Noisy RoomOur panel of expert insiders will discuss the week’s hottest topics, including:

  • Iran Deal UPDATE & Iranian Lobby
  • White House altering of ISIS intelligence reports
  • Europe’s Migrant INVASION
  • Russians in Syria

& more…

You can listen to USA Transnational Report live on JJ McCartney’s Nightside Radio Studios.

Call in with Questions!!!  (855) 853-5227

You can also listen Red State Talk Radio, Studio A!


NoisyRoom Article Recap – 09/09-11/15

Noisy Room


A Psalm for 9/11: The Dreams That Fly Away

Doug Ross @ Journal
Hat Tip: BB

We remember.

All mankind will pass before You

like members of the flock.

Like a shepherd pasturing his flock,

making sheep pass under his staff,

so shall You cause to pass, count, calculate, and consider the soul of all the living;

and You shall apportion the fixed needs of all Your creatures

and inscribe their verdict.

For Your Name signifies Your praise:

hard to anger and easy to appease,

for You do not wish the death of one deserving death,

but that he repent from his way and live.

Until the day of his death You await him;

if he repents You will accept him immediately.

It is true that You are their Creator and

You know their inclination,

for they are flesh and blood.

Our origin is dust and our end is dust.

At the hazard of our life we earn our bread.

We are like a fragile vessel,

like the grass that withers

the flower that fades,

the shadow that passes,

the cloud that vanishes,

the wind that blows,

the dust that floats,

the dreams that fly away


The dreams that fly away.

Your kingship is an eternal kingship.

Your dominion is for all generations.


5,113 Days After the Falling Man of September 11, 2001

By: Frank Salvato

It has been 5,113 days since the al Qaeda attacks on New York’s World Trade Center, the Pentagon in Washington, DC, and the failed third assault that was intercepted into a farm field in Shanksville, Pennsylviania, by American patriots. To borrow a phrase from a past generation that certainly applies to this event, it is a day that will live in infamy. But few would believe where our country is today given the events of that fateful day. Today Americans stand viciously divided in our politics as a society that rationalizes Islamofascist aggression (and, in the case of Iran, facilitates it), even as we harbor ideological factions that stand in protest of our law enforcement officers. We have moved away from the cohesive and united front we embraced shoulder-to-shoulder at the smoking pile of rubble that was the remnants of the World Trade Center; the tomb that holds so many souls.

Today, as we face the fourteenth anniversary of September 11, 2001, the United States government has radically shifted from the sworn obligation to confront and exterminate violent Islamofascism wherever it exists, to a tolerant acquiescence of co-existence with a culture dedicated opposing that state. Today, 3,115 days after 2,977 people were slaughtered by Islamofascists, the Islamic State is on the march, spreading its oppressive and murderous dogma of Islamofascism across the Middle East and Africa, even as its influence reaches the shores around the world, extending into our homes right here in the United States. Al Qaeda has a state of the art “inspirational” magazine for the discerning jihadi. And the United States, under President Barack Obama and the efforts of Secretary of State John Kerry and his predecessor Hilary Clinton, stands not only sympathetic to the Iranian mullahs, but have purposefully facilitated their path to a nuclear weapon.

Today, just 74,760-some hours after the first jetliner sliced through the North Tower, and on a day that would claim the lives of 71 law enforcement officers and 343 firefighters would lose their lives in the line of duty, the racists and supremacists of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement – a violent and intolerant ideological faction spurred on by those who benefit from divisive and race-based politics – march in the streets bastardizing statistics and calling for violence against police officers and first responders. The very people who were hailed as heroes for their courage and selfless acts fourteen years ago are, today the target of vile protestations, lies and vilification.

These societal maladies are but two that exists in today’s United States, maladies born of selfish, ideological politics and a population that refuses to engage in the hard work of casting aside the special interest rhetoric of opportunistic skullduggery or even supporting those who fight daily to dilute the madness.

In all the wrong that exists today, and suffering the wickedness of the dividers, the political opportunists, the Islamofascists and the ideological zealots, we – the American people – must reach deep down into our souls to find the courage and the dedication to come together; to re-attain the brotherhood we shared on that fateful day fourteen years ago; 3,115 days ago; 74,760-some hours ago, that we can not only measure up to what we should be as Americans, but so that we can become what we need to be so that our Republic can survive; so that we can confront and defeat the things that divide us; so that we can achieve e pluribus unum.

Each September 11th, I remember – purposefully – Jonathan Briley, the “falling man” of September 11, 2001. I penned a piece titled, “Feeling the Pain of the Falling Man of September 11th” on the first anniversary of the attacks. Since then it has been updated to address current circumstances. I ask you – I implore you – to remember the pain you felt on September 11, 2001; to feel the loss and the immediate kinship you felt for being American and being in the cross-hairs. I implore you (and invite you) to remember Jonathan Briley:

Feeling the Pain of the Falling Man of September 11th: Redux

Everyone remembers the horrifying images of September 11, 2001. Anyone alive and aware on that date will live with those images the rest of their life. The scenes of havoc and panic, destruction and slaughter, demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that even though the United States military is the best trained and well equipped in the world, our country remains vulnerable to the wicked.

When one accepts the fact — and it is a fact — that the free world, not just the United States, is at war with violent Islamists, this story is all the more chilling and disturbing.

The mainstream media in the United States has taken the images of September 11th, 2001 off the television and out of the newspapers, but for the obligatory image on the anniversary itself. They say that the images are too disturbing, that they incite a want for revenge rather than allow for closure. But they are wrong to do this.

The United States should not and cannot simply forgive and forget just because the our current president fallaciously insisted that al Qaeda was on the run and that the Islamic State is “jayvee.” Facts demonstrate that al Qaeda, the Taliban – and now the Islamic State and Boko Haram; violent Islamists, have been planning and preparing to implement their global campaign of terrorism — their declared war against the Western World — since before 1993, well before September 11th. Their central location for training may have been eliminated but they had prepared for that, splintering like roaches to the four corners of the world, preparing, planning and implementing their battle plans made decades before.

Make no mistake, they are a cunning adversary. They understood that the US would come after them. They planned for this event. Now they have metastasized and their threat is even greater than before September 11, 2001.

This war cannot be about “tolerance” or forgiving, or about understanding the “reasons why” someone would want to murder innocents whether it be with an airplane, a car bomb, a suicide vest or a saif. This battle has to be about freedom and the right of innocents to live their lives in liberty, free of fear from an unholy sect of genocidal totalitarians who offer only oppression, dominance and terror as their bounty.

The Progressive left and the complicit mainstream media would have us believe that it is America that is to blame for her audacity in the promotion of freedom and free markets, liberty and the vision of a world free of dictators who torture, murder and slaughter for power. To that extent, Progressives and the agenda-driven media are dangerous and a direct threat to the existence of our country, teetering on the brink of treason and sedition. They will attack these words by saying that I have intimated that they are not patriotic and un-American.

For the record, I hold the belief that anyone who believes the United States brought the attacks of September 11, 2001, onto itself IS unpatriotic and un-American. I believe that they have become toadies for our enemy and should be treated and opposed as such. While they manipulate the true meaning of the First Amendment’s free speech clause, they attempt to indoctrinate and transform our youth and the less than suspecting among us into believing in the doctrine of self-loathing, an oppressive ideology born of the less than great thinkers of Europe almost a century ago.

In its March 15, 2006 edition, The Mirror, a British publication (the American mainstream media too gutless to publish such truth), revealed the identity of a man who had to make the unimaginable decision of whether to burn to death in the raging fires of the World Trade Center on September 11th or escape the pain of hell on earth by leaping from the top of one of the world’s tallest buildings to his certain death.

The article was titled, Revealing the Identity of the Falling Man of 9/11. Jonathan Briley was “The Falling Man of 9/11.”

I would beg each of you to read the article but The Mirror, along with Esquire and a number of publications who once cared about such things, has taken the article down. You can search his name – Jonathan Briley – and look at the pictures and feel Jonathan Briley’s helplessness, his terror, and then try to imagine the split second of excruciating pain that he felt when his body hit the cement below with such force that he, a human being just seconds before, was left a bloodstain on a sidewalk, slaughtered like road kill by barbarian Islamists.

The people of the United States need to rekindle the flame of emotional anguish about the attacks of September 11th, 2001. We need to seethe. We need to employ the ingenuity and intelligence that is fostered in a free society dedicated to liberty, and scream our ire from the top of the world. Then we need to take definitive action.

If we are to wage war on terrorists; on violent Islamists, then let us be the ones who strike terror into the hearts of our enemies. Let us bring terror to those who blow-up innocents, saw the heads off hostages and threaten the world with words of annihilation and nuclear Armageddon. If we are to be in a war we did not choose to begin then in the memory of all who have fallen in the quest to provide freedom and liberty to the world, let us be the ones who act decisively to end it.

We need to embrace the undeniable truth that the free world is at war and cease pandering to those who would wake up one day in the future ruing the fact that we should have acted earlier.

A pre-emptive strike doctrine for the United States? Eradicating the world of the likes of al Qaeda, the Islamic State, Boko Haram and every other Islamist organization that preaches the conquest and servitude of the “dhimmi”? You’re damn right!


The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 09/11/15

The Watcher’s Council

In remembrance of all those who perished Sept. 11th, 2001.

In remembrance of all those who perished Sept. 11th, 2001.

From: Media Equalizer

From: Media Equalizer

From: Media Equalizer

From: Media Equalizer

From: Media Equalizer

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice. – Charles de Montesquieu

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. – CS Lewis

Supposition all our lives shall be stuck full of eyes; For treason is but trusted like the fox, Who, ne’er so tame, so cherished and locked up, Will have a wild trick of his ancestors. – William Shakespeare


This week’s winning essay is Joshuapundit’sThe Tale Of The Swine. It’s just a little fable – and a warning – I found very apropos given what we’re hearing from certain people these days. Here’s a slice:

Once there was a tribe of wild pigs who lived in a remote area of the woods.

As anyone who’s spent time around pigs will tell you, they are by no means the most unintelligent of animals, and these pigs had learned to adapt quite well to their circumstances. They had fashioned dens and had gradually learned to piece together a tribal law that allowed them to work as a group when necessary to ensure an adequate if not over generous food supply, care for their young and defend themselves against any natural predators. In their little corner of the woods, they were pretty much the dominant species, and were reasonably content.

One day, a pig named Andy went missing. The others searched for him throughout their part of the forest, but they were unable to find him no matter where they looked. Andy’s fate became a major topic of conversation among the pigs. It was totally unheard of for one of them to simply disappear like that.

The pigs didn’t quite keep track of time beyond the seasons, but still by their reckoning it was some time before, to their astonishment, Andy reappeared as the leaves were turning color.

The pigs were ecstatic to see their lost tribe member returned to them..and even better, in what appeared to be rip roaring good health.

Most of the wild pigs tended to lose some weight as the weather started to turn colder and food became scarce and harder to find, but Andy was sleek, fat and obviously had been living, if you’ll pardon the expression, high on the hog. His bristles and hooves were clean, his eyes shone brightly and he was as happy as a pig in – well, you know. And much to the other pig’s surprise, he had a pretty red collar around his neck, something none of them had ever seen before.

“Wherever have you been Andy?” the other pigs asked. “We looked everywhere for you.”

“Oh, I can’t wait to tell you”, said Andy. “I’ve discovered something wonderful.”

“You know, I was chasing down some berries I smelt over by the oak trees over by our eastern border, you know the place. Well I ended up going a little past our bounds and what bad luck! I wasn’t paying attention and got my left rear trotter lodged in a tree root.”

“I tried and tried, but I couldn’t get free and I thought I might die there. But then the most marvelous thing happened. A man heard my squealing, came through the underbrush and set me free.”

Now, the pigs had heard of men before, but only in their pig legends that dated long before they had moved to their present remote home. Some pigs wondered if they even existed. And now, here was Andy telling them he’d actually seen one!

“I was still injured, so the man took me back with him to an amazing place called a Farm. I couldn’t believe what I saw there. There are fields loaded with food and grain, and all kinds of different animals living there in peace and plenty. I lived in a large, warm den called a barn, with straw for my bed and the very best of food.No sleeping out of doors for this pig! And do you know what I had this morning? Apples! And corn mash! You can’t believe how good it tastes compared to the berries, roots and acorns we live on here – and free, every day, without me having to go out and find it.”

“The man – I call him my Dear Farmer – gave me this red collar and made me his pet. He knew I came from a tribe of wild pigs in the area somewhere, and I overheard him say to one of the other men that he was going to let me go near where he found me to see if I would be able to lead him to the other pigs. He wants us all to come live there on the Farm, can you believe it?”

Needless to say, the other pigs were astounded. And as they began discussing this on their own, various differences emerged between them on what they should do.

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was the one and only Sarah Palin with What The President Didn’t See From Alaska, submitted by Joshuapundit. The governor hasn’t lost her touch in the least and reading this will make you reflect how different the state of America and the world would be right now if she were in the Oval Office instead of the creature whom now inhabits it.

Here are this week’s full results:

Council Winners:

Non-Council Winners:

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?


The Absurdity of Hillary Clinton’s Apology Tour

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

Hillary Clinton has been desperately trying to sell a number of lies to the American people about her inexcusable behavior as Secretary of State, but it is mainly the mainstream media who are buying her excuses. And even that avenue appears to be drying up as a source of support. Despite her protestations of innocence, it is clear that she has violated both the spirit and the letter of the law in an attempt to skirt accountability and stay on track to win the Democratic Party nomination for president in 2016.

However, most mainstream journalists are not interested in holding her accountable. Instead, news organizations run headlines about how Mrs. Clinton has finally apologized for her private server.

“As I look back at it now, even though it was allowed, I should have used two accounts,” said Clinton on ABC News on September 8. “That was a mistake. I’m sorry about that. I take responsibility.” But the next day, in an interview with Ellen DeGeneres, in a show to air on Thursday, she was back to apologizing only for the “confusion that has ensued.”

Anne Gearan reports for The Washington Post that Hillary claimed that she “did not send or receive classified material on the account” and was making an effort toward greater transparency.

Each of these assertions are demonstrably false. Whether or not classified information was sent and received, not whether or not it was marked classified—which is the current iteration of her evolving explanation—is the real issue. As Secretary of State, most of Mrs. Clinton’s communications were highly sensitive, guaranteeing that at some point classified information would pass through her server.

According to The Washington Post, among the emails released to the public, at least six of those sent by Mrs. Clinton have been marked as containing classified information. Reuters reports that 87 email threads to date contain information that should have been presumed classified.

Mrs. Clinton’s much-publicized apology is, in effect, no apology at all. It is, instead, an attempt to still justify her actions, with the aid of the media.

During a previous facile attempt at accountability, NBC anchor Andrea Mitchell actually stopped questioning this presidential candidate in order to avoid making her feel uncomfortable.

“Are you sorry?  Do you want to apologize to the American people for the choice you made?” asked Mitchell on September 4.

“Well, it wasn’t the best choice,” responded Mrs. Clinton. “And I certainly have said that.  I will continue to say that.  As I’ve also said many times, it was allowed. And it was fully above board.”

Mitchell told MSNBC’s Morning Joe on September 8 that she felt, after a dozen minutes of pressing Mrs. Clinton about her emails, that “out of concern that they would cut it off, obviously, that I had to move on.”

In other words, Mitchell allowed the Clinton campaign to set the tone of the interview, rather than doggedly pursuing the facts.

But the best line from Hillary in the interview with Mitchell was when she said she “was not thinking a lot when [she] got in. There was so much work to be done. We had so many problems around the world.” So therefore, she “didn’t really stop and think what kind of e-mail system will there be.”

Shannen Coughlin, a former George W. Bush Justice Department official, demolished that assertion. Writing in National Review, Coughlin fired off a list, starting each point with, “So she didn’t think when she…” For example, “paid a former campaign staffer to build the server and set up ‘Clinton.com’ e-mail addresses for herself and close State Department aides, including her deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin.” And, “So she didn’t think when she neglected to report her server to the Department of Homeland Security, as required by law, so DHS could audit the security of her system as part of its mission to protect the government’s Internet security.” You get the picture. It’s worth reading the whole article.

However, mainstream reporters seem uninterested in exposing Mrs. Clinton’s ongoing lies. Instead, the Associated Press asked Mrs. Clinton on September 7 “why she won’t directly apologize,” offering an opening for her to further justify herself or show some real contrition.

“What I did was allowed,” she told the AP. “It was allowed by the State Department. The State Department has confirmed that.” Yet when Mrs. Clinton still maintained on ABC News that her actions were allowed by the State Department, Gearan characterized this as “the furthest Clinton has gone in showing remorse for” her personal server. Remember, Mrs. Clinton was head of the State Department at the time she is saying they “allowed” it.

To the contrary, Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, told Politifact that “Anyone at [National Archives and Records Administration] NARA would have said you can’t use a personal email account for all of your official business.”

Politifact refused to give Mrs. Clinton a truth-o-meter rating—which might have involved exposing her blatant lies—because it argued that the truth wasn’t “clear cut” enough.

Reporters’ reticence to label these falsehoods for what they are empower Mrs. Clinton to continuing lying to the public while claiming that she has made a full apology.

Jonah Goldberg puts Clinton’s apologies in perspective, asking, at National Review, “Who gives a rat’s ass?” about her apology.

He continues: “Note that she’s apologizing for the narrowest definition of her transgressions, which is a clever way of trying to minimize the scandal. It was perfectly allowed…but I should have used two email addresses. My bad. This is a strange way to ‘take responsibility,’ after months of saying you did absolutely nothing wrong and attacking anyone who said otherwise. If she’s going to apologize for anything, she should apologize for that. Or she could apologize for putting national security at risk. Or she could apologize for violating rules rank-and-file people can get sent to jail for. This ‘apology’ is a response to her falling poll numbers and nothing more. That’s because everything she does these days is in response to poll numbers.”

The Washington Post’s David Ignatius continues to dismiss this as a fake scandal. “After talking with a half-dozen knowledgeable lawyers, I think this ‘scandal’ is overstated,” he wrote. “Using the server was a self-inflicted wound by Clinton, but it’s not something a prosecutor would take to court.”

“It’s common’ that people end up using unclassified systems to transmit classified information,” former CIA general counsel Jeffrey Smith told him. Smith described this crossover as “inevitable, because the classified systems are often cumbersome and lots of people have access to the classified e-mails or cables.”

One thing Ignatius left out is more background on his source: Jeffrey “Smith served as a ‘close’ national security adviser for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and that Smith has a history with the Clintons going back to at least President Bill Clinton’s election in 1992.” Not that that would influence his judgment on this matter.

“Several former prosecutors said flatly that such sloppy, unauthorized practices, although technically violations of law, wouldn’t normally lead to criminal cases,” argues Ignatius.

Mrs. Clinton’s exclusive use of a private server can hardly be equated with opting for a more convenient, yet normal, mode of communication. Neither can one excuse the mishandling of classified information under the excuse that everyone does it.

“Intent to do wrong or to leak material is not required to justify a prosecution and many officials, including some high ranking ones, have been subjected to embarrassing prosecutions that either ruined their careers or actually resulted in jail time,” writes Jonathan S. Tobin for Commentary Magazine. “But the FBI does not investigate civil cases or machines,” he adds. “They do criminal probes and if, as the Inspector General has just told us, she mishandled classified information, she and her aides are in serious trouble.”

Mrs. Clinton’s abuse of the system was egregious, deliberate, and systematic. Those reporters who continue to believe that this is a fake scandal have mired themselves in the technicalities at the expense of moral clarity, parsing legalese in order to, somehow, let Mrs. Clinton off the hook. But Hillary’s cover-up has been so blatant that it doesn’t even survive the legal challenge.

“The law says that no one has to use email, but it is a crime (18 U.S.C. section 1519) to destroy even one message to prevent it from being subpoenaed,” wroteRonald D. Rotunda in an opinion for The Wall Street Journal in March. “Prosecutors charging someone with obstruction don’t even have to establish that any investigation was pending or under way when the deletion took place.”

Mrs. Clinton didn’t just destroy one message—she destroyed thousands of them in order to prevent them from later being accessed by government officials. Arguments about the precise timing of her actions serve as a distraction.

By failing to challenge Mrs. Clinton’s obvious lies and technical hairsplitting, the mainstream media perpetuate this presidential candidate’s dishonesty. But no further information is necessary in order to demonstrate that Mrs. Clinton has not been forthcoming with the American people about Benghazi or her emails. The question is, when will the liberal media admit this to themselves?

It’s clear that within the ranks of the liberal media establishment and the Democratic Party, their concerns are increasing. Though they ran it on page A22, today’s New York Times has a story entitled “Democrats Concerned About Clinton’s Swoon Consider a Big-Name Plan B.” It offers a cutting criticism from a long-time Democratic activist:

“‘You have Democrats beginning to panic about the one thing that a lot of them never worried about, which was Clinton’s electability in the general election,’ said Robert Shrum, a veteran strategist who was a senior adviser to Mr. Gore and Mr. Kerry during their presidential runs. ‘You still have to think of her as the odds-on favorite for the Democratic nomination. But the challenge she faces in the general election is both the trust problem and the likability problem.’”


Weekly Featured Profile – Daraka Larimore-Hall


Daraka Larimore-Hall

Daraka Larimore-Hall is Secretary of the California Democratic Party.

Raised in a Santa Barbara activist family, “Daraka’s background forged his strong commitment to social justice and some of his earliest family memories are from anti-Apartheid and nuclear disarmament protests.”

Since graduating with honors from the University of Chicago in 1999, Larimore-Hall has worked as a political organizer on electoral and issue-based campaigns throughout the United States and Europe. In 2001-2002, he worked as an anti-racism and election organizer in Norway and Sweden. From 2003 until 2011, he was an activist and an officer in UAW Local 2865, the union for Teaching Assistants at the University of California. He is currently finishing a PhD in Sociology at University of California, Santa Barbara.

Larimore-Hall has been Chair of the Democratic Party of Santa Barbara County. He has served as Vice President of the Tri-Counties Central Labor Council and served as Vice Chair of the California Democratic Party Labor Caucus.

In 1995, Daraka Larimore-Hall was a co-chair of the Democratic Socialists of AmericaYouth Section and was elected to the DSA National Political Committee at the November 1997 National Convention in Columbus, Ohio.

In 2004, Larimore-Hall wrote of his ideas for infiltrating Marxism into the Democratic Party:

Imagine an America in which socialism is part of our political landscape. Imagine an America in which the Right couldn’t destroy any initiative for social justice by simply labeling it with the “s” word. Imagine an America in which the values of solidarity and equality are defended by politicians with the same vigor as liberty and security.
A majority of activists of color, unions, feminists, queer activists and environmentalists have made the political choice to work within the Democratic Party. For that reason, democratic socialists should also work as Democrats. Of course, that’s not all we do, but we share with these movements a belief that Republicans are worth beating, and that many (but not most) Democratic politicians are part of the progressive majority we hope to strengthen. Even those good Democrats need the pressure of people’s movements to allow them to create policies which foster a long-term change in America’s power structure.
If you really want to insure prosperity, equal opportunity, racial and gender equality and global justice, you must address the problems at the root of the capitalist system. Liberalism is a great start, but in order to fulfill its own goals, it must confront the structural problems of global capitalism.