These Afghan Army Uniforms Cost American Taxpayers $28 Million ‘in the Name of Fashion’

The Pentagon is under fire for spending nearly $28 million procuring camouflage uniforms for the Afghan army, gear suited for environments so rare they account for just 2 percent of Afghanistan’s countryside, according to a new watchdog report.

The Defense Department organization overseeing efforts to train and equip Afghan forces supervised selection and design of the new proprietary woodland camouflage pattern without proper testing and assessment, according to the report published Wednesday by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

For years, Afghan conventional forces and elite commandos have fielded the U.S. Army’s woodland pattern utility uniforms. In 2007, the Afghan Defense Ministry embarked on a quest to design new uniforms to counter efforts by the Taliban and militants battling government forces to counterfeit the clothing.

The new uniform was designed in similar fashion to the current uniform worn by the U.S. Army, called the Army Combat Uniform, but at a much higher cost, the inspector general determined.

According to the report, the HyperStealth’s Spec4ce Forest camouflage pattern was chosen by the then-Afghan Defense Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak — because he liked what he saw while browsing a website. (Read more from “These Afghan Army Uniforms Cost American Taxpayers $28 Million ‘in the Name of Fashion'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Former Government Worker Charged With Giving Top-Secret Info to China

The Justice Department announced Thursday that it had arrested and charged a former US government employee for sharing top-secret information with a Chinese government agent.

The criminal complaint states that Kevin Mallory has been charged with delivering defense information to aid a foreign government and making false statements to investigators. The Justice Department said Mallory could face a life sentence if convicted . . .

The criminal complaint says Mallory met with a Chinese national in Shanghai during March and April 2017 who “represented himself” as working for a think tank the FBI has said is intertwined with Chinese intelligence. Mallory consented to an interview with FBI agents in late May, where he told them about a communication device the Chinese national had provided him with. He allowed the FBI to examine the device, and the Justice Department said the FBI found classified information on it, including a document marked top-secret. (Read more from “Former Government Worker Charged With Giving Top-Secret Info to China” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

California Bans State Travel to Areas They View as ‘Discriminatory Towards Transgender and Homosexual People’

California is restricting publicly funded travel to four more states because of recent laws that leaders here view as discriminatory against gay and transgender people.

All totaled, California now bans most state-funded travel to eight states.

The new additions to California’s restricted travel list are Texas, Alabama, Kentucky and South Dakota.

They join Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee as states already subjected to the ban.

California Attorney Xavier Becerra announced the new states at a Thursday press conference, where he was joined by representatives from ACLU Northern California and Equality California. (Read more from “California Bans State Travel to Areas They View as ‘Discriminatory Towards Transgender and Homosexual People'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mega Actor Makes ‘Joke’ Towards Trump That Sounds More Like a Threat

By Patrick Smith. In a year that he would like to forget, which included his acrimonious divorce to Amber Heard, Johnny Depp appeared at a Q&A at the new Cinemageddon stage at Glastonbury.

Introducing his 2004 film The Libertine, about a 17th-century poet who notoriously drank himself to an early death, the 54-year-old chose to discuss American politics.

“I think [Donald] Trump needs help,” he said. “There are a lot of dark places he could go.”

He added: “I’m not insinuating anything – by the way this will be in the press and it will be horrible – but when was the last time an actor assassinated a president?”

Responding to loud cheers, Depp said: “Don’t worry, I’m not an actor, I lie for a living.” (Read more from “Mega Actor Makes ‘Joke’ Towards Trump That Sounds More Like a Threat” HERE)

_______________________________________

Elise Jordan Says Defending Trump ‘Like Hugging a Suicide Bomber’

By Aidan McLaughlin. Elise Jordan warned Republicans against defending a fact-challenged President Donald Trump, comparing doing so to “hugging a suicide bomber” on MSNBC Thursday.

The comments were in response to Trump’s latest tweets undermining his previous statement hinting that he may have recorded tapes of his conversations with former FBI director James Comey . . .

MSNBC’s Craig Melvin asked Jordan about the president’s tweets, noting “it would seem as if the president may have been lying all along about the existence of these tapes.”

“No, he’s just wasting — he wasted the country’s collective time speculating over whether these tapes existed or not,” Jordan said. “It’s a sad day when you cannot depend on the president’s word.”

Jordan — a Bush White House aide turned MSNBC analyst and TIME contributor — then doled out some advice for Republican lawmakers: “My advice would just be to Republicans who do cozy up to him — it’s like hugging a suicide bomber.” (Read more from “Elise Jordan Says Defending Trump ‘Like Hugging a Suicide Bomber'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

30 GOP Congressmen Have Been Attacked or Threatened Since May

A total of 30 Republican members of Congress have either been attacked or revealed that they were the victim of a death threat since the beginning of May.

May 8: Wendi Wright, 35, was arrested after stalking Rep. David Kustoff (Tenn.) and trying to run him off the road. After pulling over, Wright “began to scream and strike the windows on Kustoff’s car and even reached inside the vehicle.”

May 9: Virginia Rep. Tom Garrett needed heavy security at a town hall after receiving a series of death threats in May that police “deemed to be credible and real.” . . .

May 12: A town hall participant accosted North Dakota Rep. Kevin Cramer, shoving fake dollar bills into his suit jacket. A Kramer supporter grabbed the same man by the neck. Both men were ejected by law enforcement, but neither were charged.

May 12: A Tucson, Ariz. school district employee was arrested by the FBI for sending several death threats to Arizona Rep. Martha McSally. The man threatened to shoot McSally and told her to “be careful” because her days “were numbered.” (Read more from “30 GOP Congressmen Have Been Attacked or Threatened Since May” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Open Marriages Happier? Not So Fast, Family Research Expert Says

Anecdotal praise of open relationships can be found all over the internet. The New York Times’ May feature is the most prominent example. The headline wonders, “Is an Open Marriage a Happier Marriage?

Meanwhile, LGBT advocates are celebrating the first polyamorous “family” to be legally recognized in Colombia this month.

But are these kinds of relationships really as healthy as recent reports suggest?

Just as Happy?

Studies traditionally report that people in open marriages and other forms of polyamory are less happy than monogamous couples. A March study suggests that’s because society is biased against them. Researchers at SAGE Journals found that “CNM [consensual non-monogamous] relationships generally have equally positive relational outcomes as monogamous relationships.”

But Dr. Brad Wilcox said there is a lack of good evidence on the actual appeal of open marriages. For instance, the Times piece on open marriages was “data free.” That was “striking,” he told The Stream. Wilcox is the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia.

Studies favoring polyamory “are based on non-representative samples,” he said. “It’s not really good science.” Even the SAGE study’s authors admit their survey respondents were not chosen randomly. They may have been biased toward positive reporting.

“My guess is that these marriages are really unstable,” Wilcox said. The complexity that comes along with an open marriage might be harder in practice than in theory, he added.

Wilcox noted that most Americans still favor the idea of fidelity. And people who have had just one partner in the last year and not several tend to be happier, he said. He called those pushing for polyamory and open marriages “a small minority.”

Redefining Morality

Why is that minority so vocal? Perhaps it has to do with Americans’ shifting view of morality.

LifeWay Research released a telling study last month. It revealed that 81 percent of Americans worry about “declining moral behavior.” But people disagree about the meaning of “moral.” Nearly 50 percent said that right and wrong are absolutes. But 20 percent said something is “wrong” only if it hurts someone.

According to the study, “More than 6 in 10 of those older than 45 say right and wrong do not change. For those 35 and younger, fewer than 4 in 10 make that claim.” The age gap between the two is not surprising. Another recent study revealed that only 4 percent of millennials hold a “biblical worldview.”

Since many people don’t view moral truths as absolute, the growing acceptance of polyamory makes sense. If it doesn’t hurt anybody, why not? “How is love bad?” asks one husband who lives with his wife, daughter, and his wife’s boyfriend.

True Happiness Requires Holiness

The Times portrays its “Open Marriage” interview subjects with sophistication. The author is impressed by the “boldness” of their unconventional ways. But really, there’s nothing new or bold about seeking sensual pleasure.

In Galatians, Paul refers to sinful desires as “the flesh.” He warns Christians to “not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh.” (Galatians 5:13) A few verses later, he writes:

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. (Galatians 5:16-17)

Christians are taught to reject fleshly desires in favor of something greater. We believe true joy is found in holiness. And we become holy by accepting God’s salvation through Jesus Chirst. In that salvation, there is freedom from the sin that enslaves all of us.

Anything in marriage beyond fidelity between one man and one woman is sin. And so participating in anything else is to resubmit to sin’s bondage. As D.C. McAllister wrote for The Federalist in 2015, critiquing a polyamorist columnist:

Burrows was so quick to throw off the chains of religion and social norms that she fails to see that she has entered a new kind of bondage: she is bound by the chains of her sexual desires. Little does she know that those butterflies that make her feel so alive will soon become dragons that burn off her soul and reduce her to an empty shell of animalistic appetites. Burrows fails to see that liberty — real liberty — is found in self-government and self-control.

The idea of open marriage and poly-romance isn’t new. Neither is defining happiness and freedom by the unbridled pursuit of sensual pleasure. But there is a recent wave of exploration when it comes to the idea of polyamory as a legitimate, ethical relationship (and parenting) style — even if led by a “small minority.” Founded on empty desires, false morality and little research, it’s a wave that deserves push-back. (For more from the author of “Open Marriages Happier? Not So Fast, Family Research Expert Says” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Starbucks Caught Lying to Public Again: Spent Almost $100 Million Covering up GMO Use

First, it was Starbucks’ anti-family campaign, then its anti-gun fanaticism that turned off millions of conservative Americans to its high-priced coffee. Now, with Starbucks caught lying over GMO use, the coffee-giant is offending citizens of all political stripes. As reported by the Hearty Soul.

We live in an age of inequality and social divide. With 1% of the population in the United States holding 38% of the wealth and almost all of the power. Education, healthcare, the government, and even the food we eat and drink are owned by wealthy individuals and faceless corporations.

So it may not come as a surprise to you that a morning coffee from Starbucks is the last thing that you should be drinking to put a pep in your step. It has been discovered that the coffee conglomerate has spent nearly $100 million to cover up their use of GMOs in their drinks.

‘In the past two years alone, Starbucks has been a part of a GMA-led coalition that has donated more than $70 million dollars to defeat GMO labeling efforts in California and Washington State,’ said a spokesperson for Food Democracy Now. ‘By opposing GMO labeling, Starbucks has willingly climbed in bed with Monsanto and the GMA and is intentionally misleading customers about their commitment to sustainability and ethical sourcing.’

It’s a damning statement and is certainly warranted. Not only have Starbucks been putting on a facade as an ethical organization, but they have proactively sought to increase the usage of GMO foods. Considering that they have over 23,000 stores in 64 different countries, Starbucks has a huge influence on farmers.

Starbucks’ milk currently comes from factory farmed cows, usually owned by their partner Monsanto. These cows are kept in terrible conditions, pumped with unnatural antibiotics and fed GMO grains. According to the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) in 2011, Starbucks used over, ‘93 million gallons of milk per year, enough to fill 155 Olympic-sized swimming pools.’

Considering their continued growth over the past five years it is likely that the figure today would be even higher. Their continued desire to quash legislation that calls for the labeling of GMO foods equates to an awful lot of people consuming them without their prior knowledge.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Did Obama Do Enough to Save Otto Warmbier in North Korea?

Did President Obama do enough to save Otto Warmbier?

Otto’s father, Fred, clearly doesn’t appear to think so. During a press conference following the return of his then-comatose son, Warmbier said that the Obama administration told him and the family to “take a low profile” — meaning, avoid speaking to the media or making public statements about his son’s plight.

“We did so without resolve,” Mr. Warmbier said of his family’s compliance, after receiving assurances that the Obama White House was working hard to secure his son’s release.

So, what exactly did Obama and his Cabinet do to ensure Otto Warmbier was brought home?

It all started in late February, when under notably visible, extreme duress, Warmbier “confessed” to an act he allegedly committed.

One month later, the regime in Pyongyang convicted Warmbier of “hostile acts” against the nation after he was charged with trying to steal a political banner in a hotel. The then-21-year-old Warmbier was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor for his actions.

On March 16, 2016, in response to a question about Warmbier, Obama White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters that “there is no greater priority for this administration than the welfare and safety of U.S. citizens abroad.”

“The allegations for which this individual was arrested and imprisoned would not give rise to arrest or imprisonment in the United States, or in just about any other country in the world,” Earnest said.

“We strongly urge the North Korean government to pardon him and grant him special amnesty and immediate release.”

That same day, President Obama signed an executive order sanctioning companies and individuals attached to the government of North Korea. However, Earnest said the sanctions were a response to North Korean ballistic missile tests the previous months, and seemingly not its imprisonment of an American citizen.

A search of public statements made by the Obama White House on Warmbier’s case, since Earnest’s call for his release, comes up almost entirely empty.

Months went by, and Otto Warmbier’s imprisonment seemed to be a forgotten cause. At this time, Fred Warmbier decided “the time for strategic patience was over.”

So, what did the Obama administration do behind the scenes while the young college student was suffering at the hands of the North Koreans?

Conservative Review reached out to the State Department to fill in the gaps.

“Together with Sweden, the protecting power for the United States in North Korea, we consistently raised concerns about Mr. Warmbier, the lack of consular access, and his harsh 15-year sentence to hard labor,” a State Department official told Conservative Review.

“We hold North Korea accountable for Otto Warmbier’s unjust imprisonment, and we want to see the three other Americans who are unjustly detained in North Korea come home as soon as possible.”

Nonetheless, until President Trump came into office, the diplomatic effort did not yield any noteworthy results.

“The question was, do I think the past administration could have done more? The results speak for themselves,” Warmbier told reporters, in a clear slight of the Obama White House.

Fred Warmbier credited the new administration with helping to bring his son home from captivity.

But four days after his release, Otto Warmbier died from complications stemming from a severe brain injury suffered in the custody of the tyrannical regime in North Korea. Otto was 22 years old. (For more from the author of “Did Obama Do Enough to Save Otto Warmbier in North Korea?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Watch: Christian Aid Worker Braves ISIS Gunfire to Rescue Little Girl in Mosul

A former special forces operative who now works as an aid worker was recently caught on camera braving the Islamic State gunfire in the open in order to save a little girl in Mosul, Iraq.

David Eubank, 56, is founder of the Free Burma Rangers, an organization dedicated to assisting pro-Democracy groups in conflict zones such as Burma or Iraq with highly trained, highly mobile, multipurpose relief teams. These teams deliver food, clothing, water, and medical care where they are dispatched and where other organizations don’t have the skill to go.

Eubank, who is also a husband and father of three, was a member of the First Special Forces Group. According to the Los Angeles Times, Eubank joined the special forces team when he was 18, but after 10 years decided that he needed “the freedom to go where God was leading.”

The Times reported that when a Burmese Bible group asked Eubank’s Christian missionary parents for help, they turned to their son.

“The Burmese said they were a warrior people, and they needed someone like that. My parents called me up and asked what I thought,” Eubank said. “I figured I could go and even if I helped only one person, at least they would be happy and I would be happy.” (Read more from “Watch: Christian Aid Worker Braves ISIS Gunfire to Rescue Little Girl in Mosul” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Privacy Organization Urges Congress to Examine FBI’s Secret Biometric ID Program

While the general public is still in the dark about the arrival of biometric identification that is taking place in nearly every walk of life, even privacy defenders who have been closely following these developments don’t have sufficient information.

A shocking report came to light early this year about a massive FBI database that has been collecting millions of faceprints of American citizens – for years.

Known as the Next Generation Identification system, since 2014 the FBI has amassed more than 50 million images scoured from facial recognition alone; and, as reported by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the images have merged into the FBI’s legacy database of fingerprints and other identifiers to create a centralized hub of surveillance:

NGI builds on the FBI’s legacy fingerprint database—which already contains well over 100 million individual records—and has been designed to include multiple forms of biometric data, including palm prints and iris scans in addition to fingerprints and face recognition data. NGI combines all these forms of data in each individual’s file, linking them to personal and biographic data like name, home address, ID number, immigration status, age, race, etc. This immense database is shared with other federal agencies and with the approximately 18,000 tribal, state and local law enforcement agencies across the United States.

(Source)

Worst of all, the FBI has admitted that the system contains non-criminal identification as well as criminal, including:

suspects and detainees,
fingerprints for job applicants
licenses
military or volunteer service
background checks
security clearances
naturalization

All told, it’s been estimated that half of all adult Americans appear in a biometric database.

Despite what is clearly a sweeping program of surveillance and a violation of numerous Amendments to the Constitution, the FBI has resisted all inquiries made by privacy organizations and even the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Now one of the most respected privacy defenders, EPIC, is urging Congress to do its job and fully examine the secret FBI program. EPIC summarized the scope of the program, as well as measures taken by the FBI to exempt itself from privacy protections:

EPIC has sent a statement to the House Appropriations Committee in advance of a hearing on the FBI’s budget. EPIC urged the Committee to examine the FBI’s Next Generation Identification program. EPIC explained that the program “raises far-reaching privacy issues that implicate the rights of Americans all across the country.” The FBI biometric database is one of the largest in the world, but the Bureau proposed to exempt the database from Privacy Act protections. EPIC and others supported strong safeguards for the program. In an early FOIA case against the FBI, EPIC obtained documents which revealed high error levels in the biometric database. EPIC has recently filed a FOIA lawsuit against the FBI for information about the agency’s plans to transfer biometric data to the Department of Defense.

(Source)

The full statement from EPIC is posted below. As the use of biometrics is increasing by the day, it is essential that we help uncover the true scope of how this information is going to be used. Spread the word now and raise awareness so that we can ensure the best chance possible at resisting what appears to be the construction of a digital tyranny.

(For more from the author of “Privacy Organization Urges Congress to Examine FBI’s Secret Biometric ID Program” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.