Ninety miles from the South Eastern tip of the United States, Liberty has no stead. In order for Liberty to exist and thrive, Tyranny must be identified, recognized, confronted and extinguished.
infinite scrolling
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
Pres. Trump Warned Theresa May, ‘Focus on Radical Islamic Terrorism’, Day After Muslims Arrested in Plot to Assassinate UK PM
The day before President Donald Trump warned British Prime Minister Theresa May, “don’t focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom. We are doing just fine!”, two Muslim men were arrested by British police for targeting May in an assassination plot that allegedly involved bombing 10 Downing Street and stabbing May to death.
Trump gave the warning in a to-and-fro with May on November 29 about his retweets of videos critical of radical Muslims posted by Britain First’s Jayda Fransen.
Metropolitan Police released a statement on Tuesday announcing the arrests of two men on November 28 for terrorism offenses. The UK media is reporting the arrested men were plotting to kill May.
Trump gave the warning in a to-and-fro with May on November 29 about his retweets of videos critical of radical Muslims posted by Britain First’s Jayda Fransen.
.@Theresa_May, don’t focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom. We are doing just fine!
Two men arrested last week have been charged with terrorism offences.
Naa’imur Zakariyah Rahman, 20 (23.07.97) of north London has today been charged as follows:
= within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct in preparation for giving effect to that intention, contrary to section 5(1)(a) and (3) Terrorism Act 2006;
= within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of assisting Mohammed Aqib Imran to commit acts of terrorism engaged in conduct in preparation for giving effect to his intention of committing acts of terrorism, contrary to...
The Army Has a New Way to Take on Russia or China in a Ground Fight
“Our recent conflicts against less sophisticated threats allowed for more open-hatch operations. A commander would be up out of the hatch using his own senses. Operations against a near-peer using artillery, drones and other sophisticated weapons would likely be more closed-hatched operations. This technology will enable him to have more capability in closed-hatched scenarios,” Klager said.
The Army is testing emerging next-generation ground combat vehicle sensors using computer algorithms and artificial intelligence to identify, target and destroy enemy tanks, drones and incoming fire, service officials said.
The technologies now being tested, currently in prototype form, are being engineered for the yet-to-be-built future fleet of Army Next Generation Combat Vehicles to surface in coming years. Equipping Army combat vehicles with an ability to conduct mechanized vehicle operations in a massive, full-scale ground war against a near-peer adversary is a fundamental priority in the rationale for creating this technology.
The concept is to use what Army weapons developers call “multi-function” sensors which not only help vehicle crews find and destroy enemy targets at greater distances - but also simultaneously provide 360-degree cameras around the exterior of a vehicle to more quickly locate threats or enemy attacks.
The new sensor technology, to integrate and test on actual vehicle platforms by next year, is designed to increase situational awareness by using algorithms and computer automation to help soldiers find targets or areas of combat significance; technologies include more narrow-beam thermal sights for long range targeting along with closer-in, vehicle-surrounding electro-optical cameras able to quickly detect approaching enemy drones and...
The Army is testing emerging next-generation ground combat vehicle sensors using computer algorithms and artificial intelligence to identify, target and destroy enemy tanks, drones and incoming fire, service officials said.
The technologies now being tested, currently in prototype form, are being engineered for the yet-to-be-built future fleet of Army Next Generation Combat Vehicles to surface in coming years. Equipping Army combat vehicles with an ability to conduct mechanized vehicle operations in a massive, full-scale ground war against a near-peer adversary is a fundamental priority in the rationale for creating this technology.
The concept is to use what Army weapons developers call “multi-function” sensors which not only help vehicle crews find and destroy enemy targets at greater distances - but also simultaneously provide 360-degree cameras around the exterior of a vehicle to more quickly locate threats or enemy attacks.
The new sensor technology, to integrate and test on actual vehicle platforms by next year, is designed to increase situational awareness by using algorithms and computer automation to help soldiers find targets or areas of combat significance; technologies include more narrow-beam thermal sights for long range targeting along with closer-in, vehicle-surrounding electro-optical cameras able to quickly detect approaching enemy drones and...
Number of Refugees Into U.S. Drops 83 Percent Under Trump
During his presidential campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump had promised to “stop the massive inflow of refugees” in order to safeguard the country from terrorists. Chalk up one campaign promise fulfilled.
According to Fox News, only 3,108 refugees came to the U.S. in October and November. In the same period last year, under Barack Obama's reign, 18,300 refugees were admitted. That's a jaw-dropping decline of 83 percent.
Trump restarted the refugee resettlement program in October after a four-month moratorium. A month earlier, he had lowered the annual refugee admission cap from 110,000 to 45,000, the lowest on record.
"The president's strategy on refugees is guided first and foremost by the safety and security of the American people,” Trump administration spokeswoman Helen Aguirre Ferré told Fox News. “The United States can also help a larger number of refugees by resettling them in their home region and enabling their eventual safe return home.”
Not only is there a steep drop in refugee admissions, but fewer Muslims are reportedly among them -- only 10 percent, as opposed to about 40 percent in November 2016 under Obama.
Not only that, but the administration said it is backing out of the Global Compact on Migration, a United Nations initiative established in 2016 that called for two years of negotiations focused on organized and safe migration of the world’s displaced people.
U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, said over the weekend that "The global approach in the New York Declaration is simply not compatible with U.S. sovereignty. No country has done more than the United States, and our generosity will continue. But our decisions on immigration policies must always...
According to Fox News, only 3,108 refugees came to the U.S. in October and November. In the same period last year, under Barack Obama's reign, 18,300 refugees were admitted. That's a jaw-dropping decline of 83 percent.
Trump restarted the refugee resettlement program in October after a four-month moratorium. A month earlier, he had lowered the annual refugee admission cap from 110,000 to 45,000, the lowest on record.
"The president's strategy on refugees is guided first and foremost by the safety and security of the American people,” Trump administration spokeswoman Helen Aguirre Ferré told Fox News. “The United States can also help a larger number of refugees by resettling them in their home region and enabling their eventual safe return home.”
Not only is there a steep drop in refugee admissions, but fewer Muslims are reportedly among them -- only 10 percent, as opposed to about 40 percent in November 2016 under Obama.
Not only that, but the administration said it is backing out of the Global Compact on Migration, a United Nations initiative established in 2016 that called for two years of negotiations focused on organized and safe migration of the world’s displaced people.
U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, said over the weekend that "The global approach in the New York Declaration is simply not compatible with U.S. sovereignty. No country has done more than the United States, and our generosity will continue. But our decisions on immigration policies must always...
DACA Is Not What the Democrats Say It Is. Here Are the Facts.
Some members of Congress are threatening to block government funding unless Congress provides amnesty to so-called Dreamers—the illegal aliens included in President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which President Donald Trump is ending.
Responsible members of Congress should not give in.
Such an effort would be fundamentally flawed and would only encourage even more illegal immigration—just as the 1986 amnesty in the Immigration Reform and Control Act did.
Democrats portray the DACA program as only benefitting those who were a few years old when they came to the U.S. illegally, leaving them unable to speak their native language and ignorant of their countries’ cultural norms. Therefore, the reasoning goes, it would be a hardship to return them to the countries where they were born.
Obama himself gave this rationale when he said DACA beneficiaries were “brought to this country by their parents” as infants and face “deportation to a country that [they] know nothing about, with a language” they don’t even speak.
While this may be true of a small portion of the DACA population, it certainly is not true of all of the aliens who received administrative amnesty. In fact, illegal aliens were eligible as long as they came to the U.S. before their 16th birthday and were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012.
DACA also required that beneficiaries enroll in school, graduate from high school, obtain a GED certificate, or receive an honorable discharge from the military; have no conviction for a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors; and not pose a threat to national security or public safety.
However, the Obama administration appeared to routinely waive the education (or its equivalent) requirement as long as the illegal alien was enrolled in some kind of program. Only 49 percent of DACA beneficiaries have a high school education—despite the fact that a majority of them are adults.
How thorough was Homeland Security vetting? In February 2017, after the arrest of a DACA beneficiary for gang membership, the Department of Homeland Security admitted that at least 1,500 DACA beneficiaries had their eligibility terminated “due to a criminal conviction, gang affiliation, or a criminal conviction related to gang affiliation.”
By August 2017, that number had surged to 2,139.
In fact, based on documents obtained by Judicial Watch, it is apparent that the Obama administration used a “lean and light” system of background checks in which only a few, randomly selected DACA applicants were ever actually vetted.
Additionally, DACA only excluded individuals for convictions. Thus, even if a Homeland Security background investigation—which apparently was almost never done—produced substantial evidence that an illegal alien might have committed multiple crimes, the alien would still be eligible for DACA unless Homeland Security referred the violation to...
Responsible members of Congress should not give in.
Such an effort would be fundamentally flawed and would only encourage even more illegal immigration—just as the 1986 amnesty in the Immigration Reform and Control Act did.
Democrats portray the DACA program as only benefitting those who were a few years old when they came to the U.S. illegally, leaving them unable to speak their native language and ignorant of their countries’ cultural norms. Therefore, the reasoning goes, it would be a hardship to return them to the countries where they were born.
Obama himself gave this rationale when he said DACA beneficiaries were “brought to this country by their parents” as infants and face “deportation to a country that [they] know nothing about, with a language” they don’t even speak.
While this may be true of a small portion of the DACA population, it certainly is not true of all of the aliens who received administrative amnesty. In fact, illegal aliens were eligible as long as they came to the U.S. before their 16th birthday and were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012.
DACA also required that beneficiaries enroll in school, graduate from high school, obtain a GED certificate, or receive an honorable discharge from the military; have no conviction for a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors; and not pose a threat to national security or public safety.
However, the Obama administration appeared to routinely waive the education (or its equivalent) requirement as long as the illegal alien was enrolled in some kind of program. Only 49 percent of DACA beneficiaries have a high school education—despite the fact that a majority of them are adults.
How thorough was Homeland Security vetting? In February 2017, after the arrest of a DACA beneficiary for gang membership, the Department of Homeland Security admitted that at least 1,500 DACA beneficiaries had their eligibility terminated “due to a criminal conviction, gang affiliation, or a criminal conviction related to gang affiliation.”
By August 2017, that number had surged to 2,139.
In fact, based on documents obtained by Judicial Watch, it is apparent that the Obama administration used a “lean and light” system of background checks in which only a few, randomly selected DACA applicants were ever actually vetted.
Additionally, DACA only excluded individuals for convictions. Thus, even if a Homeland Security background investigation—which apparently was almost never done—produced substantial evidence that an illegal alien might have committed multiple crimes, the alien would still be eligible for DACA unless Homeland Security referred the violation to...
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #97
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Tuesday, December 5, 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)