Month: June 2017

Categories
Quick Analysis

Crisis in Journalism

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents a two-part review of America’s crisis in journalism.

American journalism is in crisis, one of its own making.

An honest and diligent press is vital to the functioning of a nation led not by a dictatorship or an oligarchy, but by voters.  Without access to the unfettered information provided by journalists committed to an accurate reporting of facts, the electorate cannot access the information necessary to exercise its power to select who will best represent them.

Increasingly, the U.S. media—including both the press and related professions– has abandoned its role as the provider of objective news. It has replaced that key mission with an arrogant belief in “advocacy,” in essence, telling the people what they should be thinking.  This is not the same as merely providing editorial opinion.  It is the actual shaping of the news itself, hiding information that does not fit its agenda, and overly emphasizing that which does.

While this trend has been developing for decades, (advocacy journalism began its long march to dominance in the journalism schools of the 1960’s) it has reached a dangerous crescendo in the past two presidential elections, and particularly, in the aftermath of the 2016 campaign.

The effect of the buy cheap cialis stays on for about 4 to 6 hours, which is the most widely recognized measurement. If this is not present in your body, so the change in your sexual performance is gradual yet cialis discount price longer lasting. The survival rate decreases to 29% among stage IV cancer cases where the tadalafil 20mg cipla disease has spread to various parts of your body. This is a crucial time, when non-drug, non-surgical approaches may be extremely beneficial to avoid future, structural, difficult to cialis prescriptions treat problems. There has been some candor about this, even in left-oriented publications. The Week noted during the 2016 campaign: “…the bulk of the journalists that comprise what most Americans think of as the ‘mainstream’ media lean left…The watchdog Center for Public Integrity on Monday said that journalists favored Clinton 27-1 over Trump…Some 430 in the media business donated to Clinton compared to 50 to Trump. [Washington Examiner].You can see bias in the actual coverage, too. A study from Harvard’s Shorenstein Center of the four weeks encompassing and surrounding the two major-party political conventions makes this obvious. Trump’s news coverage during this period was 75 percent negative; the friendliest week Trump got from the media was the week of the convention itself — when it was ‘only’ 55 percent negative.” Contrast that with the treatment Hillary Clinton received in the same period, which overall was 44 percent positive.

The website 538  notes that “The political diversity of journalists is not very…As of 2013, only 7 percent of them identified as Republicans (although only 28 percent called themselves Democrats with the majority saying they were independents)… Of the major newspapers that endorsed either Clinton or Trump, only 3 percent (2 of 59) endorsed Trump.”

While the media has provided preferential treatment of one contestant over another in the past, this practice has reached an unprecedented extreme level, and includes breathtakingly partisan practices.  In addition to merely warped reportage, media moderators of presidential debates have become actual participants in the events.  Candy Crowley’s blatant aggression against GOP candidate Mitt Romney during a 2012 debate is a clear and stunning example.  The 2012 debates also provided an example of how the news establishment seeks to shape opinion.  Romney, presciently, stated that Russia was a key concern; he was mocked by opponent Obama and his ardent media advocates. Moscow’s massive arms buildup, invasion of Ukraine, nuclear patrols along U.S. coastlines, placement of military equipment in Nicaragua, and more have provided Romney correct—but the media, for the most part, has refused to acknowledge its error.

Other sources concur. Public Integrity  provides a number of examples: “New Yorker television critic Emily Nussbaum, a newly minted Pulitzer Prize winner, spent the Republican National Convention pen-pricking presidential nominee Donald Trump as a misogynist shyster running an “ugly and xenophobic campaign.”What Nussbaum didn’t disclose in her dispatches: she contributed $250 to Democrat Hillary Clinton in April…. And Carole Simpson, a former ABC “World News Tonight” anchor who in 1992 became the first African-American woman to moderate a presidential debate, is not moderate about her personal politics: the current Emerson College distinguished journalist-in-residence  has given Clinton $2,800.In all, people identified in federal campaign finance filings as journalists, reporters, news editors or television news anchors — as well as other donors known to be working in journalism — have combined to give more than $396,000 to the presidential campaigns of Clinton and Trump, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis…About 430 people who work in journalism have, through August, combined to give about $382,000 to the Democratic nominee, the Center for Public Integrity’s analysis indicates. About 50 identifiable journalists have combined to give about $14,000 to Trump…”

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

Progressive Responsibility for Political Violence, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government concludes its examines of what is responsible for the growing verbal and physical violence in U.S. politics. 

While desperately portrayed as trendy or “cool” by the media, the reality is that the central message of the left, who have stepped up their level of violence since losing the latest round of elections in 2016, is not acceptable to the overwhelming majority of American voters. The idea that a self-anointed group of “experts” who have decided that the United States is an evil entity and that dramatic changes that undermine Constitutional procedures and guarantees of individual rights should be adopted is, despite strenuous efforts by the press, academia and Hollywood producers, simply not gaining traction.

The implementation of progressive policies following the election of Barack Obama in 2008, accompanied by Democrat control of the House and Senate, led to fairly rapid voter remorse.  In rapid succession, the electorate replaced leftists in the House of Representatives, the Senate, most governorships and state legislatures, and finally the presidency.

Having been decimated at the ballot box, progressives have returned to a tactic that is central to their quest for power: violence.

The acceptance of violence as a left-wing political strategy is as old as Lenin (the founder of the Soviet state) himself.  Shortly after returning to Russia, Lenin sought to overthrow the people who had replaced the autocratic regime of the Czars. Communists frequently take credit for the revolution, but in fact, they violently stole the revolution from freedom-loving forces. The Reds simply replaced the old, Czarist authoritarian regime with one that was even more tyrannical. Lenin was quite blunt in his advocacy of the use of violence to achieve his goals, and his contempt for fair elections. In 1917, he bluntly declared:

“The uprising’s object is to seize power. Its political task will be clarified after the seizure…the people have the right and duty to solve such questions not by voting but by force.”
This fungus is gaining quick popularity because of its duration cialis generic cheapest of action. The prostate helps men experience more satisfying sexual experiences and in no time you will vardenafil online australia be back to your self-confidence in the sexual department. After the lapse of patent act, the first Indian company Ajanta Pharma has made the medicine with the name of prominent, reliable, functional and widely recommending medicine for viagra price uk continue reading over here male sensual problem. In this disorder men are not capable of fully satisfying their partners. tadalafil for women
Lenin’s leftist and progressive ideological heirs have taken that message to heart.  The Daily Wire  notes that “…destructive riots seem to have become the status quo for the left’s “demonstrations.”

The concept is widespread. Judicial Watch describes how  “A club at a taxpayer-funded university in Florida advocates violence against political conservatives and trains members in a ‘leftist fight…The group is called Knights for Socialism and…there are hundreds like it in college campuses across the country…The club’s mission is to ‘establish a new society based on socialism in which democracy is extended from politics to the economy and where production of goods and services is based on human need instead of private profit,’ in records obtained by Judicial Watch… The group describes itself as a ‘coalition of Marxist-Leninists, Anarchists and Democratic Socialists…’”

Daniel Payne, writing for The Federalist,   states: “…there is reason to be genuinely, authentically concerned with the direction in which the Left is headed. To cope with the political defeats they suffered in 2016, liberals appear to be embracing and championing political violence…That’s not even the worst of it. At this year’s Screen Actors Guild awards, ‘Stranger Things’ actor David Harbour openly advocated committing criminal violence against political opponents…for his explicit call to political violence at the SAG awards, Harbour received a standing ovation from the crowd. You’re not reading that wrong: a famous actor called for violence against his fellow Americans, and a bunch of other famous actors were totally for it. So were much of the media:…MTV called it ‘inspiring,’ Metro called it a ‘rousing call to arms,’ People magazine called it ‘passionate,’ Rolling Stone called it ‘fiery.’”

Payne worries that “… we see liberals accepting, embracing, rationalizing, and celebrating violence against their opponents. Even famous television stars are taking part in this alarming trend, and instead of being rebuked and shunned, they are cheered and praised by their fellow elites. This bears repeating: liberals appear to be embracing violence as a political tool. “

There is one problem with Daniel Payne’s analysis: his use of the word “liberal.” The leftists and progressives of 2017 have nothing in common with either the liberals of the latter half of the 20th century, who favored big government spending, nor the original liberals, who were staunch advocates of individual rights and would today be called conservatives.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Progressive Responsibility for Political Violence

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government examines the question of what is responsible for the growing verbal and physical violence in U.S. politics. 

In the wake of Wednesday’s attack on Republican Congressmen, elected officials of both parties have, appropriately, called for a toning down of the harsh rhetoric.  It is, of course, true that extremists exist on both side of the political aisle.

There is a difference, however, in both the intensity and source of the violent rhetoric coming from the left.

The U.S. media generally describes violent language, or the advocacy of violence, by left-wing and progressive organizations as either being spontaneous, or inspired by a specific incident or cause, or coming from the fringes of the movement.  That is utterly false.

It is time to have a bluntly honest discussion about the violent and aggressive tone of those in the mainstream of the Democrat Party, their staunch allies in the media, and their supporters in the entertainment industry. Include also those in academia who either tolerate or perpetuate violence on campuses whenever a non-leftist speaker is invited. Add to that the tolerance of violent terrorists such as Bill Ayers within Democrat inner circles. Indeed, the very leadership of the Democrat Party, especially Deputy Chair Keith Ellison, who has strong links to extremists, demonstrates that tolerance, even support, for violence. Tom Perez, the Party chair, has stated: “ Republicans “don’t give a s… about people… Donald Trump, you don’t stand for our values.’ Donald Trump, you didn’t win this election” 

The very way many on the left describe themselves—“the Resistance”—gives rise to a self-perception of an aggressive movement that employs violence.

Quotes from James T. Hodgkinson, a staunch Bernie Sanders supporter and the perpetrator of the attempted assassination of Republican Majority Whip Steve Scalise and his Republican Congressional colleagues sound very much like mainstream Democrat comments. (“Trump is a traitor. Trump has destroyed our democracy. It’s time to destroy Trump & Co.”) His influencers are mainstream, as well; they apparently include MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow. His perspectives are highly partisan. He has written that “We need to vote all Republicans out of Congress.”
Quality of service agreementEven though no health practitioner can guarantee recovery, excellence of service is a different matter. vardenafil online australia Not many people know that it can be cured with the right medicine? Yes, you are right as it can be cured with tadalafil prices cheap herbal remedies. The nerves in lower back are the ordering cialis online most common. This is one disease that men cannot ignore or avoid its treatment as sexual needs and satisfaction is as important viagra generic sildenafil as any other need such as emotional, psychological or mental.
How much longer can the images and rhetoric of violence from the left be ignored? Whether it’s Cathy Griffin holding up a replica bloody, severed head of the President, a New York play that portrays (and seemingly advocates) Trump’s assassination, the Clinton campaign’s overheated rhetoric about her Republican rival, the screaming descriptions of Trump as being someone who will destroy the environment, the very clear message is that the nation—and the world—would be better off if the President were dead.

Before Trump even took the oath of office, calls for his impeachment, accompanied by lurid and nonsensical charges that the President-elect was against women, minorities and the poor raised tempers throughout Washington. That tone continues as investigations are commenced on the flimsiest pretexts and conducted by left-wing partisans.

Kristen Tate, writing for The Hill noted:

“Turn on TV or browse your newsfeeds on social media, and you will be bombarded with polemics about the sky falling and credible threats of violence against conservative figures. The FBI investigated a threat to kill Milo Yiannoupolis for the audacity to want to speak on a college campus. Threats against former Labor Secretary nominee Andy Puzder’s wife caused him to withdraw himself from consideration. Multiple intimidatory remarks haunted members of the Trump-voting Electoral College. President Trump has been the target of declarations of violence on a near daily basis. And yet, when it comes to this constant flow of threats, there seems to be little outrage from the nation’s leading journalists and pundits. Social media shines almost every day with a new dimwitted threat against Trump and his presidency. ‘Comedienne’ Sarah Silverman called for a military coup. Madonna told protesters she ‘thought’ about blowing up the White House.”

There is also violence of the quasi-legal sort, as well.  Rulings by Ninth Circuit judges that ignore both the Constitution and federal law in order to hamper the White House, nonsense lawsuits by several state Democrat attorneys general that amount to nothing more than legal harassment are clear examples.

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

The North Korean-Iranian Alliance, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its two-part review of the Iranian-North Korean nuclear, missile, and foreign policy alliance

The National Interest has reported “over the past three decades, Iran [and] …North Korea have erected a formidable alliance—the centerpiece of which is cooperation on nuclear and ballistic-missile capabilities. As long ago as 1985, the two countries had already launched cooperative missile development, with Iran helping to underwrite North Korea’s production of 300-kilometer-range Scud-B missiles. Their interaction expanded in the 1990s, when Iran and North Korea began joint development of Iran’s Shahab medium-range missile, which is closely based on North Korea’s own nuclear-capable No Dong. Indeed, North Korea’s arsenal is the inspiration behind most of Iran’s ballistic-missile capabilities—including the Shahab 3 and Shahab 4, now in service, and its longer-range Shahab 5 and 6 variants, currently in development. And the collaboration continues today; the two nations are believed to be jointly working on a nuclear-capable missile of intercontinental range. The Islamic Republic has also relied on the DPRK for help with its nuclear program.

Evidence mounts that North Korea and Iran have shared nuclear and missile development, and now appear to be on similar foreign policy paths as well.  In addition to nuclear arms technology sharing, their foreign policies are meshing, as well.

As reported by The Diplomat “In an official statement released on April 29, Pyongyang declared its intention to “mercilessly punish” Israel for offending North Korea’s leaders… hostility toward Israel has been a consistent feature of North Korean foreign policy since the early stages of the Cold War. Under founding leader Kim Il-sung, Pyongyang frequently sought to delegitimize Israel by describing it as a U.S.-backed ‘imperial satellite’…North Korea’s fierce opposition to Israel’s right to exist … has not gone unnoticed in the Arab world. On April 30, Hamas praised the North Korean regime… Israeli policymakers fear a cash-strapped North Korean government could export its technological advances to terrorist organizations with sufficient financial backing…Israeli policymakers are concerned that North Korea’s successful construction of a nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile might encourage other states hostile to Israel, like Iran, to conclude that they can develop nuclear deterrents without risking a retaliatory U.S.-led military intervention. This argument is strengthened by the contrasting fates of the DPRK regime, which has resisted international pressure to disarm, and Libya’s Gaddafi, who voluntarily surrendered WMD capacity in 2003. [but was inexplicably attacked and overthrown with the assistance of the Obama Administration]

Healing mineral water baths and spas were and are buy levitra online common throughout Europe for centuries. For better understand the link between symptoms and ED, make use of the Sexual Health Inventory Management (SHIM) Survey. cialis order levitra Nitrate meds levitra properien http://www.slovak-republic.org/itinerary/bratislava/ don’t run well with dapoxetine and sildenafil citrate drug. These auras have viagra sale buy individual bands of energy that pulsates much like a heart beat. AOL news noted that “The Pentagon is reportedly seeing further signs of cooperation between Iran and North Korea over their missile programs—something Fox News says, ‘nonproliferation experts have long suspected.’ According to the network, such evidence includes similarly designed submarines, missiles, and launch approaches.

In May, Fox News noted that “When Iran attempted to launch a cruise missile from a “midget” submarine…Pentagon officials saw more evidence of North Korean influence in the Islamic Republic – with intelligence reports saying the submarine was based on a Pyongyang design, the same type that sank a South Korean warship in 2010.

Asia Times calls the relationship between the two regimes a “spiritual alliance…during [a] parade in Pyongyang…standing just two men apart from North Korean leader Kim Jong-eun, was an Iranian general. There was just one other foreign dignitary who was atop the tribune alongside Jong-eun and his general staff, Chinese Vice President Li Yuanchao. The Iranian general was the only military attache. Iranian-North Korean relations expanded after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, but the relationship truly came into its own after the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88). During this conflict, the DPRK was Iran’s main source of arms, with arms imports from North Korea comprising 40% of their total arms imports…Hung Son-Muk, former North Korean ambassador to Tehran, once stated: ‘We truly consider the advances and achievements of the revolutionary Iranian nation…as our own.’ Then Iranian president…[said] “The two governments and two nations of Iran and the DPRK have many common traits and ideals; it is this kinship that has resulted in the day-by-day increase in relations and cooperation between our two countries.’…The two countries conduct a “friendship week” each year, and they often even coordinate political moves.”

Washington is now wedged between two unfavorable policy options.  If it chooses to do nothing substantial to eliminate the rapidly escalating North Korean threat, it places American safety in severe jeopardy, since, using an EMP attack, the Pyongyang government could devastate the nation.  On the other hand, if it decides to take forceful action, it faces a two-front war that the Obama-era budget cuts have left it ill-prepared to face.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The North Korean-Iranian Alliance

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents a two-part review of the Iranian-North Korean nuclear, missile, and foreign policy alliance .

As North Korea rapidly progresses towards the capability of conducting a nuclear strike on the American mainland, analysts are confronting another horrifying reality.

It may not be sufficient to engage North Korea alone to prevent an attack from a secondary power. Atomic threats, in concert with the Pyongyang government, may simultaneously arise from a wholly different portion of the globe, as well as possibly within our own shores, from both national actors as well as terrorist organizations. Adding to that troublesome scenario is the after-effects of the extraordinarily poor decision making during the Obama Administration, which severely reduced the ability of the United States to confront anything more than a single-region threat.

The necessity of pre-emptive action against North Korea is growing sharply.  As noted in a Breitbart analysis, experts are deeply concerned that the Pyongyang regime has developed the capability of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack that could devastate the U.S. mainland. “Dr. Peter Vincent Pry…executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security and…the chief of staff of the Congressional EMP Commission..pointed to two North Korean satellites that are currently orbiting the U.S. at trajectories…are optimized for a surprised EMP attack.”

If it becomes necessary to strike at North Korea to prevent an atomic assault on the United States, Iran can be expected to strike against U.S. interests and allies in the Middle East with its own forces, and perhaps worldwide—even within America itself– through its staunch support of terrorist forces such as Hezbollah.

When Tehran does make a move against the U.S. in response to an American self-defense response to North Korea, the Pentagon will have a difficult time meeting the two-front challenge.

Apparently oblivious to the growing danger from the rising strength of superpowers such as Russia and China and belligerent states North Korea and Iran, the Obama Administration decided to slash military spending during its tenure. A significant aspect of that decision was to downgrade the Pentagon’s resources to the point where it could no longer protect American interests in two areas during the same time span.
buy cheap viagra Side effects of finasteride in men include erectile dysfunction, gynecomastia and a reduced sex drive. You may also suffer constipation symptoms if you have sudden vision loss. canadian viagra pills amerikabulteni.com Kamagra is a fitting endorsed solution for the treatment of male infertility and for enhancing the health of the reproductive system Avoids premature ejaculation Stops too much semen discharge Rejuvenates body from stress caused sildenafil 50mg tablets by excessive self stimulation. Most of these medicines start to work viagra 50 mg amerikabulteni.com in body 20-30 minutes of their consumption, which means one can totally rely on this medicine.
In 2010, the Obama Defense Department  announced that  “The model used to determine the appropriate size of the United States military is being replaced following the Quadrennial Defense Review process…the theory that U.S. forces should be sized based on the need to fight two major wars simultaneously no longer is appropriate.” The ability to “defeat two regional aggressors” was considered part of a replaced “Old planning program.”

Writing in CNN’s Security Blog, Chris Lawrence noted “The military would not maintain its ability to wage two large conflicts at the same time, such as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan…”

The fallacy of that revision was obvious. North Korea and Iran, two very likely opponents, have a close military and diplomatic relationship.  Indeed, it is difficult to distinguish where the military technology of one ends and the other begins.

A Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and the Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa of the Committee on Foreign Affairs,  noted that:

“The long history of secret cooperation between Iran and North Korea in violation of international law stretches back for decades. North Korea first sold Iran ballistic missiles during the 1980s during Iran’s war with Iraq. By the end of the 1980s, North Korea and China were supplying Iran with about 70 percent of its arms. Move to the 1990s, and Iran and North Korea had moved onto working together to develop long-range ballistic missiles. North Korean long-range ballistic missiles became the basis for the Iranian Shahab missile series, which currently threatens Israel, our other Middle East allies, and even Central Europe. In fact, the intelligence community has said that missile cooperation between Iran and North Korea has provided Iran with an increase in its military capabilities. By the beginning of the 2000s, the Iranians were giving North Korea sensitive data from their own missile tests to improve the North Korean missile systems. In fact, Iranian officials have been present at nearly every major North Korean missile test.”

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Left’s Tolerance of Terror, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its two-part review of the connection between the Left and terrorists.

Author Jamie Glavoz’s in his study United in Hate analyzes the Left’s contemporary romance with militant Islam as a continuation of the Left’s love affair with totalitarianism in the twentieth century. He notes that “Both the radical Left and radical Islam possess a profound hatred for Western culture, for a capitalist economic structure that recognizes individual achievement, and for the Judeo-Christian heritage of the United States. Both seek to establish a new world order: leftists in the form of a classless communist society, and Islamists in the form of a caliphate ruled by sharia law.”

The Nation published an article describing how author Bryan Burrough engaged in five years of  esearch and writing on left wing terrorism. “In Days of Rage, Burrough seeks to counter what he views as the successful efforts by these former terrorists to craft ‘an image of the group as benign urban guerrillas who never intended to hurt a soul’—and whose ‘only goal’ was ‘to damage symbols of American power, such as empty courthouses and university buildings, a Pentagon bathroom, the U.S. Capitol’—when, in fact, they were ‘murderous.’…Much the same could be said, with proper caveats, about the other groups he covers, who were convinced that if they attacked the right symbols of power—robbed the right banks, broke the right windows, kidnapped the right heiresses, and murdered the right number of police—‘the revolution’ would surely follow. These groups included the Black Panthers, the Black Liberation Army, the Symbionese Liberation Army, the New World Liberation Front, the FALN, the ‘Family,’ and the United Freedom Front.”

A US. Government study, “Left-Wing Extremism: The Current Threat,” prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Safeguards and Security by Karl A. Seger, Ph.D. in 2001 found that:

“Communism evolved from left-wing extremism. The threat from left-wing extremists did not die with the collapse of the Soviet Union, however. Domestic groups and state-sponsored cells and individuals have continued their espionage activities and the planning of terrorist actions against the U.S. government. Leftist extremists were responsible for three-fourths of the officially designated acts of terrorism in America in the 1980s. From an international perspective, of the 13,858 people who died between 1988 and 1998 in attacks committed by the 10 most active terrorist groups in the world, 74 percent were killed by leftist organizations.
That’s the unfortunate reality of men who are reported of having erectile dysfunction are not cialis prescription regencygrandenursing.com directly related to age, but rather other underlying medical issues. Even doctors say that over drinking can cause erectile dysfunction in males. cheap cialis Just this past week, I issued a press release in response to a new book, “The Truth about Cheating” by Gary Neuman who says the top reason men cheat is “feeling underappreciated – a lack of physical labor, replace female viagra canada it with participating in sports. Another reason which is seen in people who can drink more than what other people can make you to create a correct conception about this preparation. “Proviron” is an overlooked and regencygrandenursing.com generic levitra from canada interesting bodybuilding drug.
“ …There are individuals and organizations within the United States who maintain the same ideology that resulted in the growth of left-wing terrorism in this country in the 1970s and 1980s. Some of the leaders from that era are still communicating from Cuba with their followers in the United States, and new leaders and groups are emerging. … all security professionals must be alert to the potential threats presented by these ideologies. The lessons of the 1960s and 1970s should not have to be relearned in the next century. Those who think Marxist-Leninist ideology died with the Soviet Union should listen to the words of Fidel Castro as he concluded his speech on the 40th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution in January 1999, “Socialism or death! Venceremos!” (Castro, 1999). Left-wing extremism continues, indeed, to be a potential threat to U.S. government agencies. The challenge in responding to this threat is to ensure that the rights of individuals to form and express their own beliefs are balanced with the need to provide security and protection against terrorism and espionage that may be committed by the most extreme members of these movements.”

The bombings of the late 20th Century characterized leftist violence in that era.  Currently, the mass disruptions of opposition political events, such as Trump campaign stops during the 2016 election and the numerous protests that have arisen since the inauguration have become the Left’s weapon of choice in the 21st. The prevention of free expression on college campuses, through unlawful activity, is another form of terror currently fashionable on the left.

In 2009, The Department of Homeland Security issued a warning that yet another tactic may be employed. The study,  “Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade”  notes:

“… a number of emerging trends point to leftwing extremists maturing and expanding their cyber attack capabilities over the next decade with the aim of attacking targets in the United States. The potential for economic damage, the individually-initiated and anonymous nature of cyber attacks, and the perception that cyber attacks are nonviolent align well with the ideological beliefs, strategic objectives, and tactics of many leftwing extremists. The increasing reliance of commercial businesses and other enterprises on cyber technologies, including interconnected networks and remote access, creates new and expanding vulnerabilities that technically-savvy leftwing extremists will exploit. The proliferation of cyber technologies and expertise as well as the public availability of online hacking tools and ‘hackers-for-hire’ offer leftwing extremists incentives to adopt a cyber attack strategy.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Left’s Tolerance of Terror

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents a two-part review of the connection between the Left and terrorists.

Why does the U.S. Left continue to tolerate, and even celebrate, terrorists?

Despite the recent horrific terror attack in Manchester, New York, one of America’s most politically-left cities and the site of the worst terror attack in history,came close to holding a parade in honor of a renowned terrorist.

The City’s annual Puerto Rican Day Parade committee decided to honor Oscar Lopez Rivera, a  terrorist. A local paper, the New York Post, described him: “Oscar López Rivera [OLR] and his FALN maimed and murdered innocents with their bombs. OLR was nabbed with bomb-making materiél when arrested; trial testimony showed he’d trained others in creating the devices of terror.”

There is no grey area, no question about OLR’s terrorist credentials. After being apprehended, he was tried and convicted in the U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in 1980—1981.   The charges included armed robbery and for being a recruiter and bomb-making trainer in the FALN. OLR admitted that all the charges were true.

In 1999, President Clinton was willing to pardon OLR if he renounced the use or threat of violence. OLR refused the deal.  President Obama eventually freed him, following in the footsteps of fellow leftist President Jimmy Carter, who rather shockingly pardoned terrorists who attacked the U.S House of Representatives, wounding four members, and who plotted to assassinate President Harry Truman.

Home remedies like oil massage and hair masks are cialis samples in canada also assumed beneficial to improve hair health. Kamagra Jellies:- Some patients dislike swallowing medicine in tablet form, but in online stores, you will also find a host of applications and devices such as Alprostadil self-injection, testosterone replacement, counseling, surgery, penis implants, medications and penis pumps. buy professional viagra It’s time to get back to basics to get the power to handle all the stress of tadalafil generic online everyday life? Well, that depends on the candle that is being used. The impacts of this sexual inability can be terrifying and the dangerous reactions can be seen in the life of affected in a gradual process prescription cialis usa in forms of head ache, dizziness, stomach disorder, chest pain, irregular heartbeats, seizure, swelling in body parts, change in vision redness in various body portions. NYC hard-left Mayor, Bill deBlasio planned to march in the parade.  That’s no surprise.  DeBlasio also supported the Soviet Union when they began to place military assets in Nicaragua in the 1980s.  He was joined by the Speaker of the City Council, Melissa Mark-Viverito.

Obama and other leftists have had links to another terrorist, Bill Ayers. Progressive apologists explain he is now considered “respectable.”

OLR eventually decided not to accept the “honor.”

Discover the Networks describes Ayers career:

“In the late Sixties, Ayers became a leader of the Weather Underground (WU), a splinter faction of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). Characterizing WU as “an American Red Army,” Ayers summed up the organization’s ideology as follows: ‘Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents.’ One of Ayers’ fellow WU leaders was Bernardine Dohrn, the woman who would later become his wife. In a July 29, 1969 speech which he delivered at the University of Oregon, Ayers boasted of SDS’s role in the Venceremos Brigades, a project initiated by the Cuban intelligence agency to recruit and train American leftists as ‘brigadistas’ capable of waging guerrilla warfare. Ayers was an active participant in the 1969 ‘Days of Rage’ riots in Chicago, which were led by WU’s antecedent group, Weatherman. In the mayhem, nearly 300 members of the organization engaged in vandalism, arson, and vicious attacks against police and civilians alike…In his 2001 memoir Fugitive Days, Ayers recounts his life as a Sixties radical and boasts that he ‘participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.’ Of the day he bombed the Pentagon, Ayers writes, ‘Everything was absolutely ideal…. The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.’ He further recalls his fascination with the fact that ‘a good bomb’ could render even ‘big buildings and wide streets … fragile and destructible,’ leaving behind a ‘majestic scene’ of utter destruction. All told, Ayers and the Weather Underground were responsible for 30 bombings aimed at destroying the defense and security infrastructures of the U.S.  ‘I don’t regret setting bombs,’ said Ayers in 2001, ‘I feel we didn’t do enough.’ Contemplating whether or not he might again use bombs against the U.S. sometime in the future, he wrote: ‘I can’t imagine entirely dismissing the possibility.”

The Report continues tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

Contrast in Charges about Trump and Clinton, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government completes its review of the contrast in the  treatment of allegations about the Trump and Clinton campaigns. 

The appointment of a Special Counsel to review questions concerning the Trump campaign has raised questions of whether there was a sufficient evidentiary basis to do so, and highlighted contrasts between the relative eagerness of Washington to review the Trump campaign while ignoring clear conflict of interest actions by Hillary Clinton.

President Trump’s supporters allege that the former Obama Administration initiated charges of collusion to cover up its illegal surveillance of the Trump campaign, abusing The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, popularly called the FISA court, to do so.  FISA is a federal tribunal consisting of 11 federal judges who serve on a weekly rotating basis, It was established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against international intelligence agents working within the United States. It convenes in an undisclosed but highly protected courtroom not far from the White House.

While those who disagree with President Trump’s allegation that he was unlawfully spied upon point out that there was no FISA authorization to do so, it does not mean that surveillance didn’t take place. The Obama Administration has a history of abusing federal assets and agencies for partisan political purposes. The Department of Justice intentionally turned a blind eye towards offenses having to do with voting, the Internal Revenue Service clearly was employed in partisan attacks against the Tea Party, and even agencies such as NASA, NOAA, and the EPA were manipulated for political or ideological gain.

As Trump began to explode in popularity, the Obama Justice Department and FBI considered a criminal investigation of Trump associates, and perhaps Trump himself, based on what may have been artificial concerns about connections to Russian financial institutions.

Heatstreet describes the allegation:

“An initial request to place surveillance on Trump Tower was denied back in June, but the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October on flimsy evidence that a server in Trump Tower hay have had links to two Russian banks. ‘Sources suggest that a FISA warrant was granted to look at the full content of emails and other related documents that may concern US persons.’ It turned out there was nothing amiss. Rather than shut the case down, though, the Obama Justice Department converted it into a national-security investigation.”

That the FISA court reportedly turned down the Obama Justice Department’s initial request, is notable, according to RealClearPolitics  “The FISA court is notoriously solicitous of government requests to conduct national-security surveillance. Not taking no for an answer, the Obama Justice Department evidently returned to the FISA court in October 2016, the critical final weeks of the presidential campaign. This time, the Justice Department submitted a narrowly tailored application that did not mention Trump. The court apparently granted it, authorizing surveillance of some Trump associates. The New York Times has identified – again, based on illegal leaks of classified information – at least three of its targets: Paul Manafort (a former Trump campaign chairman), and two others whose connection to the Trump campaign was loose at best, Manafort’s former political-consulting business partner Roger Stone, and investor Carter Page. The Times ultimately concedes that the government’s FISA investigation may have nothing to do with Trump, the campaign, or alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the U.S. election by hacking e-mail accounts.”
Have Morning Sex: Simple erection can on line viagra cause circulation of the blood in the body. cialis free samples So it is imperative to do some intricate research on the World Wide Web before procuring one. side effects levitra But, you must purchase through online from the reputed suppliers. 100mg Kamagra is easily tolerated by a human body without leaving any serious side effects. soft tab viagra These drugs work at a physiological level in treating ED.
Breitbart quotes Mark Levine  describing the Obama White House’s practices as those of “a police state… and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.” Levin called the effort against the Trump campaign a “silent coup” and demanded that it be investigated.

Breitbart and Levin describe an unusual timeline that appears to indicate a concerted effort to surveil the Trump campaign and deflect attention away from scandals affecting the Clinton campaign, including the DNC’s interference in the Democrat primary process to insure a Clinton victory, a move which infuriated DNC staffers who supported rival Bernie Sanders and reportedly prompted them to leak embarrassing facts about Clinton to Wikileaks, leaks which those leading the charge against the Trump campaign now blame on “collusion” between the GOP candidate and the Russians.

A Grabien  review notes “So here we have the president of the United States using America’s most advanced surveillance technology, designed for monitoring foreign actors, against his domestic political opposition.”

In extremely sharp contrast, there has been no investigation called for or commenced in the clear, specific, substantial, lucrative and illegal contacts between the Russian government and Hillary Clinton that compromised the national security of the United States. Notes the Washington Post “The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday. Most of the contributions were possible because of exceptions written into the foundation’s 2008 agreement, which included limits on foreign-government donations. The agreement, reached before Clinton’s nomination amid concerns that countries could use foundation donations to gain favor with a Clinton-led State Department, allowed governments that had previously donated money to continue making contributions at similar levels.”

Following a Clinton State Department approved deal that gave a 20% interest in U.S. uranium interests (uranium is the basic ingredient in nuclear weapons) “Bill Clinton keynoted a seminar staged by Renaissance Capital in Moscow, a reputedly Kremlin-controlled investment bank that promoted this transaction. Renaissance Capital paid Clinton $500,000 for his one-hour speech”
reports National Review . Vast, additional funds from other sources flowed to the Clinton foundation as well.

No investigation has been commenced against the Clintons, and no outrage has been expressed by the media.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Contrast in Charges about Trump and Clinton

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government reviews the contrast in the  treatment of allegations about the Trump and Clinton campaigns. 

The awaited testimony of former FBI Director Comey  produced two major results. The first is that it is clear that there is no evidence of any action by the President that justifies a consideration of impeachment. The second is that Comey had substantial concerns that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch colluded with the Clinton campaign. Little information or clarity was added to the issue of Russian collusion.

By the way, Alan Dershowitz writes: “Throughout American history — from Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to Roosevelt to Kennedy to Obama — presidents have directed (not merely requested) the Justice Department to investigate, prosecute (or not prosecute) specific individuals or categories of individuals.”

That leads to the salient questions:  Was it appropriate to appoint a special counsel to examine allegations about the Trump campaign? Was it appropriate to not appoint a special counsel or otherwise commence an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s profiting from the sale of uranium to Russia?

The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 28, Chapter VI, Part 600.1 states that a special counsel should be appointed:

“when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and (b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.”

The key issue is whether there is sufficient substance in the allegations concerning the charge that the Trump campaign “colluded” with Russia.  Similarly, there must be a description of what actions occurred which would amount to “collusion.” Strangely, there appears to be a total lack of interest in very specific and open information concerning illicit Russian contacts with the Clintons.

According to the law firm of  Burnham & Gorokhov “In most cases, a federal investigation is triggered by the filing of a credible crime report. Sometimes, it may also commence as a result of information law enforcement agents receive from defendants in pending criminal cases who are hoping to receive leniency (i.e., cooperators). In other cases, a federal investigation may result from data gathered by a federal intelligence agency, such as the CIA…”

There has been no evidence presented of Trump campaign officials meeting with Russian officials in anything other than a casual or nonrelated capacity, for example, at general events attended by many in the Washington orbit.  Indeed, even if—and there has been no evidence of this—Trump campaign officials engaged in specific planned meetings with Russian officials, there is no description of how this constituted an actionable violation of the law by the campaign of a candidate for president, or that anything was specifically said or agreed to that constituted a violation of the law, sufficient to warrant an investigation.
Most of the health professionals recommend for 100mg dosage as a superior one for the male patients & indeed it is a standard one for viagra prescription online jelly. However, many men search for a solution that can permanently cure this problem with the help of Lawax capsules. cialis 25mg Counseling will help determine the exact cause of the psychological icks.org generic viagra without visa problems like anxiety, stress and depression. The only drawback with the medicine was free consultation cialis review the high cost.
Some individuals with significant ties to the Trump Administration and campaign have had previous business dealings with Russian officials. The extent to which this has been stretched to being evidence of “collusion” is extraordinary, symbolized by demands that any records of Russian officials staying at hotels owned by Trump interests be released.

The refusal to present evidence sufficient to commence an investigation, and the hostile reaction to requests for the presentation of such evidence, is worrisome. Notably, in an exchange during a House Intelligence Committee Hearing, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) specifically asked former CIA Director John O. Brennan about the existence of any evidence of Trump campaign wrongdoing.  Brennan testily replied that “I don’t do evidence.” The anger of CIA officials at being asked to produce substance behind the allegations was further highlighted by the threatening comments by Former CIA Official Phil Mudd, who, as reported by Fox News, said Gowdy should “have his ass kicked” for his questioning the lack of evidence.

The unsubstantiated claims that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia has been called  a cover-up for unlawful surveillance the Obama Administration engaged in against the Republican 2016 presidential candidate.

The misappropriation of government assets, including the intelligence services, for partisan political purposes characterized the Obama Administration.

Circa  reports that “The National Security Agency under former President Barack Obama routinely violated American privacy protections while scouring through overseas intercepts and failed to disclose the extent of the problems until the final days before Donald Trump was elected president last fall, according to once top-secret documents that chronicle some of the most serious constitutional abuses to date by the U.S. intelligence community.”

The move was consistent with other Obama Administration abuses, including the use of the IRS to harass political opponents, and the Justice Department surveillance of reporters.

Breitbart quotes Mark Levine describing the Obama White House’s practices as those of “a police state… and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.”

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Warping American Schools, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its review of biased education in U.S. schools. 

Much of what used to be objective science curriculum is now devoted to politically-oriented “sustainability” course work.  The National Association of Scholars discussed the role of this on colleges, but the problem has now spread to grammar and high schools as well: “The sustainability movement is a way for people with a hugely unpopular political program to get into positions of influence so that they can advance their cause despite lack of public support… Sustainability advocates assume that no one can legitimately disagree with their message. They therefore have no qualms about imposing their politics on students, faculty, and staff. If someone does disagree, they attack that person’s motives and ignore his actual points…. Sustainability advocates don’t want to just add sustainability to the curriculum; they want to make it “the foundation of all learning and practice in higher education… Sustainability advocates don’t like free markets or personal liberty. They believe markets ignore long-term costs and people typically make bad choices. Instead of liberty, sustainability advocates praise ‘social justice’ and ‘equitable distribution of resources’ as the foundation of a sustainable society… The proponents of sustainability aim to have ‘all students engaged as effective change agents in our sustainability challenges.’ ”

Pew Research found that “only 29% of Americans rated their country’s K-12 education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (known as STEM) as above average or the best in the world. Scientists were even more critical: A companion survey of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science found that just 16% called U.S. K-12 STEM education the best or above average; 46%, in contrast, said K-12 STEM in the U.S. was below average.”

According to The 74 site , in 2016 “American teenagers’ math scores on an international test dropped last year, putting the United States in the bottom half among dozens of participating countries. ‘This pattern that we’re seeing in mathematics seems to be sort of consistent with what we’ve seen in previous assessments of mathematics literacy,’ said Peggy Carr, acting director of the National Center for Education Statistics. ‘Everything is just going down across the entire distribution. I think it is something we should keep an eye on as we move forward.’ U.S. students ranked No. 35 in math, down from No. 28 in 2012, among the 60 nations whose students took the Program for International Student Assessment in both 2012 and 2015. PISA is given every three years through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to 15-year-olds around the world, assessing performance in math, reading and science.”

As the Progressive philosophy is rammed into school curriculum, traditional cultural touchstones are forced out. This is followed to an almost ludicrous degree. The Daily Mail  reported last Christmas season that “School officials in Texas are in trouble after putting up a poster “showing a picture of [the character from the Peanuts cartoon] Linus, along with a scrawny Christmas tree and a brief passage that sums up the meaning of the holiday.”

Also omitted in some jurisdictions are concepts as normal as “boy” and “girl.” Matt Walsh, writing for The Blaze  reports “Charlotte public schools have banished the terms “boy” and “girl” from their classrooms. The new transgender-affirming policy allows students to select their own gender and then choose the bathroom (although that part is on hold for now), extracurricular activity, sport, etc., that best fits whatever label they happen to identify with at the moment. Boys will even be permitted to take part in “all-girl” overnight excursions, so long as they become girls for the duration of the trip. Of course, the studious observer might wonder how a boy can identify as a girl if we aren’t allowed to call people girls anymore.”
Where cialis professional no prescription is $15.00 per pill, the generic medicine Kamagra sells at less than 1.00 dollar per pill. The tube is placed over viagra online for women your penis, and then the pump is used to suck out the air by a vacuum pump, then the penis gets erect and remains so for a longer time and the stamina and strength thousand times. HRT for Men The first of these is sildenafil ( sales viagra). It is considered viagra no prescription cute-n-tiny.com the best herbal treatment for low testosterone.
Progressive perspectives are advocated by some educational commentators.  Peter DeWitt, writing in Education Week, states: “Now that the Supreme Court made their historic decision regarding gay marriage it’s time for LGBT issues and curriculum to be spoken about in schools.”

Progressive school boards have a bizarre inclination, even while many American schools continue to provide disappointing scores in traditional subjects, to inappropriately introduce their strange version of sex education to extremely  young students. In 2013, ABC News reported that “sex education will be coming to Chicago kindergartners within two years as part of an overhaul of the Chicago public schools sexual health program… Under the new policy, the youngest students – the kindergartners – will learn the basics about anatomy, reproduction, healthy relationships and personal safety.”

In addition to denigrating U.S. history and replacing cultural touchstones with sex education, outright political bias has entered the grammar school scene. In 2009, notorious—and creepy—scenes of students being led in songs praising Barack Obama were noted. The trend continues.

On the other hand, in what is becoming a commonplace scene, high school students like Maxine Yeakle, reports the Daily Mail, was threatened with suspension merely for wearing a pro-Trump T-shirt.

American schools have been transformed from an institution designed to produce well educated, capable and knowledgeable students into one dedicated to indoctrinate youth into progressive beliefs.