Category Archives: common core education

The 3.7 Billion Request Tells a Bigger Story

Posted on by

The smartest people are those that have their hands dirty in government and time their respective departures when corruption goes to DEFCON levels. Such was the case with Lois Lerner at the IRS, such was the case with White House spokesperson, Robert Gibbs and such was the case with David Axelrod, a White House advisor. Now such is the case with Kathleen Sebelius.

Either these people and others do have a threshold they wont cross when it comes to fraud, lies and collusion or such fraud, lies and collusion in emerging events was just too big to endure. Either way, it is time to focus on Kathlees Sebilius for the matter of the $3.7 billion supplemental for the alien surge at the our southern border.

She timed her departure knowing full well what was ahead, while it was during her tenure at Heath and Human Services that all tracks leading up to the immigrant incursion was about to break wide open.

Now let’s look deeper. On July 8, 2014, the White House wrote a rather comprehensive letter and support document to John Boehner, Speaker of the House asking for $3.7 in funding a solution to an insurgency of the White House’s own making. The emergence of this issue involving costs under the cover of illegal immigration and covering the costs of shortfalls in other agencies originated back in June. The timing of this is no mistake as it does take time to estimate and coordinate conditions, agencies involvement and the ubiquitous bundling of dollars to pay for other items of which is always detailed for the White House Office of Management and Budget. Enter Sylvia Burwell. She was the Director of the White House OMB from 2012-2013 and now she has officially replaced Sebilius.

Now only does Burwell have a handle on financial and economic needs of major programs but she is well aware that the Congressional Budget Office can no longer predict the financial status of Obamacare due mostly in part to the alterations made by edict and Executive Order by Barack Obama himself. However, it is in fact clear that the numbers of enrollees into Obamacare as well as countless other factors prove that Obamacare is not financially stable now or in the future. This is where the $3.7 billion supplemental of the over $4 billion earmarks billions to Health and Human Services to cover short-falls and not for the medical care of illegals flooding into America.

Here is the White House letter and annexed support documents where the clues reveal themselves. Of note is the money to be allocated to fighting fires.

Further, Barack Obama asked Congress Tuesday and the White House opted not to include legislative language calling on the unaccompanied children to be deported more quickly to their home countries. But officials made clear that their intent is to speed the current turnaround process by increasing money for the immigration courts and putting a priority on recent arrivals.

What is behind this border surge is explained here. Going back as far as 1996, the immigration surge has been discussed where those in Congress have chosen to ignore real solutions for at least 18 years, yet the American taxpayer has been footing the bill for refugee resettlement and private organizations have been receiving grant money to play a large role including the Catholic church, such as we are seeing the same today. For a complete study completed in 2008 on the costs, results and effectiveness of the Refugee Resettlement office under HHS go here. The Government Accountability Office performed an intense summary of 2012 and no one is watching, much less interviewing the local stakeholders on the financial and demographic implications at the local level.

In summary, this new supplemental requested by the White House is not only hiding financial shortfalls of other government agencies, this making this a planned and well executed event, favoritism is also at hand here, so America, don’t be fooled with the rhetoric including those that will be deported and that laws are being enforced.

This is madness of epic proportions, while the larger matter is we are in a national security condition that is reaching the red level of the DEFCON alarm system.

If you don’t think we are at DEFCON and this has been a mission by the Obama administration then consider this.

Asylum Claims under the Obama regime.

Leaked Data Shows 10-Fold Increase In Obama’s Asylum Approvals

By: Neil Munroe

The number of foreigners who successfully filed asylum claims in the United States almost tripled from 2012 to 2013, up to 30,393.

That’s 10 times the number from 2008, when President Barack Obama was elected, and it is evidence his immigration officials are agreeing that many people in the growing wave of Central American migrants face a “credible fear” of harm if they are returned. Official approval allows the migrants to file for asylum in immigration court, where judges will approve or reject the asylum request.

If you came illegally to the U.S. seeking asylum in 2013, you had better than a four-in-five chance of successfully filing an asylum claim. That’s up from a three-in-five chance in 2008.

The migrants include mothers with children, and youths who have been brought north by their parents who are living illegally in the United States. Roughly 240,000 migrants — parents, youths and children — are expected to cross the border by the end of September.

The total includes 57,525 unaccompanied youths and children, from October 2013 to June 30, 2014, according to DHS. Because of a 2008 law, unaccompanied youths from countries other than Mexico and Canada don’t have to pass the “credible fear” hurdle, but can directly file asylum cases in immigration courts.

Legislators urged more care in granting asylum after the media reported that the father of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, successfully applied for asylum in 2002.

The internal federal data from the Department of Homeland Security was provided to The Daily Caller by a source.

It shows that officials endorsed 3,097 asylum requests in the year up to Sept. 30, 2008 — dubbed fiscal year 2008 — to people who said they faced a “credible fear” of persecution if they were repatriated.

Obama took office in January 2009, and officials approved 3,411 “credible fear” approvals in the next 12 months, up to the end of September in 2009.

Officials approved another 6,293 in the next 12 months, and another 9,423 in the next 12 months, ending September 2011.

 

 

DC, Target Rich for Lawsuits

Posted on by

Whistleblowers abound, they include the EPA, the Veterans Administration and the White House. It is about time that those in government finally sound the alarm while there should be thousands more doing the same thing.

The one target rich agency that needs the most whistleblowers is in fact the Department of Justice, but that is a fool’s errand to hope for that to happen. So, there are two lawsuits brewing that are notable and it is a start in the process.

The House Speaker, John Boehner introduced his resolution for a lawsuit against Barack Obama and here is the resolution.

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/RU/RU00/20140716/102507/BILLS-113pih-HRes___.pdf

While Barack Obama is mocking this pending lawsuit with his ‘so sue me’ there is one Congressman that is taking on Lois Lerner. His resolution is here.

The full text of Stockman’s resolution:

RESOLUTION

Providing for the arrest of Lois G. Lerner to answer the charge of contempt of Congress

Whereas Lois G. Lerner, former Director, Exempt Organizations, Internal Revenue Service, has been found to be in contempt of Congress for willfully and intentionally refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena duly issued by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, thereby obstructing the Congress in the lawful exercise of its constitutionally mandated legislative powers; and,

Whereas such behavior is an insult to the dignity of the House of Representatives, an attack upon the integrity of its proceedings, works violence upon the rights of the House collectively, and therefore implicates the long-recognized inherent power of the House to punish and commit for contempt, privileged under the Constitution; and,

Whereas recent history with similarly contumacious and insolent witnesses such as Eric Himpton Holder, Junior, strongly suggests that the present statutory judicial rubric set up to punish and reform such insubordinate and obstructionist witnesses would be ineffective in this case, as it is likely that the US Attorney for the District of Columbia would refuse to perform his lawful duty to bring the offending contemnor Lerner before a Grand Jury and prosecute the same for her misconduct pursuant to section 104 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (2 U.S.C. 194) and section 102 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (2 U.S.C. 192); and,

Whereas the executive and judicial branches’ prolonged and dawdling failure to prosecute Attorney General Holder’s insolent contempt of the 112th Congress strongly suggests that a like proceeding against contemnor Lerner would be similarly futile, and the threat of such prosecution has clearly been insufficient to encourage contemnor Lerner to be honest and candid with the Congress regarding the heinous actions of the Internal Revenue Service;

Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Speaker issue his warrant, directed to the Sergeant-at-Arms, or his deputy, commanding him to arrest and take into custody forthwith, wherever to be found, the body of Lois G. Lerner, and bring her to the bar of the House without delay to answer to the charge of contempt of its authority, breach of its privileges, and gross and wanton insult to the integrity of its proceedings, and in the meantime keep the body of Lerner in his custody in the common jail of the District of Columbia, subject to the further order of the House. While in custody, Lerner shall enjoy no special privileges beyond those extended to her fellow inmates, shall not access any computer or telephone, and shall not be visited by anyone other than her counsel, clergy, physician, or family.

We need a method at the Congressional level that allows the House to hires its own special prosecutor such that reliance on the Department of Justice is not required as Eric Holder simply refuses to be a law-enforcer.

 

Obama Prepares to Adopt 90,000

Posted on by

While the insurgency at the Southern Border continues, it is important to know even more outside the scope of the obvious aired on TV.

We have at least two retired Generals that have vocally said in the last few weeks that this incursion is a national security threat, their names are General Hayden and General Kelly. So what is really going on with a solution?

 Real Photo

90,000 migrants could cross border

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said Thursday that as many as 90,000 unaccompanied child migrants could cross the southwest border before the end of this fiscal year in September.

That will place a huge strain on immigration agencies which will badly need new money to get through the summer, Johnson says. The 90,000 number—the highest yet given by the administration—is spelled out in written Senate testimony by Johnson as well as Health and Human Services Sylvia Burwell, who must also deal with the border crisis.

“We are preparing for a scenario in which the number of unaccompanied children apprehended at the border could reach up to 90,000 by the end of fiscal 2014,” Johnson’s testimony reads, and he bluntly warns that without an infusion of new funds, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will run out of money in August.

Johnson appeared Thursday afternoon before the Senate Appropriations Committee, which is considering President Barack Obama’s request this week for $3.7 billion in emergency funds, chiefly for Homeland Security and HHS.

Of the 90,000, it is estimated that about 20,000 will be from Mexico and can be quickly returned. But about 70,000 would have come from Central American countries like Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, and processing these cases requires much more time under current law and has provoked debate now in Congress.

In fiscal 2013, Johnson said 24,000 unaccompanied children were apprehended by border officers in his department. That number had already doubled to 57,000 by the end of June, he said, and “it continues to climb.”

But what about the Department of Justice?

Here is the DoJ’s new priority. By: lsmoynih

Along the southern border of the United States, migrants make the dangerous journey from Central America and Mexico to our homeland on a daily, consistent basis. Throughout the process of this journey, individuals, children, and entire families are faced with varying degrees of violence, criminal activity, abusive treatment, and extortive practices. Once on United States soil, detained migrants are faced with detention and become active cases within the immigration courts of the United States. As such, these detained migrants and their human rights are the concern of the U.S. Department of Justice. Concerns of the Department of Justice range from humane treatment and proper care of migrants during detainment to the proficient completion of migrant court cases.

This week, Deputy Attorney General James Cole announced, “… that the Justice Department will implement a series of steps to help address the influx of migrants crossing the southern border of the United States.” This announcement was accompanied by a Fact Sheet titled, “Department of Justice Actions to Address the Influx of Migrants Crossing the Southwest Border in the United States.” The steps included in the announcement contain the following points of focus:

  • “Refocusing immigration court resources to adjudicate the cases of recent immigrants”
  • “Providing support and training to help address violence in Central America”
  • “Redoubling efforts to work with other federal agencies and the Mexican government to investigate and prosecute those who smuggle migrants to the United States”

To address the first point, the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) has been refocused, “… to prioritize cases involving migrants who have recently crossed the southwest border and whom DHS has placed into removal proceedings…” The purpose of this adjustment in case prioritization is to ensure that recent cases are processed proficiently, especially those cases concerning unaccompanied minors and families who crossed the border with children. Proficient case completion safeguards those migrants seeking asylum as well as returning migrants whose case proceedings deem removal as fitting. In order to achieve this level of timely case completion, the EOIR plans to reassign immigration judges, implement technology-supported proceedings by means of video teleconference, and allow for the appointment of temporary immigration judges.

In order to achieve the second point of focus, the Department of Justice is seeking a means to fund the delegation of, “… legal and law enforcement advisors at U.S. embassies…” in designated Central American Countries. In addition, to provide foreign governments with the necessary support and training to combat criminal violence, the Department of Justice, “…is seeking new funding…to assist Central American countries in combatting [sic] transnational crime and the threat posed by criminal gangs.” The purpose of supporting Central American countries in this manner is to provide potential migrants with safer home countries, and thus decreasing the number of migrants who seek protection in the U.S. from crime violence in their home of origin.

For the purposes of prosecuting migrant smugglers, the Department has announced plans to increase its attempts at “…identify[ing] and apprehend[ing] smugglers who are aiding unaccompanied children in crossing the U.S. border.” In tandem with these increased attempts, the importance of strategizing a means to “…disrupt and dismantle…” smuggling networks is addressed as a key area of focus to achieve the final focal point of the announcement.

In conclusion, the Department announcement discloses two initial steps being made this week by key officials. On July 9, 2010, Deputy Attorney General Cole made a visit to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s McAllen Station and processing facility in order to view the pressing concerns regarding the influx of migrants at the border. Apart from this, EOIR Director Juan P. Osuna plans on testifying before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to emphasize the Department of Justice’s strategies towards addressing the influx of migrants onto U.S. soil.

Flash Gordon at the White House

Posted on by

Do you ever wonder where the Barack Obama anti-Israel attitude comes from? Do you ever wonder why Hillary Clinton kept her distance from standing at the side of Israel? Do you ever wonder how John Kerry has been even more assertive in his aggression on Israel? Do you ever wonder why the New York Times maintains their journalists that write pro-Hamas and pr0-Palestinian news items? There are many in the Obama circle that maintain visual and highly vocal opposition to Israel but one you should come to know and meet in Philip Gordon. Gordon was a senior policy advisor to Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. He was later named as the Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs, responsible for 50 countries. NSC top advisor Tom Donilon completely endorses Philip Gordon. All involved completely ignore Hamas, the PLO and the fact that 20 years of peace negotiations have never advanced, so Israel is to blame according to Gordon. Why you ask? Top Obama Official Blasts Israel Over West Bank Military Occupation Amid Heightening Conflict  by: RAPHAEL AHREN, The Times Of Israel Israel’s ongoing occupation of the West Bank is wrong and leads to regional instability and dehumanization of Palestinians, a top American government official said Tuesday in Tel Aviv, hinting that the current Israeli government is not committed to peace.   In an unusually harsh major foreign policy address, Philip Gordon, a special assistant to US President Barack Obama and the White House coordinator for the Middle East, appealed to Israeli and Palestinian leaders to make the compromises needed to reach a permanent peace agreement. Jerusalem “should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate” such a treaty with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has proven to be a reliable partner, Gordon said. “Israel confronts an undeniable reality: It cannot maintain military control of another people indefinitely. Doing so is not only wrong but a recipe for resentment and recurring instability,” Gordon said. “It will embolden extremists on both sides, tear at Israel’s democratic fabric and feed mutual dehumanization.” Delivering the keynote address at the Haaretz newspaper’s Israel Conference on Peace, Gordon reiterated Obama’s position that a final-status agreement should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps. The administration is aware that Israel is facing threats on several fronts and Obama remains committed to Israel’s security, he said, speaking on the day that Israel launched Operation Protective Edge to counter rocket fire from the Hamas-run Gaza Strip. Indeed, mere hours before Gordon addressed the conference, hundreds of participants were forced to quickly evacuate the event hall and enter a safe room after an alert signaled a missile approaching Tel Aviv. After about 10 minutes, participants returned to the hall and the conference resumed. “The United States will always have Israel’s back. That’s why we fight for it every day at the United Nations,” Gordon said. But as Israel’s greatest friend and strongest defender, Washington should be allowed to ask some fundamental questions, he added. Specifically, Gordon went on: “How will Israel remain democratic and Jewish if it attempts to govern the millions of Palestinian Arabs who live in the West Bank? How will it have peace if it’s unwilling to delineate a border, end the occupation and allow for Palestinian sovereignty, security and dignity? How will we prevent other states from supporting Palestinian efforts in international bodies, if Israel is not seen as committed to peace?” The administration was disappointed that the last round of US-brokered peace negotiations failed and that currently “we find ourselves in an uneasy pause,” Gordon said. “At the same time we have no interest in a blame game. The unfortunate reality is that neither side prepared their publics or proved ready to make the difficult decisions required for an agreement. And trust has been eroded on both sides. Until it is restored, neither side will likely be ready to takes risk for peace, even if they live with the dire consequences that resolve from its absence.” The “past few weeks” show that the inability to resolve the Israeli-Palestinians conflict “inevitable means more tension, more resentment, more injustice, more insecurity, more tragedy and more grief,” he said. “And the sight of grieving families, Israeli and Palestinian alike, reminds us that the cost of this conflict remains unbearably high.” In his 25-minute speech – which marked the first time a senior White House official had directly addressed the Israeli people since Obama’s March 2013 speech in Jerusalem — Gordon rejected any alternatives to the two-state solution. He called on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resume peace talks with the PA, suggesting that Abbas is the best Palestinian leader Jerusalem could hope for. “Israel should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate such a peace with Abbas, who has shown time and again that he’s committed to non-violence and co-existence and cooperation with Israel.” At one point in his speech, Gordon appeared to directly contradict an assessment Netanyahu made last week regarding Israel’s security needs vis-à-vis its eastern border. Referring to deliberations retired US General John Allen held with IDF officers regarding ways to secure Israel’s border with Jordan, Gordon said that Allen’s plans include “a full range of contingencies, including rising threats that we see around the Middle East.” Allen was likely referring to the territorial gains made in recent weeks by the radical terror group Islamic State (formerly known as ISIL or ISIS). “The approaches that are being discussed would create one of the most secure borders in the world along both sides of the Jordan River,” Gordon said. “By developing a layered defense that includes significantly strengthening the fences on both sides of the border, ensuring the right level of boots on the ground, deploying state of the art technology, the comprehensive program of rigorous testing, we can make the border safe against any type of conventional or unconventional threat – from individual terrorists or a conventional armored forces.” On June 29, Netanyahu declared that one of Israel’s central security challenges was to “stabilize the area west of the Jordan River security line.” In this part of the West Bank, the prime minister said, “no force can guarantee Israel’s security other than the IDF and our security services… Who knows what the future holds? The ISIS wave could very quickly be directed against Jordan,” he said at a conference in Tel Aviv. Israel would thus have to maintain long-term security control of the territory along the Jordan River in any future accord with the Palestinians, the prime minister said. “The evacuation of Israel’s forces would most likely lead to the collapse the PA and the rise of radical Islamic forces, just as it did in Gaza. It would also severely endanger the State of Israel.” In his speech at the David Intercontinental Hotel in Tel Aviv, Gordon also referred to the hail of rockets that rained down on Israel throughout the day from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. “The US strongly condemns these attacks. No country should have to live under the constant threat of indiscriminate violence against innocent civilians,” said Gordon, whose administration was heavily criticized by the Israeli government for quickly agreeing to work with the new Hamas-backed Palestinian unity government when it was established last month. The administration supported Israel’s right to defend itself against these attacks, he added. “At the same time, we appreciate Prime Minister Netanyahu’s calls for acting responsibly and we in turn call on all sides to do all they can to restore calm and to protect civilians.”

Putin Sees a Post America World

Posted on by

Barack Obama in just a few short years has passed the baton to Vladimir Putin such that Putin can now dictate global conditions, economic standards and alter international law as he chooses. The United Nations, the Hague, the International Monetary Fund, Interpol and the World Bank will all fall in line with Putin at the helm, while the equilibrium of the globe will be at the hands of China, Iran and Russia.

Any influence that the United States once had, an policy that the United States once had, any loyalties the United States once had vanished without so much as a debate or whimper.

new world order

Putin: Ukraine is a Battlefield for the New World Order

By: Pavel Felgenhauer

This week in Moscow President Vladimir Putin made a major foreign policy statement, while speaking to a worldwide gathering of Russian ambassadors and permanent diplomatic representatives. According to Putin, the West did not give Moscow a choice, but to move to annex Crimea last March to defend Russians and Russian-speakers “that consider themselves part of the wider Russian world” (“Ruskiy Mir”). Putin insisted that NATO planned to swiftly move its forces into Sevastopol and radically change the balance of power in the region, depriving Russia of everything it had been fighting for since the times of Tsar Peter the Great.

According to Putin, the present crisis in Ukraine is a manifestation of the core Western policy of “deterring Russia” that continued despite the end of the Cold war. Putin announced Moscow would continue to defend the rights of Russian “compatriots” living abroad “using political, economic and self-defense humanitarian operations.” He declared that the time of U.S. world domination has ended and Russia will be reintegrating the Eurasian landmass [former USSR], while promoting better relations with Europe, “which is our natural partner.” The Russian foreign ministry was ordered to work on preparing “a joint space of economic and humanitarian cooperation from Lisbon to Vladivostok,” based on absolute noninterference in internal political matters and excluding the U.S. Putin accused Washington of blackmailing Paris to stop the delivery of the French-built Mistral helicopter-carrying assault ships to the Russian Navy (kremlin.ru, July 1). The first Mistral is planned for delivery this year and it could be stationed in Sevastopol (Rossyskaya Gazeta, June 25).

Putin’s speech was controversial: while accusing the West of ignoring international law and interfering in others’ affairs by promoting so called “democracy,” Putin strongly asserted Russia’s right to intervene in other nations internal affairs “to defend Russian compatriots abroad.” The Kremlin rejects the West ideologically, politically and militarily, but Putin’s speech did not spell out fully the practical part of the Russian foreign policy agenda (gazeta.ru, July1).

After Putin’s foreign policy statement, the deputy secretary of Russia’s National Security Council, Eugenie Lukyanov, Putin’s appointee from St. Petersburg, told RIA Novosti that “the time of U.S. world hegemony is over,” but Washington is not ready to accept this fact. According to Lukyanov, new international rules must be written together by major world powers that would take into account the interests of all key players. Possibly, a global conference to rewrite international law must be called, because today “there are no agreed rules and the world may become an increasingly unruly place” plagued with constant conflicts. Lukyanov accused Washington of directly promoting conflict and bloodshed in Ukraine and using the conflict to rally European nations against Russia. Russia, according to Lukyanov, could reply by cutting supplies of titanium to Boeing that could seriously hamper the production of passenger aircraft in America. Lukyanov ridiculed President Barack Obama’s administration: “They spent $5 billion to prepare and organize the Maidan protests in Kyiv, but the end result was that Crimea became part of Russia and Putin’s approval ratings are more than 80 percent. It turns out Obama’s advisers are our prime helpers.” Lukyanov accused Poland of harboring training centers of Ukrainian radical nationalists on its territory and expressed hope that attempts to use the Ukrainian crisis to consolidate the West and NATO shall fail eventually (RIA Novosti, July 2).

The Kremlin apparently believes the time is ripe for a decisive drive to undermine U.S. influence and power worldwide and hit at the transatlantic link to undermine NATO, while the White House is occupied by the Obama administration, seen by Moscow as ineffective and indecisive. The Ukrainian crisis may promote the emergence of a new world order that would sideline Western democratic nations and recognize Russia’s own sphere of undisputed influence in the post-Soviet Eurasian landmass. On the practical side, Putin promised the ambassadors gathered in Moscow, who have been tasked to make this happen, a fourfold pay hike for diplomatic staff (kremlin.ru, July 1).

This week the Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko announced the termination of a 10-day unilateral ceasefire in fighting with pro-Russian separatists in Donbas. Poroshenko accused the separatists of constantly violating the ceasefire, of killing Ukrainian solders, of failing to liberate hostages and implement Poroshenko’s previously announced peace plan. Poroshenko promised “to liberate our land,” but implied the ceasefire could be resumed, if separatist fighters accept his conditions and that his peace plan was still on the table (Segodnya, July 1). Putin criticized Poroshenko for resuming the so-called anti-terrorist operation in Donbas, but also left open the possibility of a negotiated compromise (kremlin.ru, July 1). The Kremlin is at present concentrating its efforts on pressing for a prolonged ceasefire and “substantial negotiations” between the rebels and Kyiv—an arrangement that would give Putin leverage to keep Kyiv and the unruly Russian nationalist rebels under control, while containing Western influence in Ukraine and possibly inserting wedges into the transatlantic connection between the U.S. and EU. Moscow has been apparently influencing the rebels to scale down their demands and offering some tactical concessions to Poroshenko, while trying to sideline the U.S. and engage European powers as intermediaries (EDM, June 26).

Resumed fighting in Donbas this week seems to be marginal in nature—the Ukrainian forces are improving their positions and trying to secure the border with Russia, while not attempting to decisively defeat the rebels or take over any major rebel-held cities. A meeting in Berlin between the German, French, Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers on July 2 resulted in a joint press conference and a declaration calling for terms of a ceasefire to be finalized by July 5. Moscow has promised to allow Ukrainian border guards and OSCE observers into its posts on the Ukrainian border to verify that men and arms are not being smuggled into Ukraine. Hostages must be released and OSCE observers deployed to monitor any future ceasefire (Rossyskaya Gazeta, July 3). A pattern is emerging of possible intermittent fighting followed by ceasefire and negotiations. This pattern would seem to largely exclude the U.S. from the picture and be in line with Moscow’s announced overall foreign policy objectives.