POLITICO: “If Four Federal Agencies Closed Their Doors, Would Anyone Notice?” (Darren Samuelsohn, “Furlough Friday: 4 Agencies Closed For Business, POLITICO, 5/23/13)

FOUR MAJOR FEDERAL AGENCIES CLOSED TODAY DUE TO THE SEQUESTER:

Roughly 5 Percent Of The Federal Workforce Will Take An Unpaid Holiday: “This is no philosophical experiment Friday when, thanks to sequestration, the IRS, EPA, HUD and OMB turn a normal workday into an unpaid holiday for nearly all of their employees. In all, about 115,000 people — roughly 5 percent of the federal workforce — won’t be on the clock for the day. Staffers for the Labor and Interior departments will also get an extra unpaid day for their Memorial Day weekend.” (Darren Samuelsohn, “Furlough Friday: 4 Agencies Closed For Business, POLITICO, 5/23/13)

Washington Post: “Three Big Federal Agencies To Close Friday.” “Three of the largest federal agencies will close to the public on Friday, the first time since the government shutdowns of the 1990s that large corners of the government have ceased operations on a weekday. The mass furlough of 115,000 employees at the Internal Revenue Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Housing and Urban Development and the small Office of Management and Budget — 5 percent of the federal workforce — is happening because of the budget cuts known as sequestration.” (Lisa Rein, “Three big federal agencies to close Friday, The Washington Post, 5/23/13)

FLASHBACK: DIRE WARNINGS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION

President Obama Predicted A Series Of Harmful Consequences: “[Obama] warns that if Republicans refuse him another tax increase and prevail with their ‘meat-cleaver’ approach to the budget, there will be no first responders to help disaster-struck communities recover; prosecutors will be unable to put away criminals; schools will have to lay off teachers; parents will lose child care; and kids won’t get vaccinations. As a warning shot, the administration began releasing detained illegal immigrants—a move that will not help the cause of immigration reform.” (Shikha Dalmia, “Obama’s Phony Sequester Outrage,” Reason, 3/5/13)

President Obama: “Across the country, these cuts will force federal prosecutors to close cases and potentially let criminals go.  Air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks, and that could cause delays at airports across the country.  Tens of thousands of parents will have to scramble to find child care for their kids.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings, including more than 3,500 children right here in Virginia. “ (President Obama, “Remarks by the President on the Impact of the Sequester – Newport News, VA,” White House, 2/26/13)

BUT SOME OFFICIALS ARE NOW SKEPTICAL THAT ANYONE WILL NOTICE

President Of The American Federation For Government Employees (AFGE): “I Don’t Think Anyone Will Think Much About It.” “[S]ome say closing down may not be such a disaster for the public. ‘Unless something dramatic occurs such as the Great Lakes catching fire, I don’t think the public will think much about it . . . unfortunately,’ said John O’Grady, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 704, which represents EPA employees.” (Lisa Rein, “Three big federal agencies to close Friday, The Washington Post, 5/23/13)

AFGE Official: “In The Overall Scheme Of Things, The Impact Will Be Small.” “’We could have done better customer service and provided employees with more flexibility to choose all of their days off,’ said Carolyn Federoff, an attorney and AFGE official at HUD’s Boston office. ‘But in the overall scheme of things, the impact will be small.’” (Lisa Rein, “Three big federal agencies to close Friday, The Washington Post, 5/23/13)

And While Lawmakers Continue To Ramp Up The Rhetoric …

President Obama: “No Smart Way” To Cut $85 Billion: “The problem is, when you’re cutting $85 billion in seven months … there’s no smart way to do that. There’s no smart way to do that.” (“Obama on Sequester Cuts: ‘There’s No Smart Way To Do That,’” Real Clear Politics, 2/26/13)

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) Asks If They Will Have To Eliminate All Funding For Special Education: “Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who heads the Senate Appropriations Labor subcommittee, argued the cuts would be devastating.  ‘Do they intend to eliminate the entire National Institutes of Health? That wouldn’t be enough to achieve their proposed cut,’ he said. ‘Do they plan to eliminate all funding for special education, Title I, after-school centers, and teacher quality? Again, that wouldn’t be enough to achieve their proposed cut.’“ (Erik Wasson, “Here Comes Sequester: Part 2,” The Hill, 5/22/13)

It Remains Clear That There Is A “Smart Way” To Make Cuts:

The Hill: “GAO: Government Not Cutting Waste.” “Congress and the Obama administration have scrapped just a fraction of the duplicative programs targeted for cuts by Government Accountability Office (GAO), the agency’s chief told lawmakers Wednesday. Comptroller General Gene L. Dodaro said just 12 percent of more than 300 recommendations issued by GAO since 2011 to eliminate, combine or modify duplicative programs have been fully carried out.” (Ben Goad, “GAO: Government not cutting waste,” The Hill, 5/22/13)

The Highlights:


Billions Still Being Wasted On Duplicative Programs: “The hearing follows the release of the latest in a series of GAO reports finding billions of taxpayer dollars are being wasted on government overlap spread across dozens of federal agencies.  Among its findings is the existence of two separate programs responsible for federal catfish inspections, 76 different drug abuse programs and a general lack of coordination between departments charged with providing veterans services.“ (Ben Goad, “GAO: Government not cutting waste,” The Hill, 5/22/13)

$82 Million In Unnecessary Expenses At The Pentagon: “The Pentagon has wasted $82 million in unnecessary expenses for military uniforms that now come in seven different camouflage patterns.” (Ben Goad, “GAO: Government not cutting waste,” The Hill, 5/22/13)

Billions Lost At The IRS And $66 Million In Overlapping Contracts At The Department Of Homeland Security: “The report identified billions more in revenue lost as a result of untargeted enforcement by the Internal Revenue Service and dozens of contracts awarded by the Department of Homeland Security that overlapped with activities already conducted elsewhere in the department. Together the contracts totaled roughly $66 million.” (Ben Goad, “GAO: Government not cutting waste,” The Hill, 5/22/13)

AND THE LIST GOES ON …

U.S. Military Camouflage An “Expensive Case Study In Federal Duplication”: “In 2002, the U.S. military had just two kinds of camouflage uniforms. One was green, for the woods. The other was brown, for the desert. Then things got strange.  Today, there is one camouflage pattern just for Marines in the desert. There is another just for Navy personnel in the desert. The Army has its own ‘universal’ camouflage pattern, which is designed to work anywhere. It also has another one just for Afghanistan, where the first one doesn’t work. … In just 11 years, two kinds of camouflage have turned into 10. And a simple aspect of the U.S. government has emerged as a complicated and expensive case study in federal duplication.” (David A. Fahrenthold, “With 10 Patterns, U.S. Military Branches Out On Camouflage Front,” The Washington Post, 5/8/13)

GAO Finds The Pentagon Spent More Than $12 Million On Designing New Camouflage Patterns: “At the Pentagon, a GAO study commissioned by the Senate Armed Services Committee found that the military services have spent more than $12 million on designing new camouflage patterns. The cost of buying, stocking and shipping 10 different types of camouflage uniforms is believed to be millions more. Is anybody trying to fix this?” (David A. Fahrenthold, “With 10 Patterns, U.S. Military Branches Out On Camouflage Front,” The Washington Post, 5/8/13)

Congress Forces Pentagon To Spend Billions On Tanks, Ships And Planes It Doesn’t Need. “Lawmakers have nixed several of the money-saving ideas, instead forcing the Defense Department to purchase or maintain equipment it says it doesn’t need. Take for instance the half-billion dollars in Abrams tanks that Congress ordered up for the next two years, or the seven obsolete ships the Navy is being forced to keep. The Pentagon says it doesn’t want them, or need them. But taxpayers will keep paying the price.” (Phillip Swarts, “Lawmakers force Pentagon to buy tanks, keep ships and planes it doesn’t need,” The Washington Guardian, 5/10/13)



Billions Lost In Unemployment Fraud. “A study by the St. Louis Federal Reserve released last week found that of the $108 billion paid out in unemployment benefits in 2011, some $3.3 billion was paid out dishonestly The largest share of the fraud payments—$2.2 billion—went to people who were still working.” (Mark Koba, “$3.3 Billion Lost in Unemployment Fraud: Study,” CNBC, 4/29/13)

Taxpayers Suffer Loss In Auto Company Investment: “Fisker Automotive Inc. spent more than six times as much U.S. taxpayer and investor money to produce each luxury plug-in car it sold than the company received from customers, according to a research report. … Fisker has spent $1.3 billion in taxpayer and venture capital money, or $660,000 for each car it sold, the report said.” (Angela Greiling Keane, “Fisker Spent $660,000 on Each $103,000 Plug-in Car,” Bloomberg, 4/18/13)

The potential loss of $171 million would be largest loss of federal loan money since the 2011 failure of solar panel maker Solyndra, which declared bankruptcy and laid off all its workers after receiving a $528 million loan from the Energy Department.” (Matthew Daly, “Obama Adminsitration Had Advanced Warning On Fisker,” The Associated Press, 4/24/13)

FAA Tech Upgrade Running Nearly Half A Billion Over Budget “With No End In Sight:” “For more than a decade the FAA has promised to modernize and make the civil aviation system more efficient and reliable, but the only things it has reliably generated are delays or cost overruns or usually both. The project, known as NextGen, is four years off schedule with no end in sight. … A 2011 investigation found that one part of NextGen ran $330 million over budget—or half of the FAA sequester—and then the FAA paid the contractor responsible $150 million in bonuses…. The overruns are now approaching $500 million, and that’s merely one item.” (The Wall Street Journal, “Flying the Government Skies,” 4/23/13)

IRS Overpaid Upwards Of $13 Billion In Tax Credits: “The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) overpaid between $11.6 billion and $13.6 billion in tax credits designed to help low-income families in fiscal 2012 , the Treasury Department announced in a report released Monday.” (Julian Hattem, “IRS overpaid up to $13.6B in low-income tax credits, report finds,” The Hill, 4/22/13)

Postal Service Hemorrhaging $25 Million A Day:  “The U.S. Postal Service could become ‘a significant burden to the taxpayer’ if it does not get needed flexibility to change its business operations, Postmaster General Patrick R. Donahoe told Congress Wednesday. … ‘We are losing $25 million dollars every day and we are on an unsustainable path.’” (“USPS losing $25 million daily with ‘broken business model,’” The Washington Post, 4,17,13)

Redundant Federal Programs Wasting Billions: “Redundant federal programs are leading to billions in waste, congressional auditors say, and the government is slow to adopt reforms to fix the problem. The White House says President Obama recognizes the problem and will propose eliminating redundant programs in the budget plan he releases Wednesday. … Over the past three years, the Government Accountability Office found 162 areas where agencies are duplicating efforts, at a cost of tens of billions of dollars. How many billions? No one knows.” (Gregory Korte, “Report: Redundant Federal Programs Waste Billions,” USA Today, 4/9/13)

Billions For New Mapping Data: “Government agencies are spending billions on new mapping data — without checking whether some other government agency already has maps they could use.” (Gregory Korte, “Report: Redundant Federal Programs Waste Billions,” USA Today, 4/9/13)

Duplicative Renewable Energy Programs: “At least 23 different federal agencies run hundreds of programs to support renewable energy.” (Gregory Korte, “Report: Redundant Federal Programs Waste Billions,” USA Today, 4/9/13)

Lack Of Coordination Between Branches Of The Armed Services: “Each branch of the armed services is developing its own camouflage uniforms without sharing them with other services.” (Gregory Korte, “Report: Redundant Federal Programs Waste Billions,” USA Today, 4/9/13)

Overlapping Research At The Department Of Homeland Security: “29 Department of Homeland Security contracts that partly or completely overlapped with research being done by another part of the same department. Five contracts funded research into the detection of the same chemical.” (Gregory Korte, “Report: Redundant Federal Programs Waste Billions,” USA Today, 4/9/13)

Stimulus-Funded Condom Study Creates Zero Jobs. The details of a stimulus grant awarded to Indiana University to study condom use have now been released on a government website. The study, titled ‘Barriers to Correct Condom Use,’ is now completed, according to the website, and the university received $423,500 of stimulus funds to perform the study. The stimulus project yielded a total of 0.00 jobs created, according to the federal government. ‘No jobs created/retained,’ the form says under ‘Description of Jobs Created.’” (Daniel Halper, “$423,500 Stimulus Program on ‘Correct Condom Use’ Yields Zero Jobs,” The Weekly Standard, 4/4/2013)

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Report Finds Unimplemented Recommendations Could Have Saved Taxpayers $67 Billion. “The Committee’s review found that the backlog had grown to a high of 16,906 open recommendations. Using the most conservative cost-saving estimates, implementing these recommendations could save taxpayers $67 billion per year.” (House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Report, “Staff Report: Open and Unimplemented IG Recommendations Could Save Taxpayers $67Billion,” 3/5/13)

Energy Department Approved $3.5 Million in Bonuses to 10 Employees, Some As Much As 82 Percent Above The Market Rate. “Federal employees are facing unpaid days off and salary cuts due to the sequester, but several contract workers inside the Energy Department are still raking in the cash. Ten individuals at the department’s Oak Ridge nuclear laboratory are set to make an extra $3.5 million above and beyond their normal pay, according to an Energy Department inspector general investigation that exposes a lavish bonus system. The 10 people are executives at the company UCOR, which the department hired for environmental clean-up.  And despite watchdog warnings that the executives’ salaries are as much as 82 percent above the market rate, Energy Department officials continue to pay out the bonuses.” (Phillip Swarts, “Energy Department approves lavish bonuses: $3.5 million to 10 workers alone,” Washington Guardian, 3/29/13)

IRS Video Production Unit Costs Taxpayers $4 Million A Year: “The Senate’s top tax-writer wants answers from the IRS about a ‘StarTrek’ spoof that the tax-collecting agency has now apologized for making. … Baucus also questioned why the IRS had a video production unit at all — especially at its reported $4 million a year price tag. The ‘Star Trek” parody and a separate takeoff on “Gilligan’s Island” cost around $60,000 in tandem, the IRS has said.” (Bernie Becker, “Baucus to IRS: How did the ‘Star Trek’ video happen? Who’s responsible?” The Hill, 3/27/13)

Energy Department Mismanaged More Than $90 Million In Stimulus: “The Energy Department’s (DOE) internal watchdog is attacking DOE management of a $1.5-billion stimulus program to help develop technology that captures industrial carbon dioxide emissions. An Office of Inspector General (IG) audit made public Tuesday examines $1.1 billion in funding for 15 projects. The audit notes three project recipients together received $90 million even though reviews of the proposals ‘identified significant financial and/or technical issues.’” (Ben Geman, “Report: Energy Department Mismanaged Stimulus-Backed Climate Program,” The Hill, 3/22/13)

“Pentagon Handed Out $419 Million In Improper Travel Reimbursements Last Year.” “While making improvements in some spending areas, the Defense Department was singled out this week for failing to trim unnecessary travel reimbursements. In fact, the Pentagon’s internal watchdog concluded that wasteful travel spending actually grew last year to a total of $419.3 million, accounting for roughly five percent of the Pentagon’s mammoth $8.4 billion travel budget.” (Phillip Swarts, “Pentagon Handed Out $419 Million In Improper Travel Reimbursements Last Year,” The Washington Guardian, 3/21/13)

On Wednesday, Air Force commander Maj.- Gen. Amir Eshel spelled out Israel’s concerns from a military perspective. The chance of war breaking out at any time is extremely high. Syria has a massive arsenal that includes advanced anti-aircraft missiles, anti-ship missiles and surface- to-surface missiles. Syria also has large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, advanced artillery as well as the other components of a large conventional military force.

Eshel warned, “Syria is collapsing before our eyes. If it collapses tomorrow we could find its vast arsenal dispersed and pointing at us.”

In that event, Eshel said, the air force will have to operate at 100 percent of its capacity to clear a path for ground forces to operate in Syria and secure the armaments to prevent them from being dispersed, or used against Israel.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz warned that Israel could easily find itself fighting a three-front war in the near future. Presumably we would be fighting Syria, Lebanon and Iran – whose nuclear program continues to move to completion undaunted by empty US and European threats.

Syria is a mess because there are no good guys in a position to win. Syrian President Bashar Assad is one of the most dangerous leaders in the world. He is a major supporter of terrorist groups. He enabled al-Qaida and Hezbollah to use Syria as a logistical base in their war against US forces in Iraq. He is a vassal of Iran. He is allied with Hezbollah. He is a mass murderer.

Since the civil war began two years ago, Assad’s complete dependence on Iran and Hezbollah – as well as on Russia – has been exposed for all to see. There is little doubt that whatever checks the US was able to exert against him before the civil war began no longer exist. And if he survives in power, he will be completely indifferent to US pressure and so will behave far more violently than he did before the war began.

And yet for all Assad’s horrific behavior and the reasonable presumption that his actions will only become more violent and dangerous with each additional day he remains in power, the most telling aspect of the Syrian civil war is that Israel, the US and Europe are incapable of deciding whether he is better or worse than the alternatives.

Because standing opposed to Assad and his Hezbollah and Iranian protectors is al-Qaida.

Last week, we were regaled with news analyses and stories about how the al-Qaida forces fighting Assad are now splintering. According to breathless, detailed reports, the “moderate” al- Qaida group, the Nusra Front, is being overwhelmed by the “extremist” al-Qaida in Iraq faction. The latter has moved into Syria and is taking over operations, much to the consternation of their moderate Syrian al-Qaida brothers.

But on second thought, since both the Nusra guys and the al-Qaida in Iraq guys are loyal to al-Qaida boss Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Zawahiri told the al-Qaida in Iraq fellows to move to Syria, and since al-Qaida in Iraq formed and financed the Nusra Front, it is not at all clear that anyone is splintering off from anyone, or that anyone is upset about anything.

Aside from revealing the pathological stupidity of Western news services, the attempt to make a distinction between good and bad al-Qaida forces fighting Assad points to the futility of trying to choose sides in this horrible war, which has already seen more than 80,000 killed.

At this point, despite Assad’s successful campaign to restore his control over Qusair, a strategically vital city adjacent to the Syrian-Lebanese border, most assessments indicate that the war is not nearly over. The sides may well stay bogged down fighting one another for years.

Then again, as Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said, it is also possible that it will all be over quickly.

In short then, no one knows how the war will play out in Syria. All Israeli political and military leaders know is that whatever happens, the situation in Syria is dangerous and highly flammable.

Moreover, everyone agrees that the conflict can spill out in two ways – ways which are not mutually exclusive.

First, both the government forces and their Shi’ite allies, and well as their al-Qaida opponents, could attack Israel. Both sides have a clear interest in attacking Israel, since the one thing they all agree on is that they wish to see Israel destroyed. So as is the case for the Palestinians from all parties, for both Assad and his Shi’ite allies and his Sunni opponents, attacking Israel is a surefire way to build public support.

This danger has already materialized. Assad’s forces shot at an IDF jeep patrolling the border this week and rushed to get the story – and their exaggerated version of its outcome – to the media. Rebel forces have taken pot shots at Israel, and targeted UN forces along the border, accusing them of siding with Israel.

As Eshel made clear, the second danger is that the weapons in Syria will proliferate far and wide. US officials have already admitted that they have lost track of much of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal.

This week, PJ Media reported that a State Department whistle blower is about to come forward to divulge new information about the September 11, 2012, al-Qaida attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other US personnel were murdered in the attack. The whistle blower will reportedly reveal that Stevens was sent to Benghazi in a secret State Department effort to buy back anti-aircraft Stinger missiles that al-Qaida received from the State Department during the 2011 US-led NATO campaign to overthrow the regime of longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

Since Gaddafi was defeated, his massive arsenal of terror weapons has spread out across the region, and particularly to Syria and Gaza. If Syrian weapons are similarly dispersed, the Libyan disaster will look like the military equivalent of a skinned knee.

The party most responsible for the barbarous, protracted Syrian civil war that will almost certainly drag Israel into a regional war with is of course the Syrians themselves. But the party second most responsible for this mess is the Obama administration.

Since the outset, the US had only one good option for intervention. It could have operated jointly with Israel to destroy Syria’s missile arsenals and confiscate its weapons of mass destruction.

That is the only sure bet move the US had.

Every other action came with high risks.

Rather than take its sure bet move, at every turn, the Obama administration has opted for the most dangerous action with the smallest possible payoff.

For instance, rather than actively build an opposition army based on Syrian Army defectors, Kurds and other relatively moderate forces, Obama subcontracted the formation of the Syrian opposition to Turkey’s Islamist Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. As Israel and others warned, Erdogan used his power as the US contractor to build an opposition dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose ideology is largely indistinguishable from al-Qaida. It was the Brotherhood’s domination of the Syrian opposition forces that paved the way for al-Qaida to enter and dominate opposition forces.

After Obama ensured that pro-Western forces would have no chance of taking over a post- Assad Syria, he allowed Russia to make matters worse. Rather than threaten Russian President Vladimir Putin in a credible way to prevent him from supplying S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria, Obama sat back and did nothing to block the imminent transfer of the game-changing system to Syria.

And as Eshel warned, Syria’s advanced anti-aircraft batteries, which will threaten Israel’s air superiority, will increase in a profound way the probability that Assad will attack Israel.

In the face of American rank incompetence, Assad has already broken all the red lines he and his father followed for more than 40 years.

He has already used chemical weapons. He has proliferated advanced weaponry to Hezbollah.

And he has already attacked Israel on the Golan Heights. Now that he has already crossed all of these red lines, the only question is how much he will escalate. Equipped with the S-300, the probability that he will escalate drastically has risen precipitously.

For all the danger emanating from Syria, Israel has one ace in the hole. We have a consensus that we must win the coming war with Syria decisively, whatever the cost. And for that consensus, we have just one man to thank: the late Hafez Assad.

During the 1990s, the Israeli Left and the Clinton administration managed to convince the Rabin, Netanyahu and Barak governments to offer to surrender the Golan Heights to Syria.

The only reason that the initiative failed was because Assad Sr. rejected Israel’s repeated offers to surrender the strategic plateau in exchange for a piece of paper with a smiley face on it.

Had Assad accepted Israel’s offers, we would have been facing a situation today that we would be hard pressed to contend with. On the one hand, we would be facing an all but certain war with Syria with al-Qaida or Iran controlling everything from the Jordan Valley to Haifa Bay.

On the other hand we would be facing this threat as a fractured society.

To hide their culpability for rendering Israel all but powerless to defend itself, those who supported surrendering the Golan would be pretending the dangers away. Instead of being free to discuss how to win a war in Syria, we would be bogged down in discussions of whether we have a right to fight in Syria.

In other words, if it hadn’t been for Assad Sr. and his unyielding hatred for Israel, we would be facing the same situation in relation to Syria today that we faced in Lebanon in 2006 and as we have faced in Gaza since we withdrew in 2005. The lack of consensus regarding our strategic imperative to defeat our enemies in Gaza and Lebanon caused the IDF to fail to win its campaigns in both theaters.

So at this bitter juncture, as we face the all but certain prospect of war with Syria while our one ally is behaving like a drunken bull in a China shop, we have one man to thank for our continued ability to face this daunting challenge.

Thank you, Hafez Assad. Your hatred has saved us.

These were words President Obama never used during his speech at the National Defense University yesterday. Rather, he said anything but anything that sounded like Winston Churchill’s immortal speech about defiance in the face of the march of tyranny.

In large part, there was nothing new in the counterterrorism strategy the President announced. Flash back to 2011—that was the real turning point. Before then, Obama really followed what was called “Bush-lite,” pretty much the same tactics as the previous Administration—just dropping all the rhetoric.

The war of ideas was completely banned from the Obama lexicon. Islamist terrorism became “violent extremism.” Terrorism became “senseless violence.” In 2011, however, Obama shifted course dramatically. More than dumping the war of words, the White House signed off on a new counterterrorism strategy that amounted to running away from Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible and limiting the offensive campaign to whacking top-level al-Qaeda with drone strikes.

The new strategy was bound to fail, fighting the last war while al-Qaeda evolved into a global insurgency that has spread from Pakistan to Nigeria.

Yet, even as the new fronts in the war on terrorism sprang up, the Administration continued to argue that it was winning. After Islamist terrorists murdered Americans and burned a U.S. consulate to the ground in Benghazi, the President claimed he was winning. As homegrown terrorists kill in Boston and London, he claims he is winning. As the Taliban mocks the U.S. standing down in Afghanistan, he claims he is winning.

>>> See what the Administration said about the London attack:

Yesterday’s appalling attack on a London street in the middle of the day, which left a British solider dead, was a barbaric act of terrorism perpetrated by Islamist fundamentalists. British Prime Minister David Cameron acknowledged the motivations behind yesterday’s cowardly act by saying:

This country will be absolutely resolute in its stand against violent extremism and terror. We will never give in to terror—or terrorism—in any of its forms. Second, this view is shared by every community in our country. This was not just an attack on Britain—and on our British way of life. It was also a betrayal of Islam—and of the Muslim communities who give so much to our country. There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act. We will defeat violent extremism by standing together.

In stark contrast, the Obama Administration’s response has been to avoid calling the attack terrorism, let alone terrorism motivated by a radical Islamic ideology. Instead the Administration, via the State Department, said it stood with the U.K. in the face of “such senseless violence.”

Senseless violence? One can hardly term a targeted attack on a U.K. soldier in broad daylight — where the assailants gleefully admit the radical motivation behind their attack — “senseless violence.”

Yet, use of this terminology is nothing new for the Obama Administration. “Senseless violence” is the Administration’s catch-all phrase loyally called upon whenever motivations for a despicable act should not be ascribed, lest someone take offense.

Particularly troubling is that “senseless violence” is the same terminology the Administration used when describing the terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed the American Ambassador and three other U.S. citizens.

The terrorist attack in London was indeed a senseless act of violence; however, in refusing to admit the nature and motivations behind the attack, the Obama Administration does disservice to the men and women killed in terrorist attacks. As Heritage’s Nile Gardiner advises in The Telegraph:

It’s time for President Obama to acknowledge reality. This is a global war between the free world and the forces of Islamist terror. These are not acts of “senseless violence.” They are acts of brutal terrorism aimed against Great Britain, the United States and all who defend the principles of liberty, freedom and Western-style democracy. It is important that political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic identify exactly who the enemy is, what their aims are, and why they must be emphatically defeated.

For the Administration to do otherwise would be, well, senseless.

Rather than admit failure and change course, faced with criticism here at home, the President has decided to declare victory, hoping this will reenergize support from the left. In his speech, he promised to do even less and make the less more transparent. This will no doubt please progressives who were unhappy that Obama carried over any vestige of the Bush policies.

While this speech may make the President more popular with the progressive caucus, it amounts to Maginot Line strategy: The U.S. won’t go after them if they don’t come after us. If they do come after us—we will treat them like any other criminal. If they do get through—it won’t be our fault; it will be the result of addled minds and “senseless” violence. Obama has warped backed to the Clinton counterterrorism strategy of the 1990s without remembering that was the strategy that led to 9/11.

Obama framed the challenges we face today as a false choice between sitting back and global, endless, borderless war. In reality, there is much that the U.S. can to defend itself: dismantle global terrorist networks; push back on political Islam; and champion freedom in the world. There are options between doing nothing and invading countries. President Obama has decided to ignore them. He is sick of fighting. Unfortunately, America’s enemies are not.

Candice Lanier – Legendary reporter, Bob Woodward, recently revealed he doesn’t think the IRS scandal rises to the height of the Watergate scandal he was key in uncovering. Rather, Woodward believes it is the circumstances surrounding the September 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and the subsequent response from the federal government that should be closely monitored by the public. “You’re talking about government not working, but who’s in charge of the executive branch. You go to the Constitution, and the president has sole responsibility for the executive branch,” he said in an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “This rests on him. You were talking earlier about kind of dismissing the Benghazi issue as one that’s just political and the president recently said it’s a sideshow, but if you read through all these emails, you see that everyone in the government is saying, ‘Oh, let’s not tell the public that terrorists were involved, people connected to al-Qaida. Let’s not tell the public that there were warnings.’”

Officials in the Obama administration admit that mistakes were made but attribute it to incompetence as opposed to “malice or cover up.” One Obama administration official is quoted as saying: “We’re portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots.” The official added that, “it’s actually closer to us being idiots.”

The administration’s explanation failed to convince the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA), an organization which supports the implementation of a Watergate-style investigatory committee that would oversee a fact-finding mission on the Benghazi attack. The FLEOA is the largest association of federal officers in America. Last Friday, the FLEOA sent a letter of support to Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), the chief architect of a bill that would establish the select committee, and to the investigatory committee itself.      More

a. Many mainstream Muslim organizations have terrorist ties.

b. Mainstream Muslim organizations are fronts for Islamic political organizations whose true desire is to establish Sharia law in America. Muslim Americans are using democratic processes, like litigation and free speech, to subvert democracy and install Sharia law.”

So states the Department of Homeland Security report titled “Manufacturing the Muslim Menace.” See the Clarion Project story by Ryan Mauro below, which states that the report “defends the Brotherhood, saying it is a moderate group that wouldn’t use front groups in America.”

Don’t worry everyone. All this stuff about the Muslim Brotherhood, its front organizations in America (which our government treats as “mainstream Muslim organizations”), unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing case, organizations with ties to Hamas established by our own Justice Department…

…it’s all a “manufactured menace.”

One of the primary goals of the Muslim Brotherhood is to deceive and then co-opt our nation’s political and law enforcement leadership.

You have to hand it to the Muslim Brotherhood-connected leaders in America. That they can refrain from breaking out into hilarious public laughter at the gullibility of our Department of Homeland “Security” leadership demonstrates extraordinary discipline.

Shame on those in leadership who have willfully and blindly fallen for this massive deception.

Our work has never been more important. All of us, working together, need to expose the dangerous fraud that has been perpetrated on the American people!

U.S. Gov’t: Radical Muslims Approved, Moderates Shunned

Counterterrorism trainers are told that U.S. Brotherhood groups’ are not tied to terrorism. Yet the federal gov’t has proved they are.
By Ryan Mauro

Hassan Shibly, Nihad Awad, Zair Shakir, Kifah Mustafa and Siraj Wahhaj (clock-wise from left). All are radical Islamists who have been associated with CAIR.

Shockingly, the advisory committee that likely influenced these guidelines includes numerous individuals affiliated with the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

The document says it is a list of “tips for federal, state and local government and law enforcement officials organizing CVE [Countering Violent Extremism], cultural awareness, counter-radicalization, or counterterrorism training.” It was produced by the Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in cooperation with the National Counterterrorism Center.

The DHS suggestions in the document include:

“Don’t use training premised on theories with little or no evidence to support them. Examples (from the report “Manufacturing the Muslim Menace”) of unsubstantiated theories include:

a. Many mainstream Muslim organizations have terrorist ties.

b. Mainstream Muslim organizations are fronts for Islamic political organizations whose true desire is to establish Sharia law in America. Muslim Americans are using democratic processes, like litigation and free speech, to subvert democracy and install Sharia law.”

The “Manufacturing the Muslim Menace” report cited depicts concerns about the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood as the fabrications of anti-Muslim bigots. Moreover, it defends the Brotherhood, saying it is a moderate group that wouldn’t use front groups in America.

The Federal Government Itself Provides Evidence to the Contrary

In reality, solid evidence exists to the contrary – evidence ironically from the federal government’s own determinations as well as documents from the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood itself including a 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood explanatory memorandum that explicitly states: “[O]ur work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

The Brotherhood memorandum lists “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” The list includes “mainstream” Muslim-American groups—the very same groups which appear to have influenced these very same Department of Homeland Security guidelines (see below).

Specifically, the federal government designated the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for financing Hamas. Federal prosecutors labeled these three mainstream groups as U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities in 2007. In 2009, the designations were upheld by District Court Judge Solis because of “ample” evidence linking them to Hamas.

The Clarion Project has broken numerous stories about other Islamist groups doing exactly what the DHS dismisses in the current training document as “unsubstantiated theories.”

For example, a Pennsylvania-based group, Sankore Institute of Islamic-African Studies International (SIIASI), tells Muslims to engage in “litigation jihad” to advance Sharia law in America.

A California-based group, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA), which issues authoritative fatwas, or religious declarations, said in a 2007 Arabic paper presented at one of its conferences it recommends that Muslims become judges and use deception to implement sharia law to the best of their ability. To call their rulings unsettling would be a gross understatement.

These are important facts but the DHS guidelines would leave law enforcement personnel ignorant of them.

[CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE HERE]

Americans are spun up on scary stories about the National Rifle Association.

But, there is another NRA to worry about if you appreciate lower prices for gasoline or popcorn at the movies: the National Restaurant Association.

The other NRA represents large and small restaurants, but by hijacking the Food and Drug Administration’s regulation writing process for implementing President Barack Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The Food Marketing Institute, a supermarket trade groups, estimates that cost of the new rules as more than $1 billion in new menu reporting and labeling burdens.

The restaurant industry had two problems it wanted to solve at the federal level. First, the restaurants wanted to use federal preemption to create national menu-labeling standards, which would free them from the hassle and expense of satisfying the horse blanket of state and local rules for an industry that thrives on uniformity. Already New York City and the state of California had created irksome menu and labeling ordinances.

In its Sept. 7, 2010 letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the NRA specifically called for the agency to pressure the states into “national uniformity.” Armed with its national standards codified in PPACA, the restaurants did not want any delays.

Second, the NRA wanted to beat back encroachment from the gas stations, convenience stores and supermarkets, which were selling compelling alternates to their fare.

Under the proposed FDA rules, grocery stores and supermarkets, never mentioned in the PPACA, would have to provide precise nutritional information for sheet cakes, by the slice and by the sheet.

This second step would force non-restaurant competitors to compete on a field the NRA designed with more home court advantages than the old Boston Garden’s warped parquet floor.

Consider a supermarket’s soup kettle next to the salad bar. Every day the soup changes depending on what vegetables and meats are going to expire. Even the “same” chicken noodle soup is different every time it’s made because of the same factors.

Yet, the FDA wants the same level of detail as one would get from a Big Mac that has been sold trillions of times, but figured out once and just posted.

The gas stations were a particular target because a business with more than 50 percent of its revenues from motor fuels, the tax definition of a gas station, could deduct capital investments, such as pumps and fuel tanks, over 15 years. But, the doughnut shop across the street was stuck with a 32-year schedule.

An advocate working for the supermarkets and convenience stores told me that early in the development of the PPACA, he met with restaurant industry lobbyists  and at the time there was no hint that the stores were going to be part of the law.

One of the ways the NRA pulled it off was to submit comments to the FDA – the entity charged with implementing the law – recommending that the regulations include gas stations and stores, as if they belonged under the new regime, he said.

“NRA absolutely submitted photographs of convenience stores and supermarkets in their packets with rationale for why they should be included in these regulations,” said Lyle Beckwith, a senior vice-president for government relations with the  National Association of Convenience Stores. In fact, in one of its comments to the FDA, the NRA included photos of Sheetz, a gas and convenience chain, just to bring the point home.

A fair metric of whether a business is a restaurant would be similar to the one used to decide the definition of a gas station, the insider said. If an establishment, like a Wawa or a Sheetz, generates more than 50 percent of its sales from the sale of ready-to-eat food, then they will comply as a restaurant.

“They know that if you walk like a restaurant and quack like a restaurant, you will be treated like a restaurant,” Beckwith said. “But, the  rest of the industry doesn’t.”

Not good enough for the NRA.

In its July 5, 2011 letter to the FDA, the NRA made the case for its preferred standard: 50 percent of the gross floor sales, a ridiculous standard. Then, in the next section of the letter, the NRA complained that the FDA unjustifiably excluded movie theaters.

Next time you drop $15 on popcorn and two sodas, ask your date how they enjoyed the fine dining of a true NRA-approved restaurant experience.

Section 4205 of the PPACA indicates that the menu-labeling rules will apply to restaurants and “similar retail food establishments” with 20 or more locations.  To make sure none of the restaurant competitors could escape the reach of the new NRA-inspired rules, the NRA argued in its July 5, 2011 letter that the phrase should include gas stations, convenience stores and food courts or other food service inside an ordinary retail store. FDA accepted and adopted this suggestion.

Piling on, in the letter the NRA cautioned the FDA that any attempt to narrowly define what businesses were actually restaurants or not would “run afoul of the plain language” in the healthcare law.

The chain requirement seems sensible enough on its face, until you consider that the FDA has ruled that all of the nearly 5,000 supermarket members of the Independent Grocer Alliance are members of a chain because they share a logo. Many of the IGA supermarkets are really one-unit operators.

The same rule pulls in thousands of independent gas stations and convenience store franchises, which in every way are separate and distinct businesses, not set up to take on new Obamacare burdens with the ease of a real 20-unit chain.

This rule alone will hurt thousands of the mom-and-pop businesses politicians always promise to protect.

NACS’ Beckwith said the reality of the rule is that gas stations and convenience stores will have to bring in real chain restaurants, such as NRA members: Subways or Dunkin Donuts, to mitigate the burden of the new FDA regulations.

Not only will the FDA rules punish NRA competitors, but they will force gas stations and stores to bring NRA members inside to take over the ready-to-eat business for themselves, he said.

One of the difficulties facing the stores and stations is that the FDA withdrew its “Draft Guidance for Industry:  Questions and Answers Regarding Implementation of the Menu Labeling Provisions of Section 4205 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010,” in January 2011 after the consistent uproar that resulted when it was released in August 2010.

The non-restarants are forced to wait for the FDA to publish its next attempt, but the months drag on and there is no sign that the agency is close.

In the House, there is a bill sponsored by Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R.-Wash.), the fourth-ranking leader in the GOP conference, which will straighten out how the FDA implements the PPACA. The bill, H.R. 1249, would clarify that, among other things, restaurants are restaurants and sandwiches packed in a gas station refrigerator are not.

Whether McMorris-Rodgers’ bill becomes law or not may hinge on whether it is viewed as relief for businesses caught flat-footed as the NRA hooked them up or if it looks like a healthcare reform cutout.

There is still a split on Capitol Hill among opponents of PPACA. While some look for every chance to pick away at the president’s landmark law, others are afraid to fix the most hated parts of the law, lest these fixes release so much of the built-up pressure for complete repeal that the bulk of the legislation remains—forever.

Supporters of the bill would be better off framing this as a case of the government picking winners and losers, which should be the magic words.

The SKILLS Visa Act is one of several bills the House Judiciary Committee has introduced to help address various issues within our immigration system.  Chairmen Goodlatte and Issa released the statements below on the bill’s introduction.

Chairman Goodlatte:  “In today’s global economy, our nation needs access to the world’s best talent to maintain our competitive edge.  Although high-skilled immigrants are often in demand by American employers, many of them end up on the green card waiting list for years. Consequently, many of these foreign workers and students go back to their home countries and work for one of our global competitors.

“The SKILLS Visa Act provides a solution to this problem by eliminating immigration programs that do not meet the needs of our nation and reallocating those visas to high-skilled immigrants who will help make us more competitive in the today’s economy.  By increasing high-skilled immigration and creating a new entrepreneur visa program, the SKILLS Visa Act will boost economic growth and create new jobs here at home.”

Chairman Issa:  “This bill is an investment in our Nation’s future. The SKILLS Visa Act will allow the best and brightest foreign graduates of American universities to stay in the U.S., encourage entrepreneurs and investors to grow our economy, and create American jobs. The United States is a country of innovation and opportunity that has long been a bastion for the world’s best and brightest.

“In addition to keeping the world’s best and brightest here in the U.S., the SKILLS Visas Act will modernize immigration laws to help our growing technology sector.  By bringing highly skilled workers into our economy, we will help ensure our Nation’s future as a leader of growth and innovation.”

The bill is supported by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), Compete America, inSPIRE STEM USA, the Internet Association, and the Information Technology Industry Council.

Original cosponsors of the bill include Reps. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), John Campbell (R-Calif.), Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) Howard Coble (R-N.C.), Blake Farenthold (R-Texas), Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.), George Holding (R-N.C.), Ted Poe (R-Texas), Todd Rokita (R-Ind.), Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Lee Terry (R-Neb.), and Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.).

Key Components of the SKILLS Visa Act:

· Increases Green Cards for STEM Grads:  The SKILLS Visa Act allocates up to 55,000 green cards a year for employers to petition for foreign graduates of U.S. universities with advanced degrees in STEM fields.

· Supports STEM Education in U.S.:  The bill raises the current fee on H-1B visas and institutes a fee on employers petitioning for green cards for workers that will go towards strengthening STEM education in the U.S.

· Increases and Strengthens H-1B Visa Program:  The SKILLS Visa Act increases the H-1B visa cap for high-skilled workers to 155,000 and increases the special pool of visas for foreign graduates of U.S. universities to 40,000.  The bill contains enhanced anti-fraud provisions and allows H-1B spouses to work.

· Market-Based Approach to Protect American Workers:  The bill improves the prevailing wage calculation to better protect American workers and extends the prevailing wage protection to similar visa programs.

· Provides Entrepreneur Visas:  The bill allocates up to 10,000 green cards a year for alien entrepreneurs who can attract investment from venture-capital firms to establish businesses that will create five jobs or  have already created five jobs over 10 years through the E-2 treaty investor program.

· Strengthens Investor Visa Program:  The bill strengthens the investor visa green card program by making the regional center pilot project permanent, indexing investment requirements for inflation, and adding anti-fraud protections.

· Eliminates Arbitrary Caps:  The bill eliminates the employment-based green card per-country cap, allowing American employers to have access to the best talent.

· Keeps Families Together:  The bill allocates an additional 25,000 green cards a year to the spouses and minor children of permanent residents.  It also raises the family-sponsored per-country cap.

· Makes Immigration System Smarter:  The bill repeals the diversity lottery green card program and the siblings of U.S. citizens green card program.

ISSA_058_xml

SHARE this infographic to spread the word about immigration reform that works.