. Obama, Cameron and the rest are foolish to ignore this, for all their complacent […]

    1. Sounds like Jack at the bar on a Saturday night

  53. .

    People complain about Michelle's 'food guidelines' for school lunches.

    Not to be outdone, this from the Obamaman,

    Operation Choke Point

    President Obama wasn’t kidding about acting on his own if Congress won’t go along with his plans to “fundamentally transform” the country that elected him president. Sometimes he tries his phone, then if Congress blocks his agenda, his pen, but more and more often he’s simply acted without consulting or even informing Congress. In some cases, he’s even actively sought to keep Congress in the dark about new programs he’s started without even submitting them to Congress for approval.

    This year, Congress has even learned about administration initiatives not from the White House, or the agencies implementing them, but from the press or their own constituents.

    Thus it was with Operation Choke Point, an interdepartmental program designed to cripple or eliminate completely legal businesses just because the administration doesn’t like them. The idea for the program apparently came from a zealous and perhaps overly ambitious prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Philadelphia, who suggested to his superiors that the government could persuade banks to call loans, refuse to make loans or otherwise do business with certain industries, forcing many enterprises to close.

    The resulting operation involves the Department of Justice, the FBI, the newly formed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and, most importantly, the bank regulators at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The folks at the FDIC audit banks large and small and can send bankers searching for their Maalox simply by raising an eyebrow.

    Complicated in its details, the plan is conceptually fairly simple. Internet and credit card purchases require the assistance of banks and third-party processors to clear payments and to stay in business. Large and small businesses also need and operate on lines of credit from lenders with whom they may have been doing business for years or even decades.


    1. Obama is, basically, a criminal at heart.

    2. .

      The government decided to inform banks and processors that some business sectors were higher risk than others. Businesses operating within these sectors might be more prone to defrauding their customers or breaking other laws, and a bank providing such “high-risk” businesses services could be viewed by bank regulators and federal law enforcement officials as accomplices in whatever laws the high-risk enterprise might break. A financial institution providing services to such a business might have to be more carefully and extensively audited than other banks to make sure it is diligently checking on its high-risk customers to make sure nothing is amiss.

      In meetings with bank officials, the feds made it clear that the bankers have every right to provide services to such businesses, but warned them that doing so might put them at risk, too, and could almost certainly trigger more extensive audits than would be required of banks that don’t service such customers. Bankers depend for their very survival on those who regulate them and know a threat when they hear one. Many decided it would be wiser to quietly get rid of customers in such high-risk businesses.

      As a result, customers of long-standing around the country had their lines of credit called and their accounts closed. The affected businesses were never officially told why, because the government made it clear to the banks that they would face criminal charges if they talked. Even as the feds were briefing bankers on the program and their need to protect themselves by choking off high-risk businesses, the Justice Department was refusing to brief Congress on what was going on.

      Although the administration claims it is mainly after the so-called “payday” lending industry, at one point officials provided a much more extensive list of objectionable “high-risk” business types to bankers. The list included gun dealers and manufacturers as well as firearms retailers, retailers advertising consumer products on television, gambling, products whose producers offer “lifetime” guarantees, home-based charities, those who distribute or sell tobacco products and third-party payment processors, among others.

      Read more:
      Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

      More BS from the elitist Dicks in D.C.


  54. December 6, 2014
    Smoking gun video of Michael Brown's stepfather: 'I'm going to start a riot'
    By Thomas Lifson

    Proof of intent doesn’t get any clearer than a videotape of a suspect proclaiming, “I’m going to start a riot….” Those words were from the lips of Louis Head, uttered before he climbed on a car and shouted, “Burn this bitch down,” would seem to indicate the need for him to be prosecuted.

    The super-sleuths at Conservative Treehouse uncovered the smoking gun video taken by, of all sources, Al Jazeera. Go to 0:16 in the tape embedded below, and you can hear Head, bottom of the screen, center-left, provide the evidence necessary for an indictment.


    So forget about excusing Head as simply blowing off steam, reacting emotionally and spontaneously. He indicated criminal intent. If he is let off without being prosecuted it will open the door for riots across America.

    Read more:
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    Hat Tip: Al Jazeera

    Quite damning.

  55. 'rat Doctrine' loses the War in Syria -

    "Their fate may have been sealed when U.S. airstrikes targeted Jabhat al-Nusra positions on the first day of the air war in Syria, signaling that the group was indeed on the American target list", said Aron Lund, who edits the Syria in Crisis blog for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Middle East
    Al-Qaeda group’s gains in Syria undermine U.S. strategy

    'rat Doctrine' total failure say analysts

    "Only a brain dead rat could come up with this shit", said one analyst.

    1. ... the POG Doctrine ... always popular among former E-4s after a couple rounds ...

    2. I’ll take an E-4 over an O-shit any day of the week.

  56. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 08:59:00 PM EST

    Polls closing in Louisiana.

    Landrieu is toasted.

  57. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 09:01:00 PM EST

    I passed through Louisiana once.

    Never went back.

    1. .

      I heard you weren't allowed to.


    2. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSun Dec 07, 01:13:00 AM EST

      It's true.

      The bastards accused me of being a vagrant with no visible means of support.

      I'd never ever go back there.

      They can get their handcrafted tin artworks from someone else.

  58. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 09:06:00 PM EST

    Obama Diagnosed With Acid Reflux...............drudge

    Obama, who has caused millions of Americans to throw up, now has acid reflux himself, poor dear.

    Serves him right.

  59. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 09:15:00 PM EST

    Landrieu is under 40%, in earliest returns so far.

    1. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 09:17:00 PM EST

      Cassidy (R) 85,373 64.3%
      Landrieu (D) 47,349 35.6%

    2. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 09:21:00 PM EST

      Louisiana Senate (0%)
      Candidates Votes Percent
      Cassidy (R) 85,373 64.3
      Landrieu (D) 47,349 35.6

      Louisiana House District 5 (0%)
      Candidates Votes Percent
      Abraham (R) 18,775 67
      Mayo (D) 9,243 32.9

      Louisiana House District 6 (0%)
      Candidates Votes Percent
      Edwards (D) 11,600 34.4
      Graves (R) 22,080 65.5

      Looks like a Republican night shaping up in Louisiana.

  60. SOUTHWEST ASIA - U.S. military forces continued to attack ISIL terrorists in Syria Dec 3-5 using attack and bomber aircraft to conduct six airstrikes. Separately, U.S. and partner nation military forces conducted 14 airstrikes in Iraq Dec. 3-5 using fighter, attack, and remotely-piloted aircraft against the ISIL terrorists.

    In Syria, five airstrikes near Kobani destroyed six ISIL fighting positions and a heavy weapon. Near Dayr Az Zawr, an airstrike destroyed three ISIL vehicles, an ISIL excavator and struck a ISIL training camp.

    In Iraq, four airstrikes near al-Qaim destroyed four ISIL checkpoints, four ISIL armored vehicles, four ISIL bunkers, five ISIL fortifications and struck a tactical ISIL unit. Near Kirkuk, three airstrikes destroyed an ISIL-occupied building, two vehicle IEDs and struck three tactical ISIL units. Near Samarra, two airstrikes destroyed an ISIL fighting position and struck two tactical ISIL units. Near Tal Afar, two airstrikes destroyed two ISIL bunkers and an ISIL fortification. Near Mosul, two airstrikes destroyed 11 ISIL bunkers, nine heavy weapons, an ISIL vehicle and struck two ISIL units. Near Fallujah an airstrike struck a tactical ISIL unit.

    All aircraft returned to base safely. Airstrike assessments are based on initial reports.

    The strikes were conducted as part of . . .

    1. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 11:05:00 PM EST

      In Iraq, four airstrikes near al-Qaim destroyed four ISIL checkpoints, four ISIL armored vehicles, four ISIL bunkers, five ISIL fortifications and struck a tactical ISIL unit, along with destroying the cook's Coleman Cook Stove and one kerosine lantern.

  61. 'Dutch' the WoonwagonbewonerSat Dec 06, 11:01:00 PM EST

    Louisiana Senate (97%)
    Candidates Votes Percent
    Cassidy (R) 705,290 56.7
    Landrieu (D) 537,767 43.2

    Louisiana House District 5 (99%)
    Candidates Votes Percent
    Abraham (R) 134,608 64.2
    Mayo (D) 74,954 35.7

    Louisiana House District 6 (99%)
    Candidates Votes Percent
    Graves (R) 138,832 62.6
    Edwards (D) 82,720 37.3

  62. Landrieu did well to get over 40% given the headwinds.

    1. At the end Landrieu was reduced to putting fliers on car windshields saying the Republicans are going to take your welfare checks away.

  63. Via Foreign Affairs Magazine’s Khalil al-Anani:

    Analysts now fear that the group may have sympathizers in the Egyptian military’s ranks. Since Sisi’s coup, a significant number of military officers has defected and joined radical groups. According to the Egyptian media, a devastating attack against the military checkpoint in Sinai last October, which killed 31 soldiers and injured many others, was planned and executed by two former army officers, Emad Abdel Halim and Hesham Ashmawy. There has also been speculation that a defected navy officer was involved in a recent Ansar Beit al-Maqdis assault on an Egyptian ship in the Mediterranean that left five navy officers injured and eight missing. And according to a recent New York Times report, [The ISIS-linked group] Ansar Beit al-Maqdis is believed to be recruiting informants who know intimate details about the army’s deployments. Such leaks could prove devastating, ushering a new era of insurgency that could haunt Egypt for years to come.

    “The new jihadist alliance is a disaster for Washington as well as Cairo,” the dispatch continued. “For one thing, it is proof positive that ISIS has been able to use its victories in Iraq and Syria to attract new followers and continued support outside the Levant—despite the fact that it is facing the fury of a U.S.-led air campaign.”

    “Egypt, moreover, home to such veteran jihadists as al Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri (who despite his best efforts, has never been able to establish a foothold there), has become a full-fledged area of ISIS operations,” al-Anani warned. “For the group’s leaders, Egypt plays a central role in its vision of an Islamic caliphate, not only because of the country’s political and cultural stature in the Arab world, but also because of its borders with Israel. Further attacks on the Jewish state could help ISIS legitimize its operations and enhance its popularity among Egyptians.”

    It is understandable for the administration to be increasingly confused by a country that has confounded them several times in the past, but that does not give them license to give up on Egypt altogether. With the stakes high, not merely due to ISIS’s infiltration but Russia’s ongoing effort to reverse Anwar Sadat’s Cold War decision to reorient his country toward America, the United States had better develop a comprehensive Egypt policy soon...............

    Jen Psaki correctly admits the administration has no Egypt policy
    posted at 10:01 am on December 5, 2014 by Noah Rothman