‘We don’t want World War III!’ says Judge Jeanine Pirro in her 9/7/2013 opening statement to you guessed it Barack Obama. Sit back and watch the judge rip Obama for his reaction to the situation in Syria and throughout the Middle East.
Daily Archives: September 7, 2013
Obama’s Allies in Syria: Al Qaeda, ‘Highwaymen, Kidnappers, and Killers’
Breitbart reported: On September 5, Al Qaeda-linked Syrian rebels began waging their second day of war against Christians in the village of Maaloula, while The New York Times reported brutalities committed by other rebels against captured Syrian soldiers.
Geneva convention demands do not even enter into the minds of these men, yet they are the same forces Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has demanded the U.S. support and they are those with whom the United States will at least tacitly ally if President Obama launches a strike against Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
As the battle in the village of Maaloula became entrenched on September 4, insurgents from Al Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front surrounded a church. Judging from the behavior of other Islamists against Christians, the watching world expected the church to be burned to the ground. Instead, the insurgents retreated for the night and returned on September 5. They now war against the Christians who hold the village.
Regarding the methods of torture and execution being used against Syrian troops, the NYT says “gangs of highwaymen, kidnappers, and killers” form portions of the rebel forces that are not Al Qaeda affiliated. Their brutality knows no end.
In a video provided by the NYT, seven captured Syrian soldiers were made to lie face-down in front of their rebel captors who swore revenge and then shot the soldiers one at time in the back of the head: their bodies were then collectively pushed into a hole in the ground.
Earlier this week, Secretary of State John Kerry told members of Congress, “I just don’t believe that a majority [of rebels] are Al Qaeda and bad guys.” Instead, he believes only a quarter of the rebel forces are linked to Al Qaeda or the “bad guys.”
Allen West: Bomb Iran Instead of Syria
In a recent appearance on “Hannity,” former C0ngressman Allen West stated the following:
“If this is a proxy war, and understand, before there was al Qaeda there was Hezbollah, who killed 238 Marines in Beirut-they were supported by Iran. Iran is really the center, the nerve center, and sometimes you have to go after the head, and I think that if you want to the right thing, strategically, you maybe want to focus against Iran, so that you don’t give them the initiative.”
Sean Hannity and Col. Allen West were in agreement last night that an isolated military strike on Syria is not the best course of action, fearing, among other outcomes, that the attack could spark an Iranian retaliation against our ally Israel. Hannity voiced his distrust of Iran and why he thinks a strike on the nation would be a better option.
Their ideology is – they are the modern day Nazis. They want a modern-day Holocaust. So if you agree with me that they are the proxy here, wouldn’t it make sense that if we really wanted to have an impact, rather than lob a few cruise missiles into Syria, which I don’t think would be very effective, based on days, not weeks, and no boots on the ground, why don’t we do what we should do and that’s take out Iran’s nuclear sites?”
Col. Allen West shared Hannity’s concern about Iran, as well as his solution.
“Iran is really the center, the nerve center and sometimes you have to go after the head and I think that if you want to do the right thing strategically, you maybe want to focus against Iran so that you don’t give them the initiative.”
Fox News contributor Juan Williams, however, disagreed with Hannity and West on the grounds that Iran “has not directly attacked us or our allies.” Williams may be right, but Iran’s support of anti-Western terrorism and its history of anti-Israel rhetoric raises more than a few red flags if the nation ever gains possession of nuclear weapons.
Hannity also criticized President Obama’s plan to strike Syria as ineffective, suggesting a few days old, no-boots-on-the-ground attack would not accomplish much.
“All this symbolic pinprick stuff is just silly to me.”
Do agree with West that Iran should be bombed, not Syria? Please respond below or on our Facebook page.
Federal Wages Rising Faster Than Private Sector Wages
Breitbart reported: It is fitting that Labor Day is a federal holiday, given that under a supposed wage freeze from 2010 to 2012 the average base salary for federal workers increased by 10% to $78,467. Over the same period, private sector workers’ wages rose by only 4.6% to$45,790.
Most assume these differences are due to unionization rates, but only a little over one third of federal civilian workers are actually unionized. The reason government workers’ wages rise faster than those of private sector workers is that under current law, federal workers are guaranteed periodic step increases for seniority. So while there was not much for private sector workers to celebrate this Labor Day, it was party time for federal employees who make 71% more.
Union membership rates for all wage and salary workers in 2012 were 11.3%, down from 11.8% in 2011. Only 35.9% of federal workers—a little over one third—are unionized, and according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there have been no major labor strikes in America as of 30 July 2013.
The real reason for the increasing pay advantages of federal workers is they are guaranteed under the General Schedule Law to receive “periodic step-increases” forseniority, on top of any performance promotions and inflation adjustments normally available to private sector workers. They receive automatic seniority pay raises in each of their first three years of service, a pay raise every two years for the next six years, and a pay raise every three years for the next six years. They are required to perform “acceptable” work, but just .06% of those eligible were denied increases in 2009. Despite pay freezes, about 20% of federal workers still received a raise each year.
Two years ago, Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) tried to do away with the periodic step-increases that have been used by federal agencies to set compensation rates for the last sixty years. The goal of the reform, according to his spokesman Kurt Bardella, was to create “a system that rewards good work, removes poor performers, and keeps pace with the private sector.” Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry called for “entirely eliminating classification for federal employees,” which would mean doing away with the General Schedule completely.
Colleen M. Kelley, President of the National Treasury Employees Union, said Issa’s amendment “unfairly singles out federal employees allegedly in the name of deficit reduction. In fact, it would have little to no impact on the deficit but would have a great impact of the ability of federal agencies to retain skilled employees, recruit promising new employees and meet their missions.”
Despite rapid escalation of federal wages and salaries over the last three years, the Federal Salary Council’s annual report claims that on a comparison basis from 2001 to 2009, job-to-job federal wages fell from a negative 21% to a negative 26% below private sector wages. However, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported average federal salaries rose 47% from 2000 to 2009, while private sector wages rose only 29% in the same period.
These comparisons of federal and private pay do not account for the vastly superior benefits received by government workers. Federal workers receive health insurance, retirement health benefits, a pension plan with inflation protection, a retirement savings plan with a government match, generous holiday and vacation days, flexible work hours, training options, incentive awards, and generous disability benefits protections. The Bureau of Economic Analysis calculated that in 2012, federal employee benefits were worth $33,271 a year, versus just $10,921 for the private sector.
The federal government does need competent workers for federal jobs and those workers should be reasonably paid, but is a $55,057 average premium for higher wages and benefits for federal workers over private sector workers really reasonable?
The United States of America will run about a $1 trillion dollar deficit this year, and the total debt of the federal government is at $17.2 trillion. An important piece of that deficit is the $248 billion in wages and benefits paid to federal executive branch civilians this year.
As the Cato Institute stated, “The federal workforce has become an elite island of secure and high-paid workers separated from the ocean of average American workers competing in the global economy.” I did not notice many Labor Day parades this year, probably because federal employees had their own private parade on that elite island.
Conservative Angle Archives 
You must be logged in to post a comment.