Across the dial reporters are speaking out about the invasion of privacy the Department of Justice perpetrated against a Fox Investigative reporter James Rosen and the Fox News Network. This news comes less than a week after the AP reported that their phone records had been seized by the DoJ.

Finally.

At long last, reporters are seeing that the DoJ, under Attorney General Eric Holder, has pushed an agenda that is involved in spying and cover up. This is not new. But the realization by the left this administration is now investigating and watching journalists appears to be the final straw.

From Keith Olbermann to Chuck Todd, across the country journalists on both sides are standing with FNC and Rosen.

The heretofore antithesis of FNC NBC News broke the story today that Holder had, in fact, signed off on the search warrant against the FNC reporter.

Attorney General Eric Holder signed off on a controversial search warrant that identified Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “possible co-conspirator” in violations of the Espionage Act and authorized seizure of his private emails, a law enforcement official told NBC News on Thursday.

The disclosure of the attorney general’s role came as President Barack Obama, in a major speech on his counter-terrorism policy, said Holder had agreed to review Justice Department guidelines governing investigations that involve journalists.

From the Washington Post a memo sent by Fox News Chief Roger Ailes:

We reject the government’s efforts to criminalize the pursuit of investigative journalism and falsely characterize a Fox News reporter to a Federal judge as a “co-conspirator” in a crime. I know how concerned you are because so many of you have asked me: why should the government make me afraid to use a work phone or email account to gather news or even call a friend or family member? Well, they shouldn’t have done it. The administration’s attempt to intimidate Fox News and its
employees will not succeed and their excuses will stand neither the test of law, the test of decency, nor the test of time. We will not allow a climate of press intimidation, unseen since the McCarthy era, to frighten any of us away from the truth.

CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson, while not pointing fingers, yet, did state this week that her personal and work computers have been hacked and are under investigation.

Politico reports: “I can confirm that an intrusion of my computers has been under some investigation on my end for some months but I’m not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity today as I’ve been patient and methodical about this matter,” Attkisson told POLITICO. “I need to check with my attorney and CBS to get their recommendations on info we make public.”

In an earlier interview with WPHT Philadelphia, Attkisson said that though she did not know the full details of the intrustion, “there could be some relationship between these things and what’s happened to James [Rosen],” the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Dept. investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.

As you watch the news clip below, be reminded that this administration was involved in leaking personal emails of General Petraeus which resulted in his resignation. In addition, AG Holder refused to accept responsibility for the Fast and Furious debacle which occurred under his watch and resulted in deaths of US agents, numerous Mexican citizens and a multitude of weapons released across the border in a botched effort to control drug smuggling.

This afternoon, even the Huffington Post is seeing the danger of a government that uses underhanded methods to quelch both investigative reporters and their whistle blower sources.

Today’s bold headline at HuffPo loudly proclaims, “Time to Go”.

Many, especially those born post Soviet Union, don’t realize the significance when a government limits the news. A free press investigating and with the ability to tell citizens the truth is a critical part of our open society.

Russia builds up its missile defenses, criticizes the US for doing the same

For a long time, Russia has strongly opposed the deployment of any US missile defense systems in Europe, claiming that such deployment would undermine its nuclear deterrent, give the US a first strike advantage, and spark an arms race. Western disarmament advocates have been constantly claiming the same. They and Russia’s leaders, with whom they are in complete agreement, have been lobbying the Bush and Obama administrations to cancel such deployments or, at least, sign agreements that would limit US missile defenses and thus their effectiveness.

But at the same time, Russia has been developing, deploying, and perfectioning its own missile defense systems.

Since the early 1970s, the A-35 and later A-135 nuclear-armed missile defense systems have been deployed around Moscow. These were joined in the late 1980s (in violation of the ABM treaty) by the very capable S-300 family of air- and missile defense systems, first the S-300V series and later the S-300P series, described and documented in great detail by air defense expert Carlo Kopp, founder of Air Power Australia. The S-300 (also widely exported by Russia around the world, most recently to Syria) has a range of 200 kms.

In 2007, these were then joined by the much longer-ranged S-400 “Triumf” (SA-21) system, first deployed around Moscow and then in other locations in Russia. Both can shoot down ballistic and cruise missiles (even barrages of them) as well as aircraft. Russia recently agreed to sell the S-400 to China; other countries may receive it as well. For short-range area defense against aircraft and cruise missiles, Russia has Tor-M1 and Pantsir-S1 systems (exported around the world).

Russia is now developing the new S-500 “Triumfator” system, which will have even greater range and the capability to shoot down massive barrages of ballistic and cruise missiles. The S-400 and the S-500 will greatly outperform the PATRIOT and THAAD.

Concurrently, Russia and China are developing laser-based missile defense systems. With its acquisition of S-300 and S-400 systems, procurement of many domestically-produced HQ-9 system batteries, and developments of other systems, China is likewise building a missile defense network of its own.

Such systems, if they continue to be deployed in large numbers, could undermine America’s nuclear deterrent, which the Obama administration is cutting unilaterally. In 2010, President Obama signed and the Dem-controlled Senate ratified New START, which obligates only the US (not Russia) to cut its arsenal by 1/3; between 2010 and 2013 he also unilaterally withdrew nuclear-armed cruise missiles from US submarines, while Russia has not done so and does not intend to ever do so.

But while developing and deploying BMD systems of their own, Moscow and Beijing never cease to protest America’s development of the same and to demand that the US limit or forego the development and deployment of these. Moscow’s and Beijing’s protests and demands are seconded by the American Left, particularly by Western disarmament advocates.

The Obama Administration is currently engaged in secret talks with Russia on an agreement on missile defense “cooperation”; it, like the Bush Administration, has been cravenly trying to appease Moscow on the issue and seeking Russia’s permission to deploy these systems. Some former arms control and missile defense officials, however, have condemned such outreach attempts to a hostile Russia. Former Assistant Secy. of State for Arms Control Paula DeSutter and former MDA Director LTG Henry Obering (USAF, ret.) oppose any deal that would limit America’s missile defense systems and say the US should deploy a full panoply of such systems with or without Russia’s approval.

China tests another anti-satellite missile

On Monday, China successfully tested an anti-satellite ballistic missile, thus proving it can shoot down US satellites and make the US military blind and deaf in the opening stage of any campaign. The missile was disguised as a space exploration rocket, according to the Washington Free Beacon. That newspaper was the first to report its existence (in October 2012) and its planned test (in January 2013). The test itself came just a week after China protested the DOD’s annual report on China’s military power, wherein the DOD mentioned China’s anti-sat missiles.

The missile, designated Dongning-2 and launched from the Xichang Space Launch Center – China’s main space facility, located in southern Sichuan Province –  reached the Earth’s orbit successfully, but it is not know if it hit a target. In 2007, however, China tested an SC-19 ICBM against an obsolete weather satellite, which left thousands of debris pieces still in the Earth’s orbit, posing danger to spacecraft (this debris did not reenter the atmosphere and thus didn’t burn on reentry). Also, several years ago, China blinded a US satellite with a laser, thus committing an act of war against the US.

Pentagon spokeswoman Major Cathy Wilkinson refused to comment: “We don’t have a comment on it as we don’t discuss intelligence.” China Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesman Hong Lei didn’t deny the test, but claimed that China opposes the militarization of space and advocates its peaceful use: “I am not aware of the development that you described. China has consistently advocated the peaceful use of outer space and is opposed to militarizing and conducting an arms race in outer space.”

The new anti-sat missile is but one part of China’s huge, diverse, sophisticated, and continually growing arsenal of anti-access/area-denial weapons whose purpose is to create, around the Western Pacific and China itself, a zone which US military units won’t be able to enter without suffering prohibitive casualties – a “no-go zone”.

These weapons are intended to cripple US bases and warships in the region, as well as communications and cyber networks (and the satellites on which they depend, including the GPS), in the first few hours of the conflict while keeping US warships and aircraft out with anti-ship missiles, submarines, naval mines, and air defense systems. This would mean striking at America’s current vulnerabilities – overdepence on carriers, short-range nonstealthy aircraft, cyber networks, and satellites, as well as poor anti-submarine and demining capabilities.

The idea comes from ancient Chinese general and strategist Sun Tzu, who, in his famous treatise, The Art of War, counseled strategists to attack weakness, not strength, strike where they’re unexpected, and strike boldly like a thunderbolt or like a falcon that swiftly strikes its prey.[1] China’s deceptive claims of favoring a peaceful use of space and opposing its militarization – while militarizing it with anti-sat weapons – also stem from Sun Tzu’s treatise, wherein deception and total secrecy – which have been the hallmarks of China’s military buildup – are highly advised and recommended as the norm. Sun Tzu believed that “all warfare is based on deception.”

Striking on US satellites, such as those of the GPS constellation, would have severe consequences for US civilians, not just the military. Richard Fisher, a defense analyst, commented to the WFB that:

“This is not merely a threat against some American military satellites, but a threat to a what has become a vital part of the global electronic infrastructure, affecting global commerce and financial flows, to your personal finances that contribute to personal freedom.”

China currently has around 24 ASAT missiles, according to the WFB. These could shoot down US weather, communications, intelligence, and navigational satellites (the latter being used for missile guidance and for military and civilian navigation alike). Thus, for example, American drivers could no longer rely on GPS.

X-47B drone test successful, but China tests its own UCAV

Earlier this week, the Navy celebrated a successful test of its first carrier-capable combat drone, the X-47B, a prototype for future operational Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles. The drone took off from the USS George H. W. Bush and landed at NAS Patuxent River. Later this week, the drone performed touch-and-go landings on the ship. Should carrier-capable drones be proven viable, they would dramatically increase a carrier wing’s combat capability while enabling it to stand off far from the shore of an enemy country.

Currently, the Navy’s longest-ranged strike aircraft is the F/A-18E/F Super Bug, with a 450 nm combat radius. The F-35C’s combat radius will be about 600 nm. That would put Navy carriers well within the range of Chinese and Iranian anti-ship missiles, including the Silkworm, the Moskit, the Yingji family, the FL family, and the Dongfeng-21D, which has a range of 3000 kms (over 1000 nmi).

One DF-21D or one Moskit would be sufficient to sink any ship. Their long range means USN surface ships would have to stay over 1000 nmi away from China’s coast, and thus, their aircraft wouldn’t come even close to that coast, let alone to targets deep inland. The drone, with a combat radius of over 1,500 nmi, will solve that problem, allowing carriers to stand off at safe distances.

It is not clear, however, why the Navy continues to spend money on developing and procuring the F/A-18 and F-35 aircraft that are already obsolete and overtaken by events.

Anti-ship cruise missiles can still be carried by aircraft, however, including China’s Flankers, J-10s, H-6s, and JH-7s, as well as China’s surface ships and submarines, thus extending their range still further. The longest-ranged of these, the H-6K bomber, has a combat radius of 2,200 kms. China also has 36 Tu-22Ms on order.

Moreover, China is not behind the US in drone technology. Last week, it revealed its first domestically-produced UCAV, which is very similar in appearance to the X-47B and the European nEUROn drone. It is not known whether the Chinese developed the technology domestically or stole it.

Richard Fisher, the IASC analyst, told the Washington Times: “This UCAV demonstrates an understanding of current concepts for proportioning and shaping to confer range and low observability, or stealth. The [Chinese military] likely is very pleased that these images of China’s UCAV appear at about the same time that the X-47B is about to commence carrier testing.”

The flights of China’s stealthy manned fighters, the J-20 and J-31, have already demonstrated that China has mastered advanced stealth technology, including shaping, which is the dominant factor in determining low observability. Fisher says the drone is likely being built by the Hongdu Aircraft Group and the Shenyang Aircraft Corp. – the J-31′s constructor.

[1] Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Chapter VI verse 27, Chapter VII verses 13 and 15.

At one point, Morgan recalled his confrontations with gun activists and how he thought they were irrational when they referenced the fear of a tyrannical government as a point of justification during their arguments.

The British host then did an about-face and admitted that the behavior of the government throughout these scandals is bordering on tyrannical – particularly the AP scandal and how it attacks the free press.

__

Today, following the scandalous news that the IRS did indeed target organizations who may have been outspoken during the election, Reverend Franklin Graham penned a letter to President Obama.

Read his letter and decide. Was it coincidence or was the IRS specifically targeting this well respected, but outspoken Christian group?

Rev. Franklin Graham’s Letter to President Obama about the IRS targeting scandal

A man flying in from Saudi Arabia this weekend was stopped by a Customs agent. He apparently had a few pages missing from his Passport (unbeknownst to him, of course). And when the agents looked in his suitcase he had brought along a pressure cooker (maybe not realizing there are Walmarts in the US?)

It has not been a month since terrorists killed and maimed many through the use of a pressure cooker bomb in Boston.

However, the ever helpful people at CAIR urged caution.

“I hope that our government is not criminalizing people if they travel and have cooking items just because they are Muslim or come from the Muslim world,” said Director Dawud Walid. “I don’t think someone flying with an empty pressure cooker elevates to a level of terrorism unless the government has some other sound information.”

The rest of you, who are not so naive can read more at the Detroit News.

A satellite photo, with markings, of China’s underground submarine base at Jianggezhuang near Qingdao in northeastern China. The base is super-hardened against air and missile attacks. While this 2000s photo depicts only a Han and a Xia class submarine present outside the base, more submarines were based inside. This is the base from which Chinese SSBNs going on deterrence patrols against the US probably operate. Photo source: DigitalGlobe/”China’s Nuclear Forces,” Imaging Notes, Winter 2006, p. 25.

DOD releases report on China’s military power

On Tuesday, May 7th, the DOD released its annual report on China’s military power and defense policies. The report is much longer and more detailed than last year’s, which was dramatically shortened to just 10 unclassified pages, ostensibly to cut costs while costing more to prepare than 2011′s much longer report.

This year’s version, at 92 pages, gives a great amount of information – both verbal and graphic – on China’s military power, the dispersal of its troops and bases, and the ranges of its missiles. However, while analysts consider it a significant improvement over last year’s document, this year’s still significantly understates China’s military power.

For example, it claims that China’s air force still flies, for the most part, obsolete 2nd- and 3rd-generation fighters and that modern fighters are still a minority in its fleet. This is factually incorrect: the J-7 and J-8 fighters which the report refers to, at 569 aircraft, are now less numerous than the PLAAF’s modern fighters, which number 587 (J-10s, J-11s, Su-27s, Su-30MKKs, JH-7s). Moreover, modern aircraft’s share of the PLAAF’s fleet will only grow overtime: 70 additional J-11s as well as 24 Su-35s are on order and an unknown number (but possibly hundreds) of 5th generation stealthy J-20 and J-31 fighters are poised to join the fleet.

Moreover, the J-7 and J-8, despite their age, are actually superior to the costly F-35 now under development: they can fly much higher and faster and are more agile. The J-7 has a max altitude of over 57,000 feet and a top speed of Mach 2; and its light weight and low wingloading ratio make it a superior dogfighter to the F-35. The J-7 can defeat an F-35 easily by simply refusing to be a straight, level target. In Vietnam, MiG-21s (on which the J-7 is based) routinely defeated American F-4 fighters.

The report also significantly understates China’s nuclear arsenal and submarine fleet. It claims that only 3 modern Jin class SSBNs (“boomers”) are in service, even though there were that many as early as 2007/2008; China actually has 5 in service with a sixth one under construction. This is intended to replace the old Xia class SSBN, still in service, which, together with the Jins, gives China a 6-boat SSBN fleet and thus already a continous at-sea nuclear deterrent – which the report falsely claims China doesn’t yet have.

Nonetheless, the report does warn of a large ongoing expansion of China’s sub fleet – it plans to deploy a total of 8 Jins and 6 Shangs (other sources say 6-8) and is developing a new SSBN (Type 096) and attack submarine (Type 095, Tang class). Two Tangs have already been deployed, and these are much quieter than China’s previous, noisier submarine classes.

This makes mockery of Adm. Jonathan Greenert’s recent claim that “we own the undersea domain” and that “the Chinese are not there yet”, especially in light of the fact that the USN can only supply 10 attack submarines to combatant commanders when its own minimum need is 16, and the fact that the USN’s anti-sub-warfare skills and equipment have atrophied.

The report claims that the range of the JL-2 SLBM is only 7,200 kms and can reach only parts of Alaska. But the JL-2 actually has a range of 8,000 kms according to multiple Chinese and Western sources (including SinoDefence and GlobalSecurity), and the report’s map deceptively shows the JL-2′s range as if it were launched from Chinese mainland. (p. 81)

But the JL-2 is a submarine-launched missile, meaning China can launch it from anywhere on Earth. Even with a 7,200 km range, the JL-2 could reach Los Angeles if launched from 160 degrees east, well west of Hawaii. With an 8,000 km range, it can reach LA from a position just east of 150E, i.e. just east of Japan.

Similarly, the report wrongly claims that the DF-21 land attack and anti-ship ballistic missile’s range is only 2000 kms. In fact, the DF-21A, the longest-ranged land attack variant, has a range of 2,700 kms, and the DF-21D ASBM, 3,000 kms – stretching out almost to the Second Island Chain, including Taiwan. This means any surfance ship within 3,000 kms of China’s coast can be sunk.

The report admits, for the first time, that China is testing a DF-41 multiple-warhead ICBM, but does not include it on its missile range map nor acknowledge that the DF-41 may very well already be deployed (it was first photographed in 2007). It also claims the DH-10 land-attack cruise missile has only a 2,000 km range; in reality, it’s 4,000 kms, more than enough to reach Guam.

Last but not least, Richard Fisher, a Chinese affairs expert with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, has criticized the report for failing into account China’s supply of transporter-erector-launchers for North Korean KN-08 ICBMs.

General Dempsey bows to the Muslim Brotherhood

An Army Lieutenant Colonel currently lecturing at the Joint Forces Staff College has been denied promotion and faces possible dismissal following an intervention by Gen. Martin Dempsey.

Dempsey, as chairman of the Joint Chiefs, ordered an investigation after Muslim Brotherhood affiliated organizations filed a complaint with the DOD urging LTCOL Matthew Dooley, a combat veteran and West Point graduate, to be punished after LTCOL Dooley was found to teach his students about the dangers of radical Islam. The National Defense University, which oversees the college, has not found any fault with Dooley’s teachings.

Dooley, a West Point graduate, has 6 combat deployments and 18 years of military service under his belt. An Army promotion board unanimously recommended him for promotion to battalion command, praising his career and accomplishments. However, in 2011, a student of Dooley’s complained about his supposedly offensive teachings to the DOD, and General Dempsey was informed. Dempsey, a political general, personally ordered that Dooley be denied promotion and that an investigation aimed at throwing him out of the military be initiated. The investigation has reached its predetermined conclusions, claiming that he was a “poor officer” and resulting in his firing.

The Washington Times has narrated the story in more detail here.

France makes defense cuts, retains ambitions

The French government announced some painful cuts to the military last week, as it looks to defense spending to cut France’s massive budget deficit.

While the cuts will not be as deep as in other countries – defense spending will be frozen in nominal terms (and cut slightly in inflation-adjusted euros) – there will be a cut of 24,000 personnel, mostly from the defense ministry’s administrative staff, but also a reduction of the number of troops deployable abroad from 30,000 to 15,000-20,000. The Navy will have only 15 “first-rang frigates” rather than 17, and the fleet of fighters for the Air Force and Navy combined will be cut sharply, from 300 to 225. France will also not resume production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.

Moreover, the government has delayed the delivery of new weapon systems, which, in the long term, will cost more than if they were to be delivered sooner. The decisions, outlined in the new White Paper on National Defense, will form the basis of the Law on Military Procurement for 2014-2019 and for the defense budgets for those years.

The defense cuts have been criticized from both the Right and the Left. Far-left politician Jean-Luc Melenchon has denounced them as weakening the stature of France; far-right leader Marine Le Pen has called for defense spending to be ring-fenced and kept permanent at 2% of GDP. Mainstream right-wing UMP (neo-Gaullist) party politicians have also expressed worries. So have retired generals, who estimate that with just 15-20K troops deployable abroad France will have little capacity to intervene abroad in defense of its national interests and be only a minor contributor to coalition operations alongside the US, Britain, or other allies.

Under the plans, announced recently in detail by Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian at the Ecole Militaire in Paris, the French military will avoid the deep cuts in programs imposed on other Western militaries. However, it is already a small military by American standards. Furthermore, it is estimated that 20,000 deployable troops won’t be enough to make a significant contribution to allied operations. The same can be said of its plan to cut the combined Air Force – Navy fighter fleet to just 225 aircraft, down from 300 today.

Moreover, there is a basic criticism of the White Paper: that it is being made to fit the budget, rather than the other way around, i.e. some critics claim that the government is putting the cart before the horse by making the strategy fit the budget. This is the same mistake that the governments of the US, Britain, Canada, Australia, Germany, Italy, and other countries have made, which has made them less secure.

The Department of State has sent notice (which you can view below) to DefCad.org that their distribution of 3D printable weapons, and weapons parts, is in violation of the law.

The Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance sent a letter to Cody Wilson, who runs Defense Distributed out of Austin, Texas, that he can not host and distribute his files until further review by the State Department.

Defense Distributed gave notice to followers via Twitter about the controversy:

#DEFCAD has gone dark at the request of the Department of Defense Trade Controls. Take it up with the Secretary of State.

— Defense Distributed (@DefDist) May 9, 2013

…This post will be updated as more details become available.

___

Courtesy The Atom Project Facebook page.

Born in the nuclear test area of the former USSR, Karipbek Kuyukov has no arms. According to news reports, thousands of children were born with similar deformities during the nuclear test program. Despite his disability Karipbek has become a renown artist, using his feet to hold the paint brush. His work was on display at the Carnegie Institute last year.

Kuyukov is also an outspoken activist against nuclear proliferation.As an honorary ambassador of The Atom Project, Kuyukov works to end global nuclear testing, hoping to limit the victims of radioactive fallout.  He was expected to participate in an anti-nuclear conference in the UK this month. Unfortunately, as the BBC reports, he was denied a visa. The reason? He had no fingerprints.

The UK Embassy released a press statement that there was some miscommunication and that Kuyukov was not denied a visa.

In any case, this odd visa denial may do more to publicize both the art and the work of this man than any relatively obscure conference.

Read more at News.com.au; learn about The Atom Project here.

If you ask your average American who Jodi Arias is, they will not only tell you who the slice and dice “Boyfriend Murderer” is, most Americans can relate every, single detail of the Arias murder trial and Jodi Arias’ life. But whatever you do, don’t ask too many Americans to enlighten you with the details of who, what, and where Benghazi is, you’ll most likely receive a blank stare. That’s because the slaughter of four brave American men–ignored by the Hillary Clinton’s U.S. State Department and Barry Obama’s White House during real time calls pleading for help–doesn’t compare to a blonde sexpot (suddenly turned dowdy four-eyed brunette spinster librarian) who shot her lover in the face before stabbing him 27 times and slitting his throat from ear-to-ear “in self defense.”

Just a note to all of you Jodi Arias aficionados; Benghazi is not a leg-breaker for hire from Brooklyn, New York or that really kool Japanese hibachi restaurant.

The above is not hyperbole, it’s a sad fact. The majority of Americans know who Jodi Arias is. So many Americans are preoccupied with her murder trial, that Arias has become the reigning queen daytime TV. Jodi Arias is a star and consumed more often at every dinner and dinner party discussion than our in-trouble-country.

Jodi Arias has been turned into a celebrity by TV, magazines, newspapers, pop culture and gossip. I wouldn’t be surprised if Arias has been the 2012-2013 colleges and universities leading lectures in every pre-law and law school classes versus the U.S. Constitution, vital history-changing Supreme Court cases, and Magna Carta.

If Jodi Arias gets off on self-defense for her violent act, America definitely owes Saddam Hussein an apology for calling his vicious style of torture, rape, and murder violent brutality.

Benghazi on the other hand has been turned into, as White House Press Secretary Jay Carney incongruously phrases it: “Let’s be clear, Benghazi happened a long time-ago.” In other words, old news.

Actually Carney, Pearl Harbor happened a long time ago, but that generation has never lost the horrible memory of what Japan did to America’s naval fleet, our brave men in uniform, or Hawaii’s maimed and murdered civilians.

The point is, for most Americans, Benghazi never happened, and not because Americans lack care, but for the reasons that the mainstream media ignored the slaughter in Libya in order to cover Obama’s butt in the weeks leading up to the November 2012 election. Heaven forbid voters might discover the president possibly ignored men being slaughtered. Those voters may not have reelected President Obama.

Worse yet, a Democrat White House scandal involving the murder of what happened to our men in women on the front lines is simply not as important as the murder trial of a tight-skirted, over-sexed knife-wielding loser bar-fly, or heaven forbid, missing an episode of Dancing With The Stars.

Jodi Arias is more important than the many economical and national security threats altering our nation, our lives, and the future of America.

Ask yourself this: How many times has important news regarding our troops overseas, national security threats caused by the failing U.S. economy, America’s failing education system, poor jobs numbers,  $2.2 trillion in entitlement spending bankrupting America, the $16.7 trillion and counting deficit in which “three-quarters of the deficit was financed by the Federal Reserve,”  Ben Bernanke over printing money and buying up more assets while the Dow Jones Industrial Average rises (creating unstable fiat-backed paper bubble that will burst into a Weimar and crash the markets if Ben doesn’t stop) for the live courtroom drama of Jodi Arias? How often is news concerning Obama’s preventing the much-needed pipeline, drilling on and off America shores for oil, coal and natural gas, and excessive borrowing from China, whom our government fawns over, and subsidizing questionable left-wing “Green” companies ignored for Jodi Arias’ trial?  What about the ignoring of the $6.3 trillion cost that will be added to the deficit if Marco Rubio’s “Gang of 8” amnesty bill goes through and provides 12 million illegals (I find it hard to believe that number is not 30-40 million after 30 years of amnesty bills) welfare and other tax-funded benefits that will pull the economy down further in order for TV cameras to focus on how Jodi Arias murdered her boyfriend? The answer is daily.

Furthermore, how many Americans can describe for you the blonde Jodi look versus the brunette Jodi look, but those same people are unable to illustrate the details Ty Woods experienced in order to try and save the U.S. Consulate Ambassador and his aides, as well the particulars of the four men being slaughtered by Muslim militants as they begged the State Department for support? How many Americans know who Ty Woods, Ambassador Stevens, Sean smith and Glen Doherty were? I’ve no doubt many Americans do know the name Ty Woods and Ambassador Stevens, but sadly that is as far as the knowledge extends.

I’m not even sure how many American high school and college kids, not to mention their dimwit parents, are aware that Susan Rice is not a brand you find in Isle Four of your super market.

More people know endless details about Jodi Arias’ life and trial than they know their own blood type.

Jodi Arias and her sensationalized trial are more important to Americans than every crisis we Americans are facing. If Jodi Arias gets off on self-defense, America owes Saddam Hussein an apology for calling his vicious style of torture, rape, and murder brutality.

Jodi Arias faces death (death most likely being 20 years of life sitting in prison cell thinking about how perhaps she should have only stabbed her boyfriend three times after blowing his head off) while America is facing the life and death of the Republic our Founders fought and many died for so we could have liberty.

Arias’ sentence is set to be handed down this week. But I say the judge should give Arias one act of community service Americans would be happy to agree to: Let Jodi Arias nurse the Boston Bomber before his trial since Arias is quite enthusiastic about taking care of gunshot wounds.

The Israeli military had no comment. But a source in the Israeli defense establishment told CNN’s Sara Sidner, “We will do whatever is necessary to stop the transfer of weapons from Syria to terrorist organizations. We have done it in the past and we will do it if necessary the future.”

Fox News report:

More details will be posted as they become available.

—-

When: Friday, May 3, 2013 at 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Getting Hammered with Steve Hamilton and Stevie J West

Tonight: Tonight on #GettingHammered it’s #HotConChicksFriday! Yes, in our continuing tradition of bringing you the hottest and smartest Conservative women in radio, Stevie J West joins forces with Elisha (@planet_rawr) to prove once again why manly liberal women are always so angry; they aren’t THESE two, duh! Hammy (when not drooling over his co-host and guest) will be MC’ing our new game “I hate all the things” where guests respond to a serious of topics with snarky, brilliant, well thought out (and probably alcohol influenced) answers. Any topic is up for grabs and we WILL be soliciting questions from the listeners.

Of course, we’ll Mock the Week in News and probably frivolously waste the first 20 minutes talking about drinking while ACTUALLY drinking. The bar is Open at Casa de Hammy and we’re Getting Hammered!!!

Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto

Ali was rushed to a hospital, but Dr. Wasim Khawaja said that Ali died prior to arrival.

An assigned bodyguard was also wounded in the attack. The bodyguard was assigned to Ali after he recieved threats from the Pakistani Taliban according to police spokesman Javed Hussain.

The unidentified gunmen are still at large, police said.
-

Video Courtesy CNN

___

Tamerlan Tsarnaev (Image: The Guardian)

The body of the deceased suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing has been claimed.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s body was claimed by a funeral services company hired by the family, according to Terrel Harris – spokesman for the chief medical examiner of Massachusetts. Mr. Harris did not provide details about neither the cause of death, nor where the body had been taken.

Tsarnaev was killed on April 19th during a firefight with police. Tamerlan’s younger brother, and alleged accomplice, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is currently being held in a federal prison.

___

The Obama administration is preparing to announce a new round of deep, unilateral  cuts in America’s nuclear arsenal, writes Bill Gertz of the Washington Times.

Writing in his weekly Inside the Ring column, Gertz states it will happen “soon” and that a Pentagon “review”, written precisely to “justify” these new, deep, unilateral cuts, will be used for that purpose. The cuts, as many outlets have already announced, may bring the arsenal to as few as 1,000 (or fewer) warheads. Gertz states this “review” was completed, and the decision to cut was made, months ago, but have been withheld from the public so far to prevent Obama from losing the 2012 presidential election.

Obama, having been reelected by the American electorate in 2012, will not to have to face voters ever again.

The result will be not just a deep, unilateral cut in America’s nuclear deterrent, but also a possible cancellation of warhead modernization programs, a replacement for the B-52′s aging cruise missiles (the B-52 has such a huge radar signature it cannot safely enter enemy airspace itself), the new “boomer” (ballistic missile submarine) class, and a plutonium pit producing facility in New Mexico, all of which were promised by Obama in 2010 during the New START ratification debate and in the New START ratification resolution. Construction of the said facility is also mandated by the FY2013 NDAA.

(NOTE: In 2010, this writer warned not to believe or accept President Obama’s modernization promises on the grounds that his word cut not be trusted under any circumstances; however, this writer’s warnings were roundly ignored and 13 Republicans foolishly voted for the treaty. Some of these Republicans are now the same individuals complaining about Obama’s failure to fulfill his promises, even though Obama never intended to keep those promises.)

Meanwhile, the Russian Ministry of Defense has announced it will continue growing its nuclear arsenal and modernizing it substantially, including the development of a new road-mobile ICBM (the Yars-M, tested successfully last year) and a rail-based ICBM (thus further adding to Russia’s arsenal of ICBMs). It also plans to develop a heavy ICBM (the “Son of Satan”) and an ICBM called the “Avangard”, as well as a “pseudo-ICBM” with a range of 6,000 kms, to counter China’s large nuclear arsenal of 3,000 warheads.

The US, on the other hand, does not have any road- or rail-mobile ICBMs and has no plans to develop any, although the USAF is studying such options.

Rail-mobile ICBMs were prohibited by the first and second START treaty, but are not forbidden by the one-sided New START treaty negotiated by the Obama State Department and signed by Obama in April 2010. Russia is now taking advantage of this huge loophole, as well as of the loophole (also found in previous START treaties) that does not count its 171 Tu-22M strategic bombers as such under these treaties. It’s also taking advantage of New START’s extremely weak verification regime, which gives it ample opportunity for cheating.

Concurrently, Russia is modernizing the other legs of its nuclear triad: its next generation bomber is scheduled to enter service in 2020 (as are the forementioned ICBMs), and the first of its new class of ballistic missile submarines, the Yuri Dolgoruki of the Borei class, joined the Russian Navy’s fleet last year.

Historically, Russia, and before it, the Soviet Union, has never complied with any arms control treaty it has signed.

Critics have charged that by cutting the US nuclear arsenal deeply and unilaterally below New START levels, Obama is inviting Russian nuclear blackmail of the US and dramatically undermining US national security, while needlessly dismantling the only weapon type that has never failed for its entire 67-year-long existence.

 Dempsey appeases China

During his visit to China last week, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey, an Obama appointee, asked China for help in combating cyber attacks.

Despite the well-documented fact that many, if not most cyberattacks on the US originate from China and have been perpetrated by the PLA and other Chinese government entities, Dempsey put his faith in China’s benevolence, asking its leaders for help and proposing Sino-American “cooperation” on the matter.

Such “cooperation” would mean that Chinese government and military personnel would gain intimate access to US computer networks and thus be able to find out how to navigate – or disable – them and how to steal more information from the US government.

Yet, Gen. Dempsey called a Sino-American “working group” recently established “to combat cyber attacks” “both timely and appropriate”, and claimed that cyber attacks do as much damage to the Chinese as to the US economy.

Similarly, last year, Hillary Clinton claimed that both the US and China have been “victims of cyber attacks”, suggesting moral equivalence moral equivalence between the two countries.

Heritage Foundation analyst David Inserra commented recently:

“By turning a blind eye to China’s obvious bad cyber behavior, Dempsey and others are encouraging China to keep hacking, since there will obviously be no consequences from Washington. Even worse, by recommending more cooperation with China on this issue, the Obama Administration is actually rewarding the Chinese for their hacking by allowing them to become more familiar with our cyber systems and cybersecurity responses—and thus better prepared to spy on or disrupt them.(…)

The U.S. should change its approach to China on cybersecurity. China is not a victim on this issue; it is the perpetrator, and the U.S. should take actions that make its hacking more costly and painful—for instance, by calling out Beijing for its bad actions and ceasing to cooperate. The U.S. should also pursue legal and economic actions against Chinese companies that trade in stolen U.S. intellectual property. On top of that, the U.S. should break down Chinese censorship of the Internet and support the free flow of information within China.

Failing to change the U.S. policy toward China’s cyber crimes will only encourage more crime and attacks. It’s time to stand up to China and defend American interests.”

Ray Mabus: cutting warships, playing with boats

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus still insists on decommissioning 7 of the Navy’s newest cruisers while building 55 littoral combat ships that lack appropriate combat power, survivability, and are very vulnerable to cyber attacks.

The Navy’s released FY2014 budget proposal still insists on decommissioning the cruisers .

At the same time, Mabus insists on continuing the Littoral Combat Ship program of building 55 poorly-armed, easy-to-sink boats armed with nothing more than a gun and a few short-range missiles and costing $440 mn each, without counting the cost of their combat modules.

Mabus has hailed the LCS program as “one of our very best shipbuilding programs”, even though it is grossly overbudget and behind schedule and produces poorly-armed boats that cannot defend themselves. Think-tanks such as the CNAS and the Heritage Foundation have called for truncating LCS production.

The Navy’s own shipbuilding plans and girues also show that the service will not reach even its meagre goal – set last December – of reaching 306 ships, let alone the 313 ships the Navy said it needed as recently as December 2011. Indeed, the service’s plans show its ship fleet – especially the fleets of cruisers, destroyers, and submarines – shrinking deeply during the next 2 decades. During and after that period, the Navy’s total ship number will be significantly inflated by LCSes.

Critics, such as House Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chairman Randy Forbes (R-VA-04), have charged that the Navy is woefully underinvesting in its ship fleet and leaving it too small for the missions of today, let alone those of the future. They claim that, as the US “pivots” to the Western Pacific and continues to attempt to deter Iran in the Gulf, a large ship fleet is needed to keep the peace in both theaters, which are predominantly maritime.

Currently, the Navy is able to meet only 59% of Combatant Commanders’ requests for ships and only 61% of their requests for submarines.

Partial remedies have been suggested by think tanks such as the CNAS and Brookings. The former proposes establishing “red teams” to evaluate what it calls the “unconstrained” requirements of COCOMs, while Brookings proposes to station more warships abroad to make more available where they’re needed. It points out that one warship forward-deployed abroad (e.g. in Japan) is worth 4 warships based in the US.

Congressman Forbes proposes to increase the annual shipbuilding budget from $15 bn to $23 bn per year. That budget has been stagnant at $15 bn per year for several years.

Did this family come to the United States for asylum or did they “Come to suck the fat off our land?” as the judge says. Were they true refugees or were they exaggerating their circumstances because they seemed to freely travel back and forth to their homeland? Was their goal to be productive members of this country or to sponge as much as they could from our generous system?

Is the judge outraged? You bet. And you should be too.

As you watch the judge’s entire opening statement know that new evidence is out today that the Saudi government refused entrance to the known terrorist in 2011.