Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Friday, June 15, 2018

It All Depends On Which Side You Are On!

 Michael Ramirez for 6/15/2018

This Is A Great Idea!


Congress to Consider Recognition of Israeli Sovereignty Over Golan Heights



New measure recognizes Israel’s control of Syrian territory

Israeli soldiers are seen in the Golan Heights
Israeli soldiers are seen in the Golan Heights / Getty Images
Congress is set to consider a new measure to recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the contested Golan Heights region that separates Israel from Syria, a key piece of territory that has become all the more important since the civil war in Syria brought scores of jihadist fighters, including those backed by Iran, into the region.
Rep. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, (fantastic supporter)introduced on Thursday a resolution that could lead to an historic recognition by the United States that the contested area fully belongs to Israel, according to a copy of the amendment obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
Israel annexed the Golan Heights in 1981 following the Six Day War in the late 60s with Arab nations in the region. The United States has declined for decades to take a position on the status of this territory, but following President Donald Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, DeSantis and others see an opportunity for the United States to recognize another territorial reality—that the Golan Heights will not be given back to Syria, particularly in light of the strife gripping the country.
The amendment puts the United States on Israel’s side in the land dispute and describes the Golan Heights as a key piece of territory that cannot fall into the hands of Iran, which has staked claims in Syria and continues to threaten Israel’s northern border.
“It is the sense of the Congress that the Golan Heights represent an integral part of the state of Israel and are crucial to the ability of Israel to safeguard its borders and maintain its existence,” the measure states.
“Given the civil war in Syria and the expansion of Iranian influence in Syria, the United States should recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights,” the amendment adds.
The House Rules Committee is in possession of the measure, but have yet to take a stance.
DeSantis told the Free Beacon the Golan Heights territory is key to thwarting Iranian influence across the region and that the United States’ recognition that Israel owns the territory could send a powerful message across the region.
“The continuing turmoil in Syria and the steady expansion of Iranian influence illustrate why the Golan Heights are so important to the state of Israel and the anti-terror alliance,” DeSantis said. “The Golan provides Israel with a necessary buffer against the malevolent actors that are wreaking havoc in Syria.”
If Israel was forced to give back the territory it would leave itself vulnerable to an increase in terror attacks from Iranian controlled forces and other malevolent actors who would use the Golan region to stage strikes, DeSantis said.
“Indeed, Israel would be hard-pressed to ward off such threats without the Golan,” the lawmaker explained. “Given the interest of the U.S. in rolling back Iranian influence and combating terrorism, it is time for the United States to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.”
As with the United States’ recent recognition that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital city, the recognition that the Golan Heights cannot be given back to Syria represents a factual reality on the ground, DeSantis said.
“There is no conceivable scenario in which it makes sense for Israel to abandon such a strategically significant location so that terrorists can fill the vacuum left behind,” he said.

Is This The Reason For The Increase In Suicides Among Young People?

WALSH: We Have Turned Childhood Into A Mental Disorder. And It's Ruining Our Kids.

Photo by Jb Reed/Bloomberg via Getty Images
According to a report, there has been a dramatic rise in children misusing and overdosing on ADHD medications. I happened to see that report a day after I read another study revealing an increased risk for obesity and diabetes in kids who take ADHD meds. This is not to be confused with the recent research showing that ADHD drugs could be linked to brittle bones. These must all be added, of course, to the cacophony of already known side effects, including insomnia, irritability, decreased appetite, depression, and suicidal thoughts.
Maybe this is why a majority of kids diagnosed with ADHD wind up developing other mental illnesses as they grow older. Pharmaceutical companies cite that latter detail as proof of the biological basis of ADHD. I think it is much easier to see it as proof of the pharmacological basis for the mysterious rise in mental illnesses across America. Drug companies and the psychiatric industry have so far gotten almost 20 percent of the country onto psychiatric drugs. Many of these drugs cause suicidal thoughts, anxiety, and depression. Meanwhile, a lot of Americans are having suicidal thoughts, anxiety, and depression. One need not be a detective to notice a potential causal relationship here.
The psychiatric industry has set out to catalog and medicalize virtually every human behavior, emotion, inclination, temptation, and personality trait. It would seem, as many leading mental health experts have warned, that soon nobody in America will be considered normal. Indeed, you wonder where the drug companies and psychiatrists get their idea for "normal" behavior, and "normal" brains, and "normal" emotions, considering they so rarely come across a behavior, brain, or emotion they consider normal.
But nowhere is this tendency to medicalize the human condition more apparent, or more dangerous, than with children. As most people know, there has been an astounding rise in ADHD diagnoses over the last several years. Somewhere around ten percent of all children in the country have been labeled with this alleged disorder, and the label is being stuck on kids at earlier and earlier ages. We are now told that kids as young as three years old can be diagnosed ADHD. New medical guidelines recommend psychiatric drugs for kids starting at four if their "symptoms" are "debilitating." A third of kids with ADHD are diagnosed before the age of six. Doctors will assure parents that the drugs are safe and will cause no long term damage to their children, but, at best, we don't know whether that is actually true or not. There is plenty of reason to believe that the drugs will alter your child's brain for years to come.
And on what basis have we taken this incredible step, as a society, to drug into oblivion what used to be considered common (even charming, even crucial) childhood characteristics? After all, any experienced parent will recognize the list of "ADHD symptoms" as the most normal characteristics in the world:
-In constant motion
-Squirms and fidgets
-Makes careless mistakes
-Often loses things
-Does not seem to listen
-Easily distracted
-Does not finish tasks
Frankly, I would be more concerned about a child who doesn't exhibit these "symptoms." So, how can we know when normal childhood behaviors may be a manifestation of mental illness? It is quite easy to know when your liver, or kidney, or heart are malfunctioning. But, with ADHD (and so many other mental illnesses), pediatricians and psychiatrists claim to have identified a malfunction of the whole human person. It is non-controversial to look at a diseased liver and say, "A liver shouldn't do that." But doctors are now looking at physically healthy children and saying, "This entire person shouldn't do that."
How? On what basis?
Well, the National Institute of Mental Health offers a clue (emphasis mine):
People who have ADHD have combinations of these symptoms:
-Overlook or miss details, make careless mistakes in schoolwork, at work, or during other activities
-Fail to not follow through on instructions, fail to finish schoolwork, chores, or duties in the workplace, or start tasks but quickly lose focus and get easily sidetracked
-Avoid or dislike tasks that require sustained mental effort, such as schoolwork or homework, or for teens and older adults, preparing reports, completing forms, or reviewing lengthy papers
-Lose things necessary for tasks or activities, such as school supplies, pencils, books, tools, wallets, keys, paperwork, eyeglasses, and cell phones
The Mayo Clinic puts it this way:
In general, a child shouldn't receive a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder unless the core symptoms of ADHD start early in life — before age 12 — and create significant problems at home and at school on an ongoing basis.
According to the medical community, a child's personality becomes diseased at the precise moment that his personality interferes with his schooling. This is odd, isn't it? Physical diseases aren't judged this way. If you go to the doctor because you think you have diabetes, he won't ask: "Well, is the diabetes causing problems at home or school?" Diabetes is diabetes no matter how convenient or inconvenient it may be to you or those around you. Diabetes is diabetes at school. Diabetes is diabetes at home. Diabetes is diabetes even when you're alone in the forest. But ADHD may not be ADHD in the forest. ADHD is only ADHD when it is a nuisance.
This diagnostic criteria is rather peculiar, especially because advocates for ADHD drugs will claim that the disorder can be located in the brain. If it can be located in the brain, why is it diagnosed with a personality survey? Has anyone ever stopped to ask that question?
Now, it may be true that you can find certain neurological similarities among certain people who have been diagnosed with ADHD. You can also find neurological similarities among people with similar dispositions like enthusiasm and altruism. You can find neurological similarities among optimists and among pessimists. But that does not prove that these similarities cause optimism, or enthusiasm, or "hyperactivity" in children. You could look at the brain scan of a man grieving for his dead wife and see his grief reflected in his brain. You could also see his happiness at the birth of a child. You could even see the calm, meditative joy he finds in prayer. But that does not prove that the chemical reactions in his brain are causing his grief, his joy, his closeness with God. We know the opposite is true. His brain is a reflection of the real cause. It is not the cause itself.
Of course, if you take an entirely materialistic view of the human person — which, catastrophically, many psychiatrists do — then you must believe that everything he feels, everything he thinks, all of his traits, his characteristics, his flaws, his sins, his desires, his goals, his love, his joy, his despair, and so on, are all just material phenomena. The mind is an illusion in that case. You are just your brain and nothing more. If, on the other hand, you factor in the soul, and free will, and the uniqueness of each human person who is created by a Divine Force, it becomes clear that the mind exists, and it drives the brain much more than the brain drives it.
But even if we put all of this aside — and I don't see how you really can put it aside, because this chicken or egg problem lies at the very heart of the entire psychiatry industry and everything we think about mental illness — but even if you do, and even if you accept just for a moment that brain chemistry determines everything about a person, that still wouldn't prove that any particular personality, like the ADHD personality, is disordered. It doesn't prove, in other words, that a person isn't supposed to be that way.
We have decided that kids aren't supposed to be that way. We have decreed it from on high, like gods, and then set out to chemically eliminate every sort of human disposition that gets in the way of our societal goals. But this is subjective. And arbitrary. And horrific. It is not scientific. It is a philosophical judgment. A really bad philosophical judgment.
We have determined philosophically that a child shouldn't always act like a child. Or at least he shouldn't act too much like a child. (And who decides what qualifies as too much? What science can demonstrate the too-muchness of a certain trait? Who draws that line? On what authority?) I take the opposite view. And I have the entirety of humanity on my side, up until the last century or so. Up until everyone, including Christians, decided to adopt Freud's radically materialist view of the human person. Up until we chose to accept as Gospel literally everything the drug companies and psychiatrists tell us about ourselves and our children.
I submit this counter suggestion: a child is supposed to be a child, and act like one. If the schools cannot handle kids without drugging millions of them, then the schools are disordered. The real illness can be found in an educational system which requires children, starting at a very young age, to sit still for seven hours a day, five days a week, nine months a year, and regurgitate often very useless information onto various forms and sheets and Scantrons. A child is not sick if he struggles in that dull, claustrophobic environment. The environment is sick. We are sick for expecting children to be robots. The child's "ADHD" is no more the fault of brain chemistry than the grieving man's grief is the fault of brain chemistry. It is natural to be sad when your wife dies. It is natural to be bored, fidgety, and inattentive when you're chained to a desk doing busywork.
We are drugging our kids because they are kids. We have made childhood itself into an illness. The results of this decision has been disastrous. And it will only get worse if we don't change.

CNN Feeds More Junk News To Uninformed, Low Information Viewers

WATCH: CNN's Brooke Baldwin Unleashes The DUMBEST Rant About Male And Female Athletes

Screenshot: YouTube
On Wednesday, CNN’s Brooke Baldwin unleashed one of the dumbest rants about male and female professional athletes to ever grace the airwaves, which is no small feat considering she works at CNN, where the competition for stupidity and absurdity is fierce.
Baldwin argued — nay, demanded — that professional female athletes make as much as their male counterparts, suggesting that any income disparity is tied to sexism.
We will discuss why this is so clearly delusional later, but here are her insane, self-righteous comments: "What do Serena Williams, Danica Patrick, Lindsey Vonn, Ronda Rousey and Maria Sharapova all have in common?" starts in Baldwin. "They’re all bad-ass women not on the list of the one hundred highest paid athletes in the world."
"In fact, not a single woman is on that list," she continues. "Not one, instead the men on this new list out this week made a record $3.8 billion, that is up 23 percent from the previous year."
The CNN host went on to cite, for example, Danica Patrick's $10.3 million salary to Lewis Hamilton's $51 million and Serena William's $18 million to Roger Federer's$77 million.
Baldwin then widened the net, zoning in on the widely-debunked sexist-driven gender pay gap for all other industries. "More importantly, in this conversation, the people who do not make the millions," she said, reading actress Amy Adams' recent comments about getting waitresses and teachers "equal pay." (This is a lie and has been debunked at SlateForbesThe HillTimeThe EconomistThe Daily Wire, and numerous other places.)
But back to Baldwin's weak sports commentary. This is intentionally misleading. Baldwin cannot be this stupid, so her narrative that male and female players are worth the same and thus should be paid the same has to be derived from malice. There really is no other explanation.
Let's take tennis, for example. Male and female players are compensated differently because of the money they bring in. As reported by Yahoo! Sports, male viewership at the Australian Open eclipsed female viewership by 25%, and, in general, "the men’s ATP World Tour events have generated significantly larger audiences and more revenue than the women’s WTA Tour. According to statistics compiled by BBC, the ATP drew 973 million viewers in 2015 compared to the WTA’s 395 million, both excluding Grand Slam events." Not to mention, because of such feminist pressures, women have been awarded the same prize money at all four Grand Slam tournaments since 2007, unfairly so, I would argue.
Soccer was another example Baldwin mentioned. "The women's soccer team filed a lawsuit a couple of years ago arguing discrimination over their salaries since their team actually brings in more than the men's team," she said.
Yeah, this is misleading, too. The women's team negotiated their own pay in a collective bargaining agreement and their players receive benefits that men do not. "U.S. maintains that the women's team set up the compensation structure, including a guaranteed salary rather than a pay-for-play model like the men, in the last collective bargaining agreement. The women earn an additional salary because the federation pays their salaries in the National Women's Soccer League," reported the Daily Mail, adding, "The women's national team players also receive other benefits, including health care paid for by the U.S. Olympic Committee, that the men don't receive, the federation maintains."​
Again, it's hard to argue that Baldwin is stupid. So why push such debunked victimhood myths?
WATCH:

Want A Job--Here Is A Job Fair For Conservatives


The White House is pictured. | Getty Images
A job fair is seen as an unusual step for a White House to take. | Al Drago/Pool/Getty Images


Trump White House recruits at a Hill job fair amid staff exodus

'Interested in a job at the White House?' reads the flyer for an event aimed at conservatives.
 
06/13/2018 10:59 PM EDT
 
Updated 
The White House – which has been having trouble filling positions as it bleeds staffers – is now trying to find recruits at a conservative job fair on the Hill.
“Interested in a job at the White House?” is the subject line of an email that was blasted out widely to Republicans on the Hill late Wednesday advertising the upcoming event.
It promises that “representatives from across the Trump administration will be there to meet job seekers of every experience level.” A person familiar with the planning said that Johnny DeStefano, who oversees the White House personnel department, and Sean Doocey, a deputy assistant to the president for presidential personnel, are expected to be on hand, among other officials from the West Wing.
The flyer lists positions open in the White House as well as a handful of government agencies including Defense, Interior, Commerce, Homeland Security, Health & Human Services, NASA, Energy, and Treasury.
The “Executive Branch Job Fair” is scheduled for Friday afternoon in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, according to a flyer attached to the email.
“There are positions currently open and we are looking for the most competent conservatives to recommend,” the flyer, shared with POLITICO, reads.

The fair is being hosted by the Conservative Partnership Institute, an organization founded by former Heritage Foundation president Jim DeMint last year.


“CPI’s mission is to support conservatives in Washington and we are excited about giving hundreds of qualified, experienced conservatives an opportunity to meet with Trump administration officials and learn about career opportunities,” Rachel Bovard, senior policy director at Conservative Partnership said in an email.
A White House spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Recriting at a job fair is seen as an unusual step for a White House to take. Typically jobs in the executive branch are coveted career-making opportunities.


A former Obama administration official said it would have been unheard of in the previous administration, and that West Wing jobs were rarely even listed on UsaJobs.Gov, the official job search site for the federal government. But the executive branch of the Obama administration did sometimes host events on campuses of historically black colleges and universities to meet potential candidates from underrepresented groups, the former official added.
The Trump White House, however, has had difficulty bringing new people in as staffers have resigned amid ongoing chaos and a crackdown on security clearances – or, more recently, been fired as part of a purge of people accused of leaking information to reporters.
The departures have hollowed out the ranks of lower-level staffers, with dozens departing from various policy offices as well as the press and communications shops.
Perhaps most prominently, the position of communications director has sat vacant since Hope Hicks departed in March – but that post is not expected to be filled at the Friday job fair.

According To Certain Members Of The FBI, All Trump Voters (Including Pence) Are Stupid, Uneducated, Poor, "Lazy POS". Time For A House Cleaning!



151021174029-fbi-seal-logo-exlarge-169
Five FBI employees have been referred by the Justice Department inspector general for investigation in connection with “hostile,” politically charged texts and instant messages.
“Some of these text messages and instant messages mixed political commentary with discussions about the Midyear investigation, and raised concerns that political bias may have impacted investigative decisions,” said the highly anticipated report, which was released Thursday to Congress.
“Midyear” was the name given to the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server to transmit classified information when she was President Obama’s secretary of state.
The Horowitz report spotlighted texts between former FBI counterespionage agent Peter Strzok and bureau lawyer Lisa Page that “potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations.”
Page wrote to Strzok: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Strzok replied: “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”
But there were other FBI employees who demonstrated virulent hatred of the Republican presidential nominee during the 2016 election and after his Nov. 8 victory.
An FBI attorney who worked on Robert Mueller’s special counsel Russia investigation until earlier this year sent anti-Trump text messages to a colleague expressing deep distress over the election outcome and declared in one “Viva le Resistance.”

Among other politically charged messages cited by Horowitz were instant messages between two agents identified only as “Agent 1” and “Agent 5.” The report notes: “Because it is relevant to their explanations, we note that Agent 1 and Agent 5, who are now married, were in a personal relationship that predated their assignment to the Midyear investigation.”
In August 2016, the agents were discussing their jobs.
Agent 1: “I find anyone who enjoys [this job] an absolute f—ing idiot. If you don’t think so, ask them one more question. Who are you voting for? I guarantee you it will be Donald Drumpf.”
Agent 5 replied: “I forgot about drumpf … that’s so sad and pathetic if they want to vote for him. Someone who can’t answer a question. Someone who can’t be professional for even a second.”
In September, the two agents labeled Trump supporters “retarded.”
Agent 5 wrote: “I’m trying to think of a ‘would I rather’ instead of spending time with those people.”
Agent 1 replied, “stick your tongue in a fan??”
Agent 5 later wrote: “I would rather have brunch with trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from ohio that are retarded.”
In a Dec. 6, 2016 exchange, Agent 5 complained to Agent 1 about being required to be on call on the day of the presidential inauguration.
Agent 5 said in a message to Agent 1: “f— trump.”
On Feb. 9, 2017, referring to an FBI employee receiving a presidential award for public service, Agent 5 messaged: “I think now that trump is the president, i’d refuse it. it would be an insult to even be considered for it.”
Horowitz said, however, he did not find “documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions.”
“Nonetheless, these messages cast a cloud over the FBI’s handling of the Midyear investigation and the investigation’s credibility.”
The report said five employees, who were not named, have been referred for investigation into whether their messages violated FBI code.
“The FBI will handle these referrals pursuant to the FBI’s disciplinary investigation and adjudication processes, and will impose disciplinary measures as warranted.” >

‘I’m with her’
On Election Day, Nov. 8, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages:
14:21:10, Agent 1: “You think HRC is gonna win right? You think we should get nails and some boards in case she doesnt”
14:21:56, Agent 5: “she better win… otherwise i’m gonna be walking around with both of my guns.”
14:22:05, Agent 5: “and likely quitting on the spot”
14:28:43, Agent 1: “You should know;…..”
14:28:45, Agent 1: “that”
14:28:50, Agent 1: “I’m…..”
14:28:56, Agent 1: “with her.”
14:28:58, Agent 1: “ooooooooooooooooooo”
14:29:02, Agent 1: “show me the money”
14:29:03, Agent 5: “<:o br="">14:29:14, Agent 5: “screw you trump”
14:19:18, Agent 5: “wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!”
14:29:32, Agent 5: “go baby, go! let’s give her Virginia”
14:30:03, Agent 1: “not to my country. You just cant get up and try to appeal to all the worst things in humans and fool my country….”
14:30:12, Agent 1: “Just 49% of us…..”
14:30:25, Agent 5: “let’s hope it’s 49% or less…”
14:30:31, Agent 5: “we’ll find out…”
The Horowitz report documented an exchange the day after the 2016 presidential election between lawyer who worked on the Clinton and Russia investigations, identified as “FBI Attorney 2,” and an FBI employee who was not involved in the investigation.

The Daily Caller reported the attorney was assigned to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation soon after it began in May 2017 but left in late February 2018 after some of his private messages were shown to the special counsel.
The Nov. 9, 2016 exchange:
09:38:14, FBI Attorney 2: “I am numb.”
09:55:35, FBI Employee: “I can’t stop crying.”
10:00:13, FBI Attorney 2: “That makes me even more sad.”
10:43:20, FBI Employee: “Like, what happened?”
10:43:37, FBI Employee: “You promised me this wouldn’t happen. YOU PROMISED.”
10:43:43, FBI Employee: Okay, that might have been a lie…”
10:43:46, FBI Employee: “I’m very upset.”
10:43:47, FBI Employee: “haha”
10:51:48, FBI Attorney 2: “I am so stressed about what I could have done differently.”
10:54:29, FBI Employee: “Don’t stress. None of that mattered.”
10:54:31, FBI Employee: “The FBI’s influence.”
10:59:36, FBI Attorney 2: “I don’t know. We broke the momentum.” 11:00:03, FBI Employee: “That is not so.”
11:02:22, FBI Employee: “All the people who were initially voting for her would not, and were not, swayed by any decision the FBI put out. Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing. They probably didn’t watch the debates, aren’t fully educated on his policies, and are stupidly wrapped up in his unmerited enthusiasm.”
11:11:43, FBI Attorney 2: “I’m just devastated. I can’t wait until I can leave today and just shut off the world for the next four days.”
11:12:06, FBI Employee: “Why are you devastated?”
11:12:18, FBI Employee: “Yes, I’m not watching tv for four years.”
11:14:16, FBI Attorney 2: “I just can’t imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA is gone. Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years. We have to fight this again. Also Pence is stupid.”
11:14:58, FBI Employee: “Yes that’s all true.”
11:15:01, FBI Attorney 2: “And it’s just hard not to feel like the FBI caused some of this. It was razor thin in some states.”
11:15:09, FBI Employee: “Yes it was very thin.”
11:15:23, FBI Attorney 2: “Plus, my god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating his staff.”
11:15:24, FBI Employee: “But no I absolutely do not believe the FBI had any part.”
11:15:33, FBI Attorney 2: “So, who knows if that breaks to him what he is going to do.”
The Horowitz report said that as part of the review, FBI Attorney 2 was asked about the exchange.
The attorney explained: “I’d say that we’re just discussing our personal feelings on [the outcome of the election] between friends, yeah.”
When asked about the FBI employee meant by “[y]ou promised me this wouldn’t happen,” the attorney said he “did not promise [the employee] anything.”
“I think, again, it’s just kind of the way that [the employee] and I converse. We tend to exaggerate some statements back and forth to one another.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2018/06/ig-refers-5-fbi-employees-over-hostile-messages/#zPUmMdjH6wklSjWB.99