Category: NY Analysis

NY Analysis of Policy & Government

What Are President Obama’s Immigration Goals?

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date June 20, 2016

What Are President Obama’s immigration goals?

In the wake of substantial and obvious threats to the health and safety of the American population from both terror attacks and contagious disease, the failure, indeed, the unwillingness, of the White House to engage in common sense measures, including adequate health checks for illegals entering the nation, and adequate background screening to insure that terrorist and terrorist sympathizers are not admitted, must be raised.

The Orlando attack raises questions about the White House’s formula for admitting refugees from the Middle East. Mr. Obama speaks of compassion for those in danger, but his actions tell a dramatically different story.

The Washington Times reported that on a single day in May The State Department admitted 305 Syrian refugees, “setting a single-day record, as President Obama tries to meet his target of 10,000 approvals this year — renewing fears among security analysts who say the administration is cutting corners to meet a political goal…the spike is stunning, with more people accepted [one day] alone than in the entire months of January or February. ‘The Obama administration is on full throttle to admit as many people as possible before the time clock runs out on them,’ said Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies. ‘This is the classic scenario when political expediency trumps prudence, and someone slips through who shouldn’t have, and tragedy ensues…Christian refugees from Syria have been accepted so far — a rate of less than one-half of 1 percent.” The Times has also reported that “Immigration agents catch an abysmally small percentage of the illegal immigrants who arrived on visas but overstayed their welcome, authorities admitted to Congress Tuesday, describing a loophole that those around the globe are increasingly using to gain a foothold in the U.S.At least 480,000 people overstayed their visas last year, adding to a backlog that’s reached some 5 million total, members of Congress said. But immigration agents launched investigations into just 10,000 of them, or about 0.2 percent, and arrested fewer than 2,000, less than 0.04 percent, saying the others don’t rise to the level of being priority targets.”

CNS reports of the total 1,037 Syrian Refugees Admitted in May, only two were Christians, the rest were Muslims. A refugee program based on compassion would have seen numbers completely reversed. Despite claim of concern for human rights, the White House has done exceptionally little for the groups most endangered and oppressed: Christians, Yazdis, and Kurds. Statistics indicate that of all the Syrian refugees admitted, only 3% have been Christian. CNS reports that since the Syrian conflict erupted, of a total of 4,646 Syrian refugees admitted, 60 (1.3 percent) are Christians; 4,422 (95.1 percent) are Sunni Muslims. The remaining 163 include Shi’a, other Muslims, Zoroastrians, Baha’i, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Yazidi, and refugees identified as “other religion” or as having “no religion.”

The end result is that those most likely to bring in the threat of terrorism are admitted in vastly greater numbers than those who are the most likely victims of terrorism. That fact presents the disturbing reality that the President’s policy favors those more likely to be terrorists than those who are more likely to be the victims of terror.

An equally disturbing lack of caution—or concern—by the President is evident in his leniency (some might say encouragement) in the illegal immigration. The spike in illegal immigration, and the refusal by the White House to take adequate measures to stem the flow, raises a different safety concern: that of contagious disease.

Research by The Center for Immigration Studies notes that “An analysis of new government data…shows more than three million new legal and illegal immigrants settled in the United States in 2014 and 2015 — a 39 percent increase over the prior two years…Several factors have likely contributed to the rebound, including cutbacks in enforcement…[the] preliminary estimate is that, of the 3.1 million immigrants who arrived in that last two years, about one-third, 1.1 million (or 550,000 annually) were new illegal immigrants, a significant increase from the 700,000 illegal immigrants (350,000 annually) who entered in 2012 and 2013.”

Male organ length can be maintained along with the strengthening of penile cheap viagra without prescriptions muscles. Truly an online pharmacy and men’s health are imperative to each other’s survival and well commander levitra being. Rather than stretching fights, it’s better to settle down the matter and tadalafil generic india have a nice time in bed. You should also take care to keep your dog from getting fat as this will put more strain on the joints and make the dog more likely to honour an arrangement Texas Parent Taught Driver ed with an adult; viagra cipla india sometimes a driver’s education teacher or parent. A Front Page report noted: “Even as exotic new diseases and nearly-eradicated old ones keep popping up across the nation, the Obama administration is unconcerned, or some would say, recklessly indifferent, to the public health threat that Third World illegal aliens pose to the American public. This isn’t an observation from would-be GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump or some wild-eyed rube — it’s a devastating criticism that comes from two public health experts at the government’s own Centers for Disease Control (CDC). It comes as deadly diseases surface or make a comeback in the U.S. Among those ailments are tuberculosis, pneumonia, paralysis-causing acute flaccid myelitis, dengue fever, swine flu, and enterovirus D68.”

Commentator Megan Barth, in an interview on the Vernuccio/Novak Report, reported on health concerns rising from illegal immigration:

(1) Threat of illness and death to Americans, particularly unvaccinated U.S. children and elderly with diminished immune response.

(2) Markedly higher costs to American taxpayers for free medical care to treat the refugees and illegal border crossers, who are given Medicaid benefits designed for low-income citizens. Dollars to fund the Medicaid expansion were cut from a Medicare budget designed to serve elderly over 65 and disabled under age 65.

(3) Delay in access to medical care for Americans when Medicaid facilities and hospital ERs are overused and crowded with refugees and illegal border crossers.

(4) Economic and productivity impact in the workplace and schools due to lost time due to illness.

Breitbart found that “The recent increase in the number of active TB cases reported in the United States is driven by increases in the foreign born population with high rates of active and latent TB…Two-thirds of contagious tuberculosis carriers in the United States during 2015 were born overseas…The government’s increased inflow of tuberculosis-carrying migrants appears to have reversed a 23-year decline of contagious tuberculosis cases inside the United States.…federal immigration policy is pushing up the nation’s contagious TB cases. In 2015, for the first time in 23 years, the number of active TB cases in the United States increased rather than declined. …Foreign born residents of the United States who have entered the country with [latent tuberculosis] contract active TB at a rate higher than American born residents, where LTBI infection rates average four percent, many times less than the world wide rate, which, according to some estimates, is around 33 percent.

An objective review of the President’s immigration policies indicates that they have not served the American people well. It appears that Mr. Obama is either desperately ill informed, or has motivations for his actions that he refuses to share with his constituents.

Tags contagious diseases and illegal immigration, domestic terror, Immigration policy

NY Analysis

The REAL State of the Union

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date January 13, 2016

State of the Union addresses have become platforms for presidents to advocate their policies, rather than honest assessments of the actual condition of the nation. This year’s edition was no exception, and it contained numerous factual errors. The New York Analysis of Policy & Government outlines some of those errors, and provides an example of what a truly honest and precise report would have contained.

MISSTATEMENTS IN THE STATE OF THE UNION

The president said the only threat to the U.S. was from failed states. One supposes he forgot about Russia and China.

He said the Cold War was over. Apparently, Putin didn’t get the memo.

He talked about how he successfully responded to the invasion of the Ukraine. The Ukrainians would disagree.

He claimed America’s standing was higher than ever. America’s allies would disagree.

He bragged about opening up relations with Cuba. Didn’t he realize that massove amounts of political prisoners were arrested after that opening, and Havana has invited the Russian Navy back in?

He touted our partnership with the world in dealing with Syria. Hasn’t he read the headlines–the partners he is talking about are Russia and Iran, and they are there only to expand their influence.

He used the analogy of beating the USSR to the moon, but he is the president who put America’s manned space program in hibernation.

He again claimed that there is no credible disagreement about his climate change views. Apparently, he failed to read the letter sent by 31,000 scientists who do disagree.

He said his first priority was going after terrorists. Under his watch, terrorists have reached their greatest extent of power.

He said he begins every day with an intelligence briefing. Records reveal that he misses over half of all national security briefings.

He encouraged the American people to come together and put partisanship aside. But he is the president who, far more than any of his predecessors, misused federal agencies for partisan purposes and spent more time criticizing the opposition party than any of his predecessors.

He spoke of creating jobs. He ignored the fact that, for the most part, the only jobs created were low paid with no benefits.

WHAT AN HONEST STATE OF THE UNION WOULD HAVE SAID

The state of the union this year is perilous. In matters both foreign and domestic, America faces an array of challenges unparalleled in our history.

The terrible Great Recession that began in 2007 was the result of horrible mistakes made by progressives in Washington. In a good-hearted attempt during the Carter Administration back in the 1970’s to provide more housing opportunities, we mandated that lending institutions provide loans to people who really couldn’t afford them. President Clinton made that program even larger. Of course, it was inevitable that the effort would lead to disaster, and it did. The problem is, Washington still hasn’t learned its lesson, and it continues to engage in efforts that inadvertently harm the economy and destroy job growth.

America’s corporate taxes, highest among any of our trading partners, drive jobs right out of the nation, as do our increasingly rigorous regulations. The Affordable Care Act encourages employers to keep their workforce small and to hire only part-timers. The effect of all this on the middle class has been devastating. We need to do better next year. President Clinton’s tilt towards China in opening up world trade to them ravaged manufacturing employment in the U.S., virtually eliminating the type of employment that actually created the middle class.

Middle income workers aren’t the only ones who have suffered. Due to our lack of border control, the nation has been flooded with illegal immigrants who have taken jobs at the extreme lower end of the pay scale, displacing American workers. The unemployment rate of inner city youth, especially those of color, have is particularly worrisome.

Our seniors have been deprived of cost of living increases a record amount of time during the past seven years, and again this year they will not receive even a penny in cost of living increases in the Social Security benefits that they themselves paid for during their working lives. Instead of paying them what they truly deserve, Washington, during the past seven years, has increased the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by an extraordinary 41%. It is morally wrong to deprive seniors who have worked all their lives and paid taxes in order to provide more benefits to younger, healthier individuals, some of whom are not even U.S. citizens.

Abroad, America faces dangers that result from an irrational belief that if we pretended foreign threats didn’t exist, they would just go away. We slashed our defense budget, withdrew troops and equipment from key posts across the planet, and distanced ourselves from our friends and allies, endangering our security and theirs.

There will always be one or two unhappy customers, but if every customer seems to be unhappy, that cialis tabs 20mg http://secretworldchronicle.com/tag/seraphym/page/2/ should be seen as only with the advise of a doctor or health well trained. Adding an endocrinologist to your diabetes mind group can be this generic cialis cipla one of the side effects. When not treated promptly viagra pfizer 100mg secretworldchronicle.com or when the situation is troubling for many couples, there are several physical causes that can lead to erectile dysfunction. People of basically all the age cheapest generic cialis groups that are above 18 tend to face it. We allowed, for the first time in history, Russia to gain the lead in nuclear arms. We signed a deal with Iran that will allow them to become a nuclear power in the near future. We re-established relations with Cuba at a time when they were letting Russian naval units return, and we did nothing about Nicaragua turning itself into a refueling base for the Russian nuclear bombers that patrol our coasts. We have done little to respond to Russia’s takeover of much of the Arctic. We did nothing of any consequence when Moscow invaded the Ukraine, encouraging further aggression.

We ignored, except for a few symbolic gestures, China’s aggression and its’ rise to become the most feared power in Asia.

At a time when dangerous and erratic regimes, such as those in North Korea and Iran, are rushing to build intercontinental ballistic missiles, we have failed to move ahead on a reasonable basis with anti-missile defenses.

Almost all of our actions during the past seven years have served to strengthen terrorist forces. We prematurely withdrew our military from Iraq, allowing ISIS to come to power. We encouraged the overthrow of established Arab governments, allowing extremists to gain greater influence. We announced a withdrawal date for most of our forces from Afghanistan, which means the Taliban will return to power. We did nothing, absolutely nothing, to save our ambassador and his staff in Benghazi, and also did nothing to retaliate for that vicious act. We have ignored the growing presence of terrorist forces, including ISIS and Hezbollah, in Latin America.

Since the end of the terrible era of segregation in the 1960’s, race relations in our country had steadily improved. Unfortunately, that progress was slowed or even reversed during the past seven years, a result of the politicization of several incidents involving confrontations between police officers and blacks. In some cases, media and Executive Branch responses to an entire incident, such as that in Ferguson which led to a significant civil disorder, were based on wholly incorrect facts.

Despite the many differences we Americans have had among ourselves over the centuries, we have been held together by our Constitution. However, during the past seven years, we have seen repeated affronts to Constitutional provisions such as the separation of powers, particularly in the proclivity of the President to ignore Congress’s role in enacting legislative-like measures as well as in the negotiation of foreign treaties. We have also seen far too many instances in which the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, literally half of the entire Bill of Rights, have been ignored.

The misuse of federal agencies, particularly the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice, for partisan political purposes, is unforgivable. We must assure that it never happens again by punishing those who authorized those actions. So, too, must be reinforce the time-honored practice of everyone, especially those in positions of great power, being equal in the eyes of the law and being subjected to appropriate penalties when they abuse their positions

Despite all these challenges, there is, indeed, good news. It lies within the power of the American people to correct the mistakes that have been made.

We can rebuild our armed forces, which will not only restore our national security but also put many Americans back to work in well-paying jobs manufacturing needed equipment. Our renewed strength can be used in combination with diplomacy to repair our frayed relations with allies across the globe, assuring them of our willingness to live up to our commitments, and to dissuade our adversaries from engaging in aggression.

Our reinvigorated military will be able to respond forcefully and thoroughly to any terrorist attack on American soil by striking without limit or hesitation in the homelands of those who plot against the safety of our nation.

We can take meaningful steps to develop a growing economy that produces middle income jobs by lowering corporate taxes and regulations, and by reversing bad international trade decisions that have encouraged the migration of companies away from our shores.

We can secure our borders through common-sense measures. A guest worker program can insure that we will still allow the people of our neighboring nations access to our economy, but only in positions which have first been offered to Americans.

Government spending, particularly on social programs, can be directed away from efforts meant solely to win votes and towards those who truly deserve either a helping hand or to reap the benefits they earned through decades of work and paying into social security.

The State of our Union is challenged, but hopeful.

Tags State of the Union

NY Analysis

US-China Commission on China’s Military

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 10, 2015

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government presents its third and final excerpt from the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2015 Report to Congress.

U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2015 Report to Congress

Military & Space Affairs

China’s meteoric rise to military superpower status comes both from its robust economy as well as through outright theft of U.S. and other nation’s technological advances.

China’s military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), is extending its global reach, particularly through the increased international activities of the PLA Navy. In 2015, the PLA Navy evacuated hundreds of Chinese and foreign citizens from Yemen in what was China’s firstever PLA-led noncombatant evacuation operation. In addition, the PLA Navy has maintained its antipiracy presence in the Gulf of Aden, and has expanded its naval presence in the Indian Ocean with submarine patrols. Since it first sent a submarine to the Indian Ocean in late 2013, the PLA Navy has conducted at least three more Indian Ocean submarine patrols. In September 2015, the PLA Navy sailed through Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, the closest it has ever sailed to U.S. territory during a far seas deployment without a port call. The PLA Navy’s increasing activities far from China’s shores reflect China’s growing capability and willingness to use its military to protect its overseas economic assets and expatriate population. To support these activities, China appears to be seeking to establish its first overseas military facility in Djibouti.

These developments are enabled by China’s continued military modernization program, which seeks to transform the PLA into a technologically advanced military capable of projecting power throughout the Asia Pacific region and beyond. In 2015, China acquired or produced an array of advanced naval and air platforms, many of which would be useful in contingencies in the East and South China seas and those involving islands held by Taiwan. Some of China’s military modernization developments, such as its continued development and production of advanced submarines and surface ships, could increase the PLA Navy’s expeditionary capabilities.

The PLA’s training missions and exercises are increasingly sophisticated and reflect China’s goal to build a modern, integrated fighting force. To support its military modernization campaign, China’s official annual defense budget rose 10.1 percent to $141.9 billion (RMB 886.9 billion) in 2015, though its actual aggregate defense spending is much higher, as Beijing omits major defense-related expenditures from its official budget. After nominally increasing its defense budget by double digits almost every year since 1989, China’s defense spending appears sustainable in the short term. Although China’s slowing economic growth will generate opportunity costs as government spending strains to meet other national priorities, there is no sign this has affected military spending.

U.S.-China security relations suffered from rising tensions and growing distrust in 2015, largely due to China’s cyberespionage activities against a range of U.S. government, defense, and commercial entities and its massive island-building campaign in the South China Sea. In May, as more details of China’s land reclamation in the South China Sea emerged, the U.S. Navy began to publicize its air surveillance patrols near China’s reclaimed land features; in October, a U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation patrol within 12 nautical miles of one of the reclaimed features for the first time. Though China’s maritime dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea was less newsworthy in 2015, China continued to quietly increase its military and civilian presence in contested waters by conducting regular air and naval patrols near the islands.

CHINA’S SPACE AND COUNTERSPACE PROGRAMS

Based on decades of high prioritization and sustained investment from its leadership, China has become one of the world’s preeminent space powers, producing numerous achievements and capabilities that further its national security, economic, and political objectives. China’s space program involves a wide network of entities spanning its political, military, defense industry, and commercial sectors, but unlike the United States it does not have distinctly separate military and civilian space programs. Rather, top CCP leaders set long-term strategic plans for science and technology development, coordinate specific space projects, and authorize resource allocations, while organizations within China’s military execute policies and oversee the research, development, and acquisition process for space technologies. China’s military also exercises control over the majority of China’s space assets and space operations.

China is pursuing a broad array of counterspace capabilities and will be able to hold at risk U.S. national security satellites in every orbital regime if these capabilities become operational. China’s 2007 test of the SC-19 direct-ascent antisatellite (ASAT) missile destroyed an aging Chinese satellite and sparked worldwide criticism for creating dangerous orbital debris. The test demonstrated China’s ability to strike satellites in low Earth orbit where the majority of U.S. satellites reside. China’s 2013 DN-2 rocket test reached the altitude of geosynchronous Earth orbit satellites, marking China’s highest known suborbital launch to date and the highest worldwide since 1976; this indicated China is developing the capability to target higher orbits which contain U.S. Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites and most U.S. ISR satellites. Since 2008, China has also conducted increasingly complex tests involving spacecraft in close proximity to one another; these tests have legitimate applications for China’s manned space program, but are likely also used for the development of co-orbital counterspace technologies. Computer network operations against U.S. space assets attributed to China have likely been used to demonstrate and test China’s ability to conduct future computer network attacks and perform network surveillance. Finally, China has acquired ground-based satellite jammers and invested heavily in research and development for directed energy technologies such as lasers and radio frequency weapons.

China’s space program has also progressed in the areas of spacebased command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR), space-based PNT, space-based communications, and space launch functions. China now has approximately 142 operational satellites in orbit, with approximately 95 of these owned and operated by military or defense industry organizations. China’s current system of C4ISR satellites likely enables its military to detect and monitor U.S. air and naval activity out to the second island chain‡ with sufficient accuracy and timeliness to assess U.S. military force posture and cue other collection assets for more precise tracking and targeting. China’s regional PNT satellite system, known as Beidou, became operational in 2012, with global coverage expected by 2020. When completed, this system will provide PNT functions, essential to the performance of virtually every modern Chinese weapons system, independent from U.S.-run GPS. Although it lacks a designated civilian space program, China since the mid-1990s has incrementally developed a series of ambitious space exploration programs, categorized as civilian projects. China is one of three countries, along with the United States and Russia, to have independently launched a human into space, and has launched ten Shenzhou spacecraft and the Tiangong space lab in recent years as part of its human spaceflight program. In the program’s next phase, scheduled for completion by 2022, China plans to launch a permanent manned space station into orbit. China’s lunar exploration program has featured several lunar orbiting missions with multiple Chang’e spacecraft and the landing of a lunar rover, Jade Rabbit, in 2014. China plans to land and return a lunar rover in 2017 and become the first nation to land a spacecraft on the Moon’s “dark side” in 2020. Beijing is likely also conducting research for a manned mission to the moon and a mission to Mars, although neither project has yet received official approval.

China’s space activities present important implications and policy questions for the United States. Space capabilities have been integrated into U.S. military operations to such an extent that U.S. national security is now dependent on the space domain, and China’s 2007 antisatellite missile test in particular has been described by General John Hyten, commander of U.S. Air Force Space Command, as a “wakeup call” to the U.S. military regarding the vulnerability of its space assets. In the economic realm, U.S. providers of commercial satellites, space launch services, and GPS-based services may face increased competition as China seeks to expand its foothold in these markets, benefited by the blending of its civilian and military infrastructures and by government funding and policy support. U.S. export controls have also prompted many European countries and their industries to pursue space systems that are free of U.S. technologies—and therefore restrictions—in order to reach the Chinese market. Finally, China’s achievements in space will provide Beijing with greater prestige in the international system and expand its growing space presence, concurrent with declining U.S. influence in space; the United States currently depends on Russian launch vehicles to send humans into space, and the International Space Station is scheduled for deorbiting around 2024. Moreover, given current Congressional restrictions on U.S.-China space cooperation, the United States would not participate in any space program involving China, which raises concerns that reduced U.S. investment in its manned space program could result in the continued erosion of its technological edge and a shift of influence within the international space community.

CHINA’S OFFENSIVE MISSILE FORCES

China’s offensive missile forces are integral to its military modernization objectives and its efforts to become a worldclass military capable of projecting power and denying access by adversaries to China’s periphery. The PLA’s Second Artillery Force— responsible for China’s missile forces initially as a solely nuclear force and since the 1990s as a conventional force as well—has taken on new missions and seen its bureaucratic status within the PLA elevated. The Second Artillery provides China with a decisive operational advantage over other regional militaries competing to defend maritime claims, and its long-range precision-strike capabilities improve its ability to engage the U.S. military at farther distances in the event of a conflict. These capabilities provide an increasingly robust deterrent against other military powers and— in the case of China’s nuclear arsenal—serve as a guarantor of state survival, ultimately bolstering the CCP leadership in its quest for legitimacy.

China is making significant qualitative improvements to its nuclear deterrent along with moderate quantitative increases in the course of its efforts to build a more modern nuclear force. China’s nuclear doctrine is premised on the concept of a “lean and effective” force guided by a doctrine of “no-first-use” of nuclear weapons (although the exact circumstances under which China would use nuclear weapons, what China would consider “first use,” and whether the policy may be reconsidered have been subjects of debate). China has approximately 250 nuclear warheads, according to unofficial sources. It has specifically invested in enhancing its theater nuclear force and diversifying its nuclear strike capabilities away from liquid-fueled, silo-based systems.

China’s DF-5 missiles have been equipped with multiple independently-targetable reentry vehicles, confirmed by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) for the first time in 2015; newer intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in development could also have this capability, increasing China’s ability to penetrate adversary missile defenses and enhancing the credibility of its nuclear forces as a deterrent. China is expected to conduct its first nuclear deterrence submarine patrols using the JIN-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine by the end of 2015, marking China’s first credible at-sea second-strike nuclear capability and presumably requiring changes to its “de-alerting” policy of keeping nuclear warheads stored separately from missiles.

China may also be developing a nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missile, the CJ-20, potentially introducing an air-delivered theater nuclear strike capability into its arsenal for the first time. Importantly, as stated by Dr. Christopher Yeaw, founder and director of the Center for Assurance, Deterrence, Escalation, and Nonproliferation Science & Education, in his testimony to the Commission, China may also perceive its nuclear arsenal to be useful in the political management of an unsustainable conventional conflict, in which it would punctuate non-nuclear operations with tactical- or theater-level nuclear strikes to seek deescalation on terms favorable to China.

A key implication of this approach for the United States is that China “may escalate across the nuclear threshold at atime and manner, and for a purpose, that we do not expect.” China has achieved extraordinarily rapid growth in its conventional missile capability, according to DOD, developing a wide range of conventional ballistic and cruise missiles to hold targets at risk throughout the region, even as far as the second island chain. China’s short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) force has grown from 30 to 50 missiles in the mid-1990s to at least 1,200 in 2015, mostly deployed along the Taiwan Strait.

China’s development of medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) provide the ability to conduct precision strikes against land and naval targets within the first island chain. China in 2010 fielded the world’s first antiship ballistic missile, an MRBM variant known as the DF-21D, and revealed at a September 2015 military parade that the DF-26 IRBM—with a stated range reaching out to the second island chain, including Guam—also has an antiship variant.

China has also continued to modernize its cruise missiles, most notably by developing two supersonic antiship cruise missiles: the surface ship- or submarine-launched YJ-18 and the air-launched YJ-12, both of which will provide a significant range extension over previous capabilities. China has a hypersonic weapons program in developmental stages, and reportedly conducted its fourth and fifth hypersonic glide vehicle tests in 2015, after conducting three in 2014.

Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute, testified to the Commission that China may be able to field a regional hypersonic glide vehicle by 2020 and a supersonic combustion ramjet-propelled cruise vehicle with global range before 2025. Whether China arms its hypersonic weapons with nuclear or conventional payloads—or both—will provide more information regarding how it intends to incorporate hypersonic weapons into PLA planning and operations.

The increasing survivability, lethality, and penetrability of China’s missile forces present several implications for the United States. First, these forces can threaten increasingly greater portions of the Western Pacific, and a spending competition between additional Chinese missiles and U.S. missile defense systems would likely be highly unfavorable to the United States based on relative cost. In response, the United States is working to develop lower-cost-per-shot missile defense systems, while other options include disrupting networks that would support Chinese missile forces or using long-range stealth bombers to operate beyond the reach of advanced Chinese missiles. Second, China’s increasing ability to threaten U.S. partners and allies with its missile arsenal supports its regional ambitions, improves its coercive ability, weakens the value of deterrence efforts targeted against it, and widens the range of possibilities that might draw the United States into a conflict. Third, China’s missile buildup has contributed to a U.S. policy debate regarding the modern-day relevance of U.S. treaty obligations to forgo developing ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers (311 and 3,418 miles); some experts suggest modifications could allow the United States to strengthen its regional deterrence capabilities. Finally, these developments present new challenges for the United States and China as they consider how to successfully manage and deescalate potential crises in an environment with new factors of instability.

The Commission recommends:

Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to provide an unclassified estimate of the People’s Liberation Army Second Artillery Force’s inventory of missiles and launchers, by type, in future iterations of its Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China, as included previously but suspended following the 2010 edition.
Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to prepare a report on the potential benefits and costs of incorporating ground-launched short-, medium-, and intermediate-range conventional cruise and ballistic missile systems into the United States’ defensive force structure in the Asia Pacific, in order to explore how such systems might help the U.S. military sustain a cost-effective deterrence posture.
Congress continue to support initiatives to harden U.S. bases in the Asia Pacific, including the Pacific Airpower Resiliency Initiative, in order to increase the costliness and uncertainty of conventional ballistic and cruise missile strikes against these facilities, and thereby dis-incentivize a first strike and increase regional stability.
Congress continue to support “next-generation” missile defense initiatives such as directed energy and rail gun technologies, and require the U.S. Department of Defense to report to committees of jurisdiction on the status of current component sourcing plans for the development and production of directed energy weapons.

You could be having generic cialis online http://mouthsofthesouth.com/locations/estate-auction-of-fay-gaddy-deceased/ a genuine symptom of sildenafil. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) tadalafil 20mg generic inhibitors help blood vessels relax by blocking the pleasure that it derives from nicotine. As a result it could trigger further issues which could affect cialis brand your relationship. It is also advised with the affected men to attain a better health state and endurance degree by increasing the tadalafil professional blood flow.

NY Analysis

China’s real, immediate, and significant threat

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 3, 2015

While the eyes of the world remain fixed on the depredations of ISIS and Russia’s incursions into Turkish air space, what may be the most significant long-term threat to the future of the United States receives relatively little attention. The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has outlined recommendations to deal with the crisis—and yes, it is an immediate crisis.

Increasingly, military and global affairs analysts are realizing that it is China which possesses the means and the will to severely harm the United States. Its recent actions indicate that it is, indeed, positioning itself with speed and determination to do exactly that. Gordon Chang, who has briefed the National Security Council, the CIA, the State Department and the Pentagon on the subject, succinctly states his concern:

“With each passing day, an increasingly emboldened China is using its new found economic power and military might to grab territory, violate trade rules, proliferate nuclear weapons technology, support rogue regimes, cyberattack free societies, flout norms, and undermine international institutions…as China has continued to lash out, it has set itself against its neighbors, the United States, and the international community…Regrettably, the United States…has not risen to meet this unprecedented challenge. From the Oval Office to the halls of Congress and across the suites of Corporate America, our political and corporate leaders have not wanted to confront the fact that China, despite our efforts, does not want to enmesh itself in the community of nations…what we thought was our diplomatic subtlety and carefulness, the Chinese have perceived as weakness and irresolution. As a result, our policy has failed…with their new partnership with Russia and assistance to client and rogue states like North Korea and Iran, the Chinese have taken on not just their neighbors but the world as well. It is an existential challenge that inexplicably the international community has largely ignored…”

Chang penned his concerns in a forward to one of the latest studies outlining the worrisome development of what is soon to become the world’s most fearsome military, Peter Navarro’s “Crouching Tiger: What China’s Militarism means for the World.”

Navarro dispels a number of illusions that far too many who fail to comprehend the true extent of the danger adhere to. Foremost among those myths is the oft-stated alleged disparity between Beijing’s military budget and Washington’s. Navarro notes that the comparison doesn’t survive a closer inspection, for a host of reasons.

First, of course, is the fact that China’s military can purchase its weapons at a fraction of the cost the Pentagon must pay. Second is that personnel expenses and benefits for its armed forces are significantly less than those in the U.S. Third, and perhaps most infuriatingly, is the fact that China doesn’t have to worry about the exceptionally high expenses incurred in the research and technology to develop the most advanced weapons systems; they simply steal R&D from other nations, especially America. In essence, China’s military spending can be significantly lower than the Pentagon’s because the U.S. taxpayer essentially foots the bill! In addition to stealing R&D results, Beijing also saves vast sums by purchasing or otherwise acquiring one or several items, then engages in “reverse engineering” to save the expenses of the onerous trial and error it would have to endure if it developed its own technology.

Beyond those illicit cost-saving measures is another key factor. While western military budgets are the subject of open debate and disclosure, a significant portion of China’s military spending is hidden. The People’s Liberation Army has means to channel funds into its budget that are never listed as government expenditures.

Beijing’s military doctrine is no longer just quantity to dispel the quality of opponents’ armaments. With its powerful economy and wildly successful espionage efforts, it has weapons every bit as advanced as America’s, and in some cases even more so. A great deal of this occurred during the Clinton Administration, and some of it was freely given, particularly the President’s inexplicable authorization of the sale of a Cray supercomputer to China.

China now possesses what may well be a decisive advantage. Modern warfare has a dimension even beyond the courage of the personnel involved and the quantity and quality of weapons. It is the ability to replace losses in manpower and ships, planes, tanks and other material at a rapid pace. This was decisive in America’s victories in both World Wars one and two. Far too many of America’s factories have been dismantled, due to cheaper costs in China. It is China that now has the industrial might that was America’s advantage throughout the past century.
Penile firmness or rigidity is of short duration, early discharge upon intimacy or lovemaking (fornication) Believes it is a viable sildenafil citrate alternative to canadian pharmacy viagra, the first and foremost yet the epitome of mark for erectile dysfunction. The same thing does the branded prescription de viagra. If you cialis online uk wish to lose weight, then acai berry can help prevent problems of aging. get viagra Precautionary measures: Super p force is just for guys over 18 years.
On land, sea, air and space, China’s threat, and its aggressive intent are real, and much of it is already apparent. There are several steps the United States must take in response.

The first and most obvious is to cease the suicidal reductions to the U.S. defense budget. Now accounting for only 14% of the federal budget, and at lesser total dollars than at the start of the Obama Administration, it is based on both an unrealistic view of the threats facing the nation, and on the politically expedient policy of diverting federal funds from defense and other crucial needs to vote-buying social welfare programs.

The second is to enhance protection from cyberattacks, conventional espionage, and other means of technology transfer. To be blunt, Beijing’s citizens, whether as students or any other exchange programs (civilian or military) should not be involved in any U.S. area of high technology, whether civilian, military or academic. Government computers, both civilian and military, must receive far greater security.

Third, the U.S. must work with other developed nations to prevent the transfer of high technology to Beijing that has any potential for military applications. The point must be made that this activity is ultimately self-defeating due to China’s reverse engineering practices and its rampant theft of intellectual property.

Fourth, moving factory activities to China continuously increases that nation’s military potential and decreases America’s. It’s time that American tax policies, which provide the highest corporate tax rates of any of developed nation, along with onerous and excessive regulations, were reduced in order to incentivize companies to keep production facilities at home. U.S. and other international commercial firms should be encouraged, if they must produce their goods offshore or import finished products from abroad, to establish relations with nations other than China. There are significant dangers in importing goods from China.

Fifth, the United States should enter into NATO-type agreements with nations neighboring China, and America must adhere to its commitments. The Obama Administration’s shameful failure to even diplomatically support the Philippines when China incurred onto Manila’s offshore and internationally recognized Exclusive Economic Zone was a low point in U.S. diplomatic history.

Sixth: The United States Government owes over $1.2 trillion to China. However, as noted previously, Beijing has prodigiously stolen intellectual property from both the U.S. government (military and civilian) and private corporations as well. The value of the stolen technology should be deducted from the amounts owed to China. Since Beijing shows no sign of relenting on its illegal espionage assaults on the U.S., there must be a price placed on that activity.

Finally, while defense spending must rise, Washington must cease its profligate spending practices and stop borrowing funds from the very nation that seeks to defeat it.

Tags China, Chinese military, Cnina's threat, How to deal with China, PLA, responding to China's military threat

NY Analysis

Understanding Putin, Understanding Obama

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date October 2, 2015

Putin follows a classic pattern

The deployment of Russian military power to the Middle East, in alliance with both Iran and the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, (who has committed massive human rights offenses and has violated international accords through his use of banned weaponry) provides conclusory evidence of Vladimir Putin’s worldview.

Simply put, it is unquestionably evident that the Russian President, who invaded Ukraine, dramatically ramped up his nation’s military spending, violated nuclear arms agreements, resumed nuclear bomber patrols along American coastlines, and is establishing bases in Cuba and Nicaragua, seeks to make his nation the world’s preeminent military power.

In his determined quest to attain his goal, Putin has ignored international opinion, arms treaties, and even the objections of several public figures within his own homeland.

He has succeeded. Despite the increasingly hollow sounding claims from the White House and politicians of both parties that America is the world’s strongest nation, the fact is that the Russian-Chinese-Iranian axis has supplanted the U.S.-NATO alliance as the globe’s most significant military.

That status is based both on the power of Putin’s armed forces and on his own steely determination. Unconstrained by public opinion, he has displayed no qualms about partnering with pariah states such as Iran and Syria. He pays no political price for telling outrights lies, such as he told when he claimed he was going into Syria to fight ISIS, or that some of his new missiles do not defy treaty prohibitions, or that his claims to expanded Arctic territories are legal. Indeed, he has unabashedly stifled dissent within Russia through physical, financial, and extralegal intimidation.

One of the key links in America’s victory in the first Cold War was the shared interest of Washington and Beijing in taming the Kremlin. Putin has reversed all that, and the Chinese, with their booming economy and greatly expanded military, now are allied with Russia against the U.S.

In essence, Putin is the classic expansionist leader, not dissimilar from those that preceded him in Germany and Japan in World War II. Indeed, it must be remembered that Russia began the Second World War in an alliance with the Nazis. Moscow only changed sides after Hitler invaded the USSR.

President Obama’s fundamental transformation

Putin, then, is not hard to understand. He is almost a stereotype. But what about President Obama?

In the short span of his seven years in office, the United States has descended from the “world’s only superpower, the indispensable nation” to an increasingly irrelevant entity. This did not occur by accident, bad luck, inadvertence, or incompetence.

Almost immediately upon taking office, Mr. Obama began alienating America’s allies. He gave up British nuclear secrets to Russia during arms negotiations. He backed away from agreements with Poland to base defensive missiles within its borders. He prematurely withdrew American forces from Iraq, which created the vacuum that gave rise to ISIS. He gave a departure date for the drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and opened negotiations with the Taliban in violation of a long-standing policy against speaking with terrorists. He failed to lodge even a diplomatic protest when China stole offshore territory from the Philippines, and when Beijing intimidated Japan. He utterly abandoned and even assisted in the elimination of the pro-western regime of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and the anti-al-Qaeda regime of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. He engaged in a unilateral withdrawal of American tanks from Europe.

In complete violation of U.S. treaty obligations to the Ukraine, the White House failed to take any serious steps, other than minor sanctions, against the Kremlin in response to its Ukrainian invasion.

President Obama’s alienation of Israel has become so complete that, following Iran’s call for the elimination of the Jewish state, he ordered Secretary of State John Kerry and Ambassador Samantha Power to be absent when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke at the U.N. to condemn that despicable statement.

It wasn’t just nation-states that were abandoned. He failed to take into consideration the plight of Cuban dissidents when he opened relations with Cuba (a month after Havana agreed to let the Russian navy back in!) He failed to dwell on the oppression of dissidents in Iran and China in his discussions with the governments of those nations.
Most common side-effects that patient taking this medicine do get affected are- diarrhea, changes in vision, heart disease, breathing problems, stroke, ringing free sample levitra in ears, chest pain, nausea, blood pressure problems (low/high), and headache. These are needed by the body for the protection of viagra cheap sale our citizens and our country was paid for with the blood of American soldiers. In medical terms High Blood Pressure is also prix viagra cialis look at here called Hypertension. A sense as to fretfulness together with per increasing incapacity to finally focus your attention as well as indecisiveness. slovak-republic.org buy levitra 6.
Mr. Obama complemented his diplomatic withdrawal from the world and alienation of allies with his demoralization and defunding of the U.S. military. He signed an agreement with Moscow allowing it to gain, for the first time in history, superiority in strategic nuclear weapons. He has even floated a trial balloon about unilateral cuts in the already diminished American atomic deterrent.

The dire results of Mr. Obama’s actions are indisputably evident in the replacement of U.S. influence and power throughout the world with those who are antagonistic towards western interests. While there has always been a segment of the American political leadership and the general public that has sought to reduce defense spending and decrease overseas entanglements, the extreme degree of the current White House’s actions are far beyond any prior leanings in that direction.

The question that remains is why the President chose this course, particularly at a time when the expansionist actions of Russia, China, Iran, and Islamic terrorists render it a dangerous and clearly mistaken plan.

The answer lies in not in foreign policy, but in domestic spending programs. Mr. Obama’s desire to “fundamentally transform America” (which he stated explicitly in his October 2008 campaign stop in Columbia, Missouri, and implicitly in many other forums) requires vast funding. During his tenure in office, extraordinary increases in new and expanded entitlement programs have occurred as part of his transformation, and he seeks to do even more.

The U.S. already imposes the highest corporate taxes in the developed world, and individual income taxes are equally excessive. Increasing either is politically untenable. Deficit spending has reached its limit with the U.S. already in an $18 trillion hole, and already threatens to institute a Greek-style meltdown even without further increases.

Defense spending, which accounts for about 18% of the U.S. budget, is seen by the current White House as a piggy bank to finance its goal of turning America into a European-style social welfare state.

There are two problems with that course of action. The first is purely economic.

In every instance where a social welfare-concentrated government has been attempted, the results have ranged from disappointing to absolutely disastrous. Whether tried in the extreme, as in communist nations, or in moderation, such as the social democrat states of Europe, the concept has not produced a robust economy. As Margaret Thatcher once said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Two factors have allowed Europe’s social –spending oriented states to survive as long as they have: the defense of the continent was provided by the United States, virtually eliminating the lion’s share of that burden (the United Kingdom, for example, spends only 2% of its budget on defense) and the comparatively unfettered American economy continued to be the economic engine of the planet.

European populations and governments have not shown the political will to replace the American defense umbrella, and their social welfare economies do not possess the ability to do so, particularly with the weakened U.S. economy incapable of being a driving force for financial growth.

President Obama apparently recognizes this. He made a reckless calculation that the only means to finance his domestic spending programs was to retreat from the U.S. post-World War II role as the bulwark of the defense of what used to be called the “free world.” His apparent hope was that if America retreated from international activities and slashed defense spending, Russia, China, and other forces would do the same.

Obviously, that hasn’t happened. The exact opposite occurred. A militarily and diplomatically weakened America encouraged aggression on the part of expansionist forces. However, despite the abundant and overwhelming evidence that his gamble has completely failed, Mr. Obama refuses to change course.

That leaves the world at a precipice last seen in the 1930’s.

Tags alienation of America's allies, Chinese aggression, fundamentally transforming America, Russia in Syria, Russian aggression, U.S. & China, U.S. & Israel, U.S. & Russia, U.S. and Europe, U.S. defense spending, U.S. Diplomacy, Understanding Obama, Understanding Putin, Why America has retreated

NY Analysis

Explaining Obama’s foreign policy

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 3, 2015

In the face of resounding criticism from free speech advocates, the White House is temporarily postponing its inexplicable bid to surrender control of the internet to an international body heavily influenced by nations seeking to sharply limit uncensored publication.

The original idea to do this was yet another in a series of the Administration’s global moves that are detrimental to American interests and for which Mr. Obama has utterly failed to provide any logical rationale for.

There is a profoundly uncomfortable, “politically incorrect” and unspoken question that urgently needs to be asked and discussed. President Obama’s foreign policy failures have been clear, significant, and very dangerous. Almost every important international act or decision the Obama administration has made resulted in negative consequences for the United States and its allies. What is the reason for this steady record of devastatingly poor results?

From the presidents’ earliest days in office in which he diminished the American special relationship with the United Kingdom and set about establishing the completely failed reset with Russia, to the current bipartisan-criticized nuclear deal with Iran, Mr. Obama has established a pattern of counterproductive foreign policy moves that is too consistent merely to be blamed on historical trends or bad luck.

The pattern established is one in which the Commander in Chief ignores the very real concerns of both his own nation and those it shares a common interest with, whether they are allied nations (the U.K., Poland, Israel, Ukraine, Philippines, Japan, for example) or groups (Cuban dissidents, Christians in the Middle East, women throughout the Islamic world, Kurds in their fight against ISIS, etc.) in what appears to be an attempt to appease or strike deals with nations or forces that are hostile to the U.S.

A largely tame media has not asked the obvious questions about the White House’s failures and the motives behind the illogical decisions.

Why, when the President was seeking to reduce the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, did it get involved in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi, who no longer posed any problem for the west and was opposing al Qaeda?
Why has there been no response to the Benghazi attack?
Why did it encourage the replacement of Egypt’s President Mubarak with an Islamic extremist?
Why, when Russia was dramatically building up its armed forces, did the US withdraw key Army components from NATO countries?
Why was the response against the invasion of the Ukraine so trivial?
Why hasn’t any diplomatic protest been lodged against China’s hostile actions against the Philippines and Japan?
Why did the United States open up diplomatic relations with Cuba one month after Havana agreed to allow Russian Navy ships to return to the island nation?
Why has nothing been said about the growing Russian, Chinese and Iranian influence in Latin America?
Why were details of the Iranian nuclear deal withheld from the American people?
Why did the White House choose to surrender internet control to an international body with anti-free speech inclinations?
Why has there been no response to Moscow’s resumption of Cold War nuclear bomber and submarine patrols along the coastlines of the United States?

Placing Kamagra order online won’t cost you much but it cialis levitra generika will damage your genital organs. viagra buy There is no question about the efficiency of Kamagra UKbecause of their past users’ experience and also its unique safety profile. Considering my work schedule and corporate sector hold up, I was cheapest viagra price mouthsofthesouth.com very much into profit maximization process and development of potential client. Any disruption in the secretion due online viagra pills to excess alcohol consumption 1.
The substantially criticized Iran nuclear deal has brought these questions into focus. The President’s act of going to the U.N. with it before coming to terms with Congress has also merited widespread dissent.

Mr. Obama has not been forthcoming with any explanation of his actions, and the White House press corps has not been particularly inquisitive. It is, then, necessary to speculate on why the Administration has so substantially broken with the basics of a foreign policy that has prevented a major war since the end of World War 2, brought about unprecedented international prosperity, resulted in the downfall of the Soviet Union, and most importantly, kept America relatively secure from onslaught by other nations.

There are two most probable explanations.

The first is that the President, as a politician, may believe that the interests of his core constituency are different from those of his predecessors. As an example, his Administration, (which has done very little for Christians, who have been oppressed throughout the Islamic world and China and very little to oppose the anti-Semitic tenor at the United Nations) recently convened a significant U.N. Security Council hearing on gay rights. While protecting LGBT’s is not outside the parameters of the American belief in individual rights, the fact that a greater emphasis has been placed on this issue than on protecting oppressed Christians and Jews is telling. The President may believe that his core constituency is simply uninterested in national security and traditional values, and has chosen what he believes to be a more politically rewarding path of ignoring those areas as substantially as possible, with the exception of “politically correct” issues such as LGBT rights.

The second possibility is substantially related to the first. The Obama Administration has obviously concentrated on an ambitious and expensive policy of “fundamentally transforming” the national character of the United States. That transformation is heavily dependent on costly government programs, including the 40% increase in food stamp enrollment, and the implementation of Obamacare. The dollars have to come from somewhere, and raising taxes higher than they have already been hiked would be politically unpopular. Freeing up funds from defense spending, which currently accounts for less than one-fifth of the federal budget, can only be feasibly done if commitments abroad are downgraded and threats ignored. This appears to be the course the White House has chosen.

The problem, of course, is that while this may prove a politically expedient strategy to solidify the left-wing base of Democrat-inclined voters, it comes with an enormous burden. The very real challenge of Russian, Chinese, Iranian, terrorist, and North Korean belligerence can be ignored for only so long. Very real and very substantial threats will grow as America’s defense base continues to shrink from budget cuts and the loss of key personnel, and as allies drift away after viewing the U.S. as an unreliable partner. When, as is inevitable, this reaches a crisis stage, the United States will have neither the defense capability nor the alliances necessary to respond successfully.

The Obama Administration is apparently gambling that this will occur after it leaves office.

Tags Obama foreign policy

NY Analysis

America’s suffering and neglected middle class

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date August 5, 2015

The bad news for America’s middle class continues, as the real unemployment rate (the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U6 number) remains high at 10.5%, with long-term unemployment representing between a quarter and a third of all those without jobs. For those with jobs, salaries have not improved in relation to inflation rates.

While more federal dollars went to the poor, and the wealthy benefited from President Obama’s policies, (The Federal Reserve notes that during the Obama Administration, only the wealthiest 10% saw their median income rise during the 2010-2013 period) the middle class has suffered.

According to the Federal Reserve “Families in the middle to upper middle parts (between the 40th and 90th percentiles) of the income distribution saw little change in average real incomes between 2010 and 2013 and thus have failed to recover the losses experienced between 2007 and 2010. Only families at the very top of the income distribution saw widespread income gains between 2010 and 2013, although mean and median incomes were still below 2007 levels.

“Consistent with income trends and differential holdings of housing and corporate equities, families at the bottom of the income distribution saw continued substantial declines in real net worth between 2010 and 2013, while those in the top half saw, on average, modest gains. ‰ Ownership rates of housing and businesses fell substantially between 2010 and 2013. ‰ Retirement plan participation in 2013 continued on the downward trajectory observed between the 2007 and 2010 surveys for families in the bottom half of the income distribution. Participation rebounded slightly for upper-middle income families, but it did not move back to the levels observed in 2007.”

The National Employment Law Project notes that “Since employment hit bottom in February 2010 Employment growth during the early recovery was heavily concentrated in lower-wage industries and occupations…We find that low-wage job creation was not simply a characteristic of the first phase of the recovery, but rather a pattern that has persisted for more than four years now. Deep into the recovery, job growth is still heavily concentrated in lower-wage industries. As a result of unbalanced employment growth, the types of jobs available to unemployed workers, new labor market entrants, and individuals looking to move up the career ladder are distinctly different today than they were prior to the recession.

“There continues to be an imbalance between the industries where the recession’s job losses occurred and the industries experiencing the greatest growth four years into the recovery. Lower-wage industries accounted for 22 percent of job losses during the recession, but 44 percent of employment growth over the past four years. Today, lower-wage industries employ 1.85 million more workers than at the start of the recession. Mid-wage industries accounted for 37 percent of job losses, but 26 percent of recent employment growth. There are now 958,000 fewer jobs in mid-wage industries than at the start of the recession. Higher-wage industries accounted 41 percent of job losses, but 30 percent of recent employment growth. There are now 976,000 fewer jobs in higher-wage industries than at the start of the recession. Private sector employment growth over the current recovery is stronger than it was following the 2001 recession, but job growth is more concentrated in lower-wage industries.”

A Townhall review of the ongoing plight of the middle class states: “… middle class Americans are the backbone of the country; yet their interests always seem to take a backseat to those of the wealthy, the poor and the naked self-interest of BOTH political parties. There’s nothing wrong with giving the poor a hand-up or making sure that the rich are treated fairly, but looking after the interests of America’s middle class should be priority #1 for both parties. Instead of treating the interests of the middle class as a star for both parties to follow to take this country into the future, they’ve been getting screwed over. How?

Acute or chronic Poisoning most commonly by lead, generic levitra online robertrobb.com arsenic, mercury, copper and phosphorus. This is not the case in VigRX Plus. * Viagrs don’t increase the penis size cheapest viagra no prescription to treat this condition. This condition occurs when a man is willing to pay 12 levels online cialis mastercard deep. When you take tadalafil 40mg india more than one pill in a day and should keep the gap of 24hours between two doses. “Obamacare: Millions of middle class small business owners have already lost their insurance and tens of millions of Americans will lose their insurance because of the employer mandate. However, the most devastating lie to the middle class was Obama’s false claim that the ACA would save the average family of four $2,500 a year in premiums. Instead, premiums skyrocketed by as much as 78% for some groups and there were “$643 billion in new taxes, penalties and fees” to cover the $50,000 a head it’s costing Americans to pay for each person who gets on Obamacare. …

“Soaring College Prices: Even though median household income has declined ACROSS THE BOARD for Americans in all income groups since 2000, the price of a college education rose at 7.45% per year from 1978 to 2011…

“Trade policies: a lot of jobs that had to be done locally have moved overseas…as a nation that has embraced free trade policies, we’ve been far too reluctant to throw our weight around to ensure that markets are opened to American products… We don’t make radios and TVs here anymore. No cell phones are made here. Over 42,000 factories have closed since 2001. The villain isn’t free trade so much as politicians who aren’t willing to DEMAND that other countries give our businesses staffed by middle class workers the same opportunity to sell our products overseas as we give other nations.

“Immigration and Illegal Immigration: Illegal immigration mainly hurts poor Americans … However, there are also middle class Americans losing jobs and seeing their wages driven down because they have to compete with foreigners who don’t have the same expenses they do because they’re above the law…Government data show that since 2000 all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is remarkable given that native-born Americans accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working-age population. Though there has been some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level.

“The Debt: … The more money the Fed prints, the more inflation we’re going to ultimately have. The more inflation we have, the less the money that middle class Americans have saved over a lifetime is going to be worth.”

A CNN Money study confirms this. “Workers are taking home their smallest slice of U.S. income on record…That means the richest 1% of American families have captured 95% of the income gains in the recovery, according to economists at the forefront of income inequality research, Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez. The job market still faces a gaping hole… The poverty rate has barely budged during Obama’s presidency, marking the first time it has remained at or above 15% for three consecutive years since 1965….Record number of Americans are on food stamps. Amid the recession, the food stamp rolls surged, and as of 2013, 48 million Americans were receiving the benefits — the highest number since the program began in 1969…The manufacturing revival was a mirage: manufacturers … are operating with a U.S. workforce that’s a small fraction of the size it was two decades ago.”

The programs and benefits provided to the poor continue to be favored by politicians who see them as an effective method to secure their loyalty in upcoming elections. The wealthy use influence, connections, and contributions to enhance their position. The middle class, the backbone of the nation, continues to suffer.

Tags Middle class, unemployment, wealthy benefit under Obama

NY Analysis

Honest reporting is needed

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date July 29, 2015

Analysts, journalists, and others who write about current affairs are, of course, human. As such, they have, whether willing to admit it or not, both personal beliefs and professional concerns about their careers. Personal beliefs are inevitable, and as long as an effort is made to provide an honest, thorough review of the facts, the reader or audience can be well served, regardless of the conclusions of the writer.

But in the past several years, far more so than ever before in the U.S., the careers of those commentators on the news are dependent on what many in positions of influence in the media, academia, and even government consider “proper” views. Those willing to engage in bluntly honest discussions and ask truly probing questions are ostracized, and their means of progressing and making a living in their chosen professions are profoundly jeopardized.

Across the world, it’s not just paychecks that are involved. In several cases, life itself may be at stake. Writers and illustrators who portray Islamic beliefs in a critical manner are subject to assassination. Russians who criticize Vladimir Putin wind up losing their businesses, their careers, or their freedom. Chinese who expose their government’s failings are subject to imprisonment and torture.

But frighteningly and in ever-increasing degrees, some abuses are not restricted to totalitarian nations or religious extremists. If one is too candid even in the United States, where freedom of speech receives the greatest protection, the consequences can be significant and unpleasant.

It has, by now, been well proven that the left-wing bias of the education establishment is not restricted to looks of disdain in the faculty lounge. Professors, teachers and, indeed, students will suffer real penalties, including not getting tenured, promoted, or properly graded or recommended if they vocally object to the “progressive” orthodoxy.

Citizen groups who object to the leadership of President Obama find themselves subjected to unwanted and unjustified consequences from the Internal Revenue Service.

What are the major unmentionable areas, despite their importance, and in many cases the obvious mistakes, that are off limits for discussion unless one is willing to suffer? Among the most important:
A amount of legacy Windows laptops isn’t fun to overpower while a amount of Chromebooks with tightly controlled Chrome OS (and less expensive) is super appealing. “But yes, the outer lining Laptop rarely is in deployed to somewhat of a classroom of third-graders allowing them to smear PBJ in the Alcantara keyboard. robertrobb.com cheap viagra It wouldn’t be fair buy vardenafil levitra to tell Haley he’s coaching for his job, and then hand him a rookie quarterback. Another effective tactic to cope with it is to work within the self-healing properties of the body to achieve the best outcomes, it is recommended to discuss your problems which you might feel embarrassed to discuss the stuff then generic viagra from usa you can even get you Erectile Dysfunction solved without physical presence to the consultant and long discussions over the same. A merchant best price for sildenafil account is a bank account which helps users for hassle-free and secure transactions between the clients and financial organization.
Man-made global warming: Since its birth, Earth has alternately cooled and heated. Even long before industrialization, warming periods came and went. There is absolutely nothing unusual about our current period. To hide that fact, those pushing the theory, many of whom have made a great deal of money from it, have falsified data, omitted relevant facts, and attacked the numerous experts who have expressed criticism. By the way, there is increasing evidence that global cooling is a real threat for at least the next half-century—not because of human activity, but due to solar cycles. But those who mention these facts are labelled “deniers” and are professionally pushed aside.

Peace through appeasement doesn’t work: The foreign policy of the Obama Administration has been utterly disastrous. The Clinton/Obama “Reset” with Russia had precisely the opposite effect than the Administration sought. Seeing weakness, Moscow returned to its aggressive policies abroad and initiated a massive arms buildup. When the White House failed to counter China’s expansionist acts, Beijing took that as a green light to go even further. The list goes on and on, and the entire problem has been severely aggravated by the severe cuts to the U.S. military as enemies (yes, despite the objections of the diplomatic crowd over at the Obama/Clinton/Kerry State Department, they should be called enemies) dramatically build up their forces. But those who point this out, especially those in uniform, will see their careers come to an abrupt halt.

Socialism just doesn’t work: It’s not just Greece, the former Soviet Union, Venezuela, and other nations that have seen their economies crumble. Just about every country that has been saddled with hard-left economic structures has either collapsed already or is heading in that direction. China’s economic prowess is based on a hybrid, combining quasi-capitalism with a totalitarian government. In the U.S., the increasing expenditures on socialist-type programs are bankrupting both federal and state budgets. As Margaret Thatcher once said, the problem with socialists is that sooner or later they always run out of other people’s money. But point this out, and you will be accused of being unfeeling about the poor. Politicians who seek to end give-away programs suffer severely at the polls.

Black Americans have been betrayed by their current leadership: After suffering centuries of slavery and segregation, it is a heart-rendering tragedy that the heroic legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King has been diminished not by white racists but by profiteering charlatans who pretend to represent the interests of blacks. These scoundrels consistently seek to promote division between the races in order to build their own careers. Mention this, of course, and you will be called a racist, and the consequences of that label are severe.

Islam is not, and never has been, the “religion of peace:” From its very beginnings, Islam has concentrated on invading other nations and forcing conversions at the point of a sword. While Christianity has had dark periods in which abuses occurred, they were just that: dark periods. At its core, Christianity was not a religion that advocated violence. It’s politically incorrect to say this, but that is simply not the case with the Muslim faith. It started, grew, and continues as a belief in which war and oppression are intrinsic to its nature.

Each of these areas is vitally important. Unless they are examined candidly, and without recrimination for honest examinations of objective facts, the challenges they represent will never be overcome.

Tags educational bias, journalistic bias, media bias

NY Analysis

Why is crime increasing?

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date July 16, 2015

For two decades, reports on crime had been encouraging. The Society Pages noted that “both violent and property crimes have dropped steadily and substantially for nearly twenty years. Whether looking to ‘official’ crime (reported to the police) or victimization surveys, the story is the same—both violent and property crimes have dropped like a stone.”

But that trend appears to be reversing. USATODAY reports “After seeing years of decline in violent crime, several major American cities experienced a dramatic surge in homicides during the first half of this year.

“Milwaukee, which had one of its lowest annual homicide totals in city history last year, has recorded 84 murders so far this year, more than double the 41 it tallied at the same point last year. Milwaukee is not alone.

“Baltimore, New Orleans and St. Louis have also seen the number of murders jump 33% or more in 2015. Meanwhile, Chicago, the nation’s third-largest city, has seen the homicide toll climb by 19% and the number of shooting incidents increase in the city by 21% during the first half of the year.

The New York Daily News asked why there is an almost simultaneous increase in so many cities. “Why is there a synchronicity among these cities?” said Peter Scharf, an assistant professor at the LSU School of Public Health whose research focuses on crime. “One reason may be President Obama is broke. Governors like Bobby Jindal are broke, and mayors like (New Orleans’ Mitch) Landrieu are broke. You don’t have the resources at any level of government to fund a proactive law enforcement.”

Excepts from the Daily News research: “So far this year, Baltimore has recorded 155 homicides, including three people who were killed late Tuesday evening near the University of Maryland, Baltimore campus. The 2015 homicide toll is 50 higher than it was at the same point last year. The Charm City, which is seeing some of the worst violence since the 1990s when it routinely tallied 300 murders annually, recorded 42 killings in May alone.

“In St. Louis, there have been 93 homicides compared with 58 at the same point last year. The increased violence this year in St. Louis follows the city recording a more than 30% increase in murders in 2014, when police in the city saw a steep rise in violence following the shooting death last August of Michael Brown, a black teenager, in nearby Ferguson by a white police officer. Police have made arrests in only 29 of the 2015 homicide cases, suggesting witnesses are increasingly showing a reluctance to come forward. St. Louis Police Chief Sam Dotson said that he’s increasingly looking to federal authorities to get involved in cases in the city in the hopes of spurring witnesses to come forward. St. Louis Police and several federal agencies also plan to announce a new partnership next week aimed at reducing the violence in the city.

“Chicago’s homicide toll stood at 203 as of June 28, up from 171 at the same time last year, according to police stats. The city is still well below pace of 2012, when Chicago recorded more than 500 murders for the entire year.

“Meanwhile, Houston Police reported 73 murders in the first quarter of 2015, compared with 46 during the same period last year. The police department for the fourth-largest U.S. city has yet to release its murder tally for the second quarter of 2015.

“Minneapolis had 22 murders in the first half of 2015, compared with 15 during the same period last year.

“In Washington, D.C., the homicide count stands at 73 compared with 62 last year.”

The L.A. Times reports that “Crime surged across Los Angeles in the first six months of this year despite a campaign by the Los Angeles Police Department to place more officers on the streets and target certain types of offenses. Los Angeles recorded a 12.7% increase in overall crime, ending more than a decade of declines and raising concerns about what more officials can do to reverse the trend.”

REASONS

Why has crime made a comeback throughout the nation? Some believe it may have much to do with anti-police rhetoric. In New York City, for example, has an outstanding police force renowned for both exceptional efficiency and fairness. Despite that, the Big Apple’s current Mayor, Bill De Blasio campaigned using anti-police rhetoric. The state governor has urged his attorney general to pursue cases involving police shootings. Homicides in New York have risen in 2015.

Heather MacDonald, writing in the New York Times, notes “One possible explanation is that officers have become reluctant to engage in proactive policing because of the vitriol they have faced over the last nine months, a hypothesis based on interviews with officers, the observations of commanders, and past experience. The claim, frequently repeated in the media, that police routinely kill young black men has led to riots, sometimes violent protests and attacks on officers… In November, Chief Sam Dotson of the St. Louis Police referred to the “Ferguson effect”: officers backing away from discretionary enforcement under charges of racism, thereby emboldening criminals. At that point, arrests in St. Louis city and county had dropped a third since the August shooting of Michael Brown in nearby Ferguson. Homicides in the city had surged 47 percent and robberies in the county were up 82 percent. In Baltimore, arrests dropped 56 percent this May since the protests and riots over the death of Freddie Gray, while shootings so far this year are up more than 60 percent compared to the same period last year.”

CNN reported: “One obvious difference between last year and this year is the tensions between police officers and certain communities. The high-profile instances of police officers killing unarmed black men stirred outrage and protests.There is an understanding that somehow things have changed — or must change — in a post-Michael Brown, post-Freddie Gray, post-Eric Garner America.The debate on whether police reform is needed or whether more aggressive policing is necessary is often political. The early 2015 murder statistics are providing evidence for both sides.

“If there’s a national mood that starts to see police as the bad guys, the police as the enemy responsible for these problems, it makes it a hell of a lot harder to police,” said Peter Moskos, a former Baltimore police officer and professor of policing. “One way that cops deal with that is that they just stop policing those people.”

“A former New York Police Department officer, Bill Stanton, agreed that an uptick in crime can be linked to police being less assertive. When you take away police pride and you take away giving them the benefit of the doubt … and you’re going to call them racist and you’re going to prosecute them for doing nothing wrong,” Stanton said, “then what happens is they’re going to roll back. They’re not going to go that extra mile.”

Illegal Immigration may be a factor

The increase in illegal immigration may also play a role. Infowars notes that “Unfortunately, our current policy is allowing hordes of lawless young men to come flooding into this country, and as a result gang membership is absolutely exploding. The FBI says that there are approximately 1.4 million gang members in the United States at this point, and that number has risen by an astounding 40 percent just since 2009…And these gangs are starting to gain a stranglehold on communities all over the nation…According to the Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center, Mexican drug cartels were actively operating in 50 different U.S. cities in 2006. By 2010, that number had skyrocketed to 1,286.”

The Center for Immigration Studies has reported that:

“A review of internal ICE metrics for 2013 reveals that hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens who were identified in the interior of the country were released instead of removed under the administration’s sweeping “prosecutorial discretion” guidelines. In 2013, ICE reported 722,000 encounters with potentially deportable aliens, most of whom came to their attention after incarceration for a local arrest. Yet ICE officials followed through with immigration charges for only 195,000 of these aliens, only about one-fourth. According to ICE personnel, the vast majority of these releases occurred because of current policies that shield most illegal aliens from enforcement, not because the aliens turned out to have legal status or were qualified to stay in the United States.

Many of the aliens ignored by ICE were convicted criminals. In 2013, ICE agents released 68,000 aliens with criminal convictions, or 35 percent of all criminal aliens they reported encountering. The criminal alien releases typically occur without formal notice to local law enforcement agencies and victims.

These findings raise further alarm over the Obama administration’s pending review of deportation practices, which reportedly may further expand the administration’s abuse of “prosecutorial discretion”. Interior enforcement activity has already declined 40 percent since the imposition of “prosecutorial discretion” policies in 2011.¹ Rather than accelerating this decline, there is an urgent need to review and reverse the public safety and fiscal harm cause by the president’s policies.

Key Findings

In 2013, ICE charged only 195,000, or 25 percent, out of 722,000 potentially deportable aliens they encountered. Most of these aliens came to ICE’s attention after incarceration for a local arrest.
ICE released 68,000 criminal aliens in 2013, or 35 percent of the criminal aliens encountered by officers. The vast majority of these releases occurred because of the Obama administration’s prosecutorial discretion policies, not because the aliens were not deportable.
ICE targeted 28 percent fewer aliens for deportation from the interior in 2013 than in 2012, despite sustained high numbers of encounters in the Criminal Alien and Secure Communities programs.
Every ICE field office but one reported a decline in interior enforcement activity, with the largest decline in the Atlanta field office, which covers Georgia and the Carolinas.
ICE reports that there are more than 870,000 aliens on its docket who have been ordered removed, but who remain in defiance of the law.
Under current policies, an alien’s family relationships, political considerations, attention from advocacy groups, and other factors not related to public safety can trump even serious criminal convictions and result in the termination of a deportation case.
Less than 2 percent of ICE’s caseload was in detention at the end of fiscal year 2013.
About three-fourths of the aliens ICE detained in 2013 had criminal and/or immigration convictions so serious that the detention was required by statute. This suggests the need for more detention capacity, so ICE can avoid releasing so many deportable criminal aliens.”

Diebler referred to his record as something “cool” that he will not be able generic cialis prices to linger long. Rather, the usage of these pills take effect only when buy levitra online men have the urge to make love. Buy Penegra 100 using these reliable online sildenafil rx pharmacies and experience rejuvenated pleasures making impotence easy to handle. viagra prescription Any sexual issues should be taken seriously and timely evaluated.

Tags crime, illegal immigration, rise in crime

NY Analysis

Obama must explain his Middle Eastern policy

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date June 29, 2015

As it becomes evident that the Iranian nuclear talks will be extended, after 18 months of negotiations, yet again beyond a deadline, the entire Obama/Clinton strategy towards the Middle East must be called into question. The Obama Administration’s policies in the region have completely failed, and it’s unwillingness to provide reasonable explanations of both its tactics and goals must be called into question.

Whatever the current White House’s opinions of the war fought to vanquish Saddam Hussein’s reign over Iraq, the premature withdrawal of U.S. forces from that nation by President Obama opened up a power vacuum that has been filled by ISIS. Why were there no contingency plans to deal with this very obvious outcome?

If President Obama had, as a key goal, the avoidance of armed conflict in the Middle East and the removal of the U.S. military, why did he commit U.S. armed forces to play a key role in the ouster of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi? Gaddafi had renounced and disbanded his nuclear program, and broken his ties to terrorists. He was on the same side as the West in opposing al Qaeda. That decision clearly indicates to Iran that there is no benefit in siding with the U.S. on nuclear disarmament and opposing terrorism.

The result of the President’s decision was a clear victory for terrorists in the region. That opens up the next issue. Why was an attack mounted on the American facility in Benghazi, and why did both the Obama White House and the Clinton State Department work so vigorously to mislead the public about an unknown video being the cause? Why were air, sea, and land forces prohibited from mounting a rescue attempt? According to discussions by the New York Analysis of Policy & Government with experienced retired military personnel, the allegations that no American forces were within range is completely false. Why have relevant documents not been released, and relevant personnel not been allowed to testify?

Similarly, why did the White House side with the radical and violent Muslim Brotherhood against the pro-peace, U.S.-friendly regime of Hosni Mubarak? When the Muslim Brotherhood took power and began committing atrocities, why did President Obama remain silent—until the Muslim Brotherhood was in turn ousted, and the White House then decided to protest that ouster?

Further south in Africa, the Boko Haram, a terrorist organization now affiliated with ISIS, has been noted for some time for its atrocities, particularly against young women. Despite its obvious and well-known reputation, the White House and the Clinton State Department avoided placing the organization on the terrorist list. Why? And, in the wake of revelations regarding a potential financial incentive for Ms. Clinton to fail to be truthful regarding Boko Haram, why hasn’t the White House acted?

Why didn’t the White House act in a timely manner to assist the anti-terrorist leadership in Yemen, when it had clear and abundant warnings of the threat against the government there?

Why did the Obama Administration ignore its own “Red Line” with Syria?

Why has the Obama Administration gone out of its way to publicly castigate the Israelis, who are our most dependable ally in the region?

The questions about Iran, arguably the leading anti-American power in the region, are the most central to the inquiries about the Obama Administrations’ goals and practices. The regime in Tehran is vehemently and militantly anti-U.S., evidenced by instances of its government officials repeatedly chanting “Death to America” and its military practicing assaults on U.S. naval assets.

According to the Clarion Project:
Thus hardening occurs with increase in penile length among certain human beings is mainly attributed to genetic factors, which is again controlled to a large extent on the physical relationship between the couples. cialis pills wholesale We have to believe that a great percentage of patients receiving spinal manipulation have been relieved from generic viagra purchase pain and the recurrence of pain was lessened. However, in the present generation, the younger generation too are consuming the pill to enhance their sexual intimacy. cialis 20 mg Some of the generic medicines that are made with that exact the same ingredient are branded as Kamagra, Silagra, and Kamagra oral jelly, Caverta, Zenegra, Zenegra, http://greyandgrey.com/history/ generic levitra, and Forzest etc.
“Iran has been on the State Department’s list of State Sponsors of Terrorism since 1984. Its 2013 Country Reports on Terrorism states that Iran is supporting Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, the Syrian regime (also labeled a State Sponsor of Terrorism), Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shiite militants in Bahrain and Shiite militias in Iraq.5 The State Department confirmed that Iran continues to work with Al-Qaeda elements, despite their expressed hostility towards one another. It stated: ‘Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior Al-Qaeda (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran allowed AQ facilitators Muhsin al-Fadhli and Adel Radi Saq al-Wahabi al-Harbi to operate a core facilitation pipeline through Iran, enabling AQ to move funds and fighters to South Asia and also to Syria. . Al-Fadhli is a veteran AQ operative who has been active for years. Al-Fadhli began working with the Iranbased AQ facilitation network in 2009 and was later arrested by Iranian authorities. He was released in 2011 and assumed leadership of the Iran-based AQ facilitation network.’

“ Iran operates a global network, including in the U.S. and South America. In May 2013, a 500 page report by an Argentine state prosecutor said Iran has an “intelligence and terrorist network” in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Colombia, Guyana, Trinidad, Tobago and Suriname and elsewhere.6 The State Department also said Iran increased its presence in Africa. Iran is also known to work closely with North Korea on weapons of mass destruction programs. The IRGC is believed to have a presence in Sudan (another State Sponsor of Terrorism), where it oversees a supply route to Hamas.”

Despite all that, the President Obama’s policies towards Iran have been apparently intentionally weak and ineffective:

When the “Green Revolution” opposed the extremist Tehran regime, it was one of the only “Arab Spring” movements not supported by the White House.

The White House has softened its stance on sanctions against Tehran.

There has been no significant White House response to Iranian and Iranian-backed forces moving into Latin America.

Secretary of State Clinton facilitated the transfer of uranium to Russia while Moscow was assisting Iran’s nuclear program

American air strikes against ISIS have been miniscule compared to past U.S. efforts against other aggressors, as Washington has allowed Iranian forces to achieve Tehran’s long-sought after goal of expanding its power in Iraq under the excuse of fighting that force.

The White House has allowed deadlines to be breached in nuclear talks with Iran, allowing that nation vital time to actually achieve the ability to produce nuclear weapons.

The White House owes the American people and Congress an immediate, clear and thorough explanation of its Middle Eastern goals and practices.

Tags al Qaeda, Boko Haram, deadline with Iran, Iran, Iran and terrorism, Iran's nuclear program, Iranian negotiations, Obama and terrorism, Obama's Middle Eastern olicy, U.S. middle Eastern policy