Recap - No sharia law in Texas

Muslims in Texas and all over the world are collectively up in arms, and honestly I couldn’t be happier about it.

We have reports Texas has officially passed a law that bans Sharia law from existing in the state!

This is a monumental win for American ideals and freedom over Islam, Muslims and all they oppress and stand for.

Shoebat originally reported on this.

The Texas Senate last night passed and sent to Governor Greg Abbott a measure that would prevent any ‘international/sharia law’ from being used in Texas civil courts, a bill that Muslim detractors and some of their far left allies say is ‘Islamophobic.’

WOAI State Sen. Donna Campbell (R-New Braunfels) doesn’t mention Islamic Koranic law, or ‘Sharia Law’ in her bill. She simply says it guarantees that no laws fro ‘foreign courts’ will be adopted by Texas civil court judges.

“It’s just to provide some belt and suspenders to make sure that, with judicial discretion, we don’t trump Texas law, American law, with a foreign law regarding family law,” Campbell said.

Essentially what this means is that Sharia Law cannot be practiced as a law in Texas.

State Senator Kirk Watson (D-Austin) grilled Campbell on examples she has seen of foreign law being used in Texas courts.

“What foreign law are you attempting to prevent being used, and can you give examples of where it has created a problem in the state?” Watson asked.

“No foreign law,” Campbell replied. “This just provides a context for judicial discretion.”

_________________________________________

We are compelled  to pay for this Free Speech Zone - Please become our Partner and click the DONATE link below or contact the editor-in-chief [at] truthserumeditor@gmail.com

Obama casualty count - another fabrication?

From the Susan Crabtree files at the Washington Examiner

A new claim that American-led airstrikes have killed 10,000 Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria in nine months is backfiring on the administration, as officials had said months earlier that body counts are not the way to gauge success, and because officials had few other details to back up the claim.

The lack of any additional information is also making it hard for skeptics of President Obama's war against the terrorist group to square the body count claim with the news they see every day about the Islamic State seizing control of new cities in Iraq and Syria.

Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken cited the figure Wednesday at a Paris conference that focused on how to stop the Islamic State advances, which ended without any announcements about a change in strategy.

The new figure, an increase of 4,000 deaths since U.S. officials said they had killed 6,000 fighters back in January, was released on the same day that a poll showed flagging support for the Obama administration's handling of the Islamic State threat.

A CNN poll released Wednesday shows that just 32 percent of Americans support Obama's strategy against the Islamic State, down eight points from the last poll in February.

Pressed Wednesday about the plummeting poll numbers, White House press secretary Josh Earnest brushed aside the findings.

"The president is not designing our strategy around this military conflict based on monthly poll numbers, but he's doing it based on the national security interests of the United States," he said. "…That's why the president continues to believe it's not in our best interests to essentially re-invade Iraq to try to solve this problem."

Instead, Earnest said, Obama is sticking to the plan to depend on a U.S.-led international coalition to help support the Iraqi security forces in taking the fight to the Islamic State in their own country.

"That's the strategy that we're going to continue to pursue, and it's a strategy that has shown some success but obviously there's a lot more work to be done," he added.

Still, the 10,000 body count announcement appeared aimed at pushing back against the widespread criticism of Obama's record amid new reports that the Islamic State is positioning itself to take Aleppo, Syria's largest city, aided by the forces of President Bashar al-Assad, after successfully retaking the Iraqi city of Ramadi just two weeks ago.

The figure, however, prompted more questions than it answered. The administration faced a barrage of questions on Wednesday about the methodology behind the 10,000 figure and offered very few details about the metrics behind it.

More at the Washington Examiner

ISIS hostage Kayla Mueller confirmed dead

ISIS hostage, American Kayla Mueller confirmed dead by the Whitehouse

Kayla Mueller - 26 Years Old and Killed by ISIS

President Obama confirmed today that American ISIS hostage Kayla Mueller has been killed, days after the terror group claimed she had died in a Jordanian airstrike.

“It is with profound sadness that we have learned of the death of Kayla Jean Mueller,” Obama said in a statement released by the White House. “On behalf of the American people, Michelle and I convey our deepest condolences to Kayla’s family – her parents, Marsha and Carl, and her brother Eric and his family – and all of those who loved Kayla dearly. At this time of unimaginable suffering, the country shares in their grief.”

ISIS claimed in a statement Friday Mueller had been killed, but no evidence of her death was presented, prompting doubts about ISIS’s claim from former U.S. officials.

A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council said that over the weekend, the Mueller family "received a private message from Kayla's [ISIS] captors containing additional information."

Once this information was authenticated by the intelligence community, they concluded that Kayla was deceased.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

The Syrian Rubics Cube

The Syrian Rubics Cube from the Warning Signs by Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Bashar al-Assad

One has to have some sympathy for those in the CIA or the White House folks charged with telling the President what has been going on in Syria since 2011 when the opposition to Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship turned into a fighting war. It must have looked and felt like playing with a Rubics cube where the competing groups and militias kept changing all the time.

In his book, “Inside Syria”, Reese Erlich, a Peabody Award-winning journalist and author of four books on foreign policy, has a chapter devoted to the way the Syrian revolt took shape. “The antigovernment demonstrations began in the southern city of Daraa in March 2011.”

Erlich reports that they began after police arrested several pre-teen school children for writing anti-regime graffiti on the walls of a school. Being Syria, they were beaten and tortured. More than 600 protesters confronted the local governor demanding the injured children be let free.

Security forces attacked the group and killed two of the protesters. This is in keeping with the Middle Eastern mentality and culture, something Americans, accustomed to having peaceful demonstrations, have difficulty comprehending.

“By mid-March demonstrations broke out in Damascus and other parts of the country” because the Arab Spring had let loose a vast feeling of discontent and opposition in a number of nations and the Assad regime was, to put it mildly, unpopular.

It didn’t help that “Assad cracked down mercilessly on peaceful protesters” opening fire with live ammunition. Security forces arrested and tortured anyone suspected of participating in the protest.

It is necessary to understand that it is difficult to organize Syrians or other Middle Easterners under the best or worst of conditions and that explains why Americans following events can be forgiven for trying to figure out who was doing what. That includes our intelligence community.

“Local Coordinating Committees developed spontaneously in many cities as mostly young activists created grassroots groups unaffiliated with the traditional opposition. They were united on the need to overthrow Assad, hold free elections, and establish a parliamentary system with civil liberties.”

It only took from March 2011 to July for defectors from Assad’s army to announce formation of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), followed on both sides by targeted assassinations.

For many years the Muslim Brotherhood seemed to be the most influential opposition group, but it was led by an older generation that was surprised by the events led by young Syrians. “Brotherhood leaders had cultivated extensive ties internationally, particularly with the Islamist government of Turkey.

Those leaders became major players in the formation of yet another group, the Syrian National Council, (SNC) based in Istanbul. Suffice to say that there are many secular, non-religious, Muslims in the Middle East and those in Syria were not inclined to believe anything the Brotherhood's SNC had to say.

The Obama administration had a problem figuring out who to support in the developing civil war. They opted for the Free Syrian Army, as did Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, but it was reluctant to provide arms with which to wage a war against Assad. By the spring of 2012, the FSA was asking for shoulder-fired missiles capable of bringing down aircraft and our CIA said no, fearing they would fall into the wrong hands which in Syria’s case could be virtually any other group.

Another group was Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam), “formed from the September 2013 merger of dozens of smaller militias, mostly in the Damascus area.” They were Islamists preferring Sharia law and they flew the black flag of jihad. By the end of 2013 they helped form the Islamic Front. To make things more confusing there was another group, Ahrar al-Sham, one of the largest militias in Syria and their aim was a Sunni Islamic state.

In November 2013, al-Sham joined with other conservative groups and they opposed the Syrian Free Army and the Syrian Military Council, along with the al Qaeda affiliated groups of al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham. Confused? Who wouldn’t be?

Suffice to say al-Nusra was devoted to creating an Islamic state ruled by the Koran. In December 2012, the U.S. State Department put al-Nusra on its list of terrorist organizations because of its ties to al Qaeda, but it turned out that an even more extreme group existed, calling itself the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS). It was this group that announced it would lead an Islamic State in the area seized from Syria and Iraq.

ISIS is so extreme that in February 2014 Ayman al-Zawahri, the al Qaeda successor to bin Laden, cut ties to ISIS.

The U.S. and a handful of coalition partners are currently bombing ISIS in Syria and Iraq. In time the U.S. will have to put ground troops into the area to root out and kill ISIS.

Barack Obama has become a war President thanks to the chaos he created by removing U.S. troops from Iraq in 2011 and to the Arab Spring that swept over nations whose populations wanted to be rid of dictators like Bashar Assad.

This will not likely end soon.

____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

ISIS army strength grows by 2000 percent

ISIS army strength grows by nearly 2000% since January from the files of Allen B. West

Areas Controlled by ISIS

Uh, Houston, we have a problem. Back in January the terrorist group formerly known as al-Qaida in Iraq morphed in Syria and renamed itself ISIS and crossed back into Iraq and took over western Al Anbar province and the towns of Al Ramadi and Fallujah — cities where Marines and Soldiers spent precious blood to win. At the time, this group had an estimated strength of 1,500 to 2,000.

We did nothing then, as a matter of fact our President referred to them as the “jayvee” team — well, they’ve gone straight to college level.

As reported Friday by Fox News, “The CIA said Thursday that the number of Islamic State fighters has grown to as many as three times previous estimates, a day after President Obama announced he is drastically expanding the U.S. military campaign against the militants.

A spokesperson for the agency told Fox News that new assessments show that the militant group can muster between 20,000 and 31,500 fighters across Iraq and Syria. The spokesperson said the new figures were determined after a review of “all-source intelligence reports” on the group from May to August.”

So I go back to Obama’s speech Wednesday evening and ask a simple question. Can you degrade and destroy an army of 31,500 (equivalent to almost three US Army light infantry divisions) with a “very significant counter-terrorism operation” focused only on air strikes?

Military calculations for offensive operations will tell you that 3:1 is the preferred ratio, if you want to “destroy” the enemy. That means you are enemy-oriented and will conduct a multi-phased operation to include a pursuit phase to achieve your desired end state — the enemy’s destruction.

As we say in the military, “no plan survives first contact,” so will Obama and his crew of Keystone Cops adjust and perhaps allow the real professionals in the Pentagon and CENTCOM to develop a plan? Instead of his poll-driven political partisan drivel that doesn’t define success or victory.

I have to ask Mr. President, what are the area of operations and the area of interest? What is the shaping operation and what is the decisive operation? Where is our main effort and who are the supporting efforts? We already have further confusion in the command chain as the Obama administration announced a retired Marine General to be in charge of the operation.

What does that tell the CJCS General Martin Dempsey and the CENTCOM CG General Lloyd Austin? Are they supposed to report to a retired Marine General as we execute a combat operation — and this is war, it is combat?

Folks, we have watched, in less than a year, a terrorist band of brigands expand from 1,500 or so to 31,500. And yet Obama didn’t address the issue of domestic jihadist recruitment.

Fox says, “the new numbers are a big jump from the CIA’s previous estimate that there were at least 10,000 Islamic State fighters.The CIA spokesperson said the increase is likely due to the militant’s group (Islamic terrorist army’s) recruiting gains after its success on the battlefield.

“This new total reflects an increase in members because of stronger recruitment since June following battlefield successes and the declaration of a caliphate, greater battlefield activity, and additional intelligence,” the spokesperson said.”

The battlefield calculus has changed as the “assumptions” on the enemy’s strength has changed. Why didn’t Obama say we’re going back in to operate from Kirkuk AB which would cut down on the flight legs of our strike aircraft and would give them more “time on station” — that means being able to loiter over target areas.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is no coalition. The enemy is larger than what was reported and assessed for Obama’s plan. The Arab nations are doing nothing. This is all reflective of the failure of Obama as any type of leader — and ISIS continues to grow and expand.

We’re sitting around debating and looking incompetent, weak and neutered. This is the result of electing and reelecting someone based on the cult of personality and popularity based on nothing more than charismatic speeches. America is going to pay a high price as we have witnessed the Christians, Yazidis and others at the hands of ISIS.

And Mr. President ISIS is Islamic — whether that upsets your sensibilities or not, I don’t give a damn — and thanks to you, their numbers are growing.

Dropping bombs is not actually war

Kerry thinks dropping bombs on ISIS isn't actually war from the files of Colonel Allen B. West

Read the Allen B. West Files

Ok, this is becoming rather embarrassing for America. Let me be clear, when you are dropping a bomb on someone’s head, you are at war with them — unless, you are Barack Hussein Obama or John Kerry.

According to *** CNN, “U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Thursday would not say the United States is at war with ISIS, saying the administration’s strategy includes “many different things that one doesn’t think of normally in context of war.”

“What we are doing is engaging in a very significant counterterrorism operation,” Kerry told CNN’s Elise Labott in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. “It’s going to go on for some period of time. If somebody wants to think about it as being a war with ISIL, they can do so, but the fact is it’s a major counterterrorism operation that will have many different moving parts.”

So, can anyone explain to me what a “very significant counter-terrorism operation” is? Last time I checked the dictionary of military tactics, operations and terminology, a counter-terrorism operation means folks die. And if the goal is to “destroy” ISIS that means you are conducting violent actions against them — a war.

Classical military strategist Carl von Clausewitz defined war as the imposition of one’s will upon another — don’t we want to impose our will on ISIS? Isn’t seeking to degrade and destroy an enemy a matter of imposing your will — would that not mean conducting war?

This incessant PC nonsense emanating from the Obama administration continually erodes confidence. Why would I want to join a coalition with a bunch of amateurish incompetent chuckleheads who have no clue? As a matter of fact, the vaunted “coalition” of nine countries took a hit when the United Kingdom and Germany stated they hadn’t signed up for any airstrikes – but hey, we do still have the Albanians.

Just to demonstrate how delusional world Kerry’s world is, get this, he said, ISIL has attracted a “significant coalition” that is determined to go and destroy it. And who Mr. Secretary of State may that be? As we wrote here, the Turks have reservations about the Kurdish Peshmerga Army being armed and supported — so they’re not “all in” either.

Another major concern is that the Obama administration doesn’t want to present its case to Congress for approval — by vote, all things political. Say what you wish, but George W. Bush assembled a coalition of almost 40 countries and received approval from Congress for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Now, instead of doing the same, Obama believes in his imperial little mind that he already possesses the authority to involve America in a “very significant counter-terrorism operation” – a careful choice of words which he believes allows him to skirt Constitutional responsibilities, because only Congress can authorize war.

Obama is using the existing AUMF (Authorization of Use of Military Force) enacted under the Bush administration after 9-11 as cover.

*** CNN reports, “Kerry, in Jeddah for meetings with Arab leaders to enlist regional support for a coalition to defeat ISIS, defended the administration’s insistence that the 2001 authority to go after al Qaeda and affiliates applies to ISIS. He insisted that, despite the split between jihadist groups, the origin of ISIS as an al Qaeda affiliate is enough to consider them connected. “This group is and has been al Qaeda,” Kerry said. “By trying to change its name, it doesn’t change who it is, what it does.”

I hate to tell ol’ Johnny boy but even al-Qaida doesn’t want its name associated with ISIS, and I bet Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi takes offense at being associated with al-Qaida. Then again, I thought that all these al-Qaida folks were decimated and on the run? So what is the truth, B. Hussein and John?

There should be no funds appropriated for this ambiguous endeavor until there is clarity, which at this time there is none. As well, Obama should go to Saudi King Abdullah and tell him to fund this venture – the Saudis did for Operation Desert Shield/Storm — heck, they even wanted to pay every troop who fought a stipend.

But Kerry didn’t want to be upstaged by Obama’s ridiculous statement that “ISIS is not Islamic.”

“When asked whether Saudi Arabia supports the extremist expressions of the Wahhabism version of Islam espoused by some terror groups, Kerry told CNN that the nation is “deeply committed to the effort to terminate ISIL.”

“They have never funded the kind of effort you’re talking about with respect to ISIL,” Kerry said, adding that a significant part of the counter-terrorism effort will include stemming fundraising for terror groups.”

Kerry evaded the question and we all know Saudi Arabia funds Wahabbism all over the globe. The House of Saud does indeed have members who are supporting ISIS with funding. And there are Saudis amongst the ISIS terrorist army — why not just tell the truth Mr. Secretary of State?

Ladies and gents, there is no way we can trust this administration to handle this situation, unless you applaud their efforts in enabling it. The confusion is mounting. There is no coalition. And all Obama has done is outsourced our national security.

We have nearly 1,500 combat troops on the ground in Iraq who are wearing boots — yet we’re told they’re not to be involved in combat — so why deploy them? If it’s to “train” Iraqi troops, they’re already trained. Just put the original generals and leaders back in charge, and get rid of al Maliki’s cronies.

So again, we’re going to conduct a very significant counter-terrorism operation to degrade and destroy ISIS, but not with American ground troops, and it’s not a war — but we have a coalition.

The only ones not confused are ISIS, and they are winning.

*** Note: CNN pulled the supporting video yesterday.