Anti-Western Venezuela to Shelter Wounded Palestinian Children and Orphans, Maduro Says

8/2/2014

CARACAS – Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has announced plans to set up a shelter for Palestinian children wounded and orphaned in the Israeli offensive on Gaza, and has raised the possibility of finding them adoptive parents.

The President said he had proposed to build the shelters to the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) regional bloc created by Venezuela and Cuba, which also includes Bolivia, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Santa Lucia and Antigua and Barbuda.

Maduro, who called a nationwide march on Saturday in support of the Palestinian people, said the shelter in Venezuela would carry the name of deceased President Hugo Chavez (1999-2013).

“I have already decided to build a foster home with the name Hugo Chavez to bring children injured in the war and who have lost their parents, who are without their mothers, who have been orphaned,” he said Thursday during a meeting of the ruling United Socialist Party (PSUV).

“We are going to bring them to Venezuela and raise them with love; and with the agreement of the Palestinian state we are going to find some of these children Venezuelan mothers and fathers,” he added.

Maduro, a strong defender of Palestine, with which he has maintained high level bilateral relations, reiterated his condemnation of the Israeli military offensive in Gaza and called it a “war of extermination.”

“There is no war, Israel, recognized by the UN, is an occupying power which has been evicting Palestinians from their historical territory and has launched a war of extermination to evacuate Gaza and seize the Strip,” he added.

Most Latin American countries have condemned Israel’s Operation Protective Edge, which has killed 1,459 Palestinians and wounded more than 8,000 since it began 25 days ago.

Five of them – Chile, Peru, El Salvador, Brazil and Ecuador – have recalled their ambassadors for consultation.

Venezuela has no diplomatic ties with Israel.

source

Downward Spiral: Markets Weaken as Argentina’s Government Denies Debt Default

8/2/2014

Argentina's government once again denied that the country had defaulted payments after the failure of negotiations in New York over funds under dispute in U.S. courts

BUENOS AIRES – The Argentinean government once again denied that the country had defaulted payments after the failure of negotiations in New York over funds under dispute in U.S. courts.

However, the uncertainty proved too much for the financial markets which closed with sharp falls.

In an address to the country on national television on Thursday, President Cristina Fernandez said “the world keeps moving and Argentina too.”

“The world keeps moving and life goes on and Argentina too, which is good news,” Fernandez said.

She added that Argentina will use all legal means under the contracts signed with 92.4 percent of guarantors who resorted to the debt restructuring programs in 2005 and 2010.

“We don’t live in a hut, but in a country, in a nation that has a Congress which has the core authority to deal with the external debt,” she asserted.

Shortly before the intervention by the president, Economy Minister Axel Kicillof said that to talk about non-payment is a “whole lot of hogwash,” describing the ruling by New York judge Thomas Griesa in favor of the “vulture funds” as “an unprecedented ruling.”

“Argentina would be in default if any of the events considered and explained clearly in the contracts (signed with the creditors of the restructured debt) had occurred and none of them did,” he said.

The minister warned that “there is a kind of campaign aimed at sowing uncertainty, panic and terror linked to the word default,” and that the government will continue working in the face of it because there is “a lot to be done.”

“Default is when one does not pay and not when one can’t pay due to certain risks involved in the exchange, as is happening with the holdouts, and also for an entirely different set of reasons,” Kicillof said.

He added that Argentina will do all that is possible from a legal viewpoint “so that the exchange bondholders receive their money,” while holding Griesa, who has blocked the payments, responsible “for the actions of the bondholders.”

“Favoring the vultures seems to be one of the main goals of this judge,” he said.

Reiterating that Argentina deposited $539 million towards payment to the restructured creditors, Kicillof said that Argentina considered the bonds paid.

“That would be a closed question if the Bank of New York Mellon had not consulted judge Griesa. That money belongs to the exchange bondholders, let them rest assured.”

The economy minister said that Cristina Fernandez’s government “is not against an agreement between private actors,” in reference to a possible offer by Argentinean private banks to buy the debt from hedge funds or make a guarantee deposit.

“There are conditions for an agreement between private actors because the government cannot pay anymore to vulture funds and cannot participate in this type of arrangement,” he said.

The markets, that were buoyant a day earlier, responded negatively on Thursday to the lack of an agreement and after rating agencies Standard & Poor’s and Fitch put Argentinean debt in the “selective default” category.

Merval, the country’s stock exchange, registered a fall of 8.38 percent with a drop of up to 10 percent in the energy sector, which was the hardest hit.

Government bonds also fell by up to 8 percent.

The dollar, that barely rose by a cent in the formal market to 8.22 pesos per unit, jumped 27 cents in the informal market to reach 12.65 pesos.

“As was expected, after Wednesday’s sharp increases in anticipation of a last-minute agreement with the vulture funds, local assets recorded falls amid pending signs of a negotiation between private actors and also the hearing convened by Judge Thomas Griesa for tomorrow,” commented economist Gustavo Ber.

source

YET ANOTHER FIRST: OBAMA PLACES GERMAN FOREIGN COMMANDER AS CHIEF OF STAFF FOR U.S. ARMY EUROPE

8/2/2014

ANOTHER OBAMA FIRST IN DESTROYING OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

“‘Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent Alliances, with any portion of the foreign world.” George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

A German Army brigadier general who recently served with NATO forces in Afghanistan is assuming duties as the chief of staff of U. S. Army Europe, the first time a non-American officer has held that position.

Army sources in Europe said the first-ever assignment of a German general to the USAREUR staff is unrelated to the political furor over the spying revelations, but does reflect the increased importance of multinational operations in NATO.

Brig. Gen. Markus Laubenthal, most recently the commander of Germany’s 12th Panzer Brigade in Amberg, and chief of staff of Regional Command North, International Security Assistance Force Afghanistan, will be stationed at USAREUR headquarters, Wiesbaden, Germany. He could report to duty as early as Monday.

Laubenthal also has served as military assistant to the deputy commander of operations and assistant chief of staff of operations for NATO forces in Kosovo.

source

MEXICAN DRUG TRAFFICKER ASSAULTS BORDER PATROL AGENT, GETS CHARGES DISMISSED

8/2/2014

by ILDEFONSO ORTIZ 1 Aug 2014 57POST A COMMENT

McALLEN, Texas – A Mexican drug trafficker who assaulted a U.S. Border Patrol agent and sent him to the emergency room got his assault charges dismissed in exchange for pleading guilty to drug trafficking charges.

Earlier this week Miguel Angel Andrade went before U.S. District Judge Micaela Alvarez where he pleaded guilty to driving a vehicle loaded with more than 1,000 pounds of marijuana when he was arrested in the area known as La Rosita, Texas.

“Si su señoria (yes your honor)”, a burly Andrade said in Spanish when asked by Alvarez if he was guilty of the drug charge.

Court records obtained by Breitbart Texas show that on May 9, shortly after 5 a.m., agents spotted Andrade driving a minivan north from the river. This happened moments after agents had spotted Andrade driving south and had seen smugglers on the Mexican side. A Border Patrol agent tried to pull over the van at which point Andrade sped off starting a short pursuit that ended when Andrade crashed into a fence and tried to run away. Andrade then began assaulting the agent who tried to pursue him, in an effort to elude capture. Other agents arrived and after arresting Andrade were able to get help for their injured comrade.

While the court records claim that the assault was a scuffle that resulted in the agent getting a cut lip an injured knee and elbow , in reality the agent was rushed to Starr County Medical Center. There, he spent three days in the hospital and three weeks out of the job recovering from his injuries.

When Alvarez accepted the plea she asked one of the prosecutors if there were any deals. The attorney responded that for pleading to the drug charge they would ask that the charge of assaulting a federal officer be dismissed along with another drug charge and that a lesser sentence be handed down. Alvarez granted the request and set Andrade's sentencing hearing for late October. He originally could have gotten 5-40 years in prison, but because of the plea deal he will likely get less time.

While not tall, Andrade easily weighed at least 100 pounds more than the Border Patrol agent who sat in the back of the courtroom, shaking his head in disappointment. After the hearing, the agent declined to comment referring all inquiries to the local public affairs office. The plea deal that Andrade was disappointing for members of the local chapter of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) who understand the need to secure a conviction but worry about the message that is being sent out by the dismissal of the charges.

“Local and state agencies would not tolerate assaults on their people but it seems that border patrol agents are fair game,” said Albert Spratte, a fellow border patrol agent and spokesman for the NBPC Local 3307.

Assaults on border patrol agents have become commonplace in recent months. In mid-June a Border Patrol agent near Pharr trying to stop a group of immigrants ended up having to fight off an alien who tried to grab his baton and ripped his police radio away before fleeing; the alien was caught a short time later. Then in April, a man from Guatemala who had entered the country illegally rammed an agents head into a tree and struck him with the butt of his rifle during a similar struggle to get away.

On Thursday, Fox News published the findings of a Texas Department of Public Safety report that lists the increase in assaults on law enforcement officials by drug and human smugglers as well as gang members along the border. The report details attacks by gunfire, rocks and physical assaults as well as the number of seizures and detentions.

Breitbart Texas Managing Director Brandon Darby has reported on a long series criminal activity by transnational criminal organizations. In the piece “40 acts of love …and counting” Darby lists a series of criminal acts by illegal aliens which include drug trafficking, kidnapping and assaults on law enforcement.

In another piece, Darby reported on how the El Paso Sector was classified as a high risk enforcement area following a series of assaults on agents.

Follow Ildefonso Ortiz on Twitter @ildefonsoortiz.

source

FEDS FLY UNACCOMPANIED MINORS TO ALASKA

8/2/2014

26

509

by KRISTIN TATE 1 Aug 2014 907POST A COMMENT

HOUSTON, Texas--As unaccompanied minors continue to illegally cross the Texas-Mexico border, President Obama's Health and Human Services (HHS) has been quietly releasing them onto U.S. soil. A total of 30,340 unaccompanied minors have already been released from federal custody and placed into foster homes, according to HHS' Office of Refugee and Resettlement (ORR). While many migrants have been released in border states like Texas and California, others have been set free in Alaska. 

A spokesman from HHS confirmed to Breitbart Texas that as of July 7, five unaccompanied minors were released in Alaska. "Between January 1 and July 7, 2014, a total of five minors were discharged from the Unaccompanied Alien Children program to sponsors in Alaska," the spokesman said. 

The trip from McAllen, Texas--where the current border crisis is occurring--to Anchorage, Alaska is a nine and a half hour flight. This is almost double the time it would take to fly the migrants back to their home countries in Central America; a flight from McAllen to El Salvador takes just over five hours, according to Google Maps. 

The federal government's reasons for transporting unaccompanied minors all the way to Alaska are unclear. Some of the minors have also been flown to Hawaii, according to Fox News' Todd Starnes. 

Millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars have been spent flying illegal immigrants to locations around the nation. Breitbart Texas recently revealed that a Department of Homeland Security budget for Fiscal Year 2015 includes more than $87 million for the transportation of illegal immigrants, who are most often flown via charter plane from Southern Texas to shelters located in various U.S. cities. 

Subsequent to a short stay in federal housing facilities, most of the minors are released from custody. They promise to show up at an immigration court hearing at a future date, but many never do. Foster families, or "sponsors," for children migrants are often located through nonprofit organizations at various locations in the U.S. Breitbart Texas has reported closely on the process of becoming a foster parent of a foreign youth--in some cases, sponsors can receive up to $7,400 per month for housing up to six illegal immigrants at a time. The payments are dispersed by the federal government.

"ORR cares for the children in shelters around the country until they can be released to a sponsor, typically a parent or relative, who can care for the child while their immigration case is processed," an HHS webpage says. "Ensuring that a potential sponsor can safely and appropriately care for the child is a top priority.  A background check is conducted on all potential sponsors, and steps are taken to verify a potential sponsor’s identity and relationship to the child.  In some cases where concerns are raised, a home study is done. Before children are released to a sponsor, they receive vaccinations and medical screenings. We do not release any children who have a contagious condition."

Follow Kristin Tate on Twitter @KristinBTate.

source

Pentagon Official: The Facts Are In, And Obama’s Policy Is A Direct Danger To The United States

8/2/2014

Joseph Miller is the pen name for a ranking Department of Defense official with a background in U.S. special operations and combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has worked in strategic planning.

The report is in, and the review of the president’s foreign policy is clear: If there is not an immediate course-reversal, the United States is in serious danger.

In 2013, the United States Institute for Peace, “a congressionally-created, independent, nonpartisan institution whose mission is to prevent, mitigate, and resolve violent conflicts around the world,” was asked to assist the National Defense Panel with reviewing the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The National Defense Panel is a congressional-mandated bipartisan commission that’s co-chairs were appointed by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

On July 31, the National Defense Panel released its long-awaited report on the effects of the QDR and delivered its findings to Congress. The panel pulled no punches — its findings were a scathing indictment of Obama’s foreign policy, national security policy, and defense policy. The panel found that president Barack Obama’s QDR, military force reductions, and trillion-dollar defense budget cuts are dangerous — and will leave the country in a position where it is unable to respond to threats to our nation’s security. This, the panel concluded, must be reversed as soon as possible.

In particular, the report addresses the need for the administration to return to the flexible response doctrine — a policy where the military was tasked with being capable of fighting two wars at the same time. Given the current state of affairs and the threats posed to our nation, the panel felt that the two-war doctrine was still required to meet our nation’s national security challenges. The man-power reductions and budget cuts are both reflections of this change in policy, so it must be altered before that is possible.

So what is the flexible response doctrine, and why is it so important?

In 1961, the Kennedy administration sought to remake U.S. defense doctrine after concluding that former President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “New Look” doctrine, which focused on mutually-assured destruction, was inappropriate for the Cold War. Kennedy decided that the United States would adopt a “Flexible Response Doctrine,” in which we would hold adversaries at bay through strategic deterrence and the ability to fight two wars — plus a smaller conflict — at the same time. That doctrine carried the United States through the Cold War and all of the other so-called shooting wars that followed, despite numerous challenges from nation states and non-state actors alike.

In 2012, the Obama administration decided to change the two-and-a-half war policy of the Flexible Response doctrine, in part due to the nation’s war fatigue, after having been at war for over a decade, and also in response to budgetary constraints exacerbated by a sluggish economy. The administration announced its intentions to significantly reduce the defense budget and re-examine the acquisition of major defense systems and hardware, shaping the future size and scope of the U.S. military. Given that Obama was first elected on an antiwar platform, this decision seems reasonable.

Here’s the problem: At the time the Obama administration announced the change in our defense doctrine, the president was also in front of the cameras threatening to use military force in Iran and Syria, announcing a “strategic pivot” toward Asia to counter a rising China, and swearing to uphold our defense treaties with Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, NATO, etc, all while we were still at war in Afghanistan. How can you threaten to take military action that could start a war when you are already fighting one in Afghanistan if you have changed your military doctrine to only fight one war at a time?

Some detractors may argue that this is a good thing, because it will prevent the president from starting another war. It’s worth pointing out that not all wars are of our choosing. The U.S. went to war twice in the last 50 years because our homeland was attacked by enemy forces. And unlike World War II, the enemy has not been defeated — even though the president plans to withdraw our forces from Afghanistan and has chosen to not take decisive action against these enemies in Iraq, Syria, Africa, etc. — an enemy that still seeks to do us harm. The next war may not be of our choosing. And the enemy has pledged to do just that.

What is even more distressing is that this doctrine will trickle down into military acquisition strategy. The U.S. Navy purchases ships that will be in service for 50 years. That means that the ships we buy today will make up the Navy’s fleet in 2065. The change in military doctrine that Obama directed will have a negative effect on the size and shape of our armed forces for decades to come. With a rising China, a re-emerging Russia, and a continued threat of global terrorism, who knows if at that time, the U.S. will be able to meet the challenges that lie ahead.

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you want.” He was criticized for that remark, but it reflected the reality that he had to go to war with — an Army that had been hollowed out after the Gulf War by the Clinton administration. War is not a video game. You cannot hit the pause button on a crisis and ask the defense industrial base and the armed services to give you what you need to fight a war. That only comes from long-term acquisition strategy driven by doctrine that accurately reflects future threats.

If the administration does not reverse course on its defense strategy and ask congressional Democrats to reverse defense spending cuts, then our nation will find itself in a position where it is unable to defend itself and could become the victim of terrorism on U.S. soil once again.

source

Hillarious: Wasserman-Shultz makes painful admission about Obama's work ethic

8/1/2014

Rep. and Chair of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman Schultz speaks at a rally before first lady Michelle Obama came onstage in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Aug. 22, 2012. (REUTERS/Joe Skipper)

President Obama does his job less often than any commander-in-chief since Grover Cleveland, who held the office in the 19th century.

That’s according to Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was interviewed on MSNBC Wednesday ahead of a Republican-backed measure to sue Obama for overstepping his executive authority, especially in his unilateral actions to implement Obamacare.

But in the interview, Wasserman Schultz, a US congresswoman from Florida, inadvertently agreed with a complaint levied most often by Republicans that Obama has not put much effort into his job.

“I’m going to go to the House floor and actually debate why we shouldn’t be voting for the first time in American history to sue the president of the United States for doing his job, and doing his job actually less often and at a rate that is lower than any other president since Grover Cleveland,” said Wasserman Schultz, while fingering Republicans who she claims “refuse to do anything.”

It is unclear why Wasserman Schultz compared Obama to Cleveland, who was president for two non-consecutive terms from 1885 to 1889 and from 1893 to 1897.

She could be referring to a recent analysis conducted by the Washington Post and the Brookings Institute which found that Obama has resorted to using executive action less often than any president since Cleveland.

But Obama has been criticized heavily for his leisurely pursuits.

According to an analysis by the New York Post, Obama has played golf 185 times since taking office in 2009. He has hit the links 81 times during his second term — more than doubling the rate of his first term.

Obama also spends a lot of time raising money for fellow Democrats. According to the Post, he has attended 75 fundraisers since the 2012 re-election.

Despite the relative rarity in issuing executive orders, Obama has wielded his pen unilaterally on hot-button issues, to the chagrin of Republicans. One example was a 2012 executive order implementing the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy which has provided amnesty to nearly 600,000 illegal immigrants. Recent reports have suggested that Obama may issue new executive orders amid the immigration crisis currently unfolding at the southern U.S. border involving tens of thousands of unaccompanied child immigrants.

On Wednesday, the House voted along party lines, 225-201, to sue Obama. According to the Wall Street Journal, the suit will focus on Obama’s issuance of a one-year delay for the employer health insurance mandate.

WATCH:

(h/t PJ Media)

Statement by Gov. Perry on Congress’ Inability to Advance Border Security Legislation

8/1/2014

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House has abandoned a vote on legislation to address the immigration crisis on the border after tea partyers withdrew their support in a dispute over a separate measure on deportations.

Speaker John Boehner issued a statement Thursday saying the House would continue to work on solutions to the crisis.

His statement came shortly after the House postponed the vote on the final day before a five-week summer break.

In a last-ditch effort to win support, House GOP leaders had agreed to a separate vote on a companion measure that would have blocked President Barack Obama from extending deportation relief to any more immigrants living here illegally.

Conservatives wanted a tougher measure.

---

Statement by Gov. Perry on Congress’ Inability to Advance Border Security Legislation

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry today issued the following statement on the failure of Congress to advance border security legislation.

“It’s beyond belief that Congress is abandoning its post while our border crisis continues to create humanitarian suffering, and criminal aliens still represent a clear threat to our citizens and our nation. While Texas has taken what steps it can to mitigate the damage caused by a porous border, Congress and the President have a duty to address our border security issues without further delay. Congress should not go into recess until the job is completed.”

---

Statement by Congressman Filemon Vela (D-Brownsville) 

I am strongly opposed to the Republican Border Supplemental bill. This proposed legislation strips due process rights from immigrant children and makes funds available to deploy the National Guard to the U.S.-Mexico border. As of 5 p.m. Thursday, Republican leadership had not brought this bill to the floor due to a lack of votes by their own caucus.  Instead of going on a month long recess in August, Congress needs to stay to address this issue and work on a bill that truly addresses the root problems.
 
This bill should provide the needed resources to address cartel activity in Central America, Mexico and across the U.S. The bill should support Customs and Border Protection by providing them the necessary tools, technology and funding to increase the number of agents and support personnel.
 
Finally, the bill should fund the immigration court system to allow for speedier determinations pursuant to current law while protecting due process rights afforded to these children by the U.S. Constitution.

---

Statement by Congressman Ruben Hinojosa (D-Mercedes)

"Simply put Republicans cannot get their act together and once again are making Americans pay for their mistakes. For years, my Republican colleagues have been ignoring the problems caused by their inaction on immigration reform.  They have cut funding for immigration judges so that people wait years to have their cases heard.  They have cut funding to help the countries of Central America deal with the internal problems causing their children to flee.  Their solution has always been more walls, more fences and more soldiers. Worst of all, they try to railroad a bill through Congress that is inadequate and a disgrace to humanity. Their bill did not offer enough funding to reimburse our communities. Their bill does not protect due process rights for children and juveniles fleeing the violence in Central America. Democrats have presented a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would address many of the issues we face today, but Republicans will not bring that bill to the floor. Instead of Speaker Boehner suing the President, we should sue the Speaker of the House for not doing his job. Now we will wait and see what Republicans have to offer on Friday."

source