US Veterans Send Fox News Open Letter About ‘Boobs On The Ground’ Joke

The Lady is a Pilot and a Warrior.

Maiden on the Midway

This had to be done. She’s part of the allied coalition and has overcome major hurdles considering where she lives. I commend her and her hard work and determination to go beyond the limits set for women in that region. She’s making history and as a woman I can’t help but smile and say, ‘atta girl.’

US military veterans from the Truman National Security Project have written an open letter to Fox News complaining that offensive comments about a female United Arab Emirates pilot were “unwarranted” and “fundamentally opposed to what the military stands for.

View original post 649 more words

America 2014: A Country In Need of A Leader [A KJ Op Ed]

Kingsjester's Blog

WashingtonPrayingAs I was sitting at my computer this morning, trying desperately to come up with a subject to write about, I was overwhelmed.

In perusing the headlines on the Internet this morning, I was greeted by the following:



Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low


Obama signs bill to train, arm, Syrian rebels against ISIS

474 Illegals from Terror-Linked Countries Apprehended in 2014…

UN: Ebola threatens global peace, security…

US troops heading into Africa — soon…

Doctors: ‘Irresponsible’…

Domestically, our nation is the most divided it has been since the turbulent 1960s, when the dream of a “New Camelot” ended and the Nanny state of “The Great Society” was born.

It was a time when American Heroes perished valiantly in a war that was improperly prosecuted and those who survived that…

View original post 947 more words

Having it both ways

At this moment America is at peace with the world, yet with careful political engineering we live in a state of perpetual war. This is only possible due no longer calling wars and acts of war, war, instead they are labeled as counter-terrorism operations, or some other sanitized name.

By the careful splitting of hairs one could say, as BHO said, that the bombing and airstrikes were conducted in order to protect Americans, and therefore the actions were not and act of war but an act of self-defense. One could even further dissect the act of self-defense as acting to protect ones own life or the life of another, but this only applies to life outside of military operations.

Combat operations in Iraq ended in 2011 with BHO stating that he had, as promised ended the war in Iraq and what was left behind was a “safe, secure and stable” Iraq and Iraqi government. Sectarian violence broke out even before the teleprompter was turned off, and has been almost a daily occurrence since.

At this time and for several weeks the U.S. has been engaged in an air campaign against ISIS in Iraq to protect Americans and to protect the refugees fleeing ISIS, as pointed out above this could be characterized as self-defense if it was occurring outside of military operations. The airstrikes were expanded to aid the Kurdish Peshmerga forces fighting ISIS and to protect the infrastructure of northern Iraq. Protecting property can also be used as a justification for the use of force against an assailant, but again this does not apply to military operations. This week the airstrikes were further expanded to support Iraqi military operations against ISIS forces outside of Baghdad. One could say that the U.S. Embassy and American personnel were being protected but again this was a military operation. Attacking one force in support of another force can only be described as WAR, combat operations if you will, you have aligned with one against another. A war is a war not matter what you call it and act of is an act of war.

The rise of ISIL that later became ISIS and now just call themselves the Islamic State has caused a complex problem for BHO and his administration. Not only is this a complex problem it has once again proven the reluctance of BHO to follow through, although he has no problem playing through on the links. What was known as ISIL was seen as only a regional threat as was referred to as JV by BHO could have been easily handled by Syria and Iraq at the time, but that opportunity was squandered.

ISIL arrived on the scene a little more than a year ago but had its founding much earlier and were allowed to thrive and exist because of the policy blunders and practices of past administrations. They were allowed to exist much as the Taliban and al-Qaeda was allowed to exist in the 1970’s, they were an enemy of an enemy. They then as they are now armed and trained to fight an enemy, though they have and hold no allegiance to America or American interests.

The intervention and attack on Libya in early 2011 lead to the biggest foreign policy failure of BHO and his administration to that date. BHO was willing to assist insurgent fighters overthrow established governments, intervening in civil wars. Libya was engaged to say the least in internal strife, with government forces fighting several insurgent forces. The insurgent forces were made up of groups from Libya and many were non-Libyans. Administration officials and even some members of Congress said that they knew in fact which insurgent group was legitimate. The air campaign eventually led to the death of Qaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan government. BHO began the insane practice of informing the insurgent groups the limits of American intervention in military operations. The American participation in the effort to overthrow Qaddafi would be limited to airstrikes and that “no boots would be on the ground”. Even before the smoke and dust of battle ended BHO and the administration set up an Embassy and installed an Ambassador, September 11th 2012 was the culmination of BHO and his practice of destabilization. The embassy was eventually reopened, but has since been abandoned due to increasing violence. Libya has not had a stable moment since the death and overthrow of Qaddafi. The rival factions, yes even the ones that BHO, his administration and some esteemed members of Congress recognized as legitimate have been in constant struggles to gain power. The justification of the airstrikes on Libya was what, because Qaddafi and Libya were sponsors of terrorists, if that were true we should be conducting airstrikes on half the world. The failure in Libya was due to taking action with no regard for the outcome. All BHO saw was a chance to oust a dictator and he seized it. There was no justification for the use of force against Libyan forces or Qaddafi, the internal strife in Libya posed no threat to America, at least at that time. BHO and certainly no one in his administration has ever said what kind of government would control Libya after the ouster of Qaddafi. The policy of arming and training the enemy of my enemy has garnered no ally and made no friends in Libya, but it has provided valuable resources to terror organizations in the Middle-East and Africa. Lately Arab nations have been conducting airstrikes in Libya to curtail, contain and limit the violence in Libya, recognizing it as a threat to their national security. Sooner or later someone is going to have to send in combat troops to clean up the mess made by BHO, his administration and a feckless foreign policy.

The Syrian civil war broke out in early 2011, again with insurgents attacking government forces seeking to oust a leader. My guess is that the rebel forces expected BHO to intervene on their behalf at some point just as he had in Libya conducting airstrikes against government forces. BHO could not run the risk of turning Syria into another Libya so nothing was done openly. The Syrian government forces were pounding the crap out of the insurgents. Another thing about 2011 is that it was followed by 2012 and BHO would be seeking re-election, BHO who had promised to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could not be sure of engaging in and winning a war in Syria prior to the elections, having already lost Libya. Yes, I said lost Libya, as pointed out above picking a side and entering a war, even a limited air campaign, using military forces on behalf of another is going to war. In war you either win or lose, a tie is not winning. Having allowed the civil war to rage for so long took away the urgency for American intervention. BHO began seeking authorization to arm and train Syrian rebels, and again the administration and some esteemed members of Congress decided who were the moderates. The arming and training of insurgent forces was still not quite good enough for BHO who had been re-elected, he wanted more having already declared the Assad regime an illegitimate government. BHO still at that time wanted very much to be a part of the ouster of Assad and the overthrow of the Syrian government. The delay in involvement led the world to believe that Syrian government forces could shoot, shell and bomb the rebel forces to their heart’s content. The only way in was for a heinous act to be acted out against the Syrian population. BHO warned Assad and the Syrian government forces and informed the world that the U.S. would intervene in the event government forces resorted to the use of chemical weapons, a “red line” was drawn. Then the strangest thing happened, chemical weapons were used, at least the allegation of use, and the use was blamed on the Syrian forces. The problem I had with this accusation was that the government forces were handing the insurgents their asses a nearly every engagement and I could come up with no reason for the government to resort to using chemical weapons. If it was the government forces using chemical weapons, my question is this, why wait until BHO issued his warning to use them, they could have been deployed at any time by government forces. Saddam Hussein had used them against the Kurds after desert storm concluded in 1991 and the world did nothing but complain. Surely Assad did not want U.S. intervention on behalf of the rebels. I could, however come up with a reason for rebel forces to use chemical weapons and that was to bring the U.S. into the civil war on the side of the rebel forces. With the “red line’ crossed the rebel forces expected action by the U.S., BHO tried his hand a forming a “coalition of the willing” and struck out, no one was willing to go to war in Syria. BHO went to Congress to seek approval for “pin point” airstrikes and continue the practice of telling the insurgents that “no American ground combat forces would be used”. The mission was aimed at “degrading” the Syrian government forces ability to fight. The “red Line” was becoming as big a disaster as the foray into Libya. Help in avoiding further embarrassment came from an unlikely source, Russia. Allegedly all of the chemical weapons in Syria were turned over for destruction and allegedly destroyed. Only time and events will tell if all the chemical weapons were destroyed. BHO to this day still wants to be a part of the ouster of Assad and the overthrow of the current Syrian government. Again the arming and training of the so-called moderate Muslims is a high priority of BHO, his administration and some of the esteemed members of Congress. Let us not forget that ISIL sprang forth from Syria, well armed and well-trained.

As stated above dealing with ISIS has become quite a dilemma for BHO and his administration. In Iraq the U.S. is bombing and killing them while at the same time arming and training them in Syria. This is what I meant by having it both ways. ISIS will be armed and trained in Syria to be a surrogate for BHO and his foreign policy. Not one in this administration has given any thought to what Syria will become if Assad is ousted.

As the U.S. heads for its third combat action in Iraq BHO again says their will not be any ground combat role for the American service members deployed to Iraq. As for there not being any “American boots on the ground”, I wholeheartedly disagree there is at this time a least 1,000 pairs of American boots on the ground, that is of course, unless the American military has taken to wearing sandals. The military being deployed to Iraq are there only as advisors and trainers. Viet Nam began with military advisors and quickly escalated into a war that lasted ten long years. BHO and the administration say that we are not a war in Iraq, I beg to differ, check the Leave and Earnings Statement(LES) of the service members deployed in Iraq. If they are only deployed to Iraq in a non-combat role their LES should reflect Overseas Pay, if there is an entry for Eminent Danger Pay(Combat Pay)they are at war. The hasty departure from Iraq left a void that was soon filled by sectarian violence and gave opportunity for ISIL to break out of Syria, begin operating in Iraq change its name to ISIS, capture enough land, acquire enough weaponry and wealth to declare a caliphate and call itself the Islamic State. Did I mention that they were well armed and trained and now well-funded, on top of all that they seem to be able to recruit volunteers from many western countries including America, either as fighters or concubines.

Until BHO calls them for what they are there can be no effective strategy for destroying them. Yes ISIS is Islamic and yes the are extremists. Which brings this question. How is one terror group seen as moderate, while another is seen as extreme? ISIS beheaded an American journalist. Another terror group released alive a journalist they held captive. ISIS has since beheaded two more westerners one American and one British. The terror group that released its hostage must be a moderate and worthy of recognition in the eyes of BHO and his administration and a candidate for training. I say, No, a terrorist is a terrorist there are no moderate terror organizations all are extremists. They can not be degraded but they can be destroyed, but that will take more than airpower it always has, sooner or later ground combat troops will be needed just as they always have throughout history. Brave men and women will be sent into harms way to fix political blunders. Blood will be spilled to correct political expedience.

American Humanist Association Demands “Under God” Be Removed From the Pledge. Americans Say “No”.

Red Skelton was more than a comedian he was a statesman, this video proves that.

Kingsjester's Blog

pledgeofallegianceBefore I start in with the particulars of today’s Blog, please allow me to present three facts…

  • Per, 76% of Americans are Christians.
  • 92% of Americans believe in God.
  • Therefore, atheists make up just 8% of America’s Population.

Small, but vocal. You won’t believe what they’re claiming concerning our country’s Pledge of Allegiance. reports that

More than one-third of Americans support removing “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance, according to an atheist activist group.

The American Humanist Association claims that a survey it commissioned through the Seidewitz Group, a research firm, found that, when given details about the history of the national expression of loyalty, 34 percent of Americans actually support removing “under God” from the Pledge.

This is significant, as the proportions differ greatly from the single-digit support seen for the removal in at least one recent survey — and the atheist group believes that’s because of one key difference…

View original post 1,114 more words

The strategy of having no strategy

The result of moving or attempting to move “forward” with no strategy is a guarantee of total and absolute failure, that is of course, unless failure was the strategy. A strategy is no more than a plan. In business no one plans to fail, as a matter of fact no lending institution will give a business loan unless there is a good and sound business plan. A strategy for success.In politics the exact opposite is true. Individuals and groups donate huge sums of money to politicians and causes hoping for success to further a political or personal agenda. A strategy of hope. The campaign slogan of “forward” with the absence of a strategy is in essence “backward”.

“Forward” is to “Advance”. BHO used the word “Forward” as the campaign slogan in 2012, yet BHO has done nothing to advance America.
“Backward” is to “Retreat” or “Decline”. Since his election BHO has only “Advanced” the “Decline” of America, retreating from greatness and many times apologizing for it or denying it.

The world of radical Islam has no intention of going “Forward”, advancing the Muslim world in particular and the world in general. The radical groups like ISIS, Boko Haram and the myriad of others only have the intention of advancing forward to decline, by going backwards. However, they do use modern tools, weapons and equipment to advance the decline of humanity, and will continue to do so. The establishment of a Caliphate takes their world from the 21st century and lands them square in the 4th century and no farther forward than the 14th century and make no mistake, they want that for the entire world. Radical Islam has a strategy and has announced it to the world.

BHO on the other hand has no strategy to counter ISIS and has announced it to America and the world. But, BHO does have a strategy, his strategy is to tell the enemy or potential enemy what he will or will not do, what events will drive him to possible action and even discloses the timeline of events. This is a very dangerous practice to say the least.

Strategy in Iraq. Announce to America and the world when combat operations would cease, troop strength reductions would begin and the date of total withdrawal. Upon total withdrawal inform America and the world that “we” left behind a stable and self-sufficient Iraqi government, knowing full well the exact opposite was true. Every aspiring terror group knew the exact date they could begin operations to further destabilize a less than stable government and country. Unlike the U.S. government which is divided along party lines, the Iraqi government was divided along religious lines. Sectarian violence began anew.

Strategy in Afghanistan. Announce to America and the world when combat operations would cease, troop strength reductions would begin and again the date of full withdrawal. This again tells the terror groups when they can resume operations. The Taliban and al-Qaeda are still very much alive in Afghanistan and will be heard from again.

Strategy in Libya. Destabilization. Announce to America and the world that airstrikes will be used to further weaken the Libyan government and its fighting forces attempting to hold off an insurgency. Announce the arming and training of rebel forces in Libya without any thought of how the training or arms would be used afterward. While announcing what would happen BHO also announced what would not happen, BHO announced that there would be no “boots on the ground”, no U.S. ground combat forces would be used. Establish diplomatic relations with a country in turmoil and on the brink of civil war. We all saw how that worked out. The only strategy BHO had, was to topple Qaddafi, or at least help, at the present and not for what would happen after, much less what kind of government would exist or even if there would be one.

Strategy in Syria. Again, Destabilization. Announce to America and the world that the use of chemical weapons by Syrian forces would bring U.S. military action, a red line was drawn by BHO. Low and behold chemical weapons were deployed against a town being contested and there were civilian casualties. Allegations were circulated around the world that the Syrian military had used chemical weapons. My question was, was BHO warning the Syrian government or was he encouraging the rebel forces to use chemical weapons in order to bring the U.S. into action? I still think the latter. The red-line was erased or at least blurred by the intervention of Russia. The chemical weapons were being destroyed, but were they all destroyed. That news left the front pages and has never arisen since. How much was destroyed? How much is left? If any is left who has control of it?

The blunders by BHO and his administration in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria has shown to the world how ineffective the foreign policy of the U.S. is. Middle East foreign policy has suffered since President Carter and has not recovered. The policy of appeasement did not work for British PM Chamberlain and will never work for any leader.

The policy of destabilization of Libya and Syria has created the biggest and most lethal threat America has faced in many years. ISIS or as it is known now the Islamic State could have been destroyed when they were Known as ISIL only a short few months ago. They thrive and flourish now because BHO and his administration and some members of Congress were more concerned with toppling dictators than what the future may hold. The same is true of the previous administration with regards to Iraq and Afghanistan.

ISIS has made many gains while suffering a few loses. But is ISIS the only threat? In the beginning the intent was to establish The Levant, now the intent is to establish the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and have declared the establishment of a Caliphate. Why the change? The Levant is certainly larger than the Islamic State. Have they joined forces with other terror groups with each carving out their own domain in the world? Are they combining resources? When the news broke that ISIS fighters had captured a Syrian Air Base, I wondered why. Building and maintaining a civilian airport is expensive enough, but the costs of a Military Air Base are even more, much more. ISIS has no need of an Air Base, they have no aircraft. If the intent was to deny Syrian forces the use of the Airfield why not just render it useless and abandon it. It can not be disguised or moved, it is fixed. If it is captured the rightful owner will want it back, if it is still useable they will use it. Discussing this event with a friend, I made the following statements first they either have Aircraft other than stolen helicopters or they are expecting to get aircraft and second they may have stripped the Syrians down to their underwear and marched them out to the desert for execution, but all were not executed, the valuable were taken back. I say this for two reasons, first they intend on having aircraft and will need pilots and aviation support personnel and second Military Air Bases have what civilian airports lack, defense systems and they need to learn them as well. And once again the strategy of nothingness is revealed, ISIS was told by way of the announcement from BHO that he was authorizing surveillance flights over Syria to monitor the situation. If something is revealed what action will be taken. The ISIS fighters were even informed by social media how many more American service members we going to Iraq, where they would be sent and their intended mission, emphasizing a non-combat role. Think of the money ISIS saves daily by getting their intelligence straight from the administration and avoiding the expense of satellites or a spy network.

Now the chatter of missing civilian airliners from Libya, eleven of them. The rebels took control of the Tripoli airport and the airliners are now missing and ISIS has a Military Airbase in Syria. There was most certainly fuel at the airport in Tripoli and certainly fuel is at the Syrian Base now held by ISIS. What targets are in easy reach of an airliner from Syria or Libya used as a weapon?

Now to explain my previous statement that the terrorists have joined forces. It is perfectly acceptable for a Muslim to lie to a non-Muslim, known as an Infidel. When al Qaeda said they had kicked ISIS out of their group was it a member of al Qaeda that made that statement or was it an Infidel? When the rebels in Libya and Syria identified themselves as moderates was it a member of their group or was it an Infidel. I will even go one step further and simply state that all of the terror groups and their supporters are the same force with the same goal, no matter how they dress. There are no moderates.

Not only should one not make the mistake of confusing friends with enemies and then treating them as such, or trusting the enemy of ones enemy and thinking them to be your friend, one should also never make an enemy of a friend or potential friend based on political differences.

The anniversary of September the Eleventh is approaching.