[Login / Register]

Menu

Forums

error

This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: The Case Against Barack Hussein Obama - They are KILLING Children! 9/12/2013 1:39:01 AM
	Eagle slaughter: Wind farms kill 67 eagles in 5 years WASHINGTON (AP) — Wind energy facilities have killed at least 67 golden and bald eagles in the last five years, but the figure could be much higher, according to a new scientific study by government biologists. The research represents one of the first tallies of eagle deaths attributed to the nation’s growing wind energy industry, which has been a pillar of President Barack Obama’s plans to reduce the pollution blamed for global warming. Wind power releases no air pollution. PHOTOS: What are the chances? But at a minimum, the scientists wrote, wind farms in 10 states have killed at least 85 eagles since 1997, with most deaths occurring between 2008 and 2012, as the industry was greatly expanding. Most deaths — 79 — were golden eagles that struck wind turbines. One of the eagles counted in the study was electrocuted by a power line. The president of the American Bird Conservancy, Mike Parr, said the tally was “an alarming and concerning finding.” A trade group, the American Wind Energy Association, said in a statement that the figure was much lower than other causes of eagle deaths. The group said it was working with the government and conservation groups to find ways to reduce eagle casualties. Still, the scientists said their figure is likely to be “substantially” underestimated, since companies report eagledeaths voluntarily and only a fraction of those included in their total were discovered during searches for dead birds by wind-energy companies. The study also excluded the deadliest place in the country for eagles, a cluster of wind farms in a northern California area known as Altamont Pass. Wind farms built there decades ago kill more than 60 per year. The research affirms an AP investigation in May, which revealed dozens of eagle deaths from wind energy facilities and described how the Obama administration was failing to fine or prosecute wind energy companies, even though each death is a violation of federal law. The Fish and Wildlife Service has said it is investigating 18 bird-death cases involving wind-power facilities, and seven have been referred to the Justice Department. Wind farms are clusters of turbines as tall as 30-story buildings, with spinning rotors as wide as a passenger jet’s wingspan. Though the blades appear to move slowly, they can reach speeds up to 170 mph at the tips, creating tornado-like vortexes. Wind farms in two states, California and Wyoming, were responsible for 58 deaths, followed by facilities in Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, Washington, Utah, Texas, Maryland and Iowa. In all, 32 facilities were implicated. One in Wyoming was responsible for a dozen golden eagle deaths, the most at a single facility. The research was published in the Journal of Raptor Research. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/11/eagle-slaughter-wind-farms-kill-67-eagles-5-years/#ixzz2eddrlO1Z Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: The Case Against Barack Hussein Obama - They are KILLING Children! 9/12/2013 2:40:14 AM
	THE TWO MAJOR PROBLEMS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA’S SYRIA ADDRESS President Barack Obama addressed the nation Tuesday night, explaining why the chemical attack in Syria matters and where the U.S. goes from here. In his address the President talked about the images of Syrians writhing on the floor of a hospital and dying after what appears to be a chemical attack. The President said that when “dictators commit atrocities they count on the world to look away.” Obama said that the evidence against Syrian President Bashar al Assad is clear as he made the claim that “Assad’s government gassed to death over 1,000 people including children.” “No one disputes that chemical weapons were used in Syria.” and went on to say “We know the Assad regime was responsible”. The problem with President Obama’s address however is that while he made very definite statements about the chemical attack clearly happening at the hands of the Assad regime, he offered no evidence of that claim. As we have reported, the American public has no interest in the U.S. intervening in Syria. Some polls indicate as many as 91% percent of Americans are against it. Reports indicate that Congress is leaning 10 to 1 against military action. The Obama administration has insisted that they have no choice but to get involved because of the use of chemical weapons. Where the President needed to move public opinion was by offering evidence, not simply his word, but evidence that the Assad regime committed this atrocity. It is not enough for the President to state that because there is evidence of the use of sarin, that draws a direct line to Assad. We have also reported that Turkish security forces arrested members of al Nusra Front with 2kgs of sarin on May 31, 2013. Millions of Americans are aware that al Nusra is the Syrian wing of al Qaeda in Iraq and certainly is capable of carrying out this kind of chemical attack. On that note, it is interesting that in the 15 minutes President Obama spent appealing to the American people he made mention of the name al Qaeda only once and did not directly address the fact that those forces are actively working to overthrow Assad. The second major problem with the President’s appeal was that he made a promise that the public will almost definitely reject at face value. “I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not authorize open ended action as we experienced in Iraq. I will not engage in a prolonged air campaign as we did in Libya,” promised the President. Of course, this promise cannot be made when there are so many unknown variables. What if Assad retaliates and launches a larger chemical attack? What if Iran and Syria launch attacks against Israel? And the biggest question, what if U.S. strikes help to topple the Assad regime and these stockpiles of chemical weapons are exposed to “rebel” fighters including al Nusra Front? Would the U.S. not be compelled to send in ground troops to secure those weapons? Tuesday, the President needed to convince the public that the moral obligation of the United States is to intervene against ruthless dictators. For too many Americans, that address has been given one too many times. (Visited 16,786 times, 16,786 visits today) http://benswann.com/the-two-major-problems-with-president-obamas-syria-address/
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: The Case Against Barack Hussein Obama - They are KILLING Children! 9/12/2013 10:33:35 PM
	FEDS WILL FORCE TAXPAYERS TO SPEND $2 BILLION EVERY YEAR TO PROMOTE OBAMACARE 1 hour ago \| US \| Posted by Joshua Cook September 12, 2013 Tweet 5 Obamacare, also known as the Affordable Care Act, has never been embraced, or even accepted, by the American people. Indeed Obama spent the majority of his first two years in office – years in which he was backed by a Democrat majority in the House and Senate – pushing the program, with the methods fueling the first scandal of Obama’s presidential career, theflag@whitehouse.gov scandal. After it passed, the program grew less and less popular. Dozens of lawsuits – at least one of which will probably get to the Supreme Court – sought to modify the law on religious grounds. Multiple companies have cited its provisions as the reason for cutting jobs and hours, and the implementation of the employer mandate has even been delayed because of the strain it would place on small businesses. Insurance premiums have already risen for individuals, and studies have shown that young people would be financially better off paying the fines for having no coverage than purchasing coverage. Even Union leaders have spoken against the law, saying it would “destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.” Meanwhile, its backers, like Harry Reid, have said that it would necessarily lead to the creation of a Canada, UK or France-style single payer system, an idea the American people opposes even more strongly. The government’s response to this opposition and skepticism, however, has not been to reconsider, modify or eliminate the program. Instead, the writers of Obamacare included Section 4002. Section 4002, according to Kent Masterson Brown, creates a fund used for promoting Obamacare. Between 2010 and 2015, the money appropriated increases from $500 million to $2 billion per year. The “Prevention and Public Health Fund” will “Provide for expanded and sustained national investment in prevention and public health programs to improve health and help restrain the rate of growth in private and public sector health care costs.” It almost admits in this wording that its purpose is to promote the program, though it doesn’t reveal the extent to which this is the case. According to Brown, this funding has gone to symposiums for journalists, and it’s also gone to media companies like the Washington Post, NBC, Reuters and CBS. In addition, it’s gone to putting promotions of Obamacare on Modern Family, Grey’s Anatomy and other primetime TV shows. It’s also helped to fund non-profit organizations committed to promoting Obamacare. More traditional uses of promotional funds have also been paid for. $8 million, for instance, has gone to a public relations contract to help increase public support of the program, or in other words, “to convince skeptical – or simply confused – Americans that the ACA is good for them and convince them to enroll in a plan.” Using taxpayer money to convince citizens to support a partisan agenda is unconscionable and a very dangerous policy. Creating a government program with such funds built into its very structure is insane. Government is meant to represent the people, not lead them at an expense of $2 billion per year. (Visited 678 times, 678 visits today) http://benswann.com/feds-will-force-taxpayers-to-spend-2-billion-every-year-to-promote-obamacare/
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: The Case Against Barack Hussein Obama - They are KILLING Children! 9/12/2013 11:41:04 PM
	2 Hours Ago by Tim Brown CIA Delivering Weapons to Obama-Supported Syrian Rebels Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/cia-delivering-weapons-obama-supported-syrian-jihadists-weapons/#ixzz2eizCu2x1 Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/cia-delivering-weapons-obama-supported-syrian-jihadists-weapons/#PrFd8XT0kcBe9gqT.99 We've reported on how the Obama administration has been secretly arming Syrian jihadists since 2012. Now reports are coming out that the Central Intelligence Agency, headed by Muslim John Brenner, has been delivering light machine guns (something the Obama administration does not want in the hands of ordinary Americans) and other small arms to Syrian rebels for weeks. This is the same agency that wants to keep their operative's mouths shut and threatening them and their families if they testify about the jihadist attack in Benghazi. According to the Associated Press: The agency has also arranged for the Syrian opposition to receive anti-tank weaponry like rocket-propelled grenades through a third party, presumably one of the Gulf countries that has been arming the rebels, a senior U.S. intelligence official and two former intelligence officials said Thursday. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the classified program publicly. … The officials said the aid has been arriving for more than a month, much of it delivered through a third party, which could explain why the rebel commander Idris does not believe the U.S. directly delivered the aid. The officials said the aid is delivered to commanders who have been vetted by the CIA, and the path of the weaponry is tracked through trusted parties within the country — though eventually, once they're in the hands of fighters, the U.S. loses sight of where the weapons go. … The CIA program is classified as covert, which means it would be briefed to Congress's intelligence committees but not its defense committees. That explains why some senior lawmakers on the defense committees have complained the lethal aid was not arriving, two of the officials said. Rebels are denying that they are receiving aid (as if they would admit it). Rebel commander General Salim Idris told NPR that no such aid had been provided, and the CIA declined to comment. The rebels have requested quite bit of aid from the US, including anti-aircraft. Officials say they don't want such arms in the hands of the Syrians, believing that they might fall into the hands of al-Qaeda, which I'll remind you are part of the factions that make up the Syrian rebels. The Washington Post said that the shipments of light weapons and other munitions "can be tracked." This immediately raises a red flag with the current administration who failed to track any of the nearly 2,500 weapons they authorized to walk across the southern border of the United States. Wait, one ATF agent did make a homemade tracker and used a 40 hour battery. I guess these weapons being sent to Syrian rebels are in capable hands, and we'll be able to keep our eyes on them, right? Beyond that, the Post also reports non-lethal gear to the rebels as well. That aid includes vehicles, sophisticated communications equipment and advanced combat medical kits. However, on page three of the WAPO report the claims of Mark S. Ward, the State Department's senior adviser on assistance to Syria, who coordinates nonlethal aid to rebels from southern Turkey. "We feel we're able to get these local councils off to a good start," said Ward, a veteran U.S. Agency for International Development official who has worked in Libya, Afghanistan and Pakistan. "We vet individuals who are getting our assistance to make sure they are not affiliated with terror organizations." The assistance to local communities includes training in municipal management as well as basic infrastructure such as garbage trucks, ambulances and firetrucks. The areas receiving this aid are carefully selected, U.S. officials said, noting that extremist groups, including Jabhat al-Nusra, are delivering services to communities newly under rebel control. "If you see new firetrucks and ambulances in places where al-Nusra is trying to win hearts and minds, this might not be a coincidence," said a U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to explain details of a sensitive strategy. The initiatives are part of a $250 million effort to support moderate factions of the Syrian opposition. Of that, the United States has earmarked $26.6 million in aid for the Supreme Military Council. The delivery that began this week does not include items that the rebels have long identified as priorities: night-vision goggles and body armor. So Ward is telling us that Jabhat al-Nusra along with other jihadist groups is delivering services to communities under rebel control. They aren't being stopped. They are being encouraged, and Ward tells the American taxpayer that we are going to send tens of millions of dollars to those that put up drawings like the one below where jihadists are marching on Washington. The American people and Congress should be up in arms about this treasonous spending of taxpayer money. Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/cia-delivering-weapons-obama-supported-syrian-jihadists-weapons/#ixzz2eizXRbKr Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/cia-delivering-weapons-obama-supported-syrian-jihadists-weapons/#PrFd8XT0kcBe9gqT.99
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: The Case Against Barack Hussein Obama - They are KILLING Children! 9/13/2013 8:58:16 PM
	WSJ: Syrian Rebel Leader Fears Obama Policy Strengthening Assad's Hand, Turning Him Into 'National Hero' Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2013/09/12/wsj-syrian-rebel-leader-fears-obama-policy-strengthening-assads-hand-t#ixzz2eoBFgIFy While the liberal media predictably focus on the domestic political ramifications for President Obama as regards his strange and ever-evolving policy on Syria, the real story worth reporting is how Obama may actually be strengthening Bashar Assad's hand, even making him "a national hero" who can not only survive but thrive as a result. In her September 12 front-page story "Syrian Rebels Hurt By Delay," The Wall Street Journal's Nour Malas has an excellent story to that effect. Filing from Istanbul, she quotes Mohammmed al-Daher, "a commander in the rebels' Western backed Free Syria Army" as lamenting that he "wouldn't be surprised if the end result of these negotiations is that [Assad] remains as president and beyond that, turns into a national hero who saved his country." Malas continued (emphasis mine): Story Continues Below Ad ↓ The U.S. effort to arm rebels, authorized by Mr. Obama in June, appeared to have taken a step forward on Wednesday. The U.S. has started providing some arms to the Free Syrian Army, according to Khalid Saleh, spokesman for the Syrian Opposition Coalition. Mr. Saleh declined to provide details. U.S. officials said the program was delayed by initial objections from U.S. lawmakers and the difficulty of establishing secure pipelines to deliver arms to moderate fighters. The White House and the Central Intelligence Agency, which runs the arming program, declined to comment on reports that the first weapons had arrived. The delay of a U.S. military strike gave congressional supporters a new opportunity to promote their cause. But the diplomatic maneuvering—and its offer of a possible way out for Mr. Assad—came as yet another disappointment for rebels in Syria. Rebels based in the Damascus suburbs, counting on the U.S., had already adjusted their battle plans. Anticipating American airstrikes that in their view could help neutralize Mr. Assad's air force, the rebels plotted to follow with an assault on the Syrian capital that, they hoped, would crack the regime, according to these rebels. Those expectations—as with other rebel hopes for game-changing U.S. intervention over the course of the 2½-year conflict—appear to have been unrealistic. Mr. Obama raised the idea of U.S. military action as a way to punish the Assad government for using chemical weapons—not to help the rebels in the battle on the ground. U.S. military officials said the threat of a U.S. attack did affect the battle. The officials said they had seen some retreat in recent weeks by Mr. Assad's forces, moving from attacking positions to bunkers to shelter from a potential bombing campaign. As a result, the regime had been in less of a position to strike rebel positions, particularly around the city of Aleppo, the officials said. But reports of new attacks this week by the Assad regime suggest the tide shifted as the threat of an immediate American attack receded. [...] The delay also benefits rebel extremists, Western-backed rebels said. When the option of U.S. strikes emerged following the chemical-weapons attack on Aug. 21, al Qaeda-linked extremists and allied foreign jihadists in the opposition's largest foothold in northern Syria, fearing they could also be targets, went into hiding. Free Syrian Army rebels said they believed the extremists re-emerged as emboldened and more-mobile guerrilla fighters. The presence and strength of the extremists makes it harder for moderates to convince the West that Assad's defeat wouldn't turn Syria into a rogue nation dominated by terrorists. That concern also slows outside help, moderates say, as extremists sow Western doubts over the views and aims of the rebel movement. "The jihadists benefit in all the chaos," said Samir Nachar, a Syrian Opposition Coalition member opposed to the rebel extremists. "They gain as the moderates waffle about waiting for the rest of the world." The latest promise of intervention wasn't the first time the Syrian Opposition Coalition and its allied rebel forces adjusted their strategy in anticipation of U.S. aid. The Free Syrian Army regrouped and changed its leadership structure several times since the start of the civil war with the belief, rebel officials said, that by following a model encouraged by the West they could cleanse their ranks of extremists and guarantee a more consistent flow of funds and, eventually, arms. Supreme Military Council leader Brig. Gen. Salim Idriss and other council members said support so far has been inadequate. U.S. officials said rebels had unfounded expectations and often misinterpreted their statements and actions. Kudos to Malas (pictured above via her Twitter profile) for her report and to the Wall Street Journal for placing this on today's front page. About the Author Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters. Click here to follow Ken Shepherd on Twitter. Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2013/09/12/wsj-syrian-rebel-leader-fears-obama-policy-strengthening-assads-hand-t#ixzz2eoB4Piih
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

My Links

Like us on Facebook!