Will ISIS Drive U.S. Forces Out of Sinai? By Bridget Johnson

A defense official confirmed today that high-level discussions are under way to decide whether U.S. forces will be pulled out of the Sinai peninsula because of the danger posed by ISIS.

About 700 troops are currently part of the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) mission in the region established by the 1979 peace deal.

Joint Staff Vice Director for Operations Rear Adm. Andrew Lewis told reporters at the Pentagon today that reports stating two outposts outside the northern camp in the Sinai had been closed were incorrect.

“Operationally, we have people there that are committed to the mission. And my focus is making sure that they have the force protection measures in place and we have increased the force protection measures in MFO Sinai, to ensure their maximum safety,” Lewis said.

The admiral said there are no plans in place, but “those discussions are happening…whether to pull them out or not” within the U.S. government and the governments of Israel and Egypt. “And on those discussions are happening at the very highest levels,” he added.

ISIS claimed responsibility for taking down a Russian airliner over the desert on Halloween, and later published in Dabiq magazine photos of what ISIS says was the bomb — constructed out of a soda can.

Boko Haram to ISIS: We’ve Got Your Backs By Bridget Johnson

Boko Haram reinforced their year-ago pledge of allegiance to ISIS, urging self-proclaimed caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to have “steadfastness, steadfastness, and patience, patience” to achieve victory.

The video opens with pickups driving through the brush carrying masked jihadists wielding an ISIS flag. Front license plates were also replaced with ISIS flags.

A few more camera angles are used of the jihadists than the usual single, straight-on shot frequently seen in Boko Haram statements. The terrorist in the center juggles a couple pieces of paper as he reads the statement.

“The enemies of Allah the Almighty hold conferences and meetings to come up with a solution for the hole into which they fell, thinking that they can rescue their proxies and allies from the assault of the soldiers of the Caliphate,” the speaker says.

“They gave statements and threatened on television screen that they will defeat the monotheists who proved, by the grace of Allah the Almighty, the extent of their firmness and the harm they inflicted upon their enemies and the losses in terms of lives, wealth, and weapons, whether in Nigeria, the Niger border, Cameroon, or Chad,” he continued.

“Those people were shocked by what they saw, and they were surprised by the steadfastness of the monotheists in front of their Crusader campaigns, despite their alliance and cooperation with their henchmen from among the apostates and the Rafidhi [Shi’ite] militias. The monotheists have realized that victory is from Allah.”

“The march,” they vowed, will continue until jihadists “purify the land from the filth and defilement of the polytheists.”

“As usual, the disbelievers and apostates have for ages, when they feel hopeless to stop the spread of the truth, rush to scheme and sow rumors and lies against the mujahideen,” the speaker lamented.

A School Board President Who Homeschools? How Dare You! By K. Daniel Glover

Bonnie Henthorn and her husband spent their formative years in Tyler County public schools. Between them, their two children spent at least 15 years in that school system. The family has paid taxes that support the schools for decades.

With deep roots and a historical perspective like that, Henthorn is an ideal choice for president of the Tyler County school board, a role she has filled since 2014. But none of that matters now because in January she committed the unpardonable sin of public education: She started homeschooling.

Henthorn announced the family decision at the Jan. 4 school board meeting, citing two reasons that had nothing to do with Tyler County schools. “One is that I want them to have a more Christian-based education,” she said. “… Number two is I no longer feel that the state leadership has the best interest of the students at heart.”

That very personal decision, designed to benefit Henthorn’s sophomore son and seventh-grade daughter, quickly became the topic of a very hostile public debate.

At the meeting, board member Linda Hoover peppered Henthorn with questions. She implied that Henthorn couldn’t lead an education system if her children weren’t part of it and that pulling them from it is “a slap in the teachers’ faces.” Another board member, Jimmy Wyatt, called it a “questionable decision” that might show a lack of faith in the county school system.
Bonnie Henthorn (Twitter) Bonnie Henthorn (Twitter)

The outrage escalated over the next few weeks. A Tyler County native created a Facebook group and a Change.org petition demanding Henthorn’s resignation. The Charleston Gazette-Mail published an editorial decrying the “sad mess” in Tyler County and calling Henthorn “unsuited for public school leadership.”

Rainbow Ray and the Navy’s highest priority By Russ Vaughn

Not long ago, I jokingly pointed out that Obama’s secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, who in his holy quest to give his liege lord, Barack, the rainbow-hued, unicorn-mounted force the narcissist-in-chief so desires, has, in naval jargon, run aground.

The problem according to Mabus and his chief enlisted naval adviser is that, try as they might, their naval social justice retitling team can’t seem to come up with a satisfactory gender-neutral replacement for the Navy’s traditional title for a clerk, which, as it has been since the birth of the United States Navy, is yeoman. I kid you not, folks: with all the problems our military faces in this very dangerous world, our secretary of the Navy has his top chief petty officer, Master Chief of the Navy Michael D. Stevens, busy changing the titles of the countless combat specialty ratings in that force, which includes the United States Marine Corps. This quixotic quest is necessitated by the relentless insistence of the Obama administration that women be allowed to serve in all combat units and positions regardless of continuing demonstrations that this is a clearly foolish program with coming deadly consequences.

While my recent piece drew many humorous suggestions for a replacement title for yeoman, one commenter soberly noted that this is no laughing matter when it comes to the Navy’s real budget needs. Barack Obama and the Democratic Party have taken an accounting axe to our military forces, demanding drastic reductions everywhere, across every fleet and every force. In the Navy, that means not only fewer ships, but also fewer sailors to man and support those ships remaining. Because of Obama’s budgets, naval aviators aren’t allowed to fly sufficient training missions to retain their flying proficiency. Even special naval helicopter units that fly SEAL missions are being shut down, with their mission being shifted onto the Army. Point is, money’s tight, and the budget constraints are affecting mission training and performance.

Hard War By Lt. Col. Kent S Ralston USMC (Ret.)

After World War II, the U.S. abandoned the concepts of total and hard war and adopted a more politically correct view of war.

Western civilization is immolating itself on the sword of political correctness. Our leaders fail to recognize the existential threat that we now face and are unwilling to take the decisive actions necessary to combat the threat of radical jihadist Islamists.

Leadership on both sides of the political spectrum refuse to identify how we might counter this threat. This is not necessarily a new type of threat that we have not experienced before. However, what is new is our refusal to properly utilize the tools at our disposal to combat this threat.

We often hear our leadership say that it is against our values as Americans to use some of these ruthless but effective tools. Gen. George S. Patton once said, “War is cruel, ruthless and brutal and it takes a cruel, ruthless and brutal man to fight it!” It was the implementation of this approach that ultimately secured victory in 1945.

Unfortunately, our nation does not presently possess Patton’s “cruel, ruthless and brutal man” in any senior leadership position in our government or military. Politicians and generals alike often state that it is against our long-held American values to target civilians or torture prisoners. However, our country’s history is replete with examples of our leadership doing what is necessary to win. We can only logically extrapolate that those who would refuse to fight hard war would be willing to sacrifice our lives and freedom on the altar of the absurd fallacies of American values crowd.

During the Revolutionary War, Gen. George Washington hanged spies and executed deserters. During the Mexican-American War, Gen. Winfield Scott ordered the execution of fifty members of the St. Patrick’s Battalion in 1847. Many members of this unit were determined to be deserters from the U.S. Army who joined forces with the Mexican army under Santa Ana. Both Union and Confederate generals during the Civil War executed prisoners in retaliation for executions by their counterparts. Gen. William Sherman during his famous march from Atlanta to the sea issued General Order V which stated,

Army Corps commanders alone are entrusted with the power to destroy mills, houses, cotton gins, etc., and for them this general principle is laid down: in districts in neighborhoods where the Army is unmolested no destruction of such property should be permitted; but should guerillas or bushwhackers molest our march, or should the inhabitants burn bridges, obstruct roads, or otherwise manifest local hostility, then army commanders should order and enforce a devastation more or less relentless according to the measure of such hostility.

The Mainstream Media Spreads Another False ‘Islamophobia’ Story by Raheem Kassam and Liam Deacon

Originally published under the title “Molenbeek Hit And Run: How The Mainstream Media Spread Another False ‘Islamophobia’ Story.”

The journalists and publications which implied the hit and run in Molenbeek borough of Brussels this weekend was a ‘far right’ anti Islam attack had no evidence to suggest that it was as they reported, but they knew what story they wanted to write.

That’s why most hesitantly wrote “during” a “far right demonstration” instead of bluntly labelling the driver a “far right activist” as did the Daily Mail, the first publication to report on the story.

Instead of acknowledging the categorical error, or clearly reporting the truth as it emerged, however, the Mail quietly edited their original article, burying the factual change three quarters of the way down the page, and failing to issue a correction or clarification.

Its headline shifted from “Muslim Women Is Mown Down by Grinning Far-Right Activist” to “by Grinning Driver” (see above) and the critical new details only appeared in the sixth paragraph:

Police later announced that they had arrested two men, believed to have been the car’s driver and passenger, who have been named as Redouane B. and Mohamed B – both of whom are thought to be residents of Molenbeek.

Numerous other articles in the Independent, Express, New York Post, and others have yet to be amended or followed up with the truth. Some, like Evening Standard, only published their misleading story this morning, after all the facts had become widely available.

Journalists who bothered to check with sources in Brussels were able to ascertain the man was not “far right,” but a local Muslim teenager, a fact reported two days ago by those such as Channel 4’s Paraic O’Brien.

When too much really is too much :Yisrael Medad

I wonder: is Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu getting piqued? Is Jordan’s behavior beginning to annoy him? Is the pressure Jordan is applying vis a vis the Temple Mount starting to bother even him? First, despite promises to seek ways to permit Jews to pray on the Temple Mount, he succumbed to the so-called “status quo” (so-called because it is only static as regards Jews).

Second, when it was absolutely clear who was initiating violence and provocations (the Jordanian Waqf by allowing youths to infiltrate the Al-Aqsa Mosque and stay there overnight with firebombs, etc. as well as Sheikh Raad Salah’s Islamic Movement), he only spoke in a general fashion without blaming Jordan.

Third, he didn’t call out Jordan on the violation of Article Nine of the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty.

Fourth, he traveled to Amman (and Berlin) to meet US Secretary of State John Kerry and King Abdallah II and bowed to the pressure of installing cameras.

Fifth, he stood idly by for some five months while nothing happens with the camera surveillance scheme.

Sixth, he demurred when the Waqf and Jordan announced that the cameras will not be placed inside the mosque or the Dome of the Rock thus completely undermining Israel’s case to prove Muslim-instigated violence.

And now we read that Jordan is protesting a rabbi storming of Jerusalem mosque :

Jordan Tuesday strongly protested a raid into Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque compound, led by ultranationalist rabbi Yehuda Glick of the ruling Likud party, and urged Israel, as the occupation power, to stop such provocations.

Pete Mulherin Want Fries With That PhD?

Given the post-grad worth of degrees in gender studies, queer studies and journalism, to name but a few of the modern academy’s taxpayer-subsidised growth areas, it is a monumental injustice to make others underwrite the ongoing exaltation of credentialed irrelevance.
That Australia’s current system of higher education is unsustainable is a fact most are willing to concede. The latest evidence, revealed by the ABC, is of a $13.5 billion debt accrued over four years. This news adds another nail to the coffin of Entitlement Era higher ed and must surely accelerate a large-scale overhaul of the present—pun intended—arrangement.

As a graduate of two-and-a-bit university degrees, I am aware of the doors my tertiary education has opened, and am grateful for the subsidies and deferred payment system through HECS/HELP. That being said, it seems ludicrous my higher education should be paid for by the government taxpayers, including many who did not receive higher education themselves. Despite what our society leads me and fellow Gen Y-ers to believe, we do not have a right to go to university, nor are we entitled to see those studies heavily subsidised.

Speaking for myself, I would have attended university even if required to pay the full fees for my courses—albeit under a deferred-payment scheme— because my interests and professional ambitions lie in academia. On the other hand, I can safely assume that many of my co-students chose to go to university precisely because of the current arrangements. They chose uni because it was the easy option: no upfront fees, Youth Allowance, low-cost courses that might be repaid (or not paid at all, should they go overseas) in the distant future, and — or so they believe — because of better job prospects.

Encouraging this mindset was the uncapping of university places under Labor, as it carried us one step closer to socialist Nirvana: a bachelor’s certificate on every mantelpiece, a gown and mortar board in every wardrobe! All that achieved was to lower the bar. Many university degrees, and here one thinks especially of arts grads, might more appropriately be hung in the garden shed than occupy pride of place in the recent graduate’s hallway. (editor’s note: the declining gradient of Australian journalism matches to a T the rise of “journalism” as a tertiary subject. If you doubt that, note the work-experience children delivering their oracular preconceptions in the guise of “news coverage” via the Fairfax press. )

What I’m getting at is not inspired by elitism; a university graduate is as likely to make a fool of himself as any other person. No, my gripe is twofold and it’s not based on a white-male, CIS-privileged, capitalist conspiracy, despite what you may hear. Firstly, there’s the issue of entitlement, which is raging unchecked among us Gen Y-ers. And secondly, there’s the frustrating notion that suggests: ‘a truly just society must provide—for free if possible—a university degree to everyone.’

Panama Bernie Bernie Sanders’s politics produced the Panama Papers. By Daniel Henninger

Bernie Sanders caused the Panama Papers. Bernie of Vermont didn’t do it by himself, of course. The world’s most famous socialist, and Hillary Clinton’s albatross, had a lot of help. Spare me the crocodile tears over the immorality of tax avoidance. Panama is an indictment of government greed.

After World War II, the governments of the West established tax regimes to support the reconstruction of their nations. Six decades later, that tax machinery, which runs the social-welfare states in the countries Bernie Sanders cites in every campaign stop as a model for America, has run totally amok—an unaccountable, devouring monster. Billionaires aren’t the only ones who run from it.

Most governments, including ours, overtax their citizens to feed their own insatiable need for money. Then the legal thieves running the government and their cronies, unwilling to abide the tax levels they created, move their wealth offshore to places like Panama. Arguably, all the world’s people should be able to move their assets “offshore” to escape governments that are smothering economic life and growth, which has stalled in the U.S., Europe and Asia.

Speaking of crocodile tears, Barack Obama spent Tuesday bragging that corporate tax inversions are akin to Panama Papers’ tax avoidance. Mr. Obama said “corporations,” another swearword invoked by Bernie Sanders at every stop, are “gaming the system.” CONTINUE AT SITE

An Overheated Climate Alarm The White House launches a scary campaign about deadly heat. Guess what: Cold kills more people. By Bjorn Lomborg

The Obama administration released a new report this week that paints a stark picture of how climate change will affect human health. Higher temperatures, we’re told, will be deadly—killing “thousands to tens of thousands” of Americans. The report is subtitled “A Scientific Assessment,” presumably to underscore its reliability. But the report reads as a political sledgehammer that hypes the bad and skips over the good. It also ignores inconvenient evidence—like the fact that cold kills many more people than heat.

Climate change is a genuine problem that will eventually be a net detriment to society. Gradually rising temperatures across decades will increase the number of hot days and heat waves. If humans make no attempts whatsoever to adapt—a curious assumption that the report inexplicably relies on almost throughout—the total number of heat-related deaths will rise. But correspondingly, climate change will also reduce the number of cold days and cold spells. That will cut the total number of cold-related deaths.
Consider a rigorous study published last year in the journal Lancet that examined temperature-related mortality around the globe. The researchers looked at data on more than 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 areas: cold countries like Canada and Sweden, temperate nations like Spain, South Korea and Australia, and subtropical and tropical ones like Brazil and Thailand.The Lancet researchers found that about 0.5%—half a percent—of all deaths are associated with heat, not only from acute problems like heat stroke, but also increased mortality from cardiac events and dehydration. But more than 7% of deaths are related to cold—counting hypothermia, as well as increased blood pressure and risk of heart attack that results when the body restricts blood flow in response to frigid temperatures. In the U.S. about 9,000 people die from heat each year but 144,000 die from cold. CONTINUE AT SITE