British Foreign Minister Dominic Raab Under Fire For His Remarks On 'Bending The Knee'

Reuters: 'Taking the knee' seems to be from Game of Thrones: UK foreign minister

LONDON (Reuters) - British foreign minister Dominic Raab said on Thursday that “taking the knee” seems to have come from the fantasy TV drama series “Game of Thrones” and felt like a symbol of subjugation and subordination.

The death in Minneapolis of a black man, George Floyd, after a white police officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes has sparked protests around the world, with many demonstrators kneeling in streets and squares to protest against racism.

The position was first taken by National Football League player Colin Kaepernick during the playing of the U.S. national anthem to call attention to racial injustice, and has been adopted by many sports players since.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: FreeDictionary's description of "bending the knee".... to force someone into submission or compliance.

The video below is a scene from the Games of Thrones on what happens to those who do not "bend" the knee:

Anonymous Insider Trump Resisters Are Not Heroes

President Donald Trump's Cabinet gathers in the Oval Office on March 13, 2017.Donald Trump/Twitter

Peter Van Buren, Reuters: Insider Trump resisters are not heroes

The unnamed insiders who claim to be working clandestinely to resist Donald Trump are not heroes. As a State Department whistleblower who lost his career to tell the truth about the Iraq war, I am burdened by how the interviewees in Bob Woodward’s new book, “Fear,” and the anonymous writer of that New York Times “resistance” Op-Ed are hailed as patriots holding back the U.S. president’s worst impulses through fibs and bureaucratic tricks. Having faced similar choices, I know their approach is neither honorable, nor effective.
U.S. President Donald Trump approaches the news media to li

Read more ....

WNU Editor: Peter Van Buren is correct. No one should join the government to do only things they think are personally right. In the end the policy goals of the President becomes the policy of the United States, and when that happens there has to be unity when implementing it. If you do not want to implement these policies .... well then .... that is when you will have to look for another job.

Reassessing Geore Orwell To Better Understand Our Times

Scott S. Powell, American Thinker: Reassessing Orwell to Understand Our Times

Just two or three generations ago, most Americans understood that George Orwell’s classics Animal Farm and 1984 were written to explain how freedom is lost to totalitarianism and the intolerance that accompanies it. “Big Brother,” a term still casually used to describe an all-knowing governing authority, comes right out of 1984. In the state that Orwell describes, all subjects are continually reminded that “Big Brother is watching you,” by way of constant surveillance through the pervasive use of “telescreens” by the ruling class.

Read more ....

WNU editor: For those who have never read George Orwell's 1984 or Animal Farm, go to the following link where you can download the e-book for free. (The link is here).

Is It Smart Politics To Exaggerate Terrorist Threats?

Photos captured from office building above Boston Marathon finish line moments bomb when off. Includes possible suspect fleeing the scene. Benjamin Thorndike

It's Smart Politics To Exaggerate Terrorist Threats -- Bruce Schneier, Special to CNN

(CNN) -- Terrorism causes fear, and we overreact to that fear. Our brains aren't very good at probability and risk analysis. We tend to exaggerate spectacular, strange and rare events, and downplay ordinary, familiar and common ones. We think rare risks are more common than they are, and we fear them more than probability indicates we should.

Our leaders are just as prone to this overreaction as we are. But aside from basic psychology, there are other reasons that it's smart politics to exaggerate terrorist threats, and security threats in general.

The first is that we respond to a strong leader. Bill Clinton famously said: "When people feel uncertain, they'd rather have somebody that's strong and wrong than somebody who's weak and right." He's right.

Read more ....

My Comment: I am old enough to remember what the world was like pre-9/11 world .... alas .... that world is gone, and with the poltiical class being what it is .... something that I will probably never see again.

Why President Obama Is Being Hurt By The Benghazi Story

President Barack Obama speaks at the dignified transfer ceremony for the U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, and security officers Tyrone S. Woods and Glen A. Doherty on Joint Base Andrews, Md., Sept. 14, 2012. DOD photo by Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo

The Benghazi Story Refuses To Die, And It’s Hurting The President -- Walter Russel Mead, The American Interest

We still don’t know exactly what happened between the Pentagon, the State Department, the CIA and the White House as Americans in Libya requested support for Ambassador Stevens and his team in their final hours, and we almost certainly won’t before the election.

But that doesn’t do the administration much good. As various departments and officials leak to save their careers and retaliate against rivals, grenades keep getting lobbed and emails and memos keep getting leaked. The result is that the attack in Benghazi isn’t fading out of the news. As the last undecided voters make up their minds, the media outlets following this story with the greatest attention keep getting enough ammunition to keep the story alive and force the rest of the media to acknowledge the story, and that doesn’t help a White House simultaneously wrestling with a close election and a massive mutant storm hurtling at the East Coast.

Read more ....

My Comment: Could not have said it any better. This is my must read post for today.

Is President Obama On His Way Out?

President Barack Obama tapes the weekly address, White House Photo, Lawrence Jackson, 10/7/11

The 54 Trillion Dollar Question: Is Obama On His Way Out? -- Daily Mail

As America approaches the third anniversary of Barack Obama’s historic election victory, the country is mired in economic gloom.

Expectations were absurdly high in the autumn of 2008, stoked up not least by the victor’s own campaign team. Yet Americans now seem bemused by how, exactly, it could all have gone so wrong.

In the run-up to his election victory, Mr Obama won praise for keeping quiet about the economy. It was the time of the collapse of investment bank Lehman Brothers, and the financial situation was shifting quickly: since it was hard for anyone to predict what would come next, silence seemed wise.

Read more ....

My Comment: This is not going to be an easy election for him and his supporters. His advantages are (1) he is the present occupant of the White House, and (2) his Republican opponent is going to be (probably) weak. But if unemployment edges to 9.5% (or higher) as expected, and economic growth remains all but stagnant .... the Republicans can have Donald Duck as their candidate and President Obama's chances for re-election will be slim.

Is This The Obama Doctrine?

The Obama Doctrine: Drones, Targeted Killings and Secret Prisons -- The Nation

The Bush Doctrine was that the world was our battlefield—we were at liberty to carry out drone attacks and unlawful interrogations throughout the world. But many Americans may be surprised to discover that far from fading away with the former president, these policies have in fact expanded and intensified under President Obama.

As The Nation's Jeremy Scahill explained on MSNBC's Morning Joe today, Obama has succeeded in normalizing and legitimizing these policies that were considered illegal in the extreme only a few years ago.

Read more ....

My Comment: I have been saying the same thing non-stop for the past 2+ years ....

.... Obama has succeeded in normalizing and legitimizing these policies that were considered illegal in the extreme only a few years ago.

Makes you wonder where all the anti-war protestors disappeared to.

U.S. Democrat And Republican Views Are Starting To Diverge On Military Engagements And The Military Budget -- A Commentary

Dodos On Defense: Cheap Hawks, Profligate Doves -- CBS News/(The New Republic)

The Obama administration has managed to upend the laws of ornithology. The simple fact of a Democratic commander-in-chief has transformed yesterday’s Republican hawks into today’s doves. No less miraculously, and certainly for no more high-minded reasons, Democratic doves have metamorphosed into something like hawks.

In both cases, however, the transformation has been less than complete. Democrats, beginning with a president who currently presides over wars in three countries and periodically launches fusillades at several more (if a commander-in-chief earned a ribbon each time he ordered U.S. forces into action, Barack Obama would be well on his way to acquiring a chestful), have proved reluctant to fund the means for their military aims—namely, the U.S. military itself. As for Republicans, the GOP attachment to large defense appropriations endures (though just barely), but the ghost of Robert Taft haunts the party once more, making it wary of foreign entanglements. The Republican paradox has been neatly exemplified by congressional votes to deny approval for the air campaign in Libya, and then to fund the same operation to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Read more ....

My Comment: Lawrence Kaplan lists all the contradictions of Democrat/Republican views on foreign engagements and the defense budget perfectly .... could not have said it better myself.

Are We At War In Libya Or Not? (A Commentary)

White House Photo, Samantha Appleton, 3/25/11

Obama’s War On “War” -- Washington Times editorial

Administration tries hard to dodge the obvious.

What if they gave a war and nobody was allowed to say it? The debate over military action in Libya has lately taken an absurd twist, driven by the Obama administration’s bizarre unwillingness to call a war a war.

Everyone knows what is going on in Libya is a war, but the administration has placed a moratorium on plain English. Hence White House press secretary Jay Carney prefers to talk about a “time-limited, scope-limited military action,” which could actually describe most wars. And at a press briefing on Wednesday when Joint Task Force Odyssey Dawn Chief of Staff Rear Admiral Gerard Hueber was asked, “Do you consider yourself at war right now?” he said, expressionlessly, “we are carrying out the mission of the United Nations Security [Council] Resolution 1973 and the direction of the president in his speech.” Said one observer, “He has drunk the Kool Aid.”

Read more ....

My Comment: Mark Steyn's observations on the White House use (or should I say non-use) of the 'war' word is also delicious to read. That link is here.

Was General Petraeus' Good News On Afghanistan Politically Motivated?

President Barack Obama announces that he has accepted Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's resignation from his post as the top NATO and U.S. commander in Afghanistan and that he is nominating Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command, to replace him. Left to right, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, Vice President Joe Biden, Petraeus, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates accompanied Obama in the Rose Garden.

General Petraeus’s October Surprise -- Michael Scheuer, The Diplomat

The timing of Gen. Petraeus’s good news on Afghanistan is strangely convenient for Washington—and glosses over the reality of a likely civil war.

Last month saw a surprising flood of good tidings from Afghanistan. We learned that the US-NATO offensive in Kandahar is succeeding; that drone strikes are breaking al-Qaeda’s back; that the Taliban and al-Qaeda are at daggers drawn; and that the Taliban is ready to negotiate a peaceful settlement of the Afghan war.

Read more ....

My Comment: If true, this is not the first time (nor last) that Generals have either been involved in (or used) by politics and politicians. But it is unfortunate that the Afghan war has not been openly debated and discussed during this election cycle, and with news from Afghanistan getting more grim (not positive according to General Petraeus) this lack of debate will only help to reinforce those who have become deeply skeptical of our political system .... myself included.

A Terrorist War Obama Has Denied -- A Commentary

From The Washington Post:

Janet Napolitano -- former Arizona governor, now overmatched secretary of homeland security -- will forever be remembered for having said of the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit: "The system worked." The attacker's concerned father had warned U.S. authorities about his son's jihadist tendencies. The would-be bomber paid cash and checked no luggage on a transoceanic flight. He was nonetheless allowed to fly, and would have killed 288 people in the air alone, save for a faulty detonator and quick actions by a few passengers.

Heck of a job, Brownie.

The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration's response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face. Napolitano renames terrorism "man-caused disasters." Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close, CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York -- a trifecta of political correctness and image management.

Read more ....

My Comment: Charles Krauthammer is not the only one who is finding the actions of the White House incomprehensible. My contacts outside of the U.S. .... Canada, Asia, Europe, and (specifically) Russia .... they are all shaking their heads in wonderment, questioning if the U.S. administration is truly aware of the consequences of their actions and its long term implications.

As for myself, living in Canada gives me a viewpoint that is out of the beltway and the bubble that it creates. I tell critics of the President that we must reconcile ourselves with the fact that President Obama and his Democrat allies received a huge mandate from the American people for change .... and change is what he and Congress are now delivering. If it works .... he deserves the accolades and kudos for his foresight and vision. If it fails .... and it almost did on Christmas Day .... condemnation and denunciation will be the order of the day.

I learned a long time ago that the American public and the politicians that they elect are a fickle group .... and they will always give the politicians that they elect a few years to implement and initiate their policy .... for better and/or for worse. The only thing thing that we on the opposite side can do is point out why this is wrong, and hope that in the long run our worst nightmares do not become today's headlines.

Two Commentaries That Sums Up Where We Are Going(?) In Afghanistan

No Deadline Set for Decision on Troops -- Washington Post

Obama to Reassess Afghanistan War

President Obama has not set a deadline for determining a new strategy or for committing more troops to the war in Afghanistan, despite an urgent request from his top commander, his national security adviser said Saturday.

In a lengthy telephone interview, retired Gen. James L. Jones outlined Obama's plans for reassessing the war effort. Jones noted that although the administration has seen some progress in Afghanistan and Pakistan, it remains uncertain about the outcome of President Hamid Karzai's contentious bid for reelection.

Read more ....

Obama's Plan? What Plan? -- Amir Taheri, New York Post

Despite his claims, the president has no Afghan strategy.

Throughout last year’s presidential campaign, Barack Obama lambasted the Bush administration for fighting “the wrong war” in Iraq and ignoring the right one in Afghanistan. Iraq was a “war of choice,” Obama claimed, while Afghanistan was a “war of necessity.”

Repeatedly, he claimed that, if elected president, he’d unveil a new “stronger, smarter and comprehensive strategy.”

In March, in one of those solemn-looking occasions in which he excels, Obama said that the new strategy, which he did not elaborate, was already in place. He speeded up the troop buildup ordered by the Bush administration, and a few weeks later named a new commander for Afghanistan.

Read more ....

My Comment: I have been following the situation in Afghanistan since 9/11, and I have also been following very closely President Obama's approach towards the war since he assumed office. Amir Taheri is right .... aside from the rhetoric, uncertainty and hesitation has been the hallmark of this President.

While Amir Taheri puts President Obama to task, I can understand the President's point of view. A 40,000 troop surge will not only bust the U.S. Defense Department's budget, but it will also wipe out his own political capital within the Democrat base, alienate much of the American population who now favor getting out of Afghanistan, put into jeopardy his domestic agenda, and .... worst of all .... deal with a casualty rate that will sky rocket while not providing any assurance that such a troop surge will succeed.

Complicating such a course of action is further amplified by articles like the following from the Christian Science Monitor .... How can 40,000 troops fix chronic corruption in Afghanistan? In short, Afghanistan has a culture and history that will never bend towards what we want .... and if that is the case .... what is the strategic purpose and goal of us being in the country. If it is to keep Al Qaeda out .... that should then be our focus. But nation building and propping up what is essentially a corrupt and dysfunctional government is not our goal .... and it should never have been the case.

What makes me upset with the President is that he should have been aware of all of this. Hell .... I was aware of this for the past two years and I do not have any of the resources that are available to him. It seems that there is something missing in President Obama's foreign policy and national security team. It is almost as if many decisions are being made on the fly without any appreciation of the consequences or implications of making them. While this can maybe be glossed over on most issues, it cannot be glossed over when a full scale war that is jeopardizing countless lives is happening right now.

A number of U.S. and NATO soldiers were killed today .... and while this is not the fault of President Obama, I can guarantee one thing .... the more that President Obama vascilates on the issue of Afghanistan, the more likely there will be a time in the future when these deaths will start to be blamed directly on him.

Taunted By The GOP, Nancy Pelosi Throws A Punch—At The CIA. -- A Commentary

Who You Calling Debriefed? -- Slate

Nancy Pelosi is tough. With Republicans already attacking her, she's picked a new, even bigger fight with the CIA. At a press conference Thursday, Pelosi said the CIA lied in the past, is lying in the present, and generally makes a habit of it. "They mislead us all the time," she said. The weaker among us would be content to fight just one foe.

Pelosi is on the attack because she's been on the defensive. Republicans charge that she's a hypocrite. She wants a truth commission to examine the role of Bush officials who authorized enhanced interrogation techniques (some of which amounted to torture), but she was in the loop when those techniques were first discussed and didn't cry foul.

Read more ....

Panic Time For Pelosi -- A Commentary

From Human Events:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has had a bad week. Caught between her own involvement in the CIA interrogations now condemned as torture and her party’s inquisitions, Pelosi floundered. Her fear and frustration have apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA’s reaction to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy agency in the last three months.

Pelosi -- as I wrote earlier in the week -- was one of the few members of Congress briefed in detail on the harsh interrogation methods and who could have stopped them but didn’t. Pelosi first said that she wasn’t briefed about waterboarding. Then she sort of admitted she had, inserting that the CIA only said that they might do it, not that they were going to do it. Which could have been plagiarized from John Kerry’s 2004 circular explanation of his vote for the war in Iraq.

Read more ....

Homeland Security In The Age Of Obama -- A Commentary

From Homeland Security Today:

New attitudes can inspire new security

In an administration characterized by hope and optimism, homeland security has the opportunity to recast itself from the oppressive and fearful regime it is perceived as being and return to the protective and constructive mission that it pursued in the days after Sept. 11, 2001.

Those in the homeland security community know that they labor day in and day out to protect the public and the homeland, whether through law enforcement, firefighting, disaster response, emergency medical care, preparedness or any of the other crafts that together make up the totality of the homeland security discipline.

To the public, though, the face of homeland security has for too long been only security searches, long lines at airports, frightening color alerts against vague threats, watch lists, immigration raids and constitutionally questionable practices--even torture.

Read more ....