Author Archives: Denise Simon

Pentagon not Nimble to Challenge ISIS PR

Posted on by

The Pentagon has sought the assistance of DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Project Agency to collaborate on how best to cultivate the social media success of Islamic State, ISIS.

Social media, propaganda and public relations used by Islamic State is so advanced, effective and cutting edge that our own technology, resources and imagination has not kept pace with the successful methods broadcasted by the terror group.

DARPA developed software technology called MEMEX that can see and access something known as the ‘dark-web’, but dynamic encryption codes stifle efforts to capture communications used by all recognized terror groups where they collaborate on money, planning, movement, people and operations. Further our own government agencies are back to infighting on who takes the lead, what the strategy is and further what powerful countermeasures can be applied to stop the ISIS public relations/marketing machine. Enemies are nimble, the United States intelligence community is not.

Bureaucracy stifles counter-jihad info war

By Bill Gertz 

The Pentagon is struggling to counter the information warfare efforts of the Islamic State terrorist group that are effectively exploiting U.S. social media and Western press freedoms to recruit jihadists and communicate among themselves.

Bureaucratic red tape within the military, specifically the U.S. Central Command and Pentagon, is preventing rapid responses to IS propaganda and activities, Inside the Ring has learned from knowledgeable sources.

One problem is the cumbersome approval process needed before U.S. information warriors can carry out counter-actions online. Prior to doing so, they’re required to go through several layers of approvals along a lengthy chain of command.

As a result, in some cases U.S. information operations against IS propaganda were delayed for days or weeks, often making the responses ineffective or useless.

Additionally, U.S. information operations have been weakened and limited in conducting counter-information attacks because of concerns the American hand will be exposed. Another problem has been fear among U.S. higher-ups that IS will step up both information and kinetic attacks in response.

Outright lies — such as false reports of U.S. troops deployments — are more easily countered. But those cases are infrequent. Aggressive online programs to dissuade would-be jihadists and expose IS propaganda programs and activities have been stifled. Counter cyber attacks against known IS operators also have been limited.

The U.S. information warfare effort has been hampered by officials have said is a cultural bias against propaganda activities, which are sometime regarded as contrary to U.S. freedoms. That is said to be changing, however, as terrorist groups like IS and al Qaeda are increasing their use of soft power methods to attack the West. Nation-state information warfare, particularly by China, Russia and Iran, also is gradually being recognized as a growing strategic threat.

The IS information threat was highlighted by the alert issued last week raising the security threat level on U.S. military bases. The alert was prompted by an IS-linked hacker group that posted a notice online warning of an “another surprise for America” — interpreted as a possible attack.

As a result, U.S. Northern Command commander, Adm. Bill Gortney, ordered military bases to tighten security from “Alpha” to “Bravo” level around the country. Force-protection level Bravo is ordered in response to a somewhat predictable terrorist threat.

The group making the threat was the same hacker group that successfully conducted a cyber attack on Central Command’s social media accounts in January, replacing web pages with IS propaganda and the name “Cybercaliphate.”

The group conducted some low-level cyber attacks against several Pentagon web sites last week in attempted “denial-of-service” cyber strikes whose impact was limited.

One example of IS’s online agility is its use of Twitter. IS operatives and supporters are using multiple Twitter accounts to send well-crafted videos and propaganda materials. Usually, IS terrorists open up to six Twitter accounts, with successive accounts being used after one or more of the accounts are shut down by the social media giant, often at U.S. government urging.

One effective propaganda and recruiting video was posted on a Russian Internet site and targeted Central Asia Muslims. The five-minute video was described as extremely professional in both content and production values.

Another trend is a recent shift by IS away from Web-based social media sites to mobile devices that are being used to communicate through text messaging, and propagandize by mobile videos shared directly between hand-held devices.

Additionally, IS information operations to inspire Islamists to conduct attacks in the United States also are shifting to the so-called “Dark Web,” the gray Internet underworld used by criminals to share information and software.

IS also appears to have studied information dissemination methods used by neo-Nazi groups, in order to communicate and spread their message in the English-speaking world.

The target audience for IS includes Islamist sympathizers who are not directly linked to the Syrian/Iraqi based IS terror group.

New Net Assessment chief

Defense Secretary Ash Carter has selected a candidate for the influential post of director of the Office of Net Assessment, the Pentagon’s future warfare and worst-case scenario think tank.

The selection is said to be James. H. Baker, currently the principal deputy director for strategic plans and policy on the Joint Staff, and a key aide to Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey. In the past Mr. Baker was head of Joint Chiefs chairman’s action group under then-Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen.

Some military and defense officials expressed concern that Mr. Baker will reverse decades of innovative work inside the secretive Net Assessment office led by Andrew Marshall, the 93-year-old academic who stepped down in January.

Mr. Marshall was known as the Pentagon’s “Yoda” and was the only official to hold the director’s post since the office was created in 1973.

Mr. Marshall appointed his deputy, Andrew May, as acting director who was a candidate for the top post. A third candidate who lost out in the selection process was Thomas Ehrhard, currently an aide to Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work.

What concerns several China hawks is Mr. Baker’s reputation as a left-of-center analyst who has sought to minimize foreign threats, especially those from China. Mr. Baker disclosed his conciliatory views on China and advocated for greater unrestricted engagement at a 2013 speech to the Naval War College.

As ONA director, Mr. Baker would be in charge of the office’s annual $15 million budget, and have direct access to Mr. Carter. The Pentagon sought to downgrade the office last year by placing it within the office of the undersecretary of defense for policy. But Congress passed legislation blocking the move and added an additional $5 million for assessments.

Another problem for critics is Mr. Baker’s past role as senior official in the costly F-35 development program. The stealth jet program suffered cost overruns amounting to tens of millions of dollars and left the new frontline fighter with the dubious reputation of being the most expensive aircraft ever built. Unit costs for the three-version jet skyrocketed to between $98 million to $116 million per aircraft.

A Republican foreign policy adviser predicted to Inside the Ring: “James H. Baker will be fired on Jan. 20, 2017 if a Republican is elected president. He’s too partisan and too left wing. Frankly, Hillary Clinton may fire him too.”

A defense official confirmed Mr. Baker will be the next ONA director but declined to comment on his critics.

State issues foreign booze warning

The State Department’s security office recently sent out a warning notice to U.S. companies operating facilities overseas urging Americans to avoid drinking local booze.

The May 5 notice from the Overseas Security Advisory Council, a public-private entity that works with State’s Office of Diplomatic Security, stated that the warning followed the deaths last month in Nigeria of 23 people poisoned after drinking a local gin called ogogoro that apparently was tainted with a pesticide.

“The deadly situation in Nigeria underscores the need for awareness that consuming alcohol abroad comes with various risks that are not necessarily prevalent in the U.S.,” the four-page OSAC notice said.

The alert advised travelers or workers abroad to avoid drinking homemade or counterfeit alcoholic drinks around the world often made with varying levels of toxicity. For example, last year, 24 people died and dozens were injured from drinking a Kenyan bootleg alcohol called kathuvuria, and some 31 people died and 160 injured in India from drinking booze tainted with methyl alcohol.

The alert also warns Americans not to engage in drinking competitions with locals: “Even Australian PM Tony Abbott was celebrated ‘skolling’ (chugging) a schooner (2/3 of a pint) of beer before flipping the empty glass on top of his head at a pub,” the report said.

In South Korea, Americans were warned to avoid getting drunk at parties with business partners, often on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, as part of South Koreans’ efforts to learn “true personalities in a tradition known as hoesik,” the report said.

“This level of inebriation can lead to cultural misunderstandings, ruined business relations or, worse, an increase in exposure to criminality,” the report added.

 

 

 

 

 

Lying to a Judge? Just Strip Their Law License

Posted on by

The Department of Justice has employs more than 10,000 lawyers and they have the money, personnel, resources and technology to ‘get-it-right’. But under Eric Holder, now replaced by Loretta Lynch, lawyers before the court in the immigration case obfuscated the truth and chose NOT to ‘get-it-right’. Simply states, it is malpractice with purpose. Strip their license..PERIOD.

No one will be disciplined, terminated or sanctioned..it just does not happen in the Federal government. So what happened before the judge? It should also be noted, obscure work at Justice goes on past midnight….hummm

Obama Administration Admits It Violated Judge’s Order to Halt Implementation of Immigration Plan

by: Hans von Spakovsky

In another midnight filing last week in the immigration lawsuit filed by 26 states against the Obama administration in the Southern District of Texas, the U.S. Justice Department admitted that the Department of Homeland Security had violated federal Judge Andrew Hanen’s Feb. 16 injunction against President Obama’s immigration amnesty plan.

This was not the first such admission by the government. It had previously filed an “Advisory” on March 3 informing Judge Hanen that between Nov. 20, 2014, when the president announced his immigration plan, and Feb. 16 when the injunction was issued, the Department of Homeland Security had begun implementing part of the president’s plan by issuing three-year deferrals to over 100,000 illegal aliens.

In other words, despite having told Judge Hanen both in court and in written pleadings that no part of the president’s plan was being implemented until late February at the earliest, government officials were doing exactly the opposite.

On April 7, Judge Hanen issued an order with a scathing analysis of the Justice Department’s misbehavior, finding that “attorneys for the government misrepresented the facts” to the court. He told the Justice Department that he expected all of the parties in the case, including the government, “to act in a forthright manner and not hide behind deceptive representations and half-truths.”

Hanen also gave the Justice Department lawyers a hard time over not having informed him immediately upon their discovery of this misrepresentation, saying that their claim that they took prompt, remedial action was “belied by the facts”—namely, that they waited over two weeks to tell the judge.

In the latest Advisory filed on May 7, the Justice Department informed Hanen that the Department of Homeland Security “sent three-year work authorizations after the Court had issued its injunction” to approximately 2,000 individuals. This time, the Justice Department lawyers assert they only found out about the violation of the injunction order the day before the filing.

They also say that Department of Homeland Security is in the process of converting “these three-year terms into two-year terms” and that Secretary Jeh Johnson has asked the “DHS Inspector General to investigate the issuance of these three-year [Employment Authorization Documents].”

In a separate, supplemental three-page order issued on May 8, Judge Hanen cites additional evidence to support his finding that the states have standing to challenge Obama’s immigration plan. In his Feb. 16 injunction order, Hanen referenced statements by Obama that there would be consequences for any Homeland Security employee who did not follow the requirements of the Nov. 20 amnesty plan. The Justice Department had tried to downplay the president’s statements.

However, Judge Hanen notes that while testifying on April 14—after the injunction was issued—before the House Judiciary Committee, Sarah Saldana, the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, “reiterated that any officer or agent who did not follow the dictates of the 2014 DHS Directive would face the entire gamut of possible employee sanctions, including termination.”

Hanen said that “the president’s statements have now been reaffirmed under oath by the very person in charge of immigration enforcement.”

Thus, according to Hanen, the government “has announced, and has now confirmed under oath, that it is pursuing a policy of mandatory non-compliance (with the [Immigration and Nationality Act]), and that any agent who seeks to enforce the duly-enacted immigration laws will face sanctions—which could include the loss of his or her job.”

It is this “clear abdication of the law by the government—a law that is only enforceable by the government and outside the province of the states” that gives the states standing to bring suit.

The latest actions by the government may make it even harder for Justice Department lawyers to convince the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn Judge Hanen’s injunction.

 

Very Fitting Chicago Junk Rating, Obama Library

Posted on by

For a sitting president to whine about the poor not getting enough money and to slam a media outlet over reporting ‘Obama-phones’, Chicago is the junk banner for Obama. In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson announced his ‘War on Poverty’ plan where 50 years later, there is no question it failed about spending $22 TRILLION dollars.

The White House had economic advisors examine President Johnson’s plan and decided to re-tool it is all areas but of particular note in the ‘investment in and rebuilding hard-hit communities’. Obama announced ‘Promise Zones’.

The Promise Zones initiative will build on existing programs, including the Department of HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods and the Department of Education’s Promise Neighborhoods grant programs. The Administration has invested $248 million in Choice and $157 million in Promise since 2010. For every federal dollar spent, Choice Neighborhoods has attracted eight dollars of private and other investment and has developed nearly 100,000 units of mixed-income housing in 260 communities, ensuring that low-income residents can afford to continue living in their communities. Promise Neighborhoods grants are supporting approximately 50 communities representing more than 700 schools. To help leverage and sustain grant work, 1,000 national, state, and community organizations have signed-on to partner with a Promise Neighborhood site. By expanding these programs, the Administration continues to support local efforts to transform low-income urban, rural, and tribal communities across the country. *** Is Baltimore or Chicago or Detroit a ‘Promise Zone’? Chicago is no model in fact the city now carries a ‘junk’ status, and it is fitting that Obama has chosen to place his presidential library there. Cant make this up…

Moody’s downgrades Chicago debt to ‘junk’ with negative outlook

Moody’s downgraded Chicago’s credit rating down to junk level “Ba1” from “Baa2.” The announcement, which the ratings agency released Tuesday afternoon, cited a recent Illinois court ruling voiding state pension reforms. Moody’s said it saw a negative outlook for the city’s credit.

Following that May court decision, Moody’s said it believes that “the city’s options for curbing growth in its own unfunded pension liabilities have narrowed considerably.”

So let the fund-raising begin. More federal dollars and the launch of collusion for the Obama library.

Obama library likely to set off a fundraising frenzy

The announcement Tuesday that Barack Obama will build his presidential library in Chicago did more than excite the South Side of the city. It also kicked off what’s likely to become a fundraising frenzy.

Even if Obama doesn’t raise any money himself – as he pledged not to do while in office – independent analysts fear that fundraising on his behalf still might create conflicts of interest in his final two years in the White House.

 

“Is this a problem? Absolutely,” said Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. “Even if he doesn’t solicit himself, (donors) are seeing all kinds of signals that this is a priority for him. It’s all a wink and a nod. … It buys access.”

The Barack Obama Foundation – a group composed of his longtime friends and supporters, including his former campaign manager and fundraiser – is expected to collect hundreds of millions of dollars, perhaps rivaling the $700 million Obama raised to win the White House in the first place.

 

Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist at Public Citizen, a government watchdog group, said presidents should wait until they left office to raise money for their libraries. But most contributions come while a president is in office and most donations, he said, come from those who have issues pending before the administration.

“He’s doing this while he’s in office because he knows that will pull in the money,” Holman said. “It is very problematic. The conflict of interest is ever present.”

Donations will pay for the construction of the facility, which will be much more than a library: part museum, part education center and part archive, as well as a gift shop and restaurant. It will house enough unclassified documents to fill four 18-wheelers and enough artifacts to fill a swimming pool. Private contributions and taxpayers’ dollars will share the cost of maintenance after the doors open in 2020 or 2021.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday that the foundation had taken a number of steps to alleviate any potential fundraising problems, though he wasn’t aware of whether the White House had spoken to the foundation about that.

“Certainly the foundation was interested in living up to the very high standard that the president himself established,” he said.

The president and first lady Michelle Obama had considered two other states, Hawaii, where Obama was born, and New York, where he graduated from college. They settled on the University of Chicago, in the city where he launched his political career and met his wife, and they started their family.

“All the strands of my life came together and I really became a man when I moved to Chicago,” Obama said in a statement. “That’s where I was able to apply that early idealism to try to work in communities in public service. That’s where I met my wife. That’s where my children were born.”

In the last 24 hours surrounding the announcement, at least three emails were sent to previous Obama supporters about the library. “Over the next two years, you and I have the unique opportunity to help lay the groundwork for the foundation while the president is still in office,” said one from former senior adviser David Axelrod.

Coming up next from the foundation: an onslaught of phone solicitations, small-donor Internet appeals and discreet one-on-one conversations with the wealthiest of donors.

Foundation officials say they won’t accept donations from organizations that aren’t nonprofits, from individuals who are foreign nationals or from federal lobbyists.

James “Skip” Rutherford, dean of the Clinton School of Public Service at the University of Arkansas, who played an influential role in the creation of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library and Museum in Little Rock, said most library donors were past supporters of presidents or those who lived in the areas where the facilities were to be built.

Under current law, there are no fundraising restrictions for presidential libraries. Money can be raised while the president is still in office and contributors don’t need to be disclosed.

Obama’s foundation has pledged to release the names of those who contribute more than $200 on its website on a quarterly basis, though only with donation ranges and no further identifying information.

Since the foundation was created last year, several wealthy supporters have donated a total of roughly $3 million to $6 million. Many of them raised money for Obama during one of his campaigns or were appointed by him to various boards.

For years, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have considered whether presidential libraries should be required to disclose their donors. A pair of bipartisan bills is pending that would require the disclosure of contributions of more than $200 in an online searchable and downloadable format.

Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del., said his bill would “bring sunlight to the presidential library fundraising process, helping to eliminate even the appearance of impropriety.”

As a senator and a candidate for president, Obama backed the disclosure of contributors and bundlers to presidential foundations.

Government watchdog groups say his foundation’s current disclosures don’t go far enough.

“It will be critically important that President Obama and his staff be completely transparent about their fundraising for the library over the next 19 months,” said Chris Gates, president of the Sunlight Foundation, which pushes for government openness. “The public has a right to know who is contributing to the library and what interests they may have with the federal government while he’s still in office.”

Thirteen presidential libraries operated by the National Archives and Records Administration are scattered across the nation, from Boston (John F. Kennedy) to Yorba Linda, Calif. (Richard Nixon).

Ronald Reagan’s library in Simi Valley, Calif., had been the most popular, with about 400,000 visitors annually. But the newest library, the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, drew nearly 500,000 people last year, its first full year.

Obama’s library might very well surpass those numbers because of his historic tenure as the first African-American president in the United States.

 

Obama Has it Both Ways on Iran

Posted on by

Barack Obama has the memo on Iran…in fact all of them and he has dismissed them for the sake of continued talks on the nuclear program. He admits Iran is a sponsor of terror. The president knows full well the history of Iran yet still works diligently to sell an unwritten deal where sanctions and inspections of Iran are not only debatable but suspect at best.

There is chatter that Saudi Arabia has taken delivery of nuclear weapons they funded through Pakistan’s program while the arms race builds in the Middle East as other Gulf States are in talks with acquiring nuclear weapons.

This era has become the most dangerous and threatening in the world since the Cuban missile crisis under Barack Obama, his National Security Council and with John Kerry, Secretary of State. The whole globe understands the full risk of a nuclear Iran as well as their proxy armies deployed in several locations across the world. Terrorism de jour and sponsoring more is the constant mission of Iran.

Obama says Iran sponsors terrorism

WASHINGTON – President Obama is calling Iran “a state sponsor of terrorism” in his first interview with an Arab newspaper, as he tries to sell skeptical regional allies on a nuclear deal with the terror-backing state.

It was his toughest comments about Iran since the US and other nations reached the tentative nuclear pact with Tehran.

Obama gave the interview to the Saudi-owned Asharq al-Awsat on the eve of a Camp David summit with leaders and officials of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which represents Persian Gulf Arab nations — although several heads of state are skipping the Camp David affair Thursday.

“The countries in the region are right to be deeply concerned about Iran’s activities, especially its support for violent proxies inside the borders of other nations,” Obama said, a reference to Hezbollah and other groups.

“Iran clearly engages in dangerous and destabilizing behavior in different countries across the region. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. It helps prop up the Assad regime in Syria. It supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. It aids the Houthi rebels in Yemen,” Obama said.

Obama made his reassuring comments as he prepares to brief Arab allies on the status of the nuclear framework reached with Iran following months of negotiations with the regime that included a half-dozen nations.

Anxious about the Iranian threat, Gulf nations are seeking security guarantees from the US. Obama told the paper “there should be no doubt about the commitment of the United States to the security of the region” and our Gulf partners.

He also called for “working to resolve the conflicts across the Middle East that have taken so many innocent lives and caused so much suffering for the people of the region.”

“When it comes to Iran’s future, I cannot predict Iran’s internal dynamics. Within Iran, there are leaders and groups that for decades have defined themselves in opposition to both the United States and our regional partners,” the president said.

“I’m not counting on any nuclear deal to change that. That said, it’s also possible that if we can successfully address the nuclear question and Iran begins to receive relief from some nuclear sanctions, it could lead to more investments in the Iranian economy and more opportunity for the Iranian people, which could strengthen the hands of more moderate leaders in Iran. More Iranians could see that constructive engagement — not confrontation — with the international community is the better path,” he added.

Obama also said the US was taking a “hard look” at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and called for both sides to demonstrate a “genuine commitment” to a two-state solution.

It appears Obama isn’t taking Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud’s decision to skip the Camp David summit too hard. The newspaper is controlled by the king’s sons.

Iran’s weapons program continues to advance and any inspections are out of the question of their nuclear sites as told by Iran’s leadership.

Iran rejects Amano’s remarks on access to military sites

AEOI spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi

TEHRAN, May 13 (MNA) – AEOI spokesman said IAEA chief‘s interpretation of the Additional Protocol on getting access to Iran’s military sites is his own subjective interpretation, although Iran has reservations about it.

“Amano has not dictated any obligation for Iran but rather presented his own subjective interpretation of the Additional Protocol about which we have our reservations,” AEOI Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi told IRIB on Wednesday, while referring to an Associated Press interview with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano on Tuesday.

Yukiya Amano said on Tuesday that a nuclear agreement being worked on by Tehran and the six states would give his experts the right to push for access to Iranian military sites.

Kamalvandi clarified, however, that the Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’s safeguards agreements does not oblige its signatories to allow inspections to their military sites.

“First of all, Iran has neither approved nor implemented the Additional Protocol yet; secondly, no article of the protocol dictates a specific obligation regarding access to the military sites of the signatories,” he asserted.

Kamalvandi added that under the Additional Protocol, access to the sites demanded by the UN nuclear agency requires evidence and the IAEA must take into account the considerations of the signatories, including security considerations.

“If a signatory has a reason to refrain from allowing a visit to the site, the Additional Protocol has permitted access to areas adjacent to the ones demanded by the IAEA or the use of other means of inspection,” he said.

He emphasized that if Iran signs up to the Additional Protocol, it would fulfill its commitments in accordance with the document.

Iran has repeatedly stressed that it will not allow inspections of its military facilities under the pretext of nuclear inspections.

Amano’s remarks came as Iran and the 5+1 negotiators kicked off a new round of deputy-level talks in the Austrian capital of Vienna on drafting the text of a final deal over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Iran and the 5+1 countries – the United States, France, Britain, China, Russia and Germany – are seeking to finalize a deal on Tehran’s nuclear program by the end of June. The two sides reached a mutual understanding in Lausanne, Switzerland, on April 2.

TEHRAN, May 13 (MNA) – AEOI spokesman said IAEA chief‘s interpretation of the Additional Protocol on getting access to Iran’s military sites is his own subjective interpretation, although Iran has reservations about it.

“Amano has not dictated any obligation for Iran but rather presented his own subjective interpretation of the Additional Protocol about which we have our reservations,” AEOI Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi told IRIB on Wednesday, while referring to an Associated Press interview with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano on Tuesday.

Yukiya Amano said on Tuesday that a nuclear agreement being worked on by Tehran and the six states would give his experts the right to push for access to Iranian military sites.

Kamalvandi clarified, however, that the Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’s safeguards agreements does not oblige its signatories to allow inspections to their military sites.

“First of all, Iran has neither approved nor implemented the Additional Protocol yet; secondly, no article of the protocol dictates a specific obligation regarding access to the military sites of the signatories,” he asserted.

Kamalvandi added that under the Additional Protocol, access to the sites demanded by the UN nuclear agency requires evidence and the IAEA must take into account the considerations of the signatories, including security considerations.

“If a signatory has a reason to refrain from allowing a visit to the site, the Additional Protocol has permitted access to areas adjacent to the ones demanded by the IAEA or the use of other means of inspection,” he said.

He emphasized that if Iran signs up to the Additional Protocol, it would fulfill its commitments in accordance with the document.

Iran has repeatedly stressed that it will not allow inspections of its military facilities under the pretext of nuclear inspections.

Amano’s remarks came as Iran and the 5+1 negotiators kicked off a new round of deputy-level talks in the Austrian capital of Vienna on drafting the text of a final deal over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Iran and the 5+1 countries – the United States, France, Britain, China, Russia and Germany – are seeking to finalize a deal on Tehran’s nuclear program by the end of June. The two sides reached a mutual understanding in Lausanne, Switzerland, on April 2.

Obama, Tattle-Tail Runs to UN on Law Enforcement

Posted on by

Obama and his previous and current U.S. Attorney General at the Department of Justice are on an alarming mission to destroy law enforcement across the United States, calling their work violations of human rights. Obama has chosen to whine about police departments in America to the United Nations Human Rights Council. Really? Is he asking for the United Nations to apply sanctions to our law enforcement?

The UN Security Council is and never has been a judge of Human Rights where countries like Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Syria are omitted from his diatribe and are ignored by the UN as well.

Anyone remember Hamas using children as human shields during the last round of hostilities in Gaza?

Congress has stopped Barack Obama from transferring Guantanamo detainees and closing the facility while the White House has been sneaky and doing transfers and trades without advising Congress. Barack Obama is working to stop all death penalty sentences in America but he says little about sex trafficking, known slavery by other countries and worse he has no interest in protecting the slaughter of Jews and Christians in the Middle East.

Obama’s twisted logic is to report what he considers misguided adherence to law to the United Nations inviting other countries to participate our domestic debates. Simply stated, Barack Obama is deferring oversight of our justice and legal system to an international corrupt institution.

Remember that ‘red-line’ Obama declared on the use of chemical weapons in Syria? Crickets as Syria continues to use chlorine barrel bombs against citizens. Is there any doubt that Obama really does hate America? Shameful…

Obama Admin Apologizes to U.N. for American Cops

Promises to prosecute those who “wilfully use excessive force.”

The Obama administration apologized Monday to the United Nation’s Human Rights Council for American law enforcement personnel whom it described as “willfully us[ing] excessive force,” at times with racist motivation. In its defense of its handling of the issue, the administration touts prosecuting over 400 law-enforcement officials and committing itself to take down those found guilty in the future.

The Associated Press reports that the U.N. human rights council—which includes dozens of countries with deplorable human rights records—voiced “widespread concern” about unjust practices by American police. The Obama administration responded by vowing to “rededicate” itself to ensuring that “our civil-rights laws live up to their promise” and touting its punishment of out-of-control personnel:

“We must rededicate ourselves to ensuring that our civil-rights laws live up to their promise,” Justice Department official James Cadogan told delegates, adding that that is particularly important in the area of police practices and pointing to recent high-profile cases of officers killing unarmed black residents.

“These events challenge us to do better and to work harder for progress through both dialogue and action,” he said at the session’s opening. He added that the government has the authority to prosecute officials who “willfully use excessive force,” and that criminal charges have been brought against more than 400 law-enforcement officials in the past six years.

The council presented calls for changes to other U.S. policies, including abolishing the death penalty, curbing NSA surveillance programs, and closing Guantanamo Bay.

Administration officials responded with the standard non-answers. On execution, Deputy Assistant Attorney General David Bitkower explained that the “controversy” over executions in America was an ongoing “extensive debate.” As for U.S intelligence gathering, Bitkower vaguely defended the programs by saying they are “subject to stringent and multilayered oversight mechanisms.”

As for the call to close Gitmo, Brig. Gen. Richard Gross said President Obama has called shutting down Gitmo a “national imperative” and remains committed to the cause despite being thwarted by Congress. The remaining inmates after Obama’s transfer of many in recent years, the administration maintained, were all there legally.

The U.S. human rights review was part of the “Universal Periodic Reviews” of U.N. members. The reviews occur every four years. This is the second such review for the U.S, the last occurring in 2010.