Showing posts with label WFB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WFB. Show all posts

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Feds Spend $236,517 for Cellphone Game to Teach 11-Year-Old Kenyans How to Use Condoms

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is spending over $200,000 to create a mobile game that will teach young teens in Kenya to use condoms.
The game also seeks to “educate very young adolescents” about HIV and “harmful gender norms.”
“The overall goal of the proposed project is to contribute to reductions in HIV incidence among youth in sub- Saharan Africa,” according to the NIH grant. “The objective of our proposed study is to advance that goal by developing, building and pilot-testing an interactive electronic game for preadolescents that will be informed by socio-behavioral and pedagogical theories, evidence-based practice, and unique formative research on youth sexual culture in sub- Saharan Africa.”
The primary goal of the project is to “design and develop a mobile phone game for young Kenyans ages 11-14 focused on increasing age at sexual debut and condom use at first sex.”
The game will be tested on 60 young teens in western Kenya to see whether they are willing to play the game and to evaluate how much they like it.
Researchers believe the game could reduce unintended pregnancy, “challenge harmful gender norms and HIV stigma, and foster dialogue with parents and guardians.”
The study has cost taxpayers $236,517 so far.

Friday, September 4, 2015

An Anti-American White House. Column: Barack Obama’s presidency has empowered the adversaries of the United States

This week President Obama won the 34th vote in support of his nuclear deal with Iran. The vote, from Senator Barbara Mikulski, guarantees that the deal will survive a rejection by Congress. The fact that the deal will be made despite such opposition—something a few of us predicted months ago—is, in the words of the AP, a “landmark Obama victory.” It is worth asking how many more of these victories our country can withstand.
The president and his supporters, of course, say their foreign policy has improved the world. “Like George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton,” writes Gideon Rose of Foreign Affairs, “Obama will likely pass on to his successor an overall foreign policy agenda and national power position in better shape than when he entered office, ones that the next administration can build on to improve things further.”
I’m not convinced. Rather than trying to predict how things will look when Obama leaves office, rather than contemplating abstractions such as our “overall foreign policy agenda” and “national power position,” why not examine the actual results of Obama’s policies, as they exist now, in the real world before our eyes?
If we do that, we get an outcome different from Gideon’s. Subjectively, the president may be trying to peacefully integrate rogue regimes into the liberal international order. Objectively, however, the result of Obama’s foreign policy is to empower America’s adversaries. This has been, in its conduct and consequences, an anti-American White House.
I am not saying that the president or the Democratic Party is anti-American in ideology or rhetoric or intent. What I am saying is that the net effect of President Obama’s actions has been to legitimize, strengthen, and embolden nations whose anti-Americanism is public and vicious and all too serious.
Iran is an obvious example. The anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism of the regime is inescapable. Not even Obama, who has gone out of his way to defend the Iranians as rational actors, can ignore it. How has Iran’s “power position” been affected by this White House? In 2009, when the regime faced its most serious challenge in years, the president was silent. In 2011 and 2013, when urged to act against the regime’s closest ally in Syria, the president did nothing.
Why? To speak out in favor of protesting students, to support the Syrian rebels, to punish Bashar al-Assad for violating red lines the president himself had drawn—these acts would have jeopardized the nuclear negotiations with Iran.
The outcome of those negotiations was a deal in which the Iranians agree to suspend some elements of their nuclear research for about a decade in exchange for billions of dollars in sanctions relief. So a fundamentalist theocracy whose leaders chant “Death to America” and whose self-identity is based on a revolutionary challenge to the United States and Israel has been endorsed as a quasi-member of the “international community,” and will receive an infusion of much needed cash.
The Iranian leadership is strengthened, the Iranian economy is strengthened, the Iranian paramilitaries and terrorist affiliates—active in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and beyond—are strengthened, all in the fissiparous hope that decades from now this deal will result in Iran’s liberalization. Oh, and at the end of the decade, Iran retains the capability to build an atom bomb. How powerful, how dangerous, will Iranian anti-Americanism be then?
Cuba is not as important a world power as Iran, but it, too, was forged in anti-American upheaval, its ideology is anti-American, anti-capitalist, and anti-liberal, and its elite bears long-held grievances against the United States. The U.S. trade embargo may not have driven the Castros from power, but it nonetheless expresses American opposition to the nature of Cuba’s government, and to the aims and practices of its rulers. President Obama’s thawing of relations with Cuba repudiates this traditional, bipartisan, moral stand in return for … what exactly? The truth is we receive less from the opening of Cuba than we do from our détente with Iran.
The United States, as a superpower, can afford to be magnanimous with nuisances such as Cuba. But that doesn’t mean we should indulge in the fantasy that the provision of economic and diplomatic stimulus to a decrepit communist backwater will bring positive consequences for the cause of freedom and democracy, and improve the political status of the Cuban people. Nor should we cling to the idea that engaging and trading with the Cubans will pacify them. America has been trading with China for decades. The Chinese are just as un-free as they were the day Apple built its first factory there—and indeed China is more powerful, its influence greater, its willingness to challenge the United States more robust than before. What will Cuba look like—how well armed and fascistic will it be—after 20 years of trade with America?
Cuba may be unimportant, for now, but Russia is not. It has repeatedly rejected President Obama’s desire for a “reset” in relations, and has opted for historical revisionism and territorial expansion. Not only has Vladimir Putin an entire global propaganda network to attack, defame, and inspire hatred of the United States, he has Georgia, Crimea, much of eastern Ukraine, and a nuclear stockpile too.
The Baltic States are terrified of Putin’s next move, as he orders Bear Bombers to fly near our shores and deploys troops to fight alongside the Syrian military. The power base from which he launches his ideological and paramilitary attacks on the West has not diminished. It has expanded.
Indeed, the size of territory held or claimed by anti-American forces has increased considerably since President Obama took office. Not only has Russia slowly digested a once-independent nation. China has also built a series of islands to assert its claims in the South China Sea, the Islamic State governs the western provinces of what was once Iraq, Libya has fallen to Islamic militias, and the Taliban have reclaimed the south of Afghanistan. Each enlargement of the anti-American sphere brings new recruits to the various hostile causes, strengthens our adversaries’ convictions that they are on the winning side of history, fuels their desire to project power even further, heightens the risk of instability and terror.
There is no more inescapable force than the law of unintended consequences. The president, writes Gideon Rose, is “best understood as an ideological liberal with a conservative temperament—somebody who felt that after a period of reckless overexpansion and belligerent unilateralism, the country’s long-term foreign policy goals could best be furthered by short-term retrenchment.” However one understands Obama, whatever one thinks he has been doing, the results of his “short term” retrenchment have energized and amplified the global cause of anti-Americanism.
“Human beings,” wrote James Burnham in 1941, “as individuals and in groups, try to achieve various goals—food, power, comfort, peace, privilege, security, freedom, and so on. They take steps that, as they see them, will aid in reaching the goal in question.”
And yet, “experience teaches us not merely that the goals are often not reached but that the effect of the steps taken is frequently toward a very different result from the goal which was originally held in mind and which motivated the taking of the steps in the first place.”
Experience has taught Obama nothing. The next administration won’t be “building” on his foundation. It will be attempting to reclaim the ground that this anti-American White House has lost.

Monday, August 31, 2015

[VIDEO] CNN: DNC Not Backing Iran Deal ‘Big Embarrassment’ for Obama

President Obama suffered an “embarrassment” with the Democratic National Committee not passing a resolution over the weekend in support of his Iran nuclear deal, CNN panelists said Sunday.
According to the Washington Post, party chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) blocked the resolution at the summer meeting in Minnesota.
“The Obama-controlled DNC could not pass a resolution this weekend expressing support for President Obama’s Iran deal,” New York Timesreporter Jonathan Martin said. “It’s a bit of an embarrassment for the administration seeing as it’s how his party, he appointed Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and it’s revived the sort-of latest round of eye-rolling among Democratic operatives about the state of the party.”
CNN host John King said Martin was being diplomatic, saying it was a “big embarrassment for the president.”

Thursday, August 27, 2015

‘Diversity and Inclusion Specialist’ Job with Feds Pays $118K a Year

The Department of Energy (DOE) will pay a “Diversity and Inclusion Specialist” up to $118,000 a year, according to a new job opening with the federal government.
The full-time position, which opened up on Monday, will pay a minimum of $90,000 a year to a person who will come up with “effective inclusive practices and policies” for the agency.
“The Diversity and Inclusion Specialist position is located in the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI), Office of Economic Impact and Diversity, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),” the job posting stated. “The office is responsible for providing leadership, direction, coordination, evaluation and support for managing a diverse workforce and establishing effective inclusive practices and policies at DOE.”
To apply, one must be a diversity and inclusion “expert.” The person hired will provide DOE managers with guidance.
“The Diversity and Inclusion Specialist serves as a subject matter expert and advisor to the Department of Energy (DOE) leadership on diversity management and inclusive practices, and assists with leading the integration of diversity and inclusion principles of into DOE’s workplace culture,” the posting said. “Provides advice and guidance to supervisors and managers on best practices associated with leading employees from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, and aligns inclusion initiatives with the organizational mission, goals, strategies and metrics, in accordance with Executive Order 13583, and guidance provided by the Office of Personnel Management.”
The position also requires developing a “DOE-wide action plan to accomplish diversity and inclusion outcomes” every year. The plans were mandated by the executive order signed by President Barack Obama in August 2011.
The position does not require a college degree and pays between $90,823.00 and $118,069.00 a year.

Saturday, August 22, 2015

Conservatives Push to Rein in Courts on Abortion, Illegal Immigration

Experts believe Congress can use Article III to limit federal jurisdiction

A Washington think tank is raising awareness of ways that Congress could use the Constitution to rein in the authority of federal courts, which many have accused of usurping the authority of the legislative branch.
The Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research recently launched the Empower the States project, of which Thomas is director. The project is meant to draw attention to the powers available to Congress under Article III of the Constitution, which declares that “The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
Andrew Thomas, a fellow at the foundation, says that the nation’s federal court system has been “functionally taken over by the left,” the only solution to which is for Congress to remove power from courts and place it back in the hands of states and the American people.
The Supreme Court has “appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.” As such, Congress has the authority to limit the jurisdiction of federal courts, a power that Thomas identified as crucial to stop what he considers the decades-long “abuse” that some judges have exercised such areas as immigration, the death penalty, abortion, and marriage.
The challenge with Article III reforms, however, is that there exist limits on what they can accomplish because the courts will ultimately be able to decide whether to uphold limitations on their own jurisdiction.
Thomas said judicial reform should be a key concern for conservative voters ahead of the 2016 election. Data from the Pew Research Centerindicates that negative views of the Supreme Court are at an all-time high, largely driven by Republican dissatisfaction with the court.
A majority of American voters are “uncomfortable” with the direction of the U.S. on social issues in the wake of landmark Supreme Court rulings in favor of Obamacare and gay marriage, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released last month.
According to Thomas, the best Republican candidate for president will be one who is not only strong on issues like immigration and religious liberty but also a “champion of judicial reform.”
It is not enough for candidates to promise to “build a wall around the Mexican border” or “protect religious liberty,” Thomas said. The next president will face judges who will ultimately strike down the laws he or she promises to enact unless proper judicial reform is achieved.
Thomas says that using the Article III method, Congress could pass legislation barring federal courts from taking up lawsuits regarding, for example, the federal government’s implementation of deportation. All the bill would need is a signature from the president to become law.
Several Republican contenders have talked forcefully about reining in courts, including Huckabee, the retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, the former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.
The Empower the States project, of which Thomas is director, has garnered support from multiple Tea Parties in Arizona, the Las Vegas Tea Party, and several grassroots allies.
“The time has come,” Thomas said.

Friday, August 21, 2015

10 States and Washington, D.C., Issue Driver’s Licenses to Illegal Immigrants

Department of Motor Vehicles headquarters in Sacramento, California, one of 10 states that issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.

Ten states and the District of Columbia now issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants as of the summer of 2015, according to a report from the Pew Charitable Trusts.
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Vermont, and Washington, as well as Washington, D.C,, issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. The states are estimated to have an illegal immigrant population of 4,120,000 combined.
The report says that nearly 37 percent of illegal immigrants live in an area where they may obtain a license.
The decision to allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses is made at the state level and debates about issuing licenses often address the impact on public safety, insurance, and accident rates.
For instance, many states reported that applicants had difficulty passing written tests and needed to take them several times before they did so.
Illegal immigrants are undocumented, which raises the specter of fraud; some holders might have used false identities, addresses, or documents to obtain their licenses.
In addition to public safety and fraud issues, there are also higher costs associated with offering these licenses.
“The number of potential applicants affects staffing and facility needs, license processing and issuance, and expected costs and revenue,” states Pew. “The cost of new personnel was the largest anticipated expense.” The report found that California, Illinois, Connecticut, Maryland, Colorado, Nevada, and the District of Columbia created an additional 1,039 positions because of the policy.
“California’s fiscal summary estimated costs of approximately $140 million to $220 million and application fee revenue of approximately $50 million over three years,” states Pew. “The state’s 2014-15 budget allocated $67.4 million to issue licenses to unauthorized immigrants and included a mechanism for increasing funding if the number of applicants proved unexpectedly high.”
States also must factor in costs associated with changes to computer systems and programming to allow for this new policy. “Colorado reported that it undertook major programmatic and computer system changes to be able to accept new types of documents,” Pew states. “The state’s fiscal note estimated a one-time information technology cost of over $425,000 to reprogram its computer system.”

Watchdog: Two National Security Laws Appear Broken in Clinton Email Scandal

Hillary aides refused judge’s order on returning documents
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Hillary Clinton and two aides appear to have violated two national security laws by sending classified information on a private email server, according to a former Army counterintelligence agent and investigator for a public interest law group.
Additionally, the two Clinton aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, disregarded a federal judge’s order this month requiring both to make sworn statements to the court that all government documents in their possession will be returned to federal officials, said Chris Farrell, director of investigations for Judicial Watch, the law group.
“What we have is a secretary of state, the only cabinet official in our history, who established her own private email server … in an effort to avoid the normal protocols for unclassified and classified communications. It’s an end run,” he said.
Farrell, in a briefing on the Clinton email affair at the Judicial Watch offices, said supporters of Clinton have sought to portray the use of the private email system to send classified information as a minor administrative matter.
“It is not,” he said. “It is a national security crime, and should be a national security crime investigation,” he said, noting that Clinton created the private email server a week before she took up her duties at Foggy Bottom, indicating that she planned to avoid using official email that must be stored under federal rules.
Two laws apply to the mishandling of classified data on unsecure networks, Farrell said.
The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.
That statute was used to prosecute retired Army General David Petraeus, a former CIA director who provided classified documents to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $40,000 fine as part of a plea deal in March.
A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute Farrell described as a “hammer.”
That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.
Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison.
Farrell said he that as an Army counterintelligence officer, he has conducted investigations in the past that are similar to the Clinton email probe. He also worked at a special security officer who was in charge of SCIFs—special facilities used for handling sensitive intelligence.
“When it comes the law on these, intent doesn’t matter,” Farrell said. Mishandling top-secret information should bring down the full weight of the law on violators, he said.
The Clinton email matter is a “serious national security crime issue,” Farrell said. “It’s not two agencies fighting over classification after the fact.”
Judicial Watch currently has 18 lawsuits pending against the State Department seeking access to records under the Freedom of Information Act.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Letter: Obama Administration Releasing Violent Illegal Immigrants Back into U.S. Towns

U.S.-Mexico border / AP
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been releasing illegal immigrants with violent criminal records back into local U.S. communities, where they have often gone on to commit violent crimes against American citizens, according to new disclosures by a leading lawmaker and local law enforcement agencies.
Rep. Matt Salmon (R., Ariz.) and law enforcement officials petitioned the Obama administration on Wednesday to end a policy that enables illegal immigrants with criminal records to be released back into the United States.
Arizona law enforcement officials announced on Tuesday that three illegal aliens with violent criminal records had been released by DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) back onto the streets, where they went on to commit crimes including kidnapping and murdering an infant.
The ongoing release of criminals from countries such as Iraq, Sudan, and Russia prompted Salmon to petition DHS “to stop freeing violent criminals who are in our country illegally,” according to a copy of letter sent to the department and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
At least three illegal aliens released by DHS in recent weeks have been charged with serious crimes, including the beating of a 7-week-old baby and immolation of a person, according to local law enforcement and Salmon.
“Despite the repeated attacks on American citizens by illegal aliens released from our jails, DHS refuses to stop freeing violent criminals who are in our country illegally,” Salmon wrote in his letter to DHS. “Just today, we learned of three more individuals set free on law-abiding Arizonans by the Department of Homeland Security. Their crimes included the beating to death of a seven-week-old baby and the stabbing, beating, and immolation of a police informant.”
One of those released is accused of kidnapping and murdering a police informant “by taking him to a wilderness area where he beat, stabbed, and lit his gasoline-soaked body on fire,” according to Salmon.
“Instead of immediately deporting them to their country of origin, ICE released these criminals into Arizona and … chose not to inform local law enforcement before the release of these criminals was completed,” Salmon wrote.
Salmon and officials in Arizona law enforcement are demanding DHS do more to prevent such releases.
“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under current law can no longer legally hold the three individuals,” ICE press secretary Gillian Christensen said. “To further promote public safety and transparency, ICE notified local law enforcement agencies of the release of the individuals.”
“To be clear, the backgrounds of the individuals in question would generally make them enforcement priorities for ICE,” Christensen continued. “However, ICE has no legal basis for continuing to hold these individuals.”
Christensen said one individual is a lawful permanent resident and the other two were released due to a Supreme Court decision.
“ICE has been releasing these criminal illegal immigrants into local communities, that we as Sheriffs are sworn to protect,” the Arizona Sheriff’s Association (ASA) warned in a statement issued Tuesday. “You don’t have to be the Sheriff or a uniformed patrol deputy to realize that these dangerous criminals will reoffend and victimize our Arizona families.”
Just last week, ICE began to notify local law enforcement agencies of the release of violent illegal aliens. The implementation of this notification system comes after years of pressure from local law enforcement officials.
ICE notified Arizona law officials that three violent illegal aliens had been released back into the community.
“This first such notification of three dangerous criminal illegals has Arizona Sheriffs angry and concerned for the public’s safety,” the ASA said in its statement.
The issue has long plagued local law enforcement agencies, which have found themselves struggling to protect local communities after the Obama administration frees criminal illegal aliens.
In 2013, ICE freed 36,007 illegal aliens with criminal convictions across the nation, according to statistics compiled by Arizona law enforcement. At least 193 of those aliens released were convicted of homicides, 426 were convicted of sex crimes, and 303 convicted of kidnapping.
“The releases typically occurred without formal notice to local law enforcement agencies and victims,” according to the ASA.
In 2014, federal authorities released another 30,558 illegal aliens with criminal records.
“By simply notifying Sheriffs of the release of dangerous criminals doesn’t address the core problem that these dangerous criminals remain in America,” the ASA said.
Salmon says he is seeking a larger fix to the problem.
“Our Department of Homeland Security needs to focus more on securing our homeland, not on cornering the market as a transportation option for illegal aliens in the United States,” he wrote to DHS. “Americans need protection from violent criminals and an explanation for why DHS has been so miserably failing at their primary task.”
“How many more Americans must be murdered by illegal alien criminals before this administration begins taking the safety of Americans seriously?” the lawmaker asked.
Salmon went on to note that in one instance a illegal alien released by ICE was later apprehended and charged with “kidnapping, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, armed robbery, sexual abuse, and child molestation.”
“Obviously this is a direct result of this administration’s dangerous policy of releasing tens of thousands of criminal illegal aliens onto our streets and into our communities,” Salmon said.
Salmon has championed several pieces of federal legislation that would end the policy of “catch and release” and also establish mandatory minimum prison sentences for illegal aliens.
“Simply, put, there is no excuse for ICE to be releasing violent, criminal illegal aliens back onto our streets and into our communities,” Salmon wrote.

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

China Tests New Long-Range Missile with Two Guided Warheads

Latest DF-41 flight test indicates deployment near
New photo of China's newest ICBM, the DF-41
China conducted a flight test this month of its newest long-range missile that U.S. intelligence agencies say lofted two independently-targeted simulated nuclear warheads, according to defense officials.
The launch of the DF-41 road-mobile missile Aug. 6 was the fourth time the new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) has been test-fired in three years, and indicates that the weapon capable of hitting U.S. cities with nuclear warheads is nearing deployment.
The DF-41, with a range of between 6,835 miles and 7,456 miles, is viewed by the Pentagon as Beijing’s most potent nuclear missile and one of several new long-range missiles in development or being deployed.
As with earlier DF-41 flight tests, Pentagon spokesmen had no direct comment. A defense official, however, told the Washington Free Beacon: “We do not comment on PRC weapons tests but we do monitor Chinese military modernization carefully.”
The Pentagon has said it expects the new missile to become operational as early as this year.
Deployment of the DF-41 also could coincide with China’s first patrols, slated to begin this year, of submarines armed with nuclear-tipped JL-2 missiles.
The Aug. 6 test is viewed as significant by U.S. intelligence agencies because it confirmed the DF-41’s multiple-warhead capability, said defense officials familiar with analyses of the test.
Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the repeated flight tests indicate the DF-41 is “nearing operational status.”
“The mobile and solid-fueled DF-41 will be the second MIRV-equipped ICBM to enter PLA Second Artillery Corps service after the currently deployed, liquid-fueled and silo-launched DF-5B,” Fisher said.
“The bottom line is that China potentially is beginning a new phase in which its nuclear warhead numbers will be increasing rapidly,” he said.
The Pentagon’s latest annual report on China’s military, published in May, stated that the DF-41 is “possibly capable of carrying MIRVs”—the acronym for multiple, independently-targetable reentry vehicles. The Pentagon calls the DF-41 the CSS-X-20 missile.
MIRVs (Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles) are considered state-of-the-art nuclear warhead technology because their use vastly increases the potential killing power of a single missile.
The annual Pentagon report states that China’s missile force, called the Second Artillery Corps, “continues to modernize its nuclear forces by enhancing its silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and adding more survivable, mobile delivery systems.”
When deployed, the DF-41 is expected to significantly enhance China’s force of between 50 and 60 ICBMs that include DF-5, mobile DF-31, DF-31A, and submarine-launched JL-2 nuclear missiles.
Mark Stokes, a former Pentagon expert on China, said the DF-41 “marks a significant evolution in the Second Artillery’s force modernization program.”
“The DF-41 is one of a number of PLA ballistic missile systems in the advanced stages of research and development,” Stokes, now with the Project 2049 Institute, said. “Few details on deployment plans technical characteristics are currently available. Once fully operational, the DF-41 is expected to be the PLA’s most sophisticated ICBM to date.”
China’s first suspected multiple warhead flight test for the DF-41 was carried out in December 2014, when an unknown number of dummy warheads were thought to have been used. Earlier DF-41 flight tests took place in December 2013 and July 2012.
The new multiple-warhead missile is likely to renew debate over the size of China’s nuclear arsenal. Current U.S. intelligence estimates put the total number of Chinese warheads at around 240 warheads. Other analysts, however, say China’s warhead arsenal is far larger, with perhaps as many as 1,500 warheads, and base their assessments on the growing size of China’s missile forces, the addition of multiple warhead technology, and its large-scale nuclear material production capabilities.
The DF-41 is assessed by U.S. intelligence agencies as being able to carry up to 10 warheads on a single missile.
The location of the latest test was not disclosed. Past DF-41 flight tests, however, were carried out from the Wuzhai Missile and Space Testing facility, located about 250 miles southwest of Beijing.

Monday, August 17, 2015

[VIDEO] Poll: 2% of Americans Believe Hillary Clinton

58% say she knowingly lied about emails
A Fox News poll conducted last week shows only 2 percent of Americans believe Hillary Clinton told the truth about whether emails on her private server contained classified information.
The survey of 1,008 registered voters, conducted between August 11 and 13, showed 58 percent of respondents believe Clinton knowingly lied about her emails, while another 33 percent said they believe there is another explanation. Another 7 percent said they didn’t know if Clinton had lied.
The poll comes as the Washington Times reports that as many as 60 of the emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server contained classified information.

Sunday, August 16, 2015

[VIDEO] Robinson: Clinton’s Claim to be Victim of Partisan Attack ‘Doesn’t Ring So True’

Ball: Email scandal causing tensions within her campaign
Sunday’s Meet the Press panel said Hillary Clinton’s claims of partisan attacks on her don’t “ring so true” and that the private email story that has dogged her since March is causing tensions within her presidential campaign.
Last Friday, Clinton joked about her private server at the State Department and said the investigation into her was petty politics as usual.
“It’s hard to claim this is all just a partisan witch hunt when the Justice Department under a Democratic administration is looking into the whole email mess,” Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson said. “So, that doesn’t ring so true.”
After months of refusing to turn over her private server, Clinton decided last week to give it to the Justice Department. The Clinton campaigned has struggled to move past the email story and responding to it politically has caused some disagreement between Clinton supporters, The Atlantic’s Molly Ball said.
“And the fact that this story has not gone away has really worried a lot of people in the inner circle. You do have this tension within the campaign,” Ball said. “And so, you know, then it turns into an organizational mess which is what bogged down her campaign in 2008.”

Friday, August 14, 2015

[VIDEO] MSNBC ‘Frustrated’ With Clinton for Messing Up Chance to ‘Make History’

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski, after a nearly 10-minute discussion on Morning Joe of Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton turning over her private email server, said Thursday she was “frustrated” with Clinton’s campaign for its numerous errors and potentially derailing the historic nature of her candidacy.

Brzezinski, who said earlier in the segment she would vote for Clinton if she won her party’s nomination, vented about Clinton’s aides protecting her from the press and trying to gloss over the email story earlier this year. Clinton’s server from her tenure at the State Department is now at the forefront of her campaign, with a federal investigation into its security, the revelations that top-secret emails were on it and her earlier acknowledgement that she wiped it clean of more than 30,000 emails.

“If you’re managing a campaign, you haven’t done a very good job helping put this behind Hillary Clinton,” Brzezinski said. “You just haven’t. Now the FBI’s involved.”

“There’s a very obvious answer to why they used a private email server,” said New York Times reporter Nick Confessore. “To keep their emails private. Everyone knows that. It’s obvious, so just say that. Acknowledge it. Instead of, ‘It’s for convenience.’ Not so convenient now, by the way.”

Brzezinski wrapped up the segment by admitting Clinton’s conduct was bothersome since it could keep a woman from capturing the White House.

“I’m frustrated by this,” she said.

“It’s very frustrating,” Huffington Post’s Sam Stein said, nodding.

“She could be an incredibly strong candidate,” she said, sighing. “She’s got the experience, could make history.
“I think you’re speaking for a lot of people who feel the same way,” Stein said.

Popular Posts