Category Archives: Israel

No post today

Posted on by

Nothing is striking my fancy this morning. French authorities have announced the German Airbus co-pilot locked the pilot out of the cockpit and then deliberately crashed the airliner into the French Alps—BUT IT WASN’T TERRORISM! Other reports said you could hear the screams of the passengers in that recorder while the pilot was attempting to break down the door.

Drudge has a report that Obama has released classified information revealing the location of Israel’s nuclear production facilities. Since he could not make Netanyahu lose the election, he’ll stab all Israelis in the back for spite. It will take years, if not decades, to repair the international damage Obama has done.

But the libs, dems and the MSM care not.

Check back tomorrow. Perhaps something interesting will appear.

Facebook

Spite

Posted on by

I was busy yesterday, running around Missouri delivering flyers for next month’s gun rally (see yesterday’s post.) My travels gave me ample opportunity to listen to the radio, mostly Rush and Hannity, but a few others, too.

The topic yesterday was Netanyahu’s big win in the Israeli elections—and Obama’s reaction. You see, Obama sent teams to Israel, teams paid for by US tax dollars, to defeat Netanyahu. They failed.

Obama Frowning AP Photo_0This, of course, enraged Obama. Obama, has congratulated numerous election winners around the world. Many, most maybe, were dictators or our avowed enemies. Obama did not congratulate Bibi Netanyahu. Instead, he is pursuing a path to harm Israel.

From Tel Aviv to Turtle Bay

The White House hoped a new Israeli prime minister would resume peace talks with the Palestinians. With Netanyahu holding on, the administration is weighing a turn to the U.N. to help force a deal.

By John Hudson, Colum Lynch, March 18, 201

After years of blocking U.N. efforts to pressure Israelis and Palestinians into accepting a lasting two-state solution, the United States is edging closer toward supporting a U.N. Security Council resolution that would call for the resumption of political talks to conclude a final peace settlement, according to Western diplomats.

The move follows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decisive re-election Tuesday after the incumbent publicly abandoned his commitment to negotiate a Palestinian state — the basis of more than 20 years of U.S. diplomatic efforts — and promised to continue the construction of settlements on occupied territory. The development also reflects deepening pessimism over the prospect of U.S.-brokered negotiations delivering peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

Shortly before this week’s election, the United States informed its diplomatic partners that it would hold off any moves in the U.N. Security Council designed to put Israel on the spot at the United Nations in the event that Netanyahu’s challenger, Isaac Herzog, won the election. But U.S. officials signaled a willingness to consider a U.N. resolution in the event that Netanyahu was re-elected and formed a coalition government opposed to peace talks. The United States has not yet circulated a draft, but diplomats say Washington has set some red lines and is unwilling to agree to set a fixed deadline for political talks to conclude.

“The more the new government veers to the right the more likely you will see something in New York,” said a Western diplomat.

Nothing is so spiteful as a narcissist scorned. Obama is showing his true nature. I can understand why Obama hates Netanyahu. Bibi is everything Obama is not. When Netanyahu last spoke before Congress, he received a warmer welcome than Obama did at his State of the Union speech.

 

Facebook

Bibi’s Day before Congress

Posted on by
Bibi_Netanyahu-AIPAC

The Canadian Press – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gestures while addressing the 2015 American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Policy Conference in Washington, Monday, March 2, 2015

In less than an hour Bibi Netanyahu will speak before a joint session of Congress—at the invitation of Congress much to the chagrin of the democrats. He spoke yesterday before AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, laying the groundwork for today’s speech.

I’m keeping an ear on CSPAN. Mrs. Crucis is watching upstairs. John Kerry’s State Department is twitting passages from a radical Islamic cleric protesting Netanyahu. The cleric blames ‘Zionists’ for all the world’s ills.

I’m not surprised that Obama and his minions are siding the Islamists. All you need to do is read articles by the administration, listen to them on TV and on internet videos, listen to them being interviewed by the MSM. They’re all in bed with the Islamists.

This isn’t something Obama brought to government. Look at the remarks of Jimmah Cahtah and others over the years. They were, are, all siding with not only Islamists, but radical, America-hating Islamists.

Frankly, I don’t know why they support those who kill and plan to kill us. It’s psychotic. It could be they hate America, perhaps they are anti-Semitic, or, more likely, both. Regardless, Bibi will have his time before Congress concerning Obama’s efforts to allow Iran to build nuclear weapons. Bibi will warn Congress, again, and will say, I expect, that Israel reserves the right to strike in self-defense. When Iran and the Islamists say they will destroy Israel and kill all the Jews, we should take them at their words—and act accordingly.

But, the US will dither, blame Israel and inevitably, at some point, nukes will fly. Maybe today is the day Israel will announce they have nukes of their own. Seven nations, eight if the Norks finally make one that works, are known to have nuclear weapons. It is likely several more have them as well including Israel. Various intelligence agencies estimate that Israel has approximately 300 nukes of various sizes. South Africa had some but disassembled them, so they say, as did the former USSR republics of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine. Then there is Japan, South Korea and Taiwan that have the capability of building nukes but haven’t as far as we know. In South America, both Brazil and Argentina have been thought at various times to be building nukes.

Bibi will have his day before Congress, less those democrats who hate Israel. He will be eloquent and explain his position and ask the US to assist Israel in blocking Iran’s nuclear infrastructure to build a weapon. He will not succeed. The US will do nothing to assist Israel and everything to help the Islamists and our internal divide will deepen and broaden.

 

Facebook

Will it pass?

Posted on by

For a number of years now, ‘Pubs have filed Right-to-Work (RTW) bills in the legislature. This year is no different. If I’ve counted correctly, three bills have been filed that address RTW, one, a partial implementation, was filed by a St. Louis democrat.

RTW has failed in the past. Narrowly, each time and each year the margin narrows toward success. Will this be the year when Missouri finally passes a true, not some watered down ineffectual version, Right-to-Work bill?

Maybe.

All three bills have successfully passed out of committee. Speaker John Diehl has placed all three on the House calendar for a floor vote. The two bills sponsored by ‘Pubs are nearly identical. The democrat version limits RTW to the construction trades only.

The unions believe they have enough legislators in their pocket to block RTW again. They cite a number of ‘Pub union shills newly elected last November. I note most of them are from the eastern side of the state, primarily around St. Louis.

The unions have gone so far as to put at least one legislator, a democrat, on their payroll. I’d call that an ethics violation. Will the ethics committee? Doubtful. It cuts too close to home for many legislators on the eastern side of the state.

***

Obama’s feud with Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu led him to send for partisan assistance to Bibi’s opponent in the upcoming Israeli election. The fued wasn’t just about Netanyahu’s upcoming speech before Congress. It’s a knife fight in a darkened room.

Israeli Election Update: U.S. Intervention Appears to Backfire

Likud takes its largest lead yet, shortly after news broke of the Obama administration trying to sandbag Netanyahu.

February 9, 2015 – 1:00 pm

Israeli polling published Friday seems to indicate that the Obama administration’s push to remove Binyamin Netanyahu from power and to replace him with the more pliable Yitzhak (“Buji”) Herzog is backfiring. The intervention was first reported by the left-leaning newspaper Haaretz just over a week ago.

This is how the numbers look as of Friday:

zarmi_israel_poll_numbers_2-9-15-1

This is the most significant lead either of the front-runners has had since this election cycle began. Previously, Likud or HaMachane haTziyoni had led the other by only one or two seats. If the final election results look like this, the most likely governing coalition will involve Likud, HaBayit haYehudi, Yahadut haTorah, Kulanu, Shas, and Yachad (64 seats out of a total 120).

It should be noted that such a coalition, incorporating not only the right-wing Bayit Yehudi but also the nationalistic Yachad, would be on a collision course with the EU and U.S. as the party platforms now stand.

Yachad in particular would tie Netanyahu’s hands and limit his flexibility in ways he would not find congenial. The Yachad party is comprised of three elements: loyalists of former Shas head Eli Yishai, who heads the list; religious Zionist elements disappointed with the secular nationalistic constitution forced upon Bayit Yehudi by Naftali Bennett, who in consequence left that party under Yoni Chetboun; and the radically national ‘Otzma Yehudit faction, who had not joined HaBayit haYehudi when Bennett created the current party out of two smaller, earlier ones because it was insufficiently nationalistic for them.

A split between the Yishai/Chetboun faction and ‘Otzma Yehudit under the strains of coalitionary negotiations appears likely, which would yield a smaller but more wieldy coalition for Netanyahu (probably 62 seats as of this writing).

Obama’s incompetency abounds. The Israeli Parliament has no two-party system. Like most similar governments, governance is by a coalition of small parties constantly in turmoil. Such a government has great difficulty getting anything done. On the other hand, it is much easier to remove a political leader who alienates the country. All-in-all, I still like our bicameral system better.

***

If the Obama and his pet chairman at the FCC have their way, the Internet, as we have know it for its free-wheeling ways, will soon be gone. Net-neutrality is coming via regulation. The dems have failed to pass Net-neutrality in Congress. Now, Obama will implement it via regulation.

Republican FCC Member Warns Net Neutrality Is Not Neutral

Chriss W. Street 9 Feb 2015
Ajit Pai, the sole Republican Commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), inferred in a Tweet that President Barack Obama’s secret, 332-page “Net Neutrality” document is a scheme for federal micro-managing of the Internet to extract billions in new taxes from consumers and again enforce progressives’ idea of honest, equitable, and balanced content fairness.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler recently acknowledged that the two Democrats on the commission had decided to avoid Congressional input regarding the Internet by adopting President Franklin Roosevelt’s 1934 Communications Act to regulate the Internet with the same federal control as the old AT&T customer monopoly. To make sure that libertarian advocates would remain in the dark, Wheeler “embargoed” release of any of the specifics in the new administrative “policy” that will act as law.

The FCC legislation that was passed eighty-one years ago by the most leftist Congress in American history to ban companies from participating in “unjust or unreasonable discrimination” when providing phone services to customers.

But in 1949, the Democrat-dominated Commission implemented the “Fairness Doctrine” that required holders of media broadcast licenses to present “issues of public importance” in a manner that is “honest, equitable, and balanced” in the “Commission’s view. It would take 39 years before a conservative Congress could overturn a policy that hijacked the mainstream media to kowtow to liberals or face loss of their licenses.

If the Internet economy was a country, it would rank fifth, behind only the U.S., China, Japan, and India. Economic activity on the Internet totals $4.2 trillion, and almost half of the earth’s 7 billion people are already connected to the Web.

Ajit Pai’s description of “President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet” sounds Orwellian. He tweeted a picture of himself holding the 332-page plan just below a picture of a smiling Barack Obama with a comment, “I wish the public could see what’s inside.” The implication depicted Obama as George Orwell’s “Big Brother.”

Pai also released a statement: “President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works,” he said. “The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband… These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”

Pai had previously observed that he was concerned about the plan would hinder broadband investment, slow network speed and expansion, limit outgrowth to rural areas of the country, and reduce Internet service provider (ISP) competition.

“The plan saddles small, independent businesses and entrepreneurs with heavy-handed regulations that will push them out of the market,” Pai said. “As a result, Americans will have fewer broadband choices. This is no accident. Title II was designed to regulate a monopoly. If we impose that model on a vibrant broadband marketplace, a highly regulated monopoly is what we’ll get.”

Pai’s confrontational comments came after FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler penned an op-ed in Wired Magazine detailing his spin on the core aspects of the Democrat’s desire to lump ISPs under the amended Title II of the 1996 Telecommunications Act — which was used to break-up the AT&T telephone monopoly into four regional Bell companies at the dawn of the digital age.

“Using this authority, I am submitting to my colleagues the strongest open internet protections ever proposed by the FCC,” Wheeler wrote on Wednesday. “These enforceable, bright-line rules will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services.”

Pai responded that the “Courts have twice thrown out the FCC’s attempts at Internet regulation” during the Obama Administration. On January 14, 2014, the D.C. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals struck down most of the FCC’s November 2011 net neutrality rules. The Appellate Court vacated the FCC’s “anti-discrimination” and “anti-blocking” as essentially discriminatory and blocking in an attempt to again give the FCC political appointees the power to dictate what they believe is honest, equitable, and balanced.

Pai said that after a year of debates responding to the courts twice striking down FCC efforts to regulate the Internet, “There’s no reason to think that the third time will be the charm. Even a cursory look at the plan reveals glaring legal flaws that are sure to mire the agency in the muck of litigation for a long, long time.”

Pai promised he would make further comments as he reviews the plan himself in the next two weeks in the run-up to the FCC’s public vote on February 26. He has blamed the two Democrat Commissioners’ for their dismissal of any negotiations with Congressional Republicans in setting the “basic rules” governing Internet access.

As Breitbart has highlighted before, turning the Internet into a “telephone service” would “empower an intrusive public sector that thrives on high taxes, heavy-handed controls and the status quo.”

The real purpose for these regulation is to enable the FedGov to regulate content on the internet, i.e., to impose censorship. Do not be mislead by democrats, there is nothing ‘neutral’ about this. It’s nothing less than an attempt to nationalize internet access and censor content.

Many people are concerned about the intrusiveness of social media like Facebook. If these new FCC regulations are enabled, Facebook will the least of your privacy concerns.

Just as an FYI, you have to pay a tax in the UK to have access to the internet. In times past, you actually had to have a license to have a webserver, a website, or a phone in the UK. I ‘think’ the latter has loosened up a bit. Maybe.

When federal bureaucrats control our internet, internet access taxes and licensing will not be far behind.

Facebook

The Rime…

Posted on by
Ah! well a-day! what evil looks
Had I from old and young!
Instead of the cross, the Albatross
About my neck was hung.
— The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, Part II, Stanza 14.

Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Obama must be feeling as if he were that Ancient Mariner, who killed the Albatross and was condemned to wear its dead body around his neck. The difference is that Obama’s Albatross is Obamacare.

Some statistics were published today that is another weight, another burden, around Obama’s political agenda. Statistics, such as:

OBAMACARE POLL: THEY’VE TRIED IT AND THEY DON’T LIKE IT
Fifty percent of voters disapprove of ObamaCare, 43 percent strongly so, according to a poll out from the budget hawk group Public Notice. The survey, conducted by Tarrance Group, found that while 40 percent of respondents approved of the health law, a majority of key groups disapprove including women ages 18 to 44 (51 percent), employees of small businesses (57 percent), adults in households with children (56 percent) and voters who’ve tried to shop on ObamaCare Web sites (52 percent). The poll also showed that Members of Congress who voted for the president’s law are getting a negative reaction from voters, with 43 percent saying they less likely to re-elect those who voted for the health law versus 38 percent who are more likely to vote for their member if he or she voted for ObamaCare. — FOX Newsletter, 12-10-2013.

The critical issue is the age groups in the poll above. These groups are the demographic segment that Obama was planning on soaking to pay for his monstrosity. Now, they are opting out, refusing to play Obama’s game, a game he is losing badly.

But that isn’t the only damaging news about Obamacare. As we move closer to the implementation date, more failings of Obamacare are emerging. This time for prescription drugs—the list of covered drugs has been slashed. Many of us, forced onto Medicare, take maintenance drugs. Some are to control cholesterol, some to control blood pressure, plus many others. Now, with the list of covered drugs slashed, Obamacare and Medicare participants must pay for those drugs out of their pockets. Plus, for Obamacare enrollees, those out-of-pocket costs cannot be charged to your deductible.

OBAMACARE PAIN PILL
Dr. Scott Gottlieb, former senior policy adviser to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services told Megyn Kelly that many prescriptions may not be covered under ObamaCare. “The list of drugs that the plans cover, in many cases, aren’t very long.  And if the drugs aren’t covered you’re on your own, you basically have to pay for it entirely out of pocket, and the money that you spend on those drugs doesn’t count against your out of pocket limit or against your deductible,” Gottlieb said. “This could cost patients who need special drugs a lot of money, literally tens of thousands of dollars a year.” — FOX Newsletter, 12-10-2013.

***

What a disappointment Paul Ryan has turned out to be. He ran in the last election, as a conservative, a tax conservative and a spending conservative. His current budget plan, with democrat Senator Patty Murray, exposes the lies he spoke during that campaign.

The Big Spenders Return

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  December 10th, 2013 at 04:30 AM

If Paul Ryan were a Peanuts character, he’d be the guy who pulls the football out of the way just as he himself is about to kick it. Over the past number of years, Congressman Ryan has come up with a few reform proposals.

From his roadmap to this, he has made as his starting point for negotiations that which should be his ending point.

Now, with liberal Senator Patty Murray, Congressman Ryan wants to raise spending today on the promise that Congress will restrain itself ten years from now (or whenever the benchmark will be). It’s a return to pre-sequestration Washington — spending increases today in exchange for promises of spending cuts later.

I opposed sequestration at the time the GOP came up with it. I figured they’d do an end run around it. But they did not. Surprisingly, they stuck with it if only because they couldn’t figure out a way to undermine it without rocking the boat with their base.

Now it’s looking like they are prepared to rock that boat.

The Democrats have repeated painted doom and gloom scenarios about sequestration. They said it would undermine economic growth, but the latest economic figures dispute that. They said it would cause increased unemployment, but the latest employment numbers dispute that. They’ve said a great deal, all of which has been nonsensical hyperbole.

Based on what has been reported so far, the Ryan-Murray plan seems like outright capitulation to the big spending, big government agenda of both parties’ lobbyist class. In fact, the op-eds already coming out for it are being written by those who stand to profit from more spending.

Congress should start at sequestration spending levels and reduce spending from there — not raise revenue and not raise spending. After all, like Obamacare, sequestration is the law of the land too.

A sellout in any form, is still a sellout. Actions like this, Ryan’s betrayal of his Tea Party supporters, makes me wonder if there are ANY national politicians, Cruz, Lee and a handful of others excepted, who are not traitors to their constituents?

Here is a link to another report on the Paul Ryan-Patty Murray Tax and Spend bill. It’s very informative.

***

If you watch the news coming out of the Middle-east, you may have come across this article, the possible creation of strange allies, Saudi Arabia and…Israel! Neither country wants a nuclear Iran on their borders.

Saudis to Obama: We Will Not Tolerate a Nuclear Iran

By Karin McQuillan, December 10, 2013

Individuals who have even visited Israel, or who observe Judaism, or who carry a Bible are banned from Saudi Arabia.  Yet Saudi Arabia’s Israel-hating King Abdullah just flew in an Israeli scientist to have dinner with him, to enjoy some royal hospitality, accept a medal and the $200,000 “Arab Nobel Prize.”  It’s a not-so-subtle message to President Obama: the unthinkable can happen, so don’t assume the Saudis won’t join with Israel to bomb Iran.

Obama’s new Iran policy moves the Mid-East closer to war over oil and religion — Sunni Saudis versus Shia Iranians.  There is no more strategic commodity than Gulf oil to the entire world economy.  American national security stakes could not be higher.   Iran’s end game, some say more than an attack on Israel, is to seize the Saudi oil fields.  There is a Shiite majority in the oil province that the Saudi Princes fear could be turned by Iran.  The Saudis no longer see the U.S. as an ally in stabilizing the Middle East.  We have become a force for chaos. The UK Telegraph:

Chris Skrebowski, editor of Petroleum Review, said the great unknown is how Saudi Arabia will react to a move deemed treachery in Riyadh… The great question is whether they can live with this deal, or whether it is intolerable,” he said.

Mr Skrebowski said the Middle East is a tinder box, in the grip of a Sunni-Shia civil war comparable in ideological ferocity to the clash between Catholics and Protestants in early 17th Century Europe. Saudi Arabia has already shown how far it will go to protect its interests, helping to overthrow Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

The Saudis are signaling that they will unleash a pre-emptive war in the Middle East in response to Obama’s nuclear capitulation to Iran.  These signals are an effort to change Obama’s decision to prop up the mullahs and green light their nuclear program.  Can the Saudi threats become real?  It’s a wild card our President is willing to play.

The column continues, here, at the American Spectator website.

The Obama administration, acting as if by design, is alienating our friends and allies. If Obama’s plan is to isolate the United States from our friends around the world, he is being extremely successful. That’s is Obama’s only agenda item that is working.

Facebook

Peace…for our time

Posted on by

In 1938, after Germany invaded and incorporated Czechoslovakia into the German Reich, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain flew to Germany to make an agreement with Adolf Hitler to end Germany’s expansion in Europe. On his return to London, Chamberlain gave his famous speech saying he had gained, “peace for a time.”

barack_chamberlainOver the weekend, Obama announced an agreement created by Sec’y of State John Kerry with Iran to “halt” their nuclear weapons program. Of course, the agreement has no teeth and leaves Israel swinging, alone, in the breeze. As a consequence, Saudia Arabia, fearing a nuclear Iran, is in the process of buying some nukes of their own from Pakistan. The Saudis have split with Washington over the justifiable fear that if attacked by Iran, the US would do nothing.

Yes, peace…for a time. A year after Neville Chamberlain made his famous speech, Britain was at war with Germany. The events of this last week leads me to wonder what the coming year will bring in the Middle East. Israel has never announced whether it has nuclear weapons, nor has Israel signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that would allow outside inspectors to see if Israel really had any. That aside, some sources estimate that Israel has approximately 90 nuclear weapons with enough material to manufacture 150-200 more on short notice.

***

Obamacare is heading back to SCOTUS again. This time for possible violations of the First Amendment. Obamacare requires individuals and corporations to buy and provide birth control for themselves and their employees regardless of religious opposition. Hobby Lobby has filed suit and that suit is going to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court to decide whether to review ObamaCare contraception mandate

Associated Press

WASHINGTON –  President Barack Obama’s health care law is headed for a new Supreme Court showdown over companies’ religious objections to the law’s birth-control mandate.

Amid the troubled rollout of the health law, and 17 months after the justices upheld it, the Obama administration is defending a provision that requires most employers that offer health insurance to their workers to provide a range of preventive health benefits, including contraception.

Roughly 40 for-profit companies have sued, arguing they should not be forced to cover some or all forms of birth control because doing so would violate their religious beliefs.

Both sides want the justices to settle an issue that has divided lower courts. The high court could announce its decision whether to take up the topic as early as Tuesday, following its closed-door meeting.

Arguments probably would take place in late March with a decision expected in late June.

The key issue is whether profit-making corporations can assert religious beliefs under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Nearly four years ago, the justices expanded the concept of corporate “personhood,” saying in the Citizens United case that corporations have the right to participate in the political process the same way that individuals do.

The administration wants the court to hear its appeal of the Denver-based federal appeals court ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby, an Oklahoma City-based arts and crafts chain that calls itself a “biblically founded business” and is closed on Sundays. Founded in 1972, the company now operates more than 500 stores in 41 states and employs more than 13,000 full-time employees who are eligible for health insurance. The Green family, Hobby Lobby’s owners, also owns the Mardel Christian bookstore chain.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said corporations can be protected by the 1993 law in the same manner as individuals, and “that the contraceptive-coverage requirement substantially burdens Hobby Lobby and Mardel’s rights under” the law.

In its Supreme Court brief, the administration said the appeals court ruling was wrong and, if allowed to stand would make the law “a sword used to deny employees of for-profit commercial enterprises the benefits and protections of generally applicable laws.”

In two other cases, courts ruled for the administration. Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp., a Pennsylvania company that employs 950 people in making wood cabinets, is owned by a Mennonite family. Autocam Corp. is a Michigan-based maker of auto parts and medical devices that employs more than 650 people in the U.S.

The companies that have sued over the mandate have objections to different forms of birth control. Conestoga Wood objects to the coverage of Plan B and Ella, two emergency contraceptives that work mostly by preventing ovulation. The FDA says on its website that Plan B  “may also work by preventing fertilization of an egg … or by preventing attachment (implantation) to the womb (uterus),” while Ella also may work by changing of the lining of the uterus so as to prevent implantation.

Hobby Lobby objects to those two forms of contraception as well as two types of intrauterine devices (IUDs). Its owners say they believe life begins at conception, and they oppose only birth control methods that can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus, but not other forms of contraception.

Autocam doesn’t want to pay for any contraception for its employees because of its owners’ Roman Catholic beliefs.

The article continues at the website. You can read it here.

***

Thanksgiving is just around the corner. I wish you all have a great Holiday.
Facebook

Not a Brave New World

Posted on by

If you have been following the news—international news, not the farce out of Washington, DC, you, like me, wonder where will nuclear war breakout first, in the Mideast between Israel and Iran or with North Korean and their enemy of the moment.

Iran has been working to build a nuke for decades. They are currently receiving material and technological assistance from North Korea, Pakistan, China and Russia. Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister has been shouting warnings for years asking for help to stop Iran’s program. At some point, Israel will realize no one, especially Obama, cares. When that happens, Israel will do what is needed to protect themselves. Israel hasn’t publicly acknowledged possession of nukes, but no half-competent intelligence agency in the world doubts Israel has them.

On the other side of the world, Kim Jong Pud has unilaterally declared the 1953 Korean War armistice is over. He’s threatened a nuclear strike against the mainland of the US. It’s questionable if the Norks have that ability—at this time. They have had one successful nuclear test after two fizzles. They do have long range rockets capable of reaching the US west coast. The question is whether they have been able to make a nuke small enough to fit into a missile warhead and still be able to reach the US.

Aegis Anti-missile systemSuch a possibility is why we have anti-ballistic missiles in Alaska and why some Aegis missile cruisers have the ability to hit incoming ballistic missiles. The naval capability was originally for a theater-level threat. But… they could also be stationed near the US west coast for added protection.

If North Korea can’t reach the US, they could reach closer US assets in South Korea and Japan. Those are much closer. The US and Japan have agreements for the US to provide anti-missile technology and anti-missile naval assets and technology.

South Korea is still under the US umbrella and the US has military forces in South Korea. Those military forces are a trip-wire to activate the defense treaty between the US and South Korea.

There is another factor. South Korea has nuclear reactors for power generation and research. A by-product of those reactors is enriched plutonium. South Korea has the knowledge and the technology to build their own nukes—as does Japan.  One thing the Chinese do not want is a nuclear arms race in the western Pacific. If the Norks launch an attack, the Chinese just might look the other way. They’d have a tough choice; the loss of their buffer against South Korea and Japan or Japanese and South Korean nukes.

Tough choice for them but it’s quite likely they’ll throw Kim Jong Pud under the bus and look the other way when the inevitable retaliation turns North Korea into a glowing desert.

Facebook