15 Muslim Migrants Arrested In Italy After Hurling 12 Christian Refuges Off Boat

A massive influx of refuges and migrants from war-torn and impoverished African nations have been making their way across the Mediterranean from Libya to Sicily. According to the Italian Coast Guard, more than 10,000 people have made the desperate journey on rickety, often un-sea-worthy boats since last weekend.

CNN reports that as many as 400 migrants have been lost at sea.

The tragedy adds to the mounting death toll among those fleeing war and poverty in Africa and the Middle East.

So far this year as many as 900 have lost their lives. Last year at least 3,200 died making the journey. Since 2000, according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), almost 22,000 people have died fleeing across the Mediterranean.

12 Christian refuges lost their lives during a particularly harrowing trip — not due to their boat capsizing – but through Islamic violence.

The IB Times reports:

Italian police have arrested 15 Muslim immigrants in Palermo, for allegedly having thrown Christian refugees off the rubber boat that was taking them to Italy after a fight for “religious reasons”, according to media reports.

Those arrested – from Mali, Guinea and Ivory Coast – were part of a group of 100 that were rescued off the Libyan coast by the Italian coastguard.

After their arrival in Palermo, the other migrants informed police that 12 Christian refugees were hurled off the boat and killed after a religious row with the 15 Muslims that were later arrested. Among the arrested is a 17-year-old, according to Repubblica newspaper.

Deal or No Deal?: Iranian Supreme Leader Says No Deal With “Devilish” US

Although the White House has been touting a nuclear framework “deal” with Iran, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the other sides of the talks – the Iranians and the Europeans — do not share their enthusiasm. 

Yesterday, an Iranian Defense Minister accused the Obama administration of lying because key elements in the White House Fact sheet were not agreed upon.

Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan categorically rejected as a “lie” a Guardian report alleging that Tehran has granted access to its military facilities under the recent framework agreement with the world powers.

“No such agreement has been made; principally speaking, visit to military centers is among our redlines and no such visit will be accepted,” Gen. Dehqan stressed on Wednesday, rejecting “the report by foreign media outlets, such as the Guardian” as “untruthful allegations”…

Today, Iranian “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said he neither backed nor rejected the deal, but “demanded all sanctions be lifted immediately once a final agreement was concluded.”

He added in a televised speech that the details of the accord would be decisive, and the publication of a US fact sheet showing terms that were at variance with the Iranian view of the agreement showed “devilish” US intentions…

“The White House put out a statement just a few hours after our negotiators finished their talks…this statement, which they called a ‘fact sheet’, was wrong on most of the issues.”

The official explanation does little to quell suspicions that the White House is deliberately misrepresenting what Iran promised in order to make the deal more palatable to Americans. In fact, it seems to confirm those suspicions.

American officials acknowledge that they did not inform the Iranians in advance of all the “parameters” the United States would make public in an effort to lock in progress made so far, as well as to strengthen the White House’s case against any move by members of Congress to impose more sanctions against Iran.

“We talked to them and told them that we would have to say some things,” said a senior administration official who could not be identified under the protocol for briefing reporters. “We didn’t show them the paper. We didn’t show them the whole list.”

The official acknowledged that it was “understood that we had different narratives, but we wouldn’t contradict each other.”

Well, it turns out that the Obama Regime’s “narrative” was so outside the perimeters of what was agreed upon, the Iranians couldn’t play along. And “Iran’s Supreme Leader”, Ayatollah Khamenei doesn’t appreciate being Grubered by these American shysters.

And via Legal Insurrection,  Khamenei, took to Twitter to call the Obama administration a bunch of untrustworthy liars.”

So once again – we’re confronted with the spectacle of an Alinsky-trained, ends justify the means, Community Organizing president engaging in what we have taken to calling “Gruberism” –  that is – lying one’s ass off to further an agenda. Only this time it’s on an international stage – for everyone in the world to see.

And Americans are forced into the awkward position of having to agree with the mad Mullahs – “Yeah, the devilish Obama administration is lying again. You really can’t trust them.”

Somebody wake me up when this nightmare is over.

“Stunning”: Media rips Hillary Clinton over email scandal

This Washington Free Beacon “supercut” highlights the media firestorm over Hillary Clinton’s shady email practices whilst Sec. of State.

Unlike most other Obama-era scandals – EVERYONE is talking about it.

I put “stunning” in sneer-quotes because this is not stunning at all. The liberal media do not want another Clinton in the White House, PERIOD –  with all those bad memories of constant scandals having to be ignored or defended…. All those mortifying stories they were forced to pretend were not a big deal… Her checkered distant and no-so distant past now already coming back to haunt her…. Hillary is damaged goods.

Defending Obama in the face of his lawlessness, duplicity and corruption is probably doing them all sorts of psychic pain. His Praetorian media have almost two more years to go of defending the indefensible, and it must be getting old. Those who still retain some semblance of a soul, are getting worn down.

The Democrat party today is run like a criminal organization, so you would think their media water-carriers would be comfortable with covering up scandals – and of course – many of them do quite willfully and cheerfully do embrace that – but more and more they make themselves look ridiculous in doing so.

In the beginning of the Obama era – the media could paint his critics as haters, racists, conspiracy-mongers, “RWNJs” etc – because he was still an unknown quantity (to most Americans.) It was a free-for-all for the left and they enjoyed every minute of it. But those Obama-worshiping days are (for the most part) over.  Now that the public has lived under King Putt’s divisive, scandal-ridden, disastrous, imperial reign for six years, the critics can no longer be scoffed at.

Hillary still has some loyalists in the media who are willing to carry her water. But the dominant voices want to moveon.org.

Backers of the fundamental transformation want a fresh face to take the driver’s seat in 2017.

War-Bonnet-Warren

Lizzie Warren is the Change They Believe In, now – and she is the present Regime’s choice.

Hillary is toast, whether she realizes it, or not.

UPDATE:

You can put Politico in the pro-Hillary camp.

Ace of Spades HQ: TMZ Dares to Ask Hillary a Question About EmailGate; Politico Brands This Uncouth Act of Journalism “Stalking”

Hot Air: Video: U.S. media outlet goes rogue, asks would-be president about her crooked recordkeeping

po

SEE ALSO:

WFB: MSNBC: Clinton’s Email Tweet is Nonsense, ‘Insulting To Americans’ Intelligence’

WFB: Experts: Clinton Bought ‘High-End Security’ but Forgot Last Step, Left Server Vulnerable

WFB: ABC: Clinton’s Email Disclosure ‘Going to Be on the Honor System’

The Washington Examiner: Why can’t Hillary Clinton take questions from the press

Fox News Reveals Documents Detailing Obama’s “Constitutionally Odious” Amnesty (Video)

I’m gonna start calling it “cram-nesty” because that’s what it is – the usurper cramming another grossly unpopular policy down the nation’s throat.

Via Fox News Insider:

As part of the 10-point plan, up to 4.5 million illegal immigrants living with their American born kids would be allowed to stay in the U.S., an expansion of deferred action. The plan would also expand deferred action for DACA children. There is also a proposal to raise pay for ICE officers to boost morale.

The plan would also allow family members of illegal immigrants another avenue for citizenship through the military’s delayed entry program. Sources say this avenue will likely be exploited, with people joining the military, then not showing up for boot camp.

Other proposals include a 50-percent discount to the first 10,000 naturalization applicants, 500,000 technology jobs through the State Department visa program, and increased border security.

Later during the panel discussion, Charles Krauthammer called the plan “constitutionally odious.”

He said the proposal is an advertisement to the world that you can come into America illegally, and if you wait long enough, we will legalize you.

Can we talk about impeachment now? Empty talk and huffing and puffing is not going to do a thing to stop a tyrannical president.

SEE ALSO: 

Twitchy: Executive action on amnesty? Laura Ingraham braces for ‘war on America’s middle class & working poor’ 

Apparently the ass-kicking they received a week ago wasn’t strong enough.

Big Government: Father Asks Obama to Use Executive Order to Bring Son Slain by Illegal Alien Back to Life

“While your Executive Order pad is out, can you write one to bring my son and the tens of thousands (actually over 100,000) killed by illegal aliens back to life and to bring our destroyed families back together?” asks Don Rosenberg in a letter to Obama. His son Drew was killed by an illegal alien who ran over him in 2010.

In the letter, Rosenberg notes that President Obama’s administration refused to deport the illegal alien who killed his son.

Must Read: Desert Storm Vet Hammers Obama Administration For Abandoning Iraq

fsib

The approach of Veteran’s Day got Desert Storm vet Michael Banzet to ruminating about his decision to retire from the Air Force after the elections of 2008. He wrote a powerful oped, Why I quit… Desert Storm vet explains decision to leave Air Force after 22 years that was published in his hometown newspaper in Montana, The Daily Inter-Lake in November of 2010.

Four years later, he says, “the thing that prompted me to attempt to put thought to electrons was, oddly enough, the recent massacre of 770 young men around Camp Speicher, Iraq.”

Via The Daily Inter-Lake:

I served 22 years in the Air Force, and without a doubt, the most rewarding year in my career was the year that I spent on the ground in Iraq. I was able to witness the results of the sacrifice made by so many young Americans, young and old, men and women, of all colors. I was humbled by what I found. The desperately courageous Iraqis, who had to operate in the most dangerous of circumstances, depended on the steady presence of the American armed forces. And of course, the numerous allies.

I noticed that the news coverage didn’t match what I saw with my own eyes and heard with my own ears. Everything was negative. Every setback was trumpeted, every advance muffled or ignored. There were “grim milestones” for casualties updated daily. Even an esteemed senator from Nevada claimed, while young Americans were engaged in active combat, that they were losers. I was in Baghdad for some of that. Awesome. That used to be unheard of. But it gets you re-elected today.

And eventually, with the “heads it’s negative, tails it’s not positive” coverage, people began to believe that we should leave. And why not? It was the “wrong war,” it was going badly, at least until we needed a justification to leave, and then it was “strong and stable.” So the United States elected a man who promised that he would declare victory and leave. And for those of you who are sputtering, “But BUSH!” consider this:

So completely wrong was the “declare victory and leave” position that the current administration is not only using Bush’s 2001/2 Authorizations for Use of Force for legal justification, they are also embracing the Bush Doctrine of pre-emption. For gosh’ sake, the carrier that launched some of the first airstrikes is the USS George H.W. Bush. Talk about complete reversal.

Of course, anyone with the ability to think deeply about the subject would realize that changing a culture is a long proposition. Far longer than merely the end of combat. And that really should be the end game of any war that the U.S. gets involved in. The end game of war, for us, is supposed to be a free, potentially prosperous people emerging from the carnage of war. Someone who will make a good ally in the future. And that’s what was happening in Iraq. 

Iraqis, for the first time in their lives, were able to trust. That may be a small thing for you. You, who have never feared for your life from your government. You, who have never wondered if something you say is going to get you killed at the hands of your government. You, who have been able to trust your friends, neighbors and associates; if you haven’t, it wasn’t because you thought they were a government informant, ready to turn you in at the slightest misstep, perhaps to be fed into a paper shredder.

But as the year of my duty in dusty Baghdad wore on, they were starting to trust. They were starting to timidly reach out to report IED emplacements, rocket set-ups, and bad guys in the neighborhood. The thing that moved me to write my book, “A Flowershop in Baghdad,” was this simple fact. The Iraqis who had been bombed, shot at, and we had tried to kill (in one case, actually being shot down by us), all referred to us the same way: 

“The Friendly Side.”

I wrote 341 pages about the exceptionalism of this country, and how much we were changing the young men and women who were clever enough to avoid being killed for the audacity to sign up for service in the Iraqi Air Force. The 20-somethings were great at absorbing the moral compass that guides our military operations. But I also wrote about the challenge of the older officers. It’s pretty hard to change from a life of selfishness, self-preservation and fear to one of selflessness and courage. But it’s do-able; just takes some time to reinforce the goodness in the ones who can change, and supervise the transition out of power of the ones who cannot. All the while nurturing the new generation, keeping them from harm until they can take over. It’s not an easy process.

I know that it would be pretty hard for me to completely change my world view at my age. I can certainly take in new facts, but to change a significant part of my belief system would take constant reinforcement, both in issues big and small. That requires “presence.” The simple act of being around influences behavior. That’s why the police don’t all just sit at the station, waiting for a call to come in. They actively patrol; for presence. It doesn’t cost them any more to patrol; you’ve already hired them. It’s common sense. Constant reinforcement and influence until good behavior is the norm.

Due to the type of reporting from Iraq, you never knew the progress that was being made; the connections that were being completed, the goodness that exposure to the U.S. military brings. Trust. Selflessness. Leadership. Followership. Courage. And yet you voted all that away; leaves blowing in a dishonest wind. Which brings us back to the 770 young men massacred around Camp Spiecher.

iraqi-soldiers-massacred-RIPjpg

I knew those faces. Those confused, terrified young faces. About 175 of them were Iraqi Air Force recruits; the others, Army. This was precisely the process that I helped set up. Did I know personally this group? No. But they were the same young men, full of promise and hope. Capable of immense good, ready to be molded by whatever of our influence remained. But I wondered, as I looked at some of the pictures, why were they captured without uniforms? Without weapons? Why no resistance? It wasn’t until there were a couple of witness testimonies that it all snapped into place.

They were abandoned. First by us, then by the leaders, no longer influenced by “the friendly side,” that had fallen into their old habits.

One survivor talked of the young military recruits being told to change into civilian clothes, take no weapons: they would be loaded into trucks and sent to Baghdad. Another talked of their senior officers just disappearing. In both cases, the next organization that they met was ISIS. And then, they were taken out into the desert, and as an inevitable consequence of U.S. policy, slaughtered. Did ISIS pull the triggers, draw the knives across young throats? Absolutely. Did the rush to leave, for no reason other than it was Bush’s war enable them to do it? Absolutely.

If the police patrolling your neighborhood let it be known that they would no longer be patrolling your neighborhood, but that the neighborhood watch would be taking over, do you think bad behavior would go up or down? Is that because new people moved in? And in the absence of a strong presence for good, what will happen to evil?

 Read the rest, here.

WFB Supercut: Why The Dems Lost (Video)

When Republicans talk about improving their “brand” – they don’t mean changing or concealing their principles so they can be more palatable to certain constituencies that don’t traditionally vote Republican. They mean doing a better job reaching out and explaining their principles to those constituencies.

Democrats, on the other hand, get by through stealth –  their “how can we fool them today?” M/O. The reason they have to rely on phony “War on Women”, class warfare, race-baiting tactics, is because when they tell the truth about their agenda, they are rejected. That can lead to uncomfortable moments on the campaign trail when the media actually does their job and holds them accountable.

Keep in mind as you watch this, that these guys were the Democrats’ A team.

Via Washington Free Beacon.

Hat tip: White House Dossier

The CDC Should Reevaluate Its Ebola Protocols

So. A nurse in Dallas who had treated the Ebola-infected man from Liberia, was diagnosed with the deadly disease at 9:30 last night. She’s the second person in the United States who has been diagnosed with Ebola.

“At some point there was a breach in protocol” CDC director Tom Frieden said to explain how he thought the health care worker was infected.

Via The New York Times:

While the new Ebola patient was not publicly identified, officials said that she was a nurse who had helped treat Mr. Duncan at a hospital here and that she may have violated safety protocols. It was the first confirmed instance of Ebola being transmitted in this country. Officials expanded the pool of people they had been monitoring, because the nurse had not been among the 48 health care workers, relatives of Mr. Duncan and others whom they were evaluating daily.

***

The woman was in stable condition on Sunday. Dr. Daniel Varga, chief clinical officer of Texas Health Resources, which oversees Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, told reporters on Sunday that the worker had worn protective gear when coming in contact with Mr. Duncan, although he did not detail the type of contact.“This individual was following full C.D.C. precautions,” Dr. Varga said, adding, “Gown, glove, mask and shield.” Asked how concerned he was that the worker tested positive despite the precautions, he replied, “We’re very concerned.”

Despite Dr. Varga’s reassurances about C.D.C. precautions having been followed, Dr. Frieden said it appeared the woman had breached safety protocol at the hospital, possibly when removing the protective gear. Speaking on the CBS program “Face the Nation” and later at a news conference, he said that questioning of the worker had not identified precisely how a breach occurred, and that the cause of her infection was not known. Dr. Frieden said everyone who treated Mr. Duncan was now considered to be potentially exposed and that other cases of Ebola were possible.

National Journal’s Ron Fournier said on Twitter that he thinks it’s time for the CDC to reconsider its protocols.

I expressed my similar concern, later Sunday morning.

Some doctors are disputing the CDC’s assertions about how Ebola is spread.

A group of German medical doctors in a peer-reviewed medical journal article published by Oxford University Press have challenged a key assumption regarding the Ebola virus repeatedly asserted by Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

The researchers found that a patient showing no symptoms of the disease can still transmit a virus like Ebola by air if droplets containing the virus are transmitted to another person by a sneeze or cough.

As WND reported Tuesday, the World Health Organization has admitted that “wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently could transmit the Ebola virus over a short distance to another nearby person.”

***

Dr. Norman M. Balog, D.O., a board-certified family doctor practicing in Silver Spring, Maryland, brought the research of the German medical team to the attention of WND as evidence that the CDC’s Frieden could not prove his assertion air travel was safe as long as a person infected with Ebola were not showing symptoms. An infected person can go as long as 21 days in an incubation period before being infected.

“Dr. Freiden is either completely uninformed of this research,” Balog explained to WND in an exclusive telephone interview, “or he is deliberately lying because he does not want to panic the general public.”

Balog pointed out that asymptomatic carriers of diseases infecting others is a phenomenon that has been widely documented in virology studies for decades.

 

The Texas Department of State Health Services Commissioner Dr. David Lakey  health officials are still trying to figure out how the nurse got infected.

Meanwhile, the CDC is bracing for more Ebola patients.

The C.D.C. said it would conduct a nationwide training conference call on Tuesday for thousands of health care workers to ensure they would be fully prepared to treat a patient with Ebola.

“The care of Ebola patients can be done safely, but it’s hard to do it safely,” Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, director of the C.D.C., told reporters Sunday. “Even a single, inadvertent innocent slip can result in contamination.”

So this is our new normal.  Americans now get to deal with a hideous third world disease that causes death in up to 80% of those infected – because we have a president who refuses to authorize a travel ban from effected countries.

In Boston, a hospital quarantined a man who was showing “Ebola-like symptoms.”

He had recently been in Liberia.

During a press conference outside of Beth Israel, officials said the patient will undergo an evaluation to determine whether Ebola is a possible cause of the patient’s symptoms. If warranted, the hospital will test for Ebola and send the collected material to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC generally take 24 to 48 hours to return test results.

The patient was carried to Beth Israel by Brewster Ambulance. In a statement, company president Mark Brewster said the patient was waiting in his car, as instructed by Harvard Vanguard personnel. The Brewster Ambulance team followed its Ebola protocol when interacting and transporting the patient.

“Our staff has been carefully preparing over the last several weeks for situations like this, and today those preparations were put into practice,” Brewster said. “The actions by all emergency responders, including Braintree fire fighters and police and our EMS team, went exactly according to protocol.”

The Boston Public Health Commission now says that the patient “does not meet criteria to be considered someone at high risk for Ebola.”

Of course – all these panics, false alarms and eventually –  inevitably – “real things” could be avoided if we had one major protocol in place.

Via Attkisson’s article: Ebola: Officials Sound the Alarm:

“Failures in leadership have allowed a preventable disease to spin out of control,” write Lawrence Gostin and Eric Friedman in the current issue of the medical journal Lancet. Gostin, a Georgetown Law professor, is Director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center on Public Health Law & Human Rights. Friedman is Project Leader for the Joint Action and Learning Initiative on National and Global Responsibilities for Health.

If nothing changes, public health officials estimate there will be 1.4 million Ebola cases worldwide by January. There are no current projections as to how many of those might be in the U.S.

U.S. officials have repeatedly stated that we “will” have more Ebola cases here. How do they know?

“It’s inevitable,” one official told me. He asked not to be quoted by name.

Fair is fair…

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama said in May of 2008.

If Western Africa gets Ebola – then so should we.

UPDATE:

And see – I’m not the only one saying this. 

Via Moonbattery, Psychiatrist Keith Ablow tries to understand Obama’s refusal to stop to  Africans from infected West African nations from traveling here.

Such a travel ban would go some distance to stem the tide of Ebolophobia [i.e. Ebola anxiety], too. It would symbolize our country’s intention to shore up its defenses against the illness. But President Obama is very sensitive to being defined in any way by the borders of this country. I think he sees himself as a citizen of the world and sees Americans as having infected others with our deadly economic policies [i.e., capitalism] for a long time, thereby inflicting untold suffering on developing nations. To now lead the way to America insulating itself from a scourge sweeping the very countries he seems to think we have preyed upon could, of course, strike him (if only unconsciously) as profoundly unfair.

I believe the president may literally believe we should suffer along with less fortunate nations. And if he does, that is a very dangerous psychological stance from which to confront Ebola.

Let me say this plainly, as a psychiatrist who has studied this president only from a distance: In order for President Obama to keep thinking of himself as the leader of the world — and not just the free world — it may be that our boundaries must remain porous, allowing illegal immigrants and, potentially, even diseases to flow through them. …

The toll of having a president who seems to see America as having no particular manifest destiny may be seen in the spread of ISIS abroad. And it could be seen, God forbid, in not mounting a sufficient immune defense here at home, to Ebola.

Obama believes in spreading our wealth and their misery