Watcher’s Council Nominations – When Justice Just Is Not Edition

The Watcher’s Council


Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:

The Council In Action!!

The Noisy Room’s Terresa Monroe-Hamilton is now affiliated with a new group, the Stop Qatar Now Coalition along with a number of other journalists, national security experts, publishers and independent researchers. I urge you to drop by, read their report on what amounts to a narco-terrorist enabler and find out what this is all about.

Virginia Right’s Tom White continues to be a major source when it comes to Virginia Politics. This week, he was cited by a local CBS affiliate WTVR in a report on a controversial video being shown to local schoolchildren that essentially blames 9/11 on America… his fine piece this week goes into further details.

This week, The MidKnight Review, The Pirate’s Cove and The Elder Of Ziyon earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won’t be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6 PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning.

Simple, no?

It’s a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let’s see what we have for you this week…

Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions

Non-Council Submissions

Enjoy! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that! And don’t forget to tune in Friday for the results!


National Security Threats Brought Into Focus

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

“[President Barack Obama] came into office believing that through the power of his personality, and the belief that if America changed its behavior, everything would be okay—that the problem was not the ideology of radical jihadists, the problem was America,” said former Congressman Pete Hoekstra.

On September 29th, I attended an EMPact America conference about the dangers a weakened America poses to the world, the necessity for a stronger military in the face of worldwide threats, and how America has switched sides in the War on Terror. It was a sobering and frightening look at a number of the issues that confront America today. One can’t possibly do justice in a single column to all of the outstanding speakers and panels assembled, but it is available online for viewing, and is well worth watching. Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy was the main organizer and moderator of the event.

I will emphasize that there were four members of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi (CCB) who spoke. Among them, the aforementioned Pete Hoekstra, Admiral James “Ace” Lyons (Ret.), former CIA officer Clare Lopez, and former Congressman and Lt. Colonel Allen West (Ret.).

Among the threats discussed were the current conflict with the Islamic State, as well as al Qaeda and jihadists overrunning states such as Libya. Add to this Russian and Chinese aggression, and America’s lack of leadership is becoming painfully apparent.

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons criticized the Obama doctrine, which he said was to “embrace our enemies, undercut our allies, and, under the false premise that U.S. power has been the problem, you then undercut the U.S. military.”

Allen West and Ace Lyons both criticized the restrictive rules of engagement that our troops currently operate under. Admiral Lyons said that the restrictive rules have impacted “the will to win,” and that if we let our military do their jobs they will achieve victory. West said that we’re coming up with rules of engagement that benefit lawyers, not the men and women in combat.

The President believed that America could engage with moderate jihadists, said Hoekstra. Terrorists “have won in Libya, they’re winning in Syria and Iraq, and there’s nothing more attractive to get converts and to get help than to join a winning team,” he said.

Syria is also Libya all over again, he asserted. This can be seen today with the recent Congressional decision to send $500 million to arm the Syrian rebels—which the government has claimed it is in the process of vetting. This comes at the same time that some members of our U.S. military are receiving pink slips, West emphasized.

The non-state enemy only understands and respects two things, “strength and might,” asserted West. And you simply have to accept the ideology of your enemy, not deny it.

And, he noted, President Obama gave five senior members of the Taliban back to the enemy while the enemy was still fighting America. “That is not what you do in normal battlefield procedures. See, first and foremost, you repatriate [the] enemy after you have whipped the enemy. You don’t repatriate the enemy while you’re still fighting the enemy,” he said.

But President Obama’s aid to jihadists goes deeper, according to CCB member Clare Lopez, another speaker at the conference. When the Arab Spring, or “Islamic Awakening,” spread across North Africa and through Libya, America threw in with Islamic jihad by arming the rebels in Libya, who were clearly linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda. “Now, the United States government knew perfectly well with whom it was dealing in that revolution. They knew it was al Qaeda, they knew it was [Libyan Islamic Fighting Group], they knew the figures, the names. They had helped get them out of jail, in any case, in the reconciliation process,” said Lopez.

Lopez and other members of the CCB authored an April Interim Report, “How America Switched Sides in the War on Terror.”

Naturally, the left’s hit-man, Dana Milbank of The Washington Post, was there to do his best to mock the message of this distinguished group of Americans. It’s what he does, as we’ve pointed out in the past. What offended his sensibility this time, and sent him packing, was Allen West’s view of the role of the U.S. military:

“Let us do what we’re supposed to do in the military, which is crush the enemy,” West said. “And you know what? If they don’t want to act right, guess what happens? We show up again and we kick their butt all over again.”

This was too much for Milbank, who obviously prefers that the military’s main purpose should be to build roads and schools. West made it clear that he has no problem with the military having a role in, for example, helping girls finally be able to go to schools in Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, he cited that as a source of personal pride. But he also said that shouldn’t be the primary role of the military; it should instead be the role of USAID, or other non-military agencies of the government—or even the United Nations—to engage in such projects.

West’s comments brought the crowd to its feet. “This produced a standing ovation,” wrote Milbank. “And I rose to go to Manassas, to see a better side of America.” As best as I could tell, no one missed him. But I had to wonder what he really thought. Does he really believe that President Obama is making America and the world a safer place?


How Republicans Project a 52-48 Senate Majority at October 1

By: Arlen Williams
Gulag Bound

Senate Watch: Election 2014 Horse Race at 5 Weeks to Go

Sovereignty Campaign – SovCam.org

If November 4th’s elections turn out as all the data gatherers, electoral analysts, and yours truly presently assess, the Republican Party would most likely gain the caucusing majority in the U.S. Senate, 52-48. That possibility however is way too close to call, like calling ball or strike on a knuckler halfway to the plate.

There are those who see it otherwise, the Washington Post sponsors some of the best pollsters around but we know they are at essence cream of the crop collectivist propagandists; they have recently claimed the Democrats have a 51% shot at retaining Harry Reid’s leadership. The probability specialists at FiveThirtyEight say Republicans are at 61%. Most play it aptly safe and rely on “too close to call.”

The Republicans must pick up six seats to get to a 51-49 advantage. If it ends up 50-50, our Midas tongued, purported Vice President Joe Biden may apply his brainpower to throw party line votes Democrat. And do constitutional framers look on from Heaven to ponder their product?

In many of these close contests, GOP candidates are to varying degrees hampered by Libertarian Party entrants. Libertarian voters could feasibly become spoilers in seven states: Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and/or Virginia. That is a set of beaconing examples of why the runoff voting system, as is used by Georgia and Louisiana, seems an imperative step for breaking up the highly manipulable two-party lock in American politics.

Republicans are doing a fine job of hampering themselves due to party bossmanship. Hammers of force and finance via entities such as the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Republican Senate leadership in the person of Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, are held tightly and often wielded against the more authentic Republicans of the Tea Party with greater velocity than versus Democrats. This, as with the presidential failures of McCain and Romney make for a crippling self-defeat factor in many GOP elections. It is a symptom of the corruption of globalist, “New World Order” money, applied in the name of gaining greater global power held by fewer, in “combination,” to use John D. Rockefeller’s favorite word (Mussolini preferred “fascism”).

Which-Are-the-Hot-US-Senate-Races-2014-09-30For constant updating on the close elections we present two tables, one for Republican incumbents and one for the neo-Marxist antithesis party. See SovCam.org’sWhich are the Hot U.S. Senate Races page. It also links to detailed drill downs at Ballotpedia and Wikipedia for each election, including recent poll results. Then at the bottom, it links to what is even more important to know — and to do.

Considering the megatonnage of lives, liberties, and livelihoods at stake, “fun” is not the best word for delving into these matters. Nevertheless, let us dive into the “fun stuff.” State-by-state, here is a the SovCam line at the moment on two key Senate races defying the finest proffers of SWAG (scientific wild-donkeyed guess). If the Republicans can recover their edge in either of these two states, it could mean greater than a hair-splitting edge overall in the legislative branch and greater hope for those true republicans praying for and seeking a return to American authenticity.

The most sense defying contest: “What’s happened to Kansas?” ask Republicans across the nation. That horse race is about incumbent and GOP organization man, Pat Roberts vs. Democrat-deferred, alleged Independent, and self-attested Obama and Romney voter both, Greg Orman.

Presently, Orman is leading in polls, due to a sort of Jesse Ventura factor, of apparent independence plus novelty. Pundits over-stressing political fundamentals opine Roberts should recover, but this situation is divergent by its nature. Roberts was shown up for certain RINO tendencies during the primary context with Tea Partier, Milton Wolf. Orman has declared himself a human jump-ball, that if elected, he will caucus with whichever party turns out the majority. Perhaps this election should be entitled, “The Search for Conviction.” Ballotpedia is attempting to keep up with it, including litigation over whether a Democrat candidate’s name must be printed on the ballot.

Nearly as troubling, ostensibly conservative North Carolina voters are having a hard time deciding whether to ditch Obama-paralleling, Obamacare-voting Democrat, Kay Hagan for businessman and state legislator, Thom Tillis. This may be seen as a contest between the new, Obama-organized machine of this repetitively targeted state vs. Tillis’ uphill struggle for name value (name recognition plus favorability). Hagan may be hurt by a very serious scandal involving her husband and money from the 2009 “stimulus” act, but determining which Democrats are hurt by serious scandals amidst their scandalously Democrat-inclined voters is an art all its own, one of a surreal genre if not occult.

Much of Tillis’ campaign is about… Hagan. That includes this new ad, which portrays her as following Barack Obama’s footfalls even in neglecting the rise of ISIS, which seems on the verge of turning the entire arduous set of U.S. operations in Iraq since 2003 into a bloody monstrosity much more atrocious than Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party had ever wrought. Perhaps a significant percentage of voters will pay increasing attention to that titanic Democrat failure and horror, nationally.

Libertarian, Sean Haugh is being projected to come off with as much as ten percent of the NC vote, which would likely spell doom for prospects of turning the senatorial dial one notch of incremental liberty with Tillis. If the Libertarian were not effectively corrupting the election, my nod would go to a Republican pick-up.

Kansas is the one state leaning toward flipping Democrat. That being the case, seven must flip Republican to give them the majority. At this passing moment, I would give them eight, if I had to say: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia.

We will continue to assess the races, down to their wires, but just what does a McConnell orchestrated Republican majority in the Senate along with a Boehner bossed House do for us? How will it bring America into realignment with our Essential Sovereignty System, if you will, of truly self-empowered popular sovereignty under God, with state and national sovereignty to guard it? How does that revitalize us by our Natural Rights, of life, liberty, and property?

Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell; Joshua Roberts photo (Reuters)

Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell; photo Joshua Roberts (Reuters)

Now, those questions refer us to the true race we are in. We ponder it here: “2014 U.S. Senate Elections: So what do we need to know?

© Arlen Williams. Permission granted to republish.
The Sovereignty Campaign – SovCam.org


If You Are Deemed A Threat, They Are Coming For Your Guns – Now In A State Near You

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Gov. Jerry (moonbat) Brown of California

Please define what a person deemed a ‘threat‘ means…

Governor Brown just signed a gun confiscation bill that should send a chill down America’s spine. California leads the way, right off the Constitutional cliff, by becoming the first state that allows family members to ask a fascist judge to confiscate guns from a relative that they believe is a threat. That is so vague and arbitrary that anyone could be deemed a threat and it will be used as a political weapon to instill fear and exercise control, trust me. Several Marxist Democrats proposed this atrocity and they are using a murderous rampage in May near the University of California, Santa Barbara as a convenient excuse. Never, ever let an emergency go to waste. Ever.

Claiming that the parents of 22-year-old Elliot Rodger were thwarted in their attempts to seek help for their troubled son before said rampage, the Progressives gleefully lined up for select gun confiscation.

And they are not alone in the land of fruits and nuts. Law enforcement authorities in Connecticut, Indiana and Texas can now petition for a judge’s order that would allow them to seize guns from people they deem to be a danger. The new California law gives law enforcement the same option and extends it to family members. That’s right… While we weren’t paying attention and were off yelling ‘squirrel!’ at the latest outrage, these asshats were cherry picking legislation and judges to confiscate guns from those they deem ‘not worthy.’ I understand there are crazy people out there, but what happened to due process? What happened to your Second Amendment rights?

Pretty soon, anyone out there that does not agree with the government and the Marxist Progressives, will be deemed mentally unstable and their guns will be taken – door to door. It’s coming.

And dig this… Under the California bill, whoever seeks the restraining order would have to sign an affidavit under oath. If they lie, they could be charged with a misdemeanor. Boy – that’s taking them to the woodshed! A number of Republicans and Democrats voted against this measure, to no avail. And in a total justice vacuum, a court hearing would be held within 14 days after the restraining order is granted to give the gun owner a chance to argue there is no danger. Right… I’m sure all will be forgiven – not. You have to prove you are innocent after the fact — after you have been labeled as guilty of being a threat. So much for innocent until proven guilty. Up is down, black is white. Now that’s Orwellian.

From Yahoo! News:

Currently in California, authorities can seize legally purchased guns only from people convicted of a felony or a violent misdemeanor, people subject to a domestic violence restraining order or those who are determined to be mentally unstable.

The National Rifle Association and other gun-rights groups opposed the restraining order legislation.

“Our concern is not so much what they intended to do; our concern is with the method they put in place to address people with mental or emotional issues,” said Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California. “We think this just misses the mark and may create a situation where law-abiding gun owners are put in jeopardy.”

Ya think?! This bill will allow confiscation against those that are at risk for violent behavior. The Democrats now seem to have their very own dictionary and are just making crap up to suit their evil agenda. Let’s see… The Leftists have already called all gun owners violent, along with Tea Party members, veterans and conservative Constitutionalists. Sounds like they are going to pull on their jackboots and come a knockin’ on a lot of our doors.


Qatar Awareness Campaign – CNN


Dear Mr. Zucker:

This letter is being sent to you on behalf of the Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition. The purpose is to inform you and the public of the activities of the state of Qatar. CNN regularly solicits the opinion of policy experts and fellows from Brookings Doha, which receives millions of dollars in funding from Qatar. CNN.com also featured a prominent ad for the Qatar Foundation.

We urge you to read the information below, which includes evidence that Qatar is arguably the preeminent sponsor of terror in the world today. It is a benefactor of the genocidal armies of ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram; it is involved in Taliban narcotics trafficking through a relationship with the Pakistani National Logistics Cell; and profits from operating a virtual slave state. Qatar is involved in terror operations from Nigeria to Gaza to India to Syria to Iraq.

So the public understands why this letter is addressed to you, the president of CNN, here are some facts pertaining to CNN’s involvement with Qatar.

  • Following the overthrow of the pro-Muslim Brotherhood government of Mohamed Morsi, who simultaneously backed and supported Qatar, the CNN Global Public Square blog featured an interview with Gregory Gause III, professor of political science at the University of Vermont and non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Doha Center. Prof. Gause expressed disapproval of the ouster of the government of Morsi, a close ally of Qatar.
  • In August 2014, during the Israel-Gaza war, the CNN Global Public Square blog featured an op-ed by Sultan Barakat, Director of Research at Brookings Doha. Barakat was especially critical of Israel, which he accused of “disregard for basic civilian infrastructure” in Gaza, and stated that Israel “clearly prefers an underdeveloped ghetto to a viable foreign country [in Gaza].”
  • CNN.com featured a special advertising page for the Qatar Foundation. This ad linked to “a 30-minute monthly feature program … that seeks to capture the dynamism and broad range of cultural diversity in … the Middle East.” The Qatar Foundation, with the Emir of Qatar, established the Al-Qaradawi Research Center. Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and a vocal supporter of violent jihad.

In light of Qatar’s consistent and vocal support for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, we ask that you consider the attached sourced report on Qatar’s activities. The links cited are vetted and credible sources. We hope you take the time to verify the truth of the statements for yourself.

After doing so, the Coalition of the Qatar Awareness Campaign calls on you to exert due influence on the Qatari government to cease any type of involvement in all forms of Islamic terrorism, slavery, and drug trafficking!


Lt. Col. Allen B. West (US Army, Ret)

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
Center for Security Policy

Pamela Geller
Atlas Shrugs

Walid Shoebat

Charles Ortel
Washington Times

Paul E Vallely, US Army (Ret)
Chairman, Stand Up America

Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
NoisyRoom.net **

& the entire Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition.

Qatar Research Report: http://www.stopqatarnow.com/p/research-report.html
Sign the Petition! Visit www.stopqatarnow.com
Facebook: Stop Qatar Now
Twitter: @stopqatarnow

** Select signatures as of 9/27. The Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition is comprised of more than 25 journalists, national security experts, publishers, and independent researchers. To view all Coalition participants, please visit the Campaign’s website.

CC: Allison Gollust, SVP CNN PR Worldwide