Re: US strike options on TSP

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 11 May 2015 06:31

Officers Benjamin Deen, 34, and Liquori Tate, 24, were making a traffic stop Saturday evening when they were shot, Mayor Johnny DuPree said. They were taken to a hospital, but did not survive.

Authorities accuse the suspects of fleeing the crime scene, allegedly stealing a police cruiser and using it as a getaway car. Joanie Calloway, 22, was charged with two counts of capital murder, the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation said Sunday. Marvin Banks, 29, also faces two counts of capital murder, along with counts of grand theft auto and felon in possession of a firearm. Police charged his brother, Curtis Banks, with two counts of accessory after the fact of capital murder, the agency said. And a fourth suspect, Cornelius Clark, was charged with obstruction of justice Sunday, the mayor's office said.

As deputies escorted him into a police station Sunday, Curtis Banks wailed and repeated "I didn't do it."
Dean's and Tate's bodies have been taken to the state medical examiner's office for autopsies, while the suspects were taken "to undisclosed jails outside Forrest County to await their initial appearances" in the Forrest County Justice Court on Monday, state police said.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 11 May 2015 06:40

why did the suspects shoot the cops at the traffic stop? were they fleeing from something else or were already on warrant??

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 11 May 2015 06:40

When my friends (almost always white) post stories like the above and go boohooo I try to console them saying the following:

"When running an oppressive regime that murders, falsely imprisons and mindlessly destroys the lives of colored folks and their dependents, it is only fair to expect something like this to happen."

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 11 May 2015 06:48

Gus wrote:why did the suspects shoot the cops at the traffic stop? were they fleeing from something else or were already on warrant??

Reason not been given in the article my guess would be that one or more of them were violating parole (i.e. were in possession of guns while paroled) and decided to go out guns blazing. Only that they were better shots than the cops and came out alive.

Usually in a two officer stop (of black men) the second one waits a few feet behind with a fully loaded Remington shotgun (atleast in cali) . The shots from that gun will ricochet inside the car and kill everything inside. I dont know the tactical details in case of Mississippi traffic stops.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 11 May 2015 15:57

http://www.myhighplains.com/story/d/sto ... Ofg8w7ukRw

This news is from Drudgereport. This blog is quite closely followed by the conservative Texans, almost a BR for many there.

Is the fear of Feds so deep in any other part of US? You may discount these "uncalm Texans" as loony fringe, but they exist and I feel they are more than single digit.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 May 2015 06:31

US Retired Jarnails

to POTUS BO

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Medal of Honor recipient and retired Maj. Gen. James E. Livingston, USMC, and congressional counterterrorism adviser Michael S. Smith II are co-founders of the strategic advisory firm Kronos Advisory. The views expressed are solely the authors' own. Watch 'Blindsided: How ISIS shook the world', a GPS special airing Monday at 9 p.m. ET/PT on CNN.

(CNN)Be afraid -- be very afraid. This is the warning the world deserves to hear. Because the leader of the free world refuses to look with clear eyes at the chief security challenges of the 21st century: the fruits of radical Islam.

The results of the Obama White House's innovative efforts to make the world a better place can be accounted for in the ever-growing numbers of victims of radical Islam in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. Not to mention here in the United States, Canada and Europe. Is it not a tragic irony that the Arab Spring-era policies of a Nobel Peace Prize recipient accommodated the transition of Syria into the world's newest jihad theater while leaving Libya a failed state and Yemen a failing state?

The Syrian jihad gave rise to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, which now uses Syria as a rear operating base to support its jihad in Iraq, which could soon spill over into Jordan. Plus, Libya is now being used as a rear operating base by ISIS and other global jihadist elements striving to redraw the map of the Middle East, even as they plan attacks in Europe and North America.

Given the frightfully slow pace America's commander-in-chief is currently allowing our military and intelligence community to take action against both ISIS and its progenitor, al Qaeda, the picture of what's in store is clear: The body count will continue to grow in the places where these groups can generate buy-in for their agendas. And neither the United States nor our Western allies are immune to this cancer.
Academics who must say something new or different to garner interest in their work may describe the agendas of ISIS and al Qaeda as distinctly different. But the fact is they are not -- their agendas, which constitute the foremost threats to the global security environment today, are manifestations of radical Islam.
Of course, it's hardly a surprise President Barack Obama refuses to acknowledge all this in plain terms -- the president and his national security advisers have too often proven naïve, with a dangerous habit of viewing the world not as it is, but as they hope it could be.

There is no shortage of examples that highlight the absence of sound foresight on the parts of the world's most powerful politician and his national security team.

Just take the National Strategy for Counterterrorism published by the White House in 2011. That document contained the assertion that, "Since the beginning of 2011, the transformative change sweeping North Africa and the Middle East -- along with the death of Osama bin Laden -- has further changed the nature of the terrorist threat, par-ticularly as the relevance of al Qaeda and its ideology has been further diminished."

Yet, fast forward to January 2014 and America's top intelligence official, director of National Intelligence James Clapper, advised Congress that al Qaeda was no less capable of threatening the United States and our allies than a decade earlier.

Soon after Clapper acknowledged al Qaeda was not a band on the run, as President Obama had described the terrorist enterprise, a report by terrorism expert Seth Jones of the RAND Corporation highlighted yet another inconvenient truth for the White House: As restraints on freedom of expression of radical religious views vanished in places like Libya, Tunisia and Egypt during the Arab Spring, those states became fertile recruitment grounds for terrorist groups -- including al Qaeda and groups aligned with it.

According to data compiled by Jones, from 2010 through 2013, the number of Salafi jihadist groups increased by 58%. These groups are fueled by Salafiyya Jihadiyya, an ideology that not only informs the agenda of al Qaeda, but is the source code for the agenda of the al Qaeda offshoot ISIS.

Bin Laden's death 'didn't lift shadow'

Most recently, absent from the National Security Strategy produced by the Obama White House in February 2015 is any real meaningful discussion concerning threats posed by al Qaeda. Yes, Osama bin Laden was killed on President Obama's watch. But contrary to what the White House seemed to think in 2011, bin Laden's death has not lifted the shadow he casts over America's, or our allies' security.

Indeed, within days of our new National Security Strategy's publication date, in the seventh issue of ISIS's English-language magazine Dabiq, the group's leaders described their jihad as a continuation of the jihad charted by bin Laden, while accusing his successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri, of steering al Qaeda off the path of its former leader.

Meanwhile, Yemen -- home to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the al Qaeda branch that claimed credit for the January 2015 attack in Paris at the office of Charlie Hebdo -- has also become a failed state. AQAP is helmed by the second-highest-ranking official in al Qaeda writ large, and the Obama administration views it as the most dangerous component of al Qaeda's global network.

So it is interesting that, in the months before the Yemeni government was overthrown by Iran-backed rebels, President Obama described the U.S.-Yemen counterterrorism partnership as a shining example of success in the fight against al Qaeda -- interesting because the President did not do more to help that "partner" government remain in power. Once again, the president and his advisers appear to have either ignored or failed to recognize the trajectory of events in the Middle East.

What were they thinking? And how do they plan to combat AQAP now?

Despite what the White House wants the world to believe, a sober look at the security environment reveals the following key realities:

ISIS controls a large amount of territory in the Middle East, and the group is rapidly growing its ranks in places such as Libya and Afghanistan, while at the same time inspiring and plotting attacks in the West. And, although ISIS is trying to "out al Qaeda" al Qaeda, resorting to attention winning stunts to boost its profile on television sets around the world, al Qaeda itself is no less of a threat to the United States and our allies today than it was in January 2014. At the same time, the routine failures of President Obama and his advisers to understand the security environment, and to appropriately tailor America's national security posture in a manner demanded by it, foretells more disasters lie ahead.

Will Obama make the difficult decisions?

Not only Americans, but also our allies should be very, very afraid. Indeed, President Obama's refusal to simply call a problem like radical Islam by its name strongly suggests he is unwilling to make the difficult decisions that must be made today if we are to stand a chance of defeating radical Islamist groups. History has shown the dangers that millions can be placed in if our leaders don't face down a looming threat by calling it what it is and putting our full weight behind efforts to vanquish it.

President Obama has the resources at his disposal to do just that. But if he wants to help define a future for the Middle East and North Africa in which fewer threats emanate from those regions, he must spend more time listening to talented professionals in our military and intelligence community versus the idealists and yes-men surrounding him at the White House. There is too much at stake in the near term to continue down the path of experimentation with Pollyannaish theories about how to attain this future that have actually rendered us less safe.

Indeed, President Obama should also pay closer attention to what representatives from Arab states are saying behind closed doors. Most of their bosses would love to be the claimants to the prize of defeating ISIS and al Qaeda. However, all of them recognize that, unless we all want things to get a whole lot worse before they might get any better, the United States will have to deploy considerably more of our "kinetic" resources to put those victories in sight. This does not mean a ground forces-intensive response is required from us at this time. But if the President thinks it prudent to wait on our Arab partners to do most of the heavy lifting, he could be guaranteeing this will be the case in the not-too-distant future.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 May 2015 06:45

And to celebrate that, ISIS claims bum inflashun near US Consulate in Irbil.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 May 2015 23:49

No need to give url, the EnnEssAy already knows it.

HUGE win against mass government surveillance? A federal appeals court unanimously ruled that the NSA’s call records spying program is unlawful!

Section 215 – which the NSA uses to collect virtually all of our phone call records – is one of the worst parts of the Patriot Act, and is set to expire on June 1st. Yet there are those in Congress, like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who want to extend it for 5 more years.

Frankly, we've had enough. Which is why we present to you…

215 Reasons Why Section 215 Needs to Go Away: A Fictionalized Soap-Operatic Dramatization of One Person’s Life Lived Under Section 215

The NSA can collect and store all data about every phone call you make.
For instance, remember how last month you drunk-dialed your ex 4 times in the middle of the night? Yeah, the NSA knows about that.
They know she didn't call you back.
Remember how the next day you called your therapist five times? They know that, too.
They know your therapist did call you back! Phew!
And that you talked for 2 hours.
They also know that after you talked to your therapist you called your ex 3 more times.
And that she didn't pick up, not even once.

Isn’t it time to let unconstitutional and unwarranted government surveillance die?

Turns out that while your ex wasn’t picking up your calls, she was on the phone with your best friend. Yup, the NSA knows that.
Your best buddy and your ex have always been close. In fact, the NSA knows they’ve talked at least once every day since you guys broke up.
Actually, the NSA knows they were calling each other pretty regularly before you broke up, too.
Doesn’t it seem unfair that the NSA knows your best buddy and your ex are talking on the phone constantly but you don’t?
Because at the end of each day, major phone companies hand over to the NSA records of who called whom, when, and for how long.
Did you know that the NSA could also use Section 215 to track your financial records without getting a warrant?
That night you drunk-dialed your ex? The NSA can use some fancy data correlation techniques to figure out that after you bought a whole lot of drinks at the bar, you went and got a tank of gas.
And that you got an egg and cheese sandwich at the deli the next morning.
And that Bloody Mary you got at the White Horse Tavern at 10am with your credit card. Hair of the dog? No one wants the NSA to know about their morning cocktail.

Don’t think the NSA should have access to your financial records without a warrant? Tell Congress.

Having a rough weekend, aren’t you, buddy? The NSA knows all about it. You might want to consider using cash and a burner phone.
Ah, Monday. Time for you and the NSA to settle in to a slow day at the office, and some web searches about your ex. Can you believe she posted those photos online?
The NSA might know that when you chatted with your best buddy about those photos, he was also chatting with your ex. That’s not cool.
Under Section 215, the NSA may also be collecting hotel records.
About those hotel records. Your best buddy and your ex? Yeah… Sometimes the NSA knows things you don’t ever wanna know.
As adorably archaic as it may sound, the NSA can also collect library records.
So, for example, when your ex took out “The Dance of Anger: A Woman’s Guide to Changing the Patterns of Intimate Relationships”? Mmmhmmm.
And how she also took out “How to Cheat on Your Boyfriend with His Best Friend And Get Away with It”? We’re kidding. That book doesn’t exist. But if it did and she took it out, the NSA might know.
If only the NSA also offered relationship counseling services. They know more about you than your therapist does!
What else could the NSA collect under Section 215? Prescription records, for one.
Do you think the NSA has put together the **** prescription you never got filled with your ex’s frequent phone calls to your best buddy?
We’re not saying those two things are linked, but you never know what connections the NSA is making. They do have those high-powered data crunching algorithms, after all.

Don’t let this invasion of privacy get five more years to live! Section 215 should expire today.

This Monday sure won’t end. Good you called your therapist and scheduled an emergency midday session. And good thing the NSA is keeping logs of all those calls. Just in case!
Except you told your boss you have an off-site meeting. Let’s hope your boss and the NSA never compare notes. Because under Section 215 or related Patriot Act provisions, the NSA may also be collecting your cell phone location information.
So, for example, when you stop at the drug store after your “off-site meeting” to fill your therapist’s prescription for sleeping pills?
Lots of juicy data for the NSA! Maybe next time don’t drive 80 mph down the highway, mkay?
And, of course, there are the details about the actual prescription.
Do you really want the NSA to know that you just got the last batch a week ago and already need a refill?
Are they really getting all of this this without a warrant?
Without having to prove that you’ve done anything wrong?
Why on earth does the NSA get to know all your embarrassing secrets?
Even all that stuff you’re hiding from your ex, your best buddy, your therapist?

Does Section 215 sound grim yet? Sign to protect your privacy.

Your pal Jack always manages to cheer you up. Give him a call. After all, if we don’t call our nearest and dearest to say hi, the crack phone surveillance team at the National Security Agency might get bored.
Did you know that Jack has recently made some rather unsavory acquaintances?
Don’t worry - the NSA does.
There’s this awesome thing called “two hop” collection under Section 215. It allows the NSA to link you to Jack’s new “friends” for years to come.
Did we mention how unsavory they are? They’re not exactly the folks you’d invite over for a barbeque, that’s for sure. But that sure did pique the NSA’s interest!
Let’s do some fun NSA “two hop” math: if you have 100 contacts, and those folks have 100 contacts, that’s 10,000 people.
If one of those 10,000 has come under suspicion, time to flag you and your data for a super special database!
Sure hope none of those 10,000 people have ever done something unsavory. Uh, thanks Jack.

Section 215 needs to go away. Seriously.

Even after to talking to Jack, you’re still feeling a little blue. Maybe a quick heart-to-heart with your Rabbi will help?
Guess what? The NSA also collects information about communications between faith leaders and congregants!
You give Rabbi Val a call. Data point collected and stored.
The fact that you were on the phone with her for 35 minutes? Yes, they know that.
Oh, and get this! The NSA could also request a list of anyone else who worships at your synagogue.
Or your co-worker Ahmed’s mosque - they could be tracking everyone who worships there, just because.
In fact, the NSA could request a list of people who belong to any organization, like, say, an environmental group.
That $50 donation you made to protect naked mole rats? Under Section 215, an organization’s records, papers, and documents could be collected.
What would the NSA do with lists of environmentalists, anyway? Sorry buddy, there’s no way to find out what they’re doing with it.
Doesn’t that seem a little Orwellian? Even naked mole rats might agree. A federal judge did. But that didn’t stop the NSA.
Come to think about it, what about that group you dabbled with in college, the pro-marijuana-legalization activists? (Everyone has a wild phase in college, right?) Mmmmm more data!
Under Section 215, that membership list could be collected, too. Wild phase notwithstanding.

Don’t think your wild phase in college should be fair game for NSA databases? If thousands of us join together and shout it from the rooftops (or every major newspaper in America) maybe Congress will finally get the message.

TO BE CONTINUED! Stay tuned for Part 2 of 215 Reasons Why Section 215 Needs to Go Away, coming to your inbox soon!

Thanks, and see you for Part 2,
The ACLU Action Team

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 13 May 2015 04:15

shtupid phlowers think once you get the taste of abuje of power, you can simply turn the tap off with a judjment. The AyeSeeElYou ij a pressure releaje valve. For those connected to it, and is just another rakkit.

It ij a great viktory for chekx and tolaney ke kaante. Will it eshtop anything? Now why would you think that?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 May 2015 21:12

http://www.eschatonblog.com/2015/05/60- ... 60-40.html

Sixty-forty: that’s a dining room that’s 60 percent white and 40 percent black. Forty percent is the tipping point, they all said. More than 40 percent black, and suddenly, they said, the numbers don’t just flip. More than 40 percent, and — said one— the whites scurry to their holes like mice. Soon, he said, you’re looking at a restaurant where the clientele is predominantly black.

The issue was that there just weren't enough black customers to give him the level of business that he wanted. If there were "too many" black people in the bar, white customers wouldn't come in at all, and then he wouldn't have enough customers.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 19 May 2015 21:17

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/failed-congressional-candidate-pleads-guilty-in-plot-to-massacre-muslims-we-will-be-cruel-to-them/

ormer congressional candidate admitted to plotting the annihilation of a Muslim village identified by Sean Hannity and other conservatives as a terrorist training camp.

Robert Doggart was arrested last month after FBI officials said the ordained minister tried to recruit “expert Gunners” on social media to help him burn down a mosque, school, and other buildings in Hancock, New York – where law enforcement officials are frequently called to investigate right-wing rumors.

The 63-year-old Doggart was recorded speaking to a South Carolina militia member about the plot, which the failed Tennessee congressional candidate feared could turn deadly.

“If there’s a gun fight, well there’s a gun fight, and I want to come home because I love my family and I want to see my kids again,” Doggart told the militia member. “But I also understand that if it’s necessary to die, then that’s a good way to die.”

Doggart pleaded guilty last week to one count of interstate communication of threats, and he remains free on bond until his sentencing – when he faces up to five years in prison.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 23 May 2015 17:07

Naomi Prins writes well about the threat of another Clinton presidency with historical precedent of the earlier one.

Read it all here

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/05 ... i-prins-2/

But the happiness was misguided. Deregulating the banking industry might have helped the titans of Wall Street but not people on Main Street. The Clinton era epitomized the vast difference between appearance and reality, spin and actuality. As the decade drew to a close, Clinton basked in the glow of a lofty stock market, a budget surplus, and the passage of this key banking “modernization.” It would be revealed in the 2000s that many corporate profits of the 1990s were based on inflated evaluations, manipulation, and fraud. When Clinton left office, the gap between rich and poor was greater than it had been in 1992, and yet the Democrats heralded him as some sort of prosperity hero.

When he resigned in 1997, Robert Reich, Clinton’s labor secretary, said, “America is prospering, but the prosperity is not being widely shared, certainly not as widely shared as it once was… We have made progress in growing the economy. But growing together again must be our central goal in the future.” Instead, the growth of wealth inequality in the United States accelerated, as the men yielding the most financial power wielded it with increasingly less culpability or restriction. By 2015, that wealth or prosperity gap would stand near historic highs.

The power of the bankers increased dramatically in the wake of the repeal of Glass-Steagall. The Clinton administration had rendered twenty-first-century banking practices similar to those of the pre-1929 crash. But worse. “Modernizing” meant utilizing government-backed depositors’ funds as collateral for the creation and distribution of all types of complex securities and derivatives whose proliferation would be increasingly quick and dangerous.

Eviscerating Glass-Steagall allowed big banks to compete against Europe and also enabled them to go on a rampage: more acquisitions, greater speculation, and more risky products. The big banks used their bloated balance sheets to engage in more complex activity, while counting on customer deposits and loans as capital chips on the global betting table. Bankers used hefty trading profits and wealth to increase lobbying funds and campaign donations, creating an endless circle of influence and mutual reinforcement of boundary-less speculation, endorsed by the White House.

Deposits could be used to garner larger windfalls, just as cheap labor and commodities in developing countries were used to formulate more expensive goods for profit in the upper echelons of the global financial hierarchy. Energy and telecoms proved especially fertile ground for the investment banking fee business (and later for fraud, extensive lawsuits, and bankruptcies). Deregulation greased the wheels of complex financial instruments such as collateralized debt obligations, junk bonds, toxic assets, and unregulated derivatives.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 05 Jun 2015 16:54

Timothy Egan has "What to be Afraid of" in today's NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/05/opini ... id-of.html

He points out that for Americans terrorism is a very low risk.

You’ve heard it before, but it bears repeating: You are much more likely to be struck dead by lightning, choke on a chicken bone or drown in the bathtub than be killed by a terrorist. Any number of well-known diseases — cancer, diabetes, the flu — take the lives of far, far more people. Yet, by one estimate, the United States spends $500 million per victim of terrorism, and a piddling $10,000 per cancer death.

Food is a mortal menace. Every year, one in six Americans gets sick, and 3,000 die from food-borne illness. Your burger is a bigger threat than radical Islam.

Don’t get me wrong: Radical Islam is a serious threat, a poison on the globe. Hats off to the police in Boston for tracking the latest religiously infected potential killer. But we should put the threat in perspective: This is not World War II. Our entire democracy does not teeter on the outcome.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 08 Jun 2015 22:07

Posting here for relevance to things that are better left unsaid.

(CNN)The Supreme Court struck down part of a federal statute Monday that allowed Americans born in Jerusalem to record in their passport "Israel" as the place of birth.
The 6-3 decision is a victory for the Executive, and a loss for Congress and the 12-year-old boy caught in the middle of a separation of powers dispute.
For the last 60 years, the United States policy has been to recognize no state as having sovereignty over Jerusalem.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, held that "over the last 100 years, there has been scarcely any debate over the President's power to recognize foreign states." "clear" that in the statute at issue in the case," Congress wanted to express its displeasure with the President's policy, by among other things, commanding the Executive to contradict his own, early stated position on Jerusalem. This Congress cannot do."
Kennedy said that the President has the exclusive power to grant formal recognition to a foreign sovereign and said that the law infringes on the Executive's "consistent" decision to withhold recognition with respect to Jerusalem.
"Recognition is an act with immediate and powerful significance for international relations, so the President's position must be clear. Congress cannot require him to contradict his own statement regarding a determination of formal recognition," Kennedy wrote for the Court's majority.
In dissent were Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Samuel Alito.
Roberts & Alito, said "Today's decision is a first: Never before has this Court accepted a President's direct defiance of an Act of Congress in the field of foreign affairs."
Roberts said "the statue at issue does not implicate recognition" but "simply gives an American citizen born in Jerusalem the option to designate his place of birth as Israel for the purposes of passports and other documents."
Scalia took the rare step of reading part of his dissent from the bench, which was joined by Roberts and Alito, saying that the law at issue "merely requires the State Department to list a citizen's birthplace as Israel" and does not require the President to make "any other kind of legal commitment."

"Today, the Supreme Court confirmed something that lower courts and scholars had long assumed—that the power to recognize foreign governments (and their territory) resides exclusively with the Executive Branch," said Stephen I. Vladeck, an analyst. "This is not only a landmark win for presidential power over foreign affairs, but a rather decisive loss for Congress—which passed the statute at issue entirely to thwart a half-century-old Executive Branch policy," he said.
Caught in the middle was a 12-year-old boy, Menachem Zivotofsky. When he was born his parents sought to have "Israel" listed on his U.S. passport as his place of birth pursuant to a federal law. But the State Department refused.
For the last 60 years, the United States policy has been to recognize no state as having sovereignty over Jerusalem. In 2002 when Congress passed the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, President George W. Bush signed the law but issued a statement saying he objected to section 214 at issue in today's case. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli said that Congress can't use its authority to regulate passports "to command the Executive branch to issue diplomatic communication that contradicts the government's official position on recognition." He noted that the question of the status of Jerusalem "is the most vexing and volatile and difficult diplomatic issue that this nation has faced for decades."
(nausea alert here... remember Dubya 2003)
"The nations in the region, and frankly people around the world and governments around the world scrutinize every word that comes out of the United States Government and every action that the United States Government takes in order to see whether we can continue to be trusted as an honest broker who could stand apart from this conflict and help bring it to resolution," he said.
But Zivotofsky's lawyers framed the case differently. Alyza D. Lewin said the case is not about formal recognition, but simply how an American is identified on his or her passport.
"We do not claim this is recognition," she said at oral arguments.
Justice Elena Kagan seemed to side with the State Department at oral arguments.
"History suggests," she said, "that everything is a big deal with respect to the status of Jerusalem. And right now, Jerusalem is a tinderbox because of issues about the status of and access to a particular holy site there."
Scalia argued that Congress is entitled... and "the fact that the State Department doesn't like the fact that it makes the Palestinians angry is irrelevant."
The 12-year-old boy... told reporters, "I'm an Israeli, and I want people to know that I'm glad to be an Israeli."

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Jun 2015 23:10

prahaar wrote:http://www.myhighplains.com/story/d/sto ... Ofg8w7ukRw

This news is from Drudgereport. This blog is quite closely followed by the conservative Texans, almost a BR for many there.

Is the fear of Feds so deep in any other part of US? You may discount these "uncalm Texans" as loony fringe, but they exist and I feel they are more than single digit.

Geebus. No way in heck can that website and the commentators be compared to BR.
Please submit yourself to BENIS thread phor lashings.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Jun 2015 03:22

[youtube]99vKv3-FHY8&app=desktop[/youtube]

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 09 Jun 2015 15:47

Revealing study on White police officers’ prejudice and unconscious dehumanization of black children by comparing them to apes.While children in most societies are considered to be a distinct group with characteristics such as innocence and the need for protection, White Police view Black boys responsible for their actions at an age when White boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent.

The Essence of Innocence: Consequences of Dehumanizing Black Children

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Jun 2015 02:59

Also use of dehumanizing words: perpetrator, accused, suspect, male, female.
Never man or woman.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2015 22:06

From NPR on an UK Cabinet discussion on giving Us a copy of Magna Carta for persuading them in WWII to fight for UK interests.

SHAPIRO: This document in the exhibition that you describe has a quite amazing assessment of the British people and the way Americans view them. Would you read this passage? (Reading) We are regarded as...

HARRISON: (Reading) We are regarded as a cold-blooded, calculating people. And our failure to show warmth - to say it with flowers - is perhaps the main reason why American respect for us never quite ripens into a warm, uncalculating friendship, such as they have felt for the French.

SHAPIRO: (Laughter) I love that.

HARRISON: That's my favorite line of all.

SHAPIRO: Why won't the Americans love us the way they love the French? Maybe if we give them this 800-year-old document, they'll like us a little bit more.

HARRISON: Precisely. It goes on to say (reading) perhaps if we shed our caution, we offer our most precious possession to our best friends, the effect would be incalculable both today and in the future.

SHAPIRO: It says American hearts would be stirred and resistance to full participation in the present struggle will be greatly reduced.

Chinese understand this very well.

Mary Knoll missionaries and all....

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Jun 2015 01:58

Racism in the US has had a huge component of terrorism in it:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the ... and-terror

You can call these artifacts and barbarities of our past evil. And they are evil. But calling them merely evil diminishes their gravity and awfulness because it obscures the fact that such barbarity is necessary to preserve certain social systems and racial orders. Racial violence in America has always been intrinsically connected to terror. And not "terror" in the modern sense of mass casualty attacks meant to drive press attention and fear by people who are not in power. But in a far more direct sense: violence to inspire terror to solidify control and dominance.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 20 Jun 2015 20:14

The key to understanding the US is to look out your window, and google then what you dont recognize:

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_MOUTHOPEN 20 points 7 hours ago

Same in SC. I saw a lifted truck with three flags on the back going down i-26. The largest flag in the middle was the ****** current confederate flag. The truck was lifted more in the front than the back, smfh

permalinkparent

[–]BoutaBustMaNut [score hidden] an hour ago

See it in North East Ohio too. Usually with camo and FRBR stickers. Their intentions are clear.

permalinkparent

[–]JamesJax 3 points an hour ago

Yup, you see this in Kansas, too. Kansas! I mean...WTF?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?title=Bleeding_Kansas

permalinkparent

[–]crMag [score hidden] 59 minutes ago

Saw one in Lawrence, KS ironically next to the street called jayhawk boulevard.

permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)

[–]meltedsurfwax 2 points 3 hours ago

Part of NC, too. I've seen more than a handful in the western counties (Haywood, Jackson, etc).

permalinkparent

[–]catechlism9854 8 points 3 hours ago

Hell I see this shit in Oklahoma all the time which makes NO sense

permalinkparent

[–]meltedsurfwax 20 points 3 hours ago

Yeah, it's crazy. Usually younger white guys, with camo baseball caps on who apparently forgot it's 2015.

permalinkparent

[–]doomngloom80 8 points 3 hours ago

You just described 3/4 of my area male population. I'm not even joking.

permalinkparent

[–]meltedsurfwax 3 points 2 hours ago

I grew up in an area like that (SE VA).

permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)

[–]so_come_on_night 3 points an hour ago

Arkansas here. You have no idea. This flag is plastered on everything. Womens hand bags, cars, tattoos. Hell its even flown at some churches here

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 20 Jun 2015 20:34

A red pickup with the Confederate Flag looks naked without the loaded shotgun rack behind the driver's ~~brain~~ skull and the RUSSIA S*CKS sticker. Plus the empty beer bottles rattling in the truck bed.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 20 Jun 2015 21:46

Berkeley-Stanford Nausea Alert!

Comments?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 21 Jun 2015 03:53

The mind of Dylann Roof (the Charleston, South Carolina killer):

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/2 ... -terrorist

Random sample:

Modern history classes instill a subconscious White superiority complex in Whites and an inferiority complex in blacks. This White superiority complex that comes from learning of how we dominated other peoples is also part of the problem I have just mentioned. But of course I dont deny that we are in fact superior.

I wish with a passion that niggers were treated terribly throughout history by Whites, that every White person had an ancestor who owned slaves, that segregation was an evil an oppressive institution, and so on. Because if it was all it true, it would make it so much easier for me to accept our current situation. But it isnt true. None of it is. We are told to accept what is happening to us because of ancestors wrong doing, but it is all based on historical lies, exaggerations and myths. I have tried endlessly to think of reasons we deserve this, and I have only came back more irritated because there are no reasons.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 21 Jun 2015 06:36

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 23 Jun 2015 02:33

Calling all Positive Brfess: Need help!!!!

http://www.thefrisky.com/2015-06-22/let ... /#comments

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 24 Jun 2015 11:04

There is a great instructable/teachable moment passing by in the confederate flag debate. Of particular interest to india/us watchers is the behavior/actions of the SC governer as compared to say VA governer. And then the whole slew of symbols thrown up by the debate, from the capitol to all the capitals in the south.

Only china is a net gainer, confederate symbol sales are up 1000s of percent.

The question a sane person would ask -- of themselves, and of any "strategic" relationship: can you rely on the word or the letter of the supporters? Here, or elsewhere. Why? How are ied mubaraks different from these banduk mubaraks? Isnt it all just salesmenship and image management? Didnt bakis suckle at this teat to learn the art for 60 some years? How can you hope to be different by sucking the pacific teat instead of the atlantic one the bakis latched on to. Its the same poison.

edit -- http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/3 ... nfederate/ is worth glossing over if only to change your opinion on church pedophelia or global warming denial.
edit 2 -- meanwhile this was published http://www.huffingtonpost.com/douglas-a ... 24796.html

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 26 Jun 2015 17:31

Finally, a REAL Indian-American Herrow!!

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/26/sport/sat ... index.html

Satnam Singh becomes 1st Indian-born basketball player picked in NBA draft
For the moment, Singh is little known in his homeland, where cricket is by far the biggest sport and few follow the American National Basketball Association.

But success in the United States could change that -- in the same way China's Yao Ming galvanized interest in basketball in his country.

That's certainly what the Mavs are counting on.

"We certainly created a legend," owner Mark Cuban said. "There's a billion new Mavs fans out there right now."

(Gotta go barf..)

But 7' 2""? SDRE?? And there is NOOOOO Paki NBA player, from all the TFTA Pathans and PakJabis?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 26 Jun 2015 21:05

Fires at 4 Black churches in the South:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/2 ... ast-5-days

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 28 Jun 2015 00:00

President Obama gave an awesome rendition of "Amazing Grace" in a church and everyone rightly applauded in appreciation. But when PM Modiji visits a Hindu temple, the average illiberal Indian leftist gets a conniption crying, Hindu fascist PM is tyrannical towards Christians and Muslims (the small ittiy bitty "minority")

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 11 Jul 2015 12:31

California Hispanic population outstrips white: Census

California's Hispanic population now outnumbers the white population, U.S. Census data shows, marking a long-predicted shift in the country's most populous state.

Census population estimates released late last month showed that as of July 1, 2014, the state was home to roughly 14.99 million Hispanic residents compared to 14.92 million non-Hispanic white residents.

The shift makes California the third U.S. state to not have a white plurality, following New Mexico with its large Hispanic population and the predominantly Asian Hawaii.

The trend is occurring alongside nationwide growth in the Hispanic population, which increased to about 17 percent of the total as of last July from around 12.5 percent in 2000, according to U.S. Census figures.

In California, the median age of Hispanic residents was 29 years old, much lower than the median age of around 45 years old for non-Hispanic whites, Census data showed.

Demographers and state officials have predicted for years that California Hispanics would begin to outstrip the white population for the first time since statehood between 2014 and 2015.

Data released by the California Department of Finance last December forecast the trend to continue, with the Hispanic population expected to be nearly double that of non-Hispanic whites in the state by 2060.

"This is sort of the official statistical recognition of something that has been underway for almost an entire generation," Roberto Suro, director of the Tomás Rivera Policy Institute at USC, told the Los Angeles Times on Wednesday. "It is going to accelerate."

http://news.yahoo.com/california-hispan ... 59110.html

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 Jul 2015 06:01

the Southwest is steadily changing in demographics. stretch from Texas to CA, especially within 200 miles of border is already very hispanic. the trend will continue.

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 15 Jul 2015 18:04

Posting in full. This one is a gem, and it comes with a very interesting debate in the comments section. Do have a look.

I, Racist

What follows is the text of a "sermon" that I gave as a "congregational reflection" to an all White audience at the Bethel Congregational United Church of Christ on Sunday, June 28th. The sermon was begun with a reading of The Good Samaritan story, and this wonderful quote from Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's Americanah.

A couple weeks ago, I was debating what I was going to talk about in this sermon. I told Pastor Kelly Ryan I had great reservations talking about the one topic that I think about every single day.

Then, a terrorist massacred nine innocent people in a church that I went to, in a city that I still think of as home. At that point, I knew that despite any misgivings, I needed to talk about race.

You see, I don't talk about race with White people. To illustrate why, I'll tell a story:

It was probably about 15 years ago when a conversation took place between my aunt, who is White and lives in New York State, and my sister, who is Black and lives in North Carolina. This conversation can be distilled to a single sentence, said by my Black sister:

"The only difference between people in The North and people in The South is that down here, at least people are honest about being racist."

There was a lot more to that conversation, obviously, but I suggest that it can be distilled into that one sentence because it has been, by my White aunt. Over a decade later, this sentence is still what she talks about. It has become the single most important aspect of my aunt's relationship with my Black family. She is still hurt by the suggestion that people in New York, that she, a northerner, a liberal, a good person who has Black family members, is a racist.

This perfectly illustrates why I don't talk about race with White people. Even- or rather, especially- my own family.

I love my aunt. She's actually my favorite aunt, and believe me, I have a lot of awesome aunts to choose from. But the facts are actually quite in my sister's favor on this one.

New York State is one of the most segregated states in the country. Buffalo, New York where my aunt lives is one of the 10 most segregated school systems in the country. The racial inequality of the area she inhabits is so bad that it has been the subject of reports by the Civil Rights Action Network and the NAACP.

Those, however, are facts that my aunt does not need to know. She does not need to live with the racial segregation and oppression of her home. As a white person with upward mobility, she has continued to improve her situation. She moved out of the area I grew up in- she moved to an area with better schools. She doesn't have to experience racism, and so it is not real to her.

Nor does it dawn on her that the very fact that she moved away from an increasingly Black neighborhood to live in a White suburb might itself be a aspect of racism. She doesn't need to realize that "better schools" exclusively means "whiter schools."

I don't talk about race with White people because I have so often seen it go nowhere. When I was younger, I thought it was because all white people are racist. Recently, I've begun to understand that it's more nuanced than that.

To understand, you have to know that Black people think in terms of Black people. We don't see a shooting of an innocent Black child in another state as something separate from us because we know viscerally that it could be our child, our parent, or us, that is shot.

The shooting of Walter Scott in North Charleston resonated with me because Walter Scott was portrayed in the media as a deadbeat and a criminal- but when you look at the facts about the actual man, he was nearly indistinguishable from my own father.

Racism affects us directly because the fact that it happened at a geographically remote location or to another Black person is only a coincidence, an accident. It could just as easily happen to us- right here, right now.

Black people think in terms of we because we live in a society where the social and political structures interact with us as Black people.

White people do not think in terms of we. White people have the privilege to interact with the social and political structures of our society as individuals. You are "you," I am "one of them." Whites are often not directly affected by racial oppression even in their own community, so what does not affect them locally has little chance of affecting them regionally or nationally. They have no need, nor often any real desire, to think in terms of a group. They are supported by the system, and so are mostly unaffected by it.

What they are affected by are attacks on their own character. To my aunt, the suggestion that "people in The North are racist" is an attack on her as a racist. She is unable to differentiate her participation within a racist system (upwardly mobile, not racially profiled, able to move to White suburbs, etc.) from an accusation that she, individually, is a racist. Without being able to make that differentiation, White people in general decide to vigorously defend their own personal non-racism, or point out that it doesn't exist because they don't see it.

The result of this is an incessantly repeating argument where a Black person says "Racism still exists. It is real," and a white person argues "You're wrong, I'm not racist at all. I don't even see any racism." My aunt's immediate response is not "that is wrong, we should do better." No, her response is self-protection: "That's not my fault, I didn't do anything. You are wrong."

Racism is not slavery. As President Obama said, it's not avoiding the use of the word Nigger. Racism is not white water fountains and the back of the bus. Martin Luther King did not end racism. Racism is a cop severing the spine of an innocent man. It is a 12 year old child being shot for playing with a toy gun in a state where it is legal to openly carry firearms.

But racism is even more subtle than that. It's more nuanced. Racism is the fact that "White" means "normal" and that anything else is different. Racism is our acceptance of an all white Lord of the Rings cast because of historical accuracy, ignoring the fact that this is a world with an entirely fictionalized history.

Even when we make shit up, we want it to be white.

And racism is the fact that we all accept that it is white. Benedict Cumberbatch playing Khan in Star Trek. Khan, who is from India. Is there anyone Whiter than Benedict ****** Cumberbatch? What? They needed a "less racial" cast because they already had the Black Uhura character?
That is racism. Once you let yourself see it, it's there all the time.

Black children learn this when their parents give them "The Talk." When they are sat down at the age of five or so and told that their best friend's father is not sick, and not in a bad mood- he just doesn't want his son playing with you. Black children grow up early to life in The Matrix. We're not given a choice of the red or blue pill. Most white people, like my aunt, never have to choose. The system was made for White people, so White people don't have to think about living in it.

But we can't point this out.

Living every single day with institutionalized racism and then having to argue its very existence, is tiring, and saddening, and angering. Yet if we express any emotion while talking about it, we're tone policed, told we're being angry. In fact, a key element in any racial argument in America is the Angry Black person, and racial discussions shut down when that person speaks. The Angry Black person invalidates any arguments about racism because they are "just being overly sensitive," or "too emotional," or- playing the race card. Or even worse, we're told that we are being racist (Does any intelligent person actually believe a systematically oppressed demographic has the ability to oppress those in power?)

But here is the irony, here's the thing that all the angry Black people know, and no calmly debating White people want to admit: The entire discussion of race in America centers around the protection of White feelings.

Ask any Black person and they'll tell you the same thing. The reality of thousands of innocent people raped, shot, imprisoned, and systematically disenfranchised are less important than the suggestion that a single White person might be complicit in a racist system.

This is the country we live in. Millions of Black lives are valued less than a single White person's hurt feelings.

White people and Black people are not having a discussion about race. Black people, thinking as a group, are talking about living in a racist system. White people, thinking as individuals, refuse to talk about "I, racist" and instead protect their own individual and personal goodness. In doing so, they reject the existence of racism.

But arguing about personal non-racism is missing the point.

Despite what the Charleston Massacre makes things look like, people are dying not because individuals are racist, but because individuals are helping support a racist system by wanting to protect their own non-racist self beliefs.

People are dying because we are supporting a racist system that justifies White people killing Black people.

We see this in the way that one Muslim killer is a sign of Islamic terror; in the way one Mexican thief is a pointer to the importance of border security; in one innocent, unarmed Black man is shot in the back by a cop, then sullied in the media as a thug and criminal.

And in the way a white racist in a state that still flies the confederate flag is seen as "troubling" and "unnerving." In the way people "can't understand why he would do such a thing."

A white person smoking pot is a "Hippie" and a Black person doing it is a "criminal." It's evident in the school to prison pipeline and the fact that there are close to 20 people of color in prison for every white person.

There's a headline from The Independent that sums this up quite nicely: "Charleston shooting: Black and Muslim killers are 'terrorists' and 'thugs'. Why are white shooters called 'mentally ill'?"

I'm gonna read that again: "Black and Muslim killers are 'terrorists' and 'thugs'. Why are white shooters called 'mentally ill'?"

Did you catch that? It's beautifully subtle. This is an article talking specifically about the different way we treat people of color in this nation and even in this article's headline, the white people are "shooters" and the Black and Muslim people are "killers."

Even when we're talking about racism, we're using racist language to make people of color look dangerous and make White people come out as not so bad.

Just let that sink in for a minute, then ask yourself why Black people are angry when they talk about race.

The reality of America is that White people are fundamentally good, and so when a white person commits a crime, it is a sign that they, as an individual, are bad. Their actions as a person are not indicative of any broader social construct. Even the fact that America has a growing number of violent hate groups, populated mostly by white men, and that nearly *all* serial killers are white men can not shadow the fundamental truth of white male goodness. In fact, we like White serial killers so much, we make mini-series about them.

White people are good as a whole, and only act badly as individuals.

People of color, especially Black people (but boy we can talk about "The Mexicans" in this community), are seen as fundamentally bad. There might be a good one- and we are always quick to point them out to our friends, show them off as our Academy Award for "Best Non-Racist in a White Role"- but when we see a bad one, it's just proof that the rest are, as a rule, bad.

This, all of this, expectation, treatment, thought, the underlying social system that puts White in the position of Normal and good, and Black in the position of "other" and "bad," all of this, is racism.

And White people, every single one of you, are complicit in this racism because you benefit directly from it.

This is why I don't like the story of the good samaritan. Everyone likes to think of themselves as the person who sees someone beaten and bloodied and helps him out.

That's too easy.

If I could re-write that story, I'd rewrite it from the perspective of Black America. What if the person wasn't beaten and bloody? What if it wasn't so obvious? What if they were just systematically challenged in a thousand small ways that actually made it easier for you to succeed in life?

Would you be so quick to help then, or would you, like most White people, stay silent and let it happen.

Here's what I want to say to you: Racism is so deeply embedded in this country not because of the racist right-wing radicals who practice it openly, it exists because of the silence and hurt feelings of liberal America.

That's what I want to say, but really, I can't. I can't say that because I've spent my life not talking about race to White people. In a big way, it's my fault. Racism exists because I, as a Black person, don't challenge you to look at it.

Racism exists because I, not you, am silent.

But I'm caught in the perfect Catch 22, because when I start pointing out racism, I become the Angry Black Person, and the discussion shuts down again. So I'm stuck.

All the Black voices in the world speaking about racism all the time do not move White people to think about it- but one White John Stewart talking about Charleston has a whole lot of White people talking about it. That's the world we live in. Black people can't change it while White people are silent and deaf to our words.

White people are in a position of power in this country because of racism. The question is: Are they brave enough to use that power to speak against the system that gave it to them?

So I'm asking you to help me. Notice this. Speak up. Don't let it slide. Don't stand watching in silence. Help build a world where it never gets to the point where the Samaritan has to see someone bloodied and broken.

As for me, I will no longer be silent. I'm going to try to speak kindly, and softly, but that's gonna be hard. Because it's getting harder and harder for me to think about the protection of White people's feelings when White people don't seem to care at all about the loss of so many Black lives.

This blog was originally published on Medium.com.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 15 Jul 2015 22:07

^^

awesome piece. Hit the nail on the head

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 16 Jul 2015 12:09

That's a beautiful piece.

I have found blacks to be very intelligent and nuanced, certainly better than the average white.

ashvin · Post by **ashvin** » 16 Jul 2015 13:53

Excellent piece of writing! I have been waiting for such an expose with such clarity to rebut claims that America has come a long way in race relations!

srin · Post by **srin** » 16 Jul 2015 18:25

I know correlation is not causation, but I wonder if it may be in this case:
a) Americans (esp in South) love guns. Right to bear arms is a constitutional right
b) After the independence, Americans wiped out the native Indian population systematically.
c) Despite Independence, Americans had slavery for a hundred years and segregation for a hundred more. And yet, Blacks didn't rebel (no insurrection) on a large scale.

Therefore, does it follow that the right to bear arms was historically to keep the blacks under control and also to wipe out the native population (and everything else - libertarian views etc - was just a cover) ?

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 20 Jul 2015 20:46

A non-colored guy talks about racism and lays it out. It is not necessarily due to non-colored guys. The point is even more devastating - That is when it is as dangerous as Rwanda for section of population, with all the command and control at disposable, with all the years behind them, there is a stark failure to even manage a little problem. The track record is pathetic, but there is a humongous desire to occupy a moral high-ground all across the board and lecture everyone else on any and every problem. Either it is don't care or incapable. Don't know which is worse.
This dichotomy is mainly due to the huge gap in "what is said" vs "what is actually done" and people tout that what is said as the proof that there is no institutionalized racism across the board. When surveyed people will say they would not have problems with dealing non-normal (anyone that is not non-colored), but the actual conduct will be very different.
Do not know, if there is a real desire to find solution, or is it more of a desire to just manage the status-quo. Unless, this problem is really solved(takes shift in attitudes genuinely, not just being closets and mouthing sound bites), it is going to be tough to claim as solution providers.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/stats-g ... as-rwanda/

To put this into context, Silver explained, the murder rate for white Americans is similar to the murder rate for people living in Finland, Chile or Israel. The murder rate for black Americans, on the other hand, is similar to the rate found “in developing countries that are war zones even, like Myanmar, or Rwanda, Mexico, Brazil, Nigeria, places that have vast disorder.

So I’m an editor now as well as a writer so we think when a story occurs is this a quote unquote “random act of violence” or is this representative of some broader trend and I think these stories about police brutality, it’s uncovering things that have been going on for a long time and that are very common experiences…

Now that we do have video cameras everywhere it’s not a coincidence that all of a sudden now that we have means to record these things all of a sudden these things crop up all the time.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 29 Jul 2015 06:12

Result of centuries of Brainwashing

March of 1969, Ebony Magazine was nearly put out of business. Why? They published an issue of Ebony Magazine with a Black Jesus on the cover. So many in the Black community were upset to the point of threatening to cancel their subscriptions, it went as far as customers sending in pictures of the white Jesus to replace it.

KJo · Post by **KJo** » 04 Aug 2015 23:53

Hello all,
This thread is to discuss the candidates of the two main parties, the candidates, their world view, their promises and most importantly their foreign policy especially with India.