DELEITURAS

The Department of Defense announced today the deaths of one soldier, one sailor and one DOD civilian who were supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.

The deceased are:

• Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Jonathan R. Farmer, 37, of Boynton Beach, Florida. Farmer was assigned to 3rd Battalion, 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
• Navy Chief Cryptologic Technician (Interpretive) Shannon M. Kent, 35, of upstate New York. Kent was assigned to Cryptologic Warfare Activity 66, based at Fort George G. Meade, Maryland.
• DOD civilian Scott A. Wirtz of St. Louis, Missouri. Wirtz was assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency as an operations support specialist.
• Farmer, Kent and Wirtz died Jan. 16, 2019, in Manbij, Syria, as a result of wounds sustained from a suicide improvised explosive device.

The incident is under investigation.

For more information regarding Chief Warrant Officer 2 Jonathan R. Farmer, media may contact Lt. Col. Loren Bymer, U.S. Army Special Operations Command Public Affairs, at 910-432-3383 or [email protected]

The Journal of Medical Ethics published an article this month that has many people questioning the value some may put on the human life. The abstract from The Journal of Medical Ethics article states:

“Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”

We’ve all heard the tale of a person who, suddenly finds himself with unwanted kittens or puppies, puts them in a sack tossing it in the river. Pet lovers everywhere hate this idea. They work tirelessly to save the animals, finding them good homes rather than early demise. Why? Because kittens grow into cats. We know to what family they belong.

Is the idea of killing a newborn any less repugnant? Has our society changed so much that we consider a newborn irrelevant just because we don’t want to be troubled with caring for it? Is infanticide or post-birth abortion equal to killing? Where do we draw the line? It is a slippery slope when we try to decide the value of a life. Why should an infant, of unknown potential be of less value than a bedridden elderly person?  If a child…or an adult becomes brain injured should he be terminated?

Pro-life people have long argued that birth–on one side or the other–does not change the person-hood of the infant. International law follows that all human beings, regardless of age, are members of the human family and have equal rights to life. But these rules aren’t followed everywhere. Instead, many countries already acknowledge infanticide as a continuation of the abortion process. In the Netherlands where it is estimated 8% of infant deaths come at the hands of their own doctors infanticide is an acceptable option if a newborn has a poor prognosis for an ‘acceptable quality of life.’  Other countries have accepted the position that just being born a girl is reason enough for death. In Canada a woman was given a suspended sentence after killing her infant son; the judge stating that the unwanted pregnancy and childbirth placed onerous demands on the woman.

The authors question whether it is in the best interest of the child to be placed in an adoptive situation. Yes, there are times when natural and adoptive parents, foster families and other guardians misplace the trust placed in them and do not offer children the best opportunities they can. Is death the preferential option just because there is a possibility of problems? We watch with horror news stories of children killed by the parent. We rise up, en mass, and demand the parent be punished. But what makes them different from one who chooses an after-birth ‘abortion’? Is there a difference? What age does one gain ‘person-hood’? Can it be lost due to a traumatic event? Do human rights depend on the ‘capacity’ of the person? (It is worth doing a web search for people who survived abortion. People who are here with tremendous gifts and talents in a life that could have been extinguished all too quickly.)

We must answer these questions and more. Is an infant a person? Is personal convenience an acceptable reason for infanticide? We need to decide whether life is sacred. If we don’t; others will decide for us and no life will be off limits.

Several big name Democratic politicians are calling on Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam to resign following a racist picture that appeared on a page set aside for him in his 1984 medical school yearbook.

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand were some of the Democrats who called on Northam to resign. The picture showed one person wearing blackface and another in a Ku Klux Klan costume in Northam’s section of the yearbook.

Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who will be running for president in 2020, said Northam must resign if he cannot “win back” trust in a tweet on Sunday. She added, however, that there needs to be space for people to “evolve away from hatred and bigotry.”

Gabbard previously called on Congress to take “action immediately” to censure Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King over his questions on how the terms “white nationalist” and “white supremacist” became offensive.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also called out King, but has not commented on Northam at the time of reporting.

Northam apologized for the picture appearing in the Eastern Virginia Medical School yearbook Friday, but then denied being in the picture in a Saturday press conference.

Warren, Booker, Gabbard, Ocasio-Cortez and Gillibrand did not immediately respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

Children two-years-old and under watched more than twice as much TV in 2014 than in 1997 even with the rise of other technology like smartphones and tablets, according to study published online Monday.

The study, “Assessment of Screen Exposure in Young Children, 1997 to 2004,” found children two and under on average watched TV for 30 minutes in 1997 while that number increased to more than 2.5 hours in 2014. Children were also exposed to 1.32 hours of a screen in 1997 while that number rose to 3.05 hours in 2014.

Screen time in 1997 was time spent on any activity while watching TV shows, videotapes, electronic video games and computers. Cell phones, smartphones, tablets, electronic readers, and children’s learning devices got added to the list in 2014, according to the study.

“I was surprised, because I thought the screen time increase would be driven by the time spent on mobile devices,” head researcher and Florida International University assistant professor Weiwei Chen said to The Daily Caller News Foundation over email. “Instead, I find a large increase in the time spent on TV. And TV was still the dominant screen device among the studied young children in 2014.”

Chen added that more recent data might show “the time children spent on mobile devices today is probably more than that in 2014.”

Lee Humphreys, an associate professor of Communication at Cornell University, said one of the reasons children could have watched more TV in 2014 was there were more TV channels geared toward kids than in 1997. Shows are also faster paced than before.

Whether increasing screen times is harmful to children is still debated, however.

The first wave of data from the National Institute of Health (NIH) study found kids exposed to screens — like those on smartphones and tablets — for more than two hours a day had lower scores on language and thinking tests.

Dr. Dimitri Christakis, lead author of the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines on screen time, also discovered infants under two were more vulnerable to smartphone addiction than teenagers because the “experience of making something happen is so much more gratifying to them [infants],” “60 Minutes” reported in December 2018.

Humphreys, however, said more media exposure does not have to be negative, especially if parents are watching the shows with their children.

“The content available to them [kids] is actually, relatively, gotten a lot better in terms of its educational value,” Humphreys said.

There were 1327 younger than six-years-old who finished a time diary in 1997 and 443 kids in the same age group for 2014, according to the study.

Nobody except Barack Obama himself has been as responsible for the utterly failed “reset” (read: appeasement) policy towards Russia, the disastrous results of which are now available for the entire world to see.

From Ukraine to Iran, to Syria, to Cuba, to the Snowden affair, Vladimir Putin’s Russia has successfully defeated the US and undermined US national interests at every turn while arming and emboldening America’s enemies everywhere. The Russian military now occupies all of the Crimea, a Russian spy ship has docked in Cuba, the Iranian nuclear program is proceeding apace, North Korea is testing ballistic missiles, Bashar al-Assad continues to murder his own people while refusing to turn over his chemical weapons.

These are the disastrous results of the “reset” (read: appeasement) policy towards Russia which Obama and Hillary Clinton, then Obama’s Secretary of State, inaugurated in 2009.

Hardly surprising, then, that Hillary’s supporters are now desperately rushing to defeat Hillary’s utterly failed and disastrous foreign policy record, while simoultaneously denying that there was any serious trouble in the years 2008-2012, when Dmitry Medvedev (Putin’s puppet) was President of Russia.

Just recently, the ridiculously-named “Correct the Record” group (which should be called “Falsify the Record”, because that’s what it actually does), through its communications director Adienne Elrod, falsely claimed that:

“Secretary Clinton worked to successfully secure Russia’s cooperation toward anti-terrorism efforts in Afghanistan, and worked with Russia to secure critical, crippling sanctions against Iran. Not to mention, Secretary Clinton oversaw passage and enactment of the New START Treaty reducing nuclear weapons and making us all safer. This is another case of selective memory lapses by Republican opportunists.”

These are all blatant lies. Here’s an ACTUAL correction of the record – which is badly needed, so that Hillary Clinton does not get away with her treason against the US and her disastrous foreign policy record:

• The New START  is a disastrous and treasonous treaty which is making America dramatically LESS secure, not more, by requiring dramatic cuts in America’s deployed nuclear arsenal while also constraining America’s missile defense programs (and Hillary has lied to the Congress by claiming the contrary). The only country required to cut its nuclear arsenal under New START is the US – not Russia. Moscow is allowed to GROW its strategic nuclear arsenal under the treaty, and its tactical nuclear arsenal – estimated at up to 4,000 warheads and their various delivery systems – is not covered by the treaty at all.
• Therefore, Hillary Clinton and her supporters should be deeply ASHAMED of Clinton’s support for New START. Negotiating it and ramming it through the Senate was an act of treason. Lying to the Congress in support of New START was a criminal act.
• Moreover, the New START is, in any case, utterly useless because Russia has NEVER complied with ANY arms control treaty it has signed. Since 2009, it has tested and/or deployed several types of land-based intermediate range missiles banned by the INF Treaty.
• As for Iran, Russia never supported (and still opposes) any serious sanctions against that country. No “crippling” sanctions have ever been imposed on the Islamic Republic – whether before, during, or after Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. Hardly surprising, then, that under Clinton’s tenure, the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program proceeded apace, without interruption – the mullahs’ will was never broken by the pathetically weak sanctions Russia did agree to. This was BEFORE Obama, with a new Secretary of State (John Kerry), lifted the sanctions this year.
• On Afghanistan, Russia’s cooperation has been very meagre – allowing NATO to use Russian transit lines to that country – and it had been going on long before Clinton arrived at the State Department. It had been going on ever since 2002. Clinton had nothing with this. Russia has cooperated with the US (in a limited way) on Afghanistan because it is in Russia’s own interest to prevent the Taleban’s return – even more so than in America’s interest.

But Hillary’s foreign policy record as SecState is even much worse than that:

• Under the “reset”, Clinton and Obama made an entire slew of unilateral concessions to Russia, from cancelling plans to deploy missile defense systems in the Czech Republic and Poland (promised to those countries), to ignoring Vladimir Putin’s outrageous human rights abuses, to ignoring repeated simulated Russian nuclear strikes on the US and its allies, to ignoring Russia’s repeated violations of arms control treaties.
• Hillary has also turned a blind eye to human rights violations everywhere else, not raising a peep in public about this and publicly subordinating human rights to “climate change” in talks with China, one of the worst human rights offenders in the world.
• Hillary appeased China, not raising a peep about its massive military buildup and increasingly aggressive behavior, either, thus emboldening China to continue this course while worrying America’s allies. Now China claims the entire South China Sea as its internal lake, has declared an ADIZ there, and overtly threatens US allies and partners, including Japan and the Philippines.
• Hillary has also allowed China to join (as an observer) the Arctic Council, a council of countries having access to the Arctic Ocean, where China does not belong (but wants to be, in order to access the Arctic Ocean’s vast natural resources).
• Under Hillary, the State Department has resumed funding for the UN Family Planning Fund, which pays for coercive abortions in countries like China. Indeed, as Secretary of State, Hillary campaigned vigorously for “abortion rights” around the world.
• Under Hillary, the US also loosened sanctions on the criminal regime of Raul Castro, and President Obama personally met with that thug.
• Under Hillary, the US turned a blind eye to the bloodshed committed by Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad against his own people, starting in 2011 – two years before Clinton left the State Department.
• Under Hillary, the US did, however, support populist, Islamic fundamentalist revolutions against other Arab dictators, most of whom were America’s friends, including those in Tunisia and Egypt, paving the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to seize the latter country. Egypt has been saved only thanks to its military – which now sees Moscow, not Washington, as its ally. You can thank Hillary and Obama for that.
• And of course, under Hillary, the US Consulate in Benghazi was attacked, and four Americans, including the US Ambassador to Libya, were murdered with impunity. Clinton never provided any security to that consulate. Then, when testifying to the Congress about the attack, Clinton asked, “What difference does it make?”

In short, during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as SecState, appeasement of America’s enemies, especially Russia and China, combined with America’s unilateral disarmament through treasonous treaties and budgetary defense cuts, became America’s official foreign policy.

This is the policy Hillary advocated before and during her tenure as Secretary of State.

The current Russian aggression against Ukraine is nothing but an inevitable and direct consequence of that disastrous policy. No amount of wishful thinking, liberal lies, or fairytale stories will change that fact.

By advocating and implementing that disastrous, utterly failed policy, deceptively called “the reset”, Hillary and Obama brought about the current crisis and are completely responsible for it. And decent Americans MUST NOT allow Hillary to avoid responsibility for that disaster.

The basic principle on which world politics operates on is quite simple: weakness and appeasement only invite aggression, while building up strength and showing willingness to use it prevent war and guarantee peace. Sadly, the Left will never learn that lesson.

Americans need to be aware of the real threats that China and Russia pose to U.S. capabilities in space.

Space is integral to America’s economic and commercial success. Space is now also considered a wartime domain on par with land, sea, air and cyber.

Space forms the basis for America’s military advantages, and the country cannot allow those to decay or be overtaken, according to a Defense Intelligence Agency report titled “Challenges to Security in Space.”

Space is the enabling domain for many capabilities, from hand-held devices to precision navigation. America’s economic well-being relies on space including banking transactions large and small. Utility companies depend on space.

Any adversary would do well to cripple America’s capabilities in space.

China and Russia — and to a lesser extent, North Korea and Iran — are developing counterspace technologies that could cripple America’s satellite constellations and networks. China and Russia are working on ground-based systems, electromagnetic jamming, lasers and other anti-satellite capabilities to counter America’s advantage in space.

They have also developed the command and control systems needed to deploy these capabilities as weapons.

The DIA report gives Americans an unclassified explanation of what is at risk in this new world. Read it here.

Orders at U.S. factories for durable goods rose in June despite constant media reports fretting over President Donald Trump’s negotiating tactics on trade.

The Commerce Department reported Thursday that durable goods – items meant to last at least three years, like appliances – rose 1 percent in June. Excluding transportation manufacturers, orders were up 0.4%, the fifth straight monthly gain.

Trump is using tariffs to force trading partners back to the negotiating table as their unfair trade practices have resulted in the loss of good-paying American manufacturing jobs over the past few decades. Yesterday, officials from the EU met with the Trump administration. Trump then announced that Europe had made concessions on trade that would allow them to negotiate towards free trade.

Europe had disengaged from trade talks with the Obama administration and without the threat of new tariffs on automobiles would likely have been able to continue unfair trade restrictions against American goods.

Canada and China are still holding out despite the threat of increased tariffs while Mexico has signaled that it is ready to hammer out a deal with reciprocal trade policies.

Orders for most manufactured goods remain healthy, evidence that the trade spat has yet to restrain the American economy.

American diplomatic facilities around the globe are being attacked and set fire as protest grows over everything from the Pope’s visit to Lebanon to the killing of Al-Qaida’s second-in-command. Despite the Obama administration’s condemnation of the an American-produced youtube video trailer that displays the Islamic prophet Mohammed in a negative light, the protests seem to be largely-fueled by the recent publicity the video has received. The video was released in July.

Lebanon: Protesters set a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant ablaze in protest to the Pope’s visit to Lebanon. One protester has been killed and 25 wounded in clashes with police.

Sudan: Protesters broke into the German embassy, removed the German flag and replaced it with the now-familiar black, Islamic religious flag. The embassy is now reportedly on fire. At least one protester killed.

Libya: U.S. Ambassador, staff member and two former Navy Seals killed at Consulate on 9-11 and Consulate burned down. Four people have been arrested in connection to the attack, but Libyan officials say that the suspects are not directly connected to the killings.

Yemen: Hundreds of protesters storm the U.S. embassy in San’a. One protester shot and killed by Yemeni security forces.

Iraq: Protesters in the Sadr City district of northeast Baghdad carried banners and pictures of radical Shiite and anti-American cleric Muqtada

Egypt: Egyptian security forces pushed protesters back to Tahrir square on Thursday after four days of protest at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. Thursday’s protests included crowd-thrown fire bombs and rocks.

Afghanistan: An hour-long protest of the youtube video was held in the Nangarhar province. The Afghan government has indefinitely blocked the entirety of youtube to prevent further violence.

Syria: Hundreds gathered in protest of the American government’s failure to prevent the production of the youtube video and the film it portrays. Buses and cars carrying protesters are now heading to the U.S. Embassy outside of Khartoum.

India: Thousands are holding protest in the Kashmir region. Protesters are calling President Obama a “real terrorist” and chanting “Down with America. Down with Israel.” Five top separatist leaders have been put under house arrest.

Fire near/at U.S. Embassy in Tunis

Tunisia:Fire reported near U.S. Embassy in Tunis. 3 dead, 28 wounded after protesters attacked the embassy.

U.K.: American flag being burned among hundreds of protesters at American embassy in London.

Oman: Protest occurring in front of U.S. embassy.

Sinai Peninsula: U.N. Peacekeeping forces attacked by anti-American protesters.

Mauritania: U.S. Personnel told to avoid embassy and BMCI bank area due to large anti-American protest.

Whether you’re a cord-cutter or just use streaming services to find movies you somehow missed, Hanna takes on the onerous task of watching movies that may be good on the free screen but perhaps only because they’re free.

Precious Cargo is a 2016 straight-to-small-screen widget from the Oasis films factory of mediocre movies. Granted, Oasis did manage Lone Survivor and … um .. well, everything else is pretty much a b-movie action film streamer’s dream – free, fast-action, bad dialogue and full of b-list hot guys, hot women and lots of fast cars and exploding stuff.

The movie is kind of a budget version of the Ocean’s series. Gang of criminals trying to rip off a crime boss/casino magnate. It’s the same idea with more gunplay and less wit.

Bruce Willis got top billing despite making little more than cameo appearances as Eddie the crime boss who just shows up to threaten people by phone or in person. His appearances are odd if you’re trying to take the movie seriously but they add – albeit little – depth to the plotline.

Lead man Jack (Mark-Paul Gosselaar) is a criminal that specializes in stealing from international weapons dealers and thieves with the backing of his marksman companion Logan played by Jenna B. Kelly (Extraction.)

The film starts out presenting an oddly constructed love triangle between Jack, the girl-next-door Jenna (Lydia Hull) and his maniacal ex-girlfriend Karen (Claire Forlani) who spends the entirety of the movie getting Jack into dangerous heists that she is unable to complete on her own.

The center plot is Jack pulling in cohorts and compatriots to magically complete dangerous heists that Karen is unable to complete on her own.

Karen’s failed jobs and ambitions put Jack and Logan in the sights of Eddie (Bruce Willis) who, while barely in the movie, is a ruthless opponent who knows Karen all too well.

Full of car/boat chases, a virtual cornucopia of gunfire, and a  generous topping of stuff blowing up, this Oasis offering matches up with its predecessors: Extraction, Arsenal, and a plethora of similar films that have some cast members you’ll recognize from Precious Cargo.

The film is one I would have hated if I had spent ticket+popcorn and soda to see, but as an action film fan and a streaming service addict – this one gets the rating of couch worthy on Hanna’s scale of Streaming Movie Reviews.

Couch Worthy: If you’re just looking for something to watch that won’t break the bank, these movies do the trick. Grab some chips, plop on the sofa and light these up to relax and blow a few hours.

President Donald Trump’s administration is pushing back on a media report that claimed no new walls had been built along the southern border with Mexico.

The Daily Mail published a story on Thursday that said the Trump has built “ZERO new walls despite claiming otherwise for months,” citing a statement from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) spokesman Roger Maier.

Maier told the British publication that the “first new wall project, where no barrier currently exists, is anticipated to start in April.”

A senior administration official took issue with the Daily Mail’s framing. Building walls where there were gaps or only small or ineffective non-wall barriers before is, by definition, building new walls, that official told The Daily Caller News Foundation on Friday.

Maier also released a statement to TheDCNF on Friday, stating that the administration has built “new border wall,” where non-wall barriers had previously existed.

“CBP has built and continues to build new border wall along the Southwest border. To date, CBP has built 38 miles of new border wall system in San Diego and Calexico, California, Santa Teresa, New Mexico and El Paso, Texas,” Maier said.

“This new wall provides new capability by replacing ineffective or dilapidated infrastructure, such as Normandy-style barriers designed only to stop vehicles, not people on foot. This ongoing construction is part of about 115 miles of new border wall system underway using FY2017 and FY2018 funding. FY19 funding also provides for about 55 miles of new border wall,” added Maier.

The disconnect between the Daily Mail’s story and the Trump administration’s position hinges on whether replacing non-wall barriers with walls counts as “new wall.”

TheDCNF has reached out to Daily Mail reporter David Martosko, the author of the story in question, for comment.

CBP released a video on Monday showing that the agency had built two miles of “bollard wall” in CBP’s El Centro Sector in California, “immediately west of the Calexico Port of Entry.” That project replaced old fencing with the “bollard wall.”