Media Say Pentagon Can’t Confirm That Baghdadi Was Crying Before He Blew Himself Up

This is the kind of investigation we get when a Republican is in office. This is actually a NY Times article, “The Paper Of Record”, and spread out through more local sources, and their’s is about being unable to confirm the whimpering

Pentagon can’t confirm al-Baghdadi was crying before he died

The country’s top military officer said on Monday that he does not know where President Donald Trump got his information that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Islamic State leader, died “screaming, crying and whimpering.”

Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at a Pentagon news conference that he does not have similar information, but said Trump may have gotten his details from a conversation with military personnel on the ground who were involved in the raid.

“I know the president had planned to talk down to the unit and unit members,” Milley said. “But I don’t know what the source of that was. I assume it was talking directly to unit and unit members.”

His comments echoed those made the day before, by Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper, who also said he did not have the same “details” that Trump shared with the country about the Islamic State leader’s last moments.

White House officials have declined to say how the president got the information about al-Baghdadi’s “screaming” and “whimpering” during the raid. Some echoed the Pentagon assertion that Trump may have spoken with commanders or Delta Force team members on the ground.

First, this is meant to attempt to softly convey that Trump might maybe be making it up, especially since so many on the Left were Very Upset that Trump described Baghdadi in those terms, ie, “screaming, crying, and whimpering”, because the Left is deranged. I’m betting all the victims of Baghdadi and ISIS were happy to hear about him going out that way, even if Trump did make it up or embellish. Seriously, who cares if he did? Baghdadi was a horrible, horrible, evil person.

But, you know, Orange Man Bad, so, the media looks to undercut him and ask these questions. This is the same media asking for confirmation of the screaming, crying, and whimpering that refused to ask questions on Operation Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, the Benghazi attack, Hillary Clinton’s server, the payoff to Iran, and so many other issues. But, now they can ask if Baghdadi was crying, screaming, and whimpering? And they wonder why they’re accused of bias and being in the pocket of Democrats?

Read: Media Say Pentagon Can’t Confirm That Baghdadi Was Crying Before He Blew Himself Up »

Museums Are Now Sexist Or Something

Some people really need to dig deep to be Offended about stuff. It really is always something

‘Sexist’ Natural History Museums Biased Towards Dead Males

Researchers have accused the world’s leading Natural History Museums – in New York, Washington DC, Chicago, Paris and London – of sexist bias.

They discovered this after counting the number of male specimens in the collection and discovering that they outnumber female ones.

Male birds outnumber female birds by 60 per cent to 40 per cent and mammals are 52 per cent male and 48 per cent female.

Although the researchers acknowledge the fairly obvious reason for this – collectors are attracted to “species with showy male traits like colourful plumage and horns” and thus tend to overlook the generally smaller, drabber female ones – they insist that this is an imbalance that needs correcting.

They claim:

 If collections are biased towards one sex, studies may not be representative of the species.

According to the study’s lead dead-animal-counter, quoted in the Manchester Evening News, this ‘bias’ needs ‘improvement.’

Right, right, it’s a bias. Maybe an unconscious one?

Dr Natalie Cooper, of the Natural History Museum, in London, who authored the report, said: “There is a tendency for the people collecting to want to get the largest grizzly bear or the animal with the most impressive horns.”

The animals were all collected between 1751 and 2018, but things didn’t improve over time.

Dr Cooper added: “Interestingly, we see no improvement. Even recent collections are biased.”

Damned nature, mostly making the males larger and brighter colored! Ban them!

Read: Museums Are Now Sexist Or Something »

If All You See…

…are horrible plastic cups, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Patterico’s Pontifications, with a post saying goodbye to Democrat Katie Hill.

Read: If All You See… »

You Need To Watch Netflix In Low Definition To Stop ‘Climate Change’

Climate cultists might want to rethink this push, because it will surely turn the young folks against the Cult

From the article

Movie nights once required driving to the local video store to rent, rewind and return the latest blockbuster. Now on-demand video content providers offer countless binge-worthy options at the touch of a finger.

But experts say the ease of streaming services comes with a hefty environmental price tag.

Watching a half-hour show would lead to emissions of 1.6 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent, said Maxime Efoui-Hess of French think tank the Shift Project. That’s equivalent to driving 3.9 miles (6.28 kilometres).

Last year, online  streaming produced emissions equivalent to Spain and that amount may double in the next six years, according to the Shift Project.

We’re doomed! I don’t have Netflix, but, I do have Amazon prime

While most of the online traffic—34 percent—is related to streaming videos, on Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu, for example, the next biggest sector is online porn.

“Digital videos come in very large file sizes and (are) getting bigger with each new generation of higher definition video,” said Gary Cook of Greenpeace, which monitors the IT sector’s energy footprint.

These younger folks are going to be very upset, since they are rather upfront on their watching of porn. Anyhow, there’s lots of discussion on the increase in streaming, the expected increases, especially adding Disney and Apple to streaming, the size of TV screens, which use more electricity, 4K broadcasts and TVs. So, what can you do?

Experts suggest that viewers disable autoplay and stream over Wi-Fi in lower-definition formats. The  is watching over a 3G connection on a mobile device, said Lefevre.

The Shift Project offers a browser extension that monitors , displaying the amount of electricty used, the CO2 that electricity produces, and how far the user would have to drive to match those emissions.

I don’t turn off autoplay for ‘climate change’, but, because it’s annoying. They keep finding ways around it, though. As for watching in lower definition? Not going to happen.

Read: You Need To Watch Netflix In Low Definition To Stop ‘Climate Change’ »

People Of The Future Will Be Shocked That Trump Wasn’t Impeached Over The Climate Crisis Or Something

This is a scorching Hotcold Take, where Esquire manages to combine two Leftist moonbat things

Someday, They’ll Be Amazed We Didn’t Impeach Trump Over the Climate Crisis
Yeah, Ukraine. But actively undermining our efforts to combat an existential threat to human civilization as we know it surely qualifies as a high crime.

You almost do not even have to go further than the headline and subhead. Anyhow, after discussing the wildfires in California (which happen every year, including during Obama’s terms, so, why didn’t we impeach him over it?), we get The Crazy, so, do not be drinking anything

…But someday, assuming we make it that far, future generations will surely wonder why we did not remove him from the world’s most powerful office simply because he denied the existence of a fundamental threat to human civilization as we know it. The president has not just said the climate crisis is a Chinese hoax, or suggested he has some different opinion on whether it’s a problem compared to the scientists—you know, people who have devoted their lives to studying this phenomenon. He has actively rolled back our efforts in pretty much every department, to combat a crisis that will upend not just our children’s lives, but our own.

Surely, this constitutes a high crime against humanity. His apparatchiks will laugh at the suggestion now (yes, we will), and call it liberal delusion. But soon enough, they won’t be laughing. The people who actually know a goddamn thing about this say we have 12 years to change course in order to avoid this onrushing doom. The president wants to dig more crap out of the ground. He’d like to force New York State to do it, to abandon its commitment to future generations so some energy executives—who perhaps have some sort of relationship with the president—can make a buck.

 

Read: People Of The Future Will Be Shocked That Trump Wasn’t Impeached Over The Climate Crisis Or Something »

AP Reminds Us That Obama’s “JV Team” Still Poses A Threat

This is very interesting. When President Bush 43 was prosecuting the war against al Qaeda, we were told that we just needed to kill Osama and the whole thing would fall apart. This was known as the “Queen Bee” theory. When Osama was whacked under Barack Obama, we were told that AQ was dead. In fact, AQ was significantly reduced already due to killing lots of AQ members and making it hard to operate. Osama wasn’t really in control at the time, it was Ayman al-Zawahiri (Osama needed to die, though, with prejudice). But, jihadis were still out there. But, now that the ISIS/ISIL leader was forced to blow himself up, something has changed, as the AP tells us

Islamic State still poses a threat after al-Baghdadi’s death

Eliminating the Islamic State group’s elusive leader gives President Donald Trump a new argument for leaving Syria, but the U.S. military campaign against the extremists is far from finished.

The killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi by U.S. forces leaves the Islamic State without an obvious leader, a major setback for an organization that in March was forced by American troops and Kurdish forces out of the last portion of its self-declared “caliphate,” which once spanned a swath of Iraq and Syria.

But the militant group, which arose from the remnants of al-Qaida in Iraq after that group’s defeat by U.S.-led forces in 2008, has ambitions to regenerate again. And it remains a dangerous threat in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond.

“The bottom line is: This puts the enemy on its heels, but the ideology — and this sounds so cliched — it is not dead,” said Chris Costa, a former senior director for counterterrorism for the National Security Council in the Trump administration.

Key to the Islamic States is its “kill where you are” ethos, encouraging a far-flung network of followers, including those in the United States, to commit violence however and wherever they can. That jihadist message is likely to live on, even with the death of al-Baghdadi.

This is all very interesting. We were told that they were the JV by Obama, and their atrocities were minimized by the media while Obama was in office. Not too mention that the danger from Islamic terrorism was minimized. Heck, this is the type of article that would have CAIR and other useful idiots screeching about Islamophobia, is it not?

According to defense officials in Iraq and Afghanistan who study Islamic State and have watched its movements, the group is growing in power and numbers outside of Syria.

Its flagship affiliate is known as ISIS-Khorasan in Afghanistan, and it is expanding into other countries, including Pakistan, Tajikistan, Iran, India, Bangladesh and Indonesia. Many of those affiliates have liaisons in the terror group’s hub in eastern Afghanistan.

Radical Islam is constantly growing. It’s being taught in Islamic schools and mosques, on the Internet, through radicalization programs spread from those to get people to join. It’s often subtle prodding and pushing and cajoling. Along with those raised to radicalism in beliefs, with some steps to becoming a jihadi.

Funny how they like to tell us this stuff after ISIS’ leader blows himself up when cornered while a Republican is in office, eh? Oh, and we’re also getting this again

Read: AP Reminds Us That Obama’s “JV Team” Still Poses A Threat »

If All You See…

…is produce that is terrible because of all the road miles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Newsbusters, with a post on NBC whining about Trump taking a victory lap over the killing of ISIS head.

It’s shorts week.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another fantastic day in America. Getting some much needed rain, Halloween is almost here, and my thumb is down to about a 4 for pain. This pinup is by Greg Huldebrandt, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15 (just using headlines, still hard to type)

  1. Weasel Zippers covers Joe Biden twice using his position as a Senator to enrich his son
  2. The Right Scoop: Gov. Abbott gives liberal city of Austin a deadline to fix ‘lawlessness’ or the state will do it
  3. The People’s Cube: ‘Democracy dies in darkness’ is a cookbook
  4. The Other McCain: AOC: Fossil Fuels Are Racist or Something
  5. The Lid: Ilhan Omar: Democrats Know “Things Most People Can’t Understand”
  6. The Last Tradition: X22 Report: Pain Coming, It Will Devastating For The Deep State, Watch Those Who Scream The Loudest
  7. The Daley Gator: And then they came for clapping
  8. Powerline: Trump’s winning argument on impeachment
  9. Political Clown Parade: A Very Curious Spectacle: The Trained Parrot And The Democrats’ Holy Grail
  10. Pacific Pundit: At Elijah Cummings funeral, Hag Hillary Clinton calls Trump and Melania King Ahab and Queen Jezebel
  11. Climate Change Dispatch: Expensive Climate Policies Sparked The Chilean Riots, Just Like In France
  12. Jo Nova: The Australian Bureau of Met hides 50 years of very hot days
  13. Real Climate Science: Halloween Climate Crisis
  14. 357 Magnum: I Hope Calif. Enjoyed the High Tech Civilization While It Lasted
  15. And last, but not least, Brass Pills: Man Accused Of Hate Crime For Refusing Sex With UK Trans Woman

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me.

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

NY Times Continues Impeachment Fantasy, Now With A Way To Block A Second Term

This has fired up the unhinged #Resistance and #NeverTrumpers

Hey, if you can’t beat him at the ballot box under the established rules, right?

(NY Times) With chances rapidly increasing that President Trump will be impeached by the House and tried in the Senate, an intriguing question has reared its head: Could he be ousted only to try to return to the White House in 2020 in a Trumpian bid for redemption and revenge?

Like so much of the coming impeachment showdown, that decision rests entirely with the Senate. The Constitution famously grants senators the sole power to convict and remove a president — something that has never been done. What is seldom discussed is a more obscure clause of the Constitution that allows the Senate discretion to take a second, even more punitive step, to disqualify the person it convicts from holding “any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”

Imposing that penalty would effectively bar the president from reclaiming his old job. In an added twist, tacking on the extra punishment requires only a majority vote in the Senate, not the two-thirds — or 67 senators — required to convict.

For now, the idea of disqualifying Mr. Trump is the remotest of hypotheticals, since it would first require the Senate to vote to impeach and remove him. That seems far-fetched, given how little appetite Republicans in the chamber have shown so far for deserting him, despite the flood of damaging revelations that have come forth in the impeachment inquiry. But if nearly two dozen Republicans did vote to impeach him, it would take only a simple majority to banish him from the presidency for life.

The first is not going to happen, so the second is a pipe dream. And that’s what these Trump haters have: pipe dreams. They just can’t control themselves in their virulent hatred. If Trump came out in favor of abortion, assault rifle confiscation, getting rid of fossil fuels, and the Green New Deal, they’d still find a way to oppose him.

“If the impeachment is based on the Ukraine phone call and activity around that, and the idea is that he is improperly using his office to get dirt on his opponent, the remedy to that is to remove him from office,” said Edward B. Foley, an election law authority and constitutional law professor at the Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law. “If the fear is the incumbent can’t fight a fair fight, then disable the candidate’s ability to not wage a fair fight.”

Politics is all about quid pro quo, about cajoling other politicians, nations, and people, using a stick or carrot. Move on, folks.

Read: NY Times Continues Impeachment Fantasy, Now With A Way To Block A Second Term »

A Green New Deal Could Transform Our Lives Or Something

The co-founders of Green New Deal UK, Hannah Martin and Fatima Ibrahim, attempt to spin this as a good thing

How a Green New Deal could transform our lives
How do we move from moments to movements? In the midst of an environmental emergency, the co-founders of Green New Deal UK tell Dazed

As an environmental movement, we can agree there is much to worry about. In the ten years since the original Green New Deal was proposed, there has been no real progress on tackling climate change. In 2019, we are facing a period of huge uncertainty; on the horizon could be a no-deal Brexit, a financial crash or yet another General Election. Yet this is also a period of our history where the opportunities for seismic shifts in public opinion are multiplying and the government are feeling the heat. We’ve seen youth strikes take place almost every month since February and many every week across the UK and organising the largest ever UK climate justice protest in September calling for a Green New Deal as the key solution to this emergency.

Wait, I thought the Paris Climate Agreement was historic? No? Anyway, after a bit of fear-mongering and quibbling and yammering (because they want people to get that they’re doomed unless we Do Something, and our lives will be great if we do, before people tune out), we finally get

Because it is interested not purely in carbon targets but in the flourishing of whole communities, the radical idea of a Green New Deal for the UK could be a positive and unifying answer to these crises. The idea of a Green New Deal saw an enormous surge in support last year when progressive U.S. representative Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her radical vision for a just transition. But its roots go back deeper. The Green New Deal is a plan first proposed in 2007, as a collective societal mission to transform our economy. It’s an ambitious ten-year national action plan to tackle climate breakdown in a way that improves peoples’ lives and builds a fairer, more democratic society and economy. It would totally decarbonise the economy of the United Kingdom by creating millions of new well-paid, secure, unionised jobs across the country. By overhauling the finance system and surging investment in green industries, it would make sure we provide healthy and fulfilling livelihoods for all workers and communities, including those in high emissions sectors – often those hit hardest by climate crisis.

So, union jobs backed by government force. Overhauling the finance system? How so? From previous yammerings from climate cultists, we know this means a Socialized system where the government controls the economy. “We provide”? That means government is in control of your life.

At the same time a Green New Deal would transform our economy – with greater democratic participation, accountability and common ownership – empowering communities who are currently marginalised. For any climate solution to be truly holistic we must begin to respect natural ecological limits, for example, rewilding and restoring vital habitats and carbon sinks, including forests and wild areas, and ensure the provision of clean water, air and green spaces.

By “common ownership”, that’s cute Soviet style language for “government control”. The 2nd part is more about moving everyone into urban areas from the suburbs and countryside (easier to control and manage people). Think I’m being overboard? This is what decades of watching the Cult of Climastrology would lead you to, as well. They have ulterior motives.

Finally, a Green New Deal would have global justice at its core, supporting all peoples and countries to decarbonise quickly and fairly, in line with timeframes set out by science. The Green New Deal will ensure the UK does its fair share to tackle climate breakdown – and more – to account for historic emissions and the exploitation of resources and communities, particularly those in the Global South.

Are you getting the idea that this isn’t about climate?

Read: A Green New Deal Could Transform Our Lives Or Something »

Bad Behavior has blocked 9962 access attempts in the last 7 days.