Friday, May 8, 2015

No 943 "En mi opinion" Mayo 8, 2015

No 943   “En mi opinión”  Mayo 8, 2015

“IN GOD WE TRUST” LAZARO R GONZALEZ MIñO EDITOR
Amenper: LOS CUBANOS
Existe una percepción entre las otras etnias Latinas que los Cubanos tienen una actitud arrogante con respecto a lo que han logrado como minoría en los Estados Unidos. Confunden un legítimo orgullo con arrogancia. La legitimidad se basa en las realidades y las estadísticas.
La estadística más importante es que los cubanos son la UNICA minoría en los Estados Unidos con un índice económico positivo, o sea que es el único  que como grupo paga más contribuciones tributarias que los beneficios sociales que recibe.
Negros y blancos realmente son los extremos de la distribución en términos de riqueza en América. Los latinos caen en algún lugar en el medio. Caen, en promedio, más cerca a la media americana africana en términos de riqueza. Pero existe una enorme disparidad dentro de la comunidad Latina. Es difícil hablar de los Latinos como un grupo unificado porque hay enormes diferencias dentro de esa comunidad.
Los cubano americanos, tienen niveles de riqueza que son mucho más similares a los blancos. Exactamente no equivalen a los niveles de blanco, pero vienen cercanas. Por otro lado, Puertorriqueños o dominicanos son casi equivalentes a la media negra. Otros grupos, así como los mexicanos y sudamericanos, caen cerca de ese grupo.
La población latina según el censo del 2010 arrojó losa siguientes números de latinos sin contar los indocumentados:
En Millones. Mejicanos 25.8, Puertorriqueños 4,6, Cubanos 1.8, Salvadoreños 1.6 Guatemaltecos 1.0, Dominicanos 1.4, otros 8.2.
Pero cuatro de los cinco hispanos elegidos al senado los últimos 35 años fueron cubano-americanos. Mel Martínez, republicano de Florida; Bob Menéndez, demócrata de Nueva Jersey; y Marco Rubio, otro republicano de la Florida y  Ted Cruz de Texas.
Dos de los candidatos a la presidencia de los Estados Unidos son de ascendencia Cubana, Ted Cruz y Marco Rubio
Cuando se trata de educación, los cubanos tienen mucho mayores niveles de educación que la población hispana total. Un 25 por ciento de los cubanos mayores de 25 años – en comparación con el 13 por ciento de todos los hispanos de Estados Unidos – han obtenido por lo menos una licenciatura
No hay ninguna duda de que los exiliados cubanos han ayudado a convertir a Miami en "el mercado de las Américas" creando una atmósfera que ha atraído a miles de millones de dólares en comercio, inversión y gasto de América Latina. En la década de 1960, los exiliados empezaron a llegar orgulloso, aún sin un centavo. Ellos establecieron una reputación de duro trabajo y resiliencia. Incluso los médicos y abogados de Cuba, que querían escapar el comunismo, toman empleos en los Estados Unidos como camareros y conserjes. Muchos trabajaron dos o tres empleos, lo necesario para construir emprendimiento se peguen entre sí.
Su credo: es que no lo hemos traído en nuestros bolsillos sino más bien lo que llevamos en nuestros corazones y mentes que hace lo que podemos lograr en los Estados Unidos
Decididos a triunfar, exiliados comenzaron a construir relaciones de negocio basadas en la confianza. Ex Dentistas llenaría la cavidad de un ex contable a cambio de servicios de contabilidad. Un ex médico haría llamadas de casa a cambio de pagos futuros. Los banqueros exilados  prestaron dinero basada exclusivamente en la reputación de otros exilados. Así es cómo pequeñas empresas se convirtieron en poderosas empresas: en trueque, en confianza, compartiendo experiencias.
Por la vuelta del siglo XXI, los exiliados cubanos tenían más empresas en la bolsa de Nueva York que cualquier otro grupo inmigrante. Y a la segunda generación de cubanoamericanos ,los encontramos como propietarios o ejecutivos de las grandes corporaciones. Entre ellos: Coca-Cola, Movado, Amazon, Azúcar Fanjul, Mas Tec, Nascar, Charlotte Bobcats, Google, Kellogg, Westinghouse, Detecnologías Sunward, Bacardi, McDonalds, Dow Jones y AT & T.
La enorme cantidad de riqueza y la prosperidad alcanzada por los exiliados cubanos americanos en un período tan corto de tiempo puede ser inigualable. Los números son realmente impresionantes.
Si miramos la población Cubana con respecto al resto de la población hispana en cuanto a número de personas, es algo que se destaca como algo no usual. Más cuando consideramos que otras etnias como la Mejicana y la puertorriqueña han estado o por más tiempo en el país.
Por favor, antes de decir que somos arrogantes, miren las estadísticas, no son una casualidad, es el fruto de dedicación y trabajo, algo que es digno de admirar y tratar de imitar, no de criticar.


DESPIDIENDO A "DON FRANCISCO" por Esteban Fernández por Esteban Fernández

 phvr38@gmail.com>
DESPIDIENDO A "DON FRANCISCO"

EL PALLÁ DE KREUTZBERGER...¡HARTA HORA!
Un amigo chileno imploró que no lo devolviésemos a Chile.  "¡Si va para Chile, déjenlo en Bolivia!"  Yo siempre me pregunté si trabajaba en EE. UU. sin papeles (¿quizá por eso lo cancelaron?); igual me lo pregunto por Ceriani, Yomari y la vaina; por la pujonada sacada de los vuelos castrobamistas; y por muchas restructuraditas del momento.

2015-05-07 0:08 GMT-04:00 Enrique Artalejo <artalejoenrique@gmail.com>:
 por Esteban Fernández      
 DESPIDIENDO A "DON FRANCISCO" COMO  MERECE
¿Existe un cubano que sienta que se acaba “Sábado Gigante”? No lo puedo creer porque nunca han televisado un solo programa donde este individuo no haga mofa o enseñe sus desdén contra nosotros. Mientras tanto se pasa la vida besándoles los traseros a los mexicanos.
Por lo único que yo sentiría que se acabara esa pesadilla es por la sencilla razón de que yo disfruto con echarle con el rayo a "Don Francisco" ese gran pujón de “Sábado Gigante”.
Pujón, entre los cubanos, es el que "puja" las gracias, no le brotan naturalmente.  Entre los cubanos “pujón" es quien no tiene la menor idea de ser "pujón" y se cree simpático, mientras que chistoso es quien no tiene la menor idea de ser cómico, y sin darse cuenta (ni intentarlo), dice cosas graciosas. Y a mí me parece que si buscamos en un "diccionario cubano" la palabra "pujón" aparece la cara de “Don Francisco”.
El caso de "Don Francisco" es 20 veces peor que el de "El Gordo y La Flaca", porque mientras estos nos ignoran  se ve a la legua que este chileno DETESTA A LOS CUBANOS. Y nos odia hasta el extremo de que uno día –en una sección del programa dedicada a los muchachitos- se puso obviamente molesto con un inocente niñito porque este le mencionó con orgullo que era cubano.
Desgraciadamente, parece que hace rato que el tipejo este descubrió que los cubanos no tenemos mucha misericordia con los pujones como él y hasta los ponemos en peor categoría que a los "pesados". Es decir, no premiamos el "esfuerzo" de tratar por todos los medios de ser gracioso.
Entre nosotros, si usted quiere cantar, pero no sabe cantar y se le van 20 "gallos", nos hacemos de la vista gorda, le damos aliento y aplaudimos su dedicación al canto. Pero con un "pujón", del calibre de “Don Francisco”, no tenemos la misma compasión.
Las gracias, entre cubanos, tienen que ser "sin premeditación ni alevosía”. El simpático, aunque sea súper simpático, no debe excederse en la simpatía porque corre el peligro de convertirse en un "pujón. Las gracias no deben ser ensayadas, ni estudiadas, ni premeditadas. Las gracias tienen que ser espontáneas e inesperadas.
Entre nosotros preferimos que las ocurrencias sean dichas con absoluta seriedad. El que se ríe de sus propios chascarrillos corre el riego de ser confundido con un "pujón". Y entre cubanos, aceptamos mejor un asaltante de bancos agradable, que a un monaguillo de Iglesia que sea "pujón".
Los cubanos exigimos que las gracias sean naturales y no perdonamos al que arduamente se esfuerza por ser gracioso. Los cubanos, con una facilidad asombrosa, detectamos el problema y le ponemos "el cartelito" de "pujón" a cualquiera... Somos implacables con la "pujonería". Y eso parece que lo sabe muy bien este pichón de judío alemán.
Los "pujones" tienen muchas cosas en común. Como por ejemplo, la falta de gracia para hacer chistes y su INSISTENCIA en hacerlos a toda costa. Y enseguida los cubanos nos damos cuenta de eso y comenzamos a decir: "Oye ¿y quién le dijo al cabezón este que es gracioso?".
Es algo así como que existe un límite en las gracias, que el relajo tiene que ser con orden, que existe una línea invisible que nadie debe cruzar en su intento de caer bien. Hay que  saber "hasta donde se puede llegar en las bromas", porque si no, es castigado por la comunidad con el cruel apelativo de "chorro de plomo". "Don Francisco" se pasa la vida burlándose del acento de los cubanos. 
Nosotros increíblemente, preferimos al "pesado" serio y retraído que al "pesado" tratando de ser gracioso. Ser "pesado callado" es 20 veces mejor que ser "pesado" y encima de eso "bufón". Desde el primer momento el "Che" Guevara nos cayó como un "hígado frío a las 12 de la noche" a los cubanos, sin embargo un amigo mío se atrevió a "defenderlo" diciéndome: "Será un bofe y un asesino,  pero menos mal que no es pujón" 
Hasta los artistas cómicos (que viven de eso) tienen que tener mucho cuidado en no excederse con el humor negro porque pueden, con una facilidad extraordinaria, ser catalogados por nosotros como "pujones".
Difícilmente usted encuentre un solo cubano que se refiera a "Don Francisco" como "un gran comediante", hace mucho rato que este chileno se "pasó de la raya" y todo el mundo a mi alrededor siempre dice: "¡Ah, ese Don Francisco no es más que un pujón, chico!" POR ESO YO A LA HORA DE DESPEDIRLO COMO ÉL SE MERECE DECLARO HOY A DON FRANCISCO COMO EL REY DE LOS PEDANTES.
Todo lo contrario de “Don Francisco” era Leopoldo Fernández. Aunque corra el peligro que se me considere parcializado por haber sido "Pototo" mi coterráneo. A "Trespatines" le perdonábamos todo. A mí siempre me pareció que Leopoldo hubiera podido perfectamente bien darme con un bate por la cabeza y dejarme tirado en el suelo con un enorme chichón, pero si se me hubiera parado en frente y me hubiera dicho: "¡Cosa más grande la vida, muchacho!", no me hubiera quedado más remedio que morirme pero de la risa en ese momento.
Y si lo antes dicho no fuera suficiente y me quedo corto voy a subir la parada y agregar que además de pujón y anticubano, es un jamonero, insolente, mano muerta, abusador y sobre todo falta de respeto porque tengo un buen amigo que llevó a sus ancianos padres a  Sábado Gigante para celebrar sus 60 años de casados, y al presentarlos Don Francisco comenzó a burlarse e insinuar que “el viejo ya no sopla”.




Senate Votes 98-1 to Give Congress a Say on the Iran Nuke Deal — Here’s the One Republican Who Voted Against It

SHARES
·        

·        

·          
·          

·          
The Senate on Thursday easily passed legislation that will give Congress a formal role in reviewing the emerging Iran nuclear agreement, amid complaints from some Republicans that the bill will actually make it relatively easy for the Obama administration to strike a weak deal with Iran.
The Senate passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act in a 98-1 — the lone “no” vote came from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.).
The final vote followed several weeks of tension between the Senate and the White House, as President Barack Obama made it clear that he didn’t want to give Congress any authority to review a deal he hopes is finalized this summer.
However, it was almost immediately clear that members of both parties wanted to have a say over the agreement, since it could at some point require Congress to lift U.S. sanctions against Iran. When Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and the top Democrat on that committee, Ben Cardin (D-Md.), reached a deal on a bill, the White House relented and said it would support the legislation.
But several conservative Republicans said the White House was able to support the bill because while it lets Congress review the deal, it still makes it very hard for Congress to reject it.
Under the bill, Congress will be able to pass a resolution of disapproval if it decides the final Iran deal is no good. That resolution might well be able to pass both the House and the Senate, but even if it does, it can still be vetoed by Obama.
If it’s vetoed, a two-thirds majority would be needed in each chamber to override that veto. That seems doubtful, and that has led members like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to say the deal should only be approved if Congress affirmatively approves it.
Cruz tried Wednesday night to amend the bill to require an affirmative vote by Congress in order for the deal to take effect, but he was blocked. “All this amendment does is ensure that the burden is on President Obama to persuade Congress and the American people that the deal is a good one, or at a very minimum is not a terrible threat to the national security of the United States of America,” he said.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) had to fight off efforts by Cruz and Sen. Cotton to amend his bill, and was able to do so with clear support from nearly every Senate Republican. But even McConnell said he wanted the bill to be tougher.
“If we didn’t face the threats of filibusters, or the blocking of amendments, or the specter of presidential vetoes, this bill would be a heck of a lot stronger,” he said Thursday morning.
“But the truth is, we do,” he added. “That’s the frustrating reality. The response to this should not be to give the American people no say at all on a deal with Iran. The response should be to overcome those challenges in a way that will give Congress and the American people the best possible chance to review any possible deal and affect its outcome.”
Just before the final vote, the Senate voted 93-6 to end debate on the bill and move to a final vote. The only “no” votes then were from Sens. Cotton, Cruz, Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Mike Lee (Utah), Jerry Moran (Kan.) and Daniel Sullivan (Alaska.).
In the end, only Cotton stuck to his “no” vote at the last stage.
Senate passage means the House will have a chance to consider it as early as next week, when the lower chamber returns from a week-long recess http://news.yahoo.com/uks-cameron-poised-return-power-labour-routed-scotland-014734115--business.html 
Jorge A Villalon: PM Cameron sweeps to unexpected triumph in British election.
By William James and Kylie MacLellan 14 minutes ago
LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister David Cameron won a stunning election victory in Britain, overturning poll predictions that the vote would be the closest in decades to sweep easily into office for another five years, with his Labour opponents in tatters.
The sterling currency, bonds and shares surged on a result that reversed expectations of an inconclusive "hung parliament" in which Cameron would have had to jockey for power with Labour rival Ed Miliband.
Instead, Cameron was due to meet Queen Elizabeth before noon to accept a swift mandate to form a government. The royal standard was raised at Buckingham Palace to signal the queen was there awaiting him.
"This is the sweetest victory of all," he told enthusiastic supporters at party headquarters. "The real reason to celebrate tonight, the real reason to be proud, the real reason to be excited is we are going to get the opportunity to serve our country again."
Miliband was expected to step down as Labour leader. He said on Twitter: "The responsibility for the result is mine alone."
Despite the unexpectedly decisive outcome, more uncertainty looms over whether Britain will stay in the European Union - and even hold together as a country.
Scottish nationalists swept aside Labour, meaning that Scotland, which voted just last year to stay in the United Kingdom, will send just three representatives of major British parties to parliament and be all but shut out of the cabinet. That could revive calls for it to leave the United Kingdom.
Cameron sounded a conciliatory note toward Scotland, likely to be his first immediate headache.
"I want my party – and, I hope, a government I would like to lead – to reclaim a mantle we should never have lost, the mantle of one nation, one United Kingdom," Cameron, 48, said after winning his own seat in Witney, Oxfordshire.
Cameron's victory also means Britain will face a vote, which he has promised on continued membership in the EU. He says he wants to stay in the bloc, but only if he can renegotiate Britain's relationship with Brussels.
Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the EU's executive European Commission, congratulated Cameron on his victory. The Commission would examine any British proposal "in a polite, friendly and objective way," a Commission spokesman said.
Smiling beside his wife Samantha, Cameron returned to the prime minister's office in Downing Street early on Friday. He was expected to declare victory outside the black door of Number 10 Downing Street after his meeting with the queen.
With a handful of seats still to be declared in the 650-seat house, the Conservatives surpassed the 325-seat threshold of an effective majority that allows them to govern alone for the first time since 1992.
The margin of victory was a surprise even to Cameron, who said he "never quite believed we'd get to the end of this campaign in the place we are now."
That means Cameron no longer needs the Liberal Democrats, with which he has governed since 2010.
The center-left party, heir to one of the most storied liberal parties in Europe, was crushed, reduced to single digits after winning 57 seats five years ago. It's leader, Nick Clegg, held his own seat but resigned as party chief.
"It is simply heartbreaking," he said of the losses. "Clearly the results have been immeasurably more crushing and unkind than I could ever have feared."
Among the other stunning results, Ed Balls, in line to be finance minister if Labour had won, lost his seat. He fought back tears as he expressed sorrow at Labour's defeat.
"Any personal disappointment I have at this result is as nothing compared to the sense of sorrow I have at the result that Labour have achieved across the UKtonight ... and the sense of concern I have about the future," he said.
The UK Independence Party, a populist group that demands withdrawal from the EU, surged into third place in the countrywide vote tally, but that translated into a win of only a single seat. Its charismatic leader Nigel Farage lost his own bid for a seat. He stood down as party leader but said he might seek the leadership again later this year.
Sterling gained more than 2 cents against the dollar to rise above $1.55 for the first time since late February, and looked on track to enjoy its biggest one-day gain against the euro since January 2009.
The FTSE 100 stock index <.FTSE> was up 1.45 percent at 6985, approaching a record high set last month. The price of British government bonds also rose.
SCOTTISH "TSUNAMI"
With almost all of Scotland's 59 parliamentary seats counted, the Scottish National Party (SNP) had won 56 of them, up from just six five years ago, all but obliterating Labour in one of its historic strongholds.
"We're seeing an electoral tsunami on a gigantic scale," said Alex Salmond, the party's former leader, now elected to represent it in parliament in London. "The SNP are going to be impossible to ignore and very difficult to stop."
The United Kingdom includes England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. England accounts for 85 percent of the UK population but Scottish politicians elected to parliament in London have historically held important government posts. That will now be impossible with the SNP holding nearly all Scottish seats.
In a body blow to Labour that set the pattern for the night, Douglas Alexander, the party's campaign chief and foreign policy spokesman, lost his seat to a 20-year-old Scottish nationalist student, the youngest member of the House of Commons since 1667.
Miliband, a self-described "geek", never quite connected with working-class voters. He ran a campaign widely seen as better than expected, but was always far behind Cameron in polls that asked voters who they saw as a more credible leader.
"This has clearly been a very disappointing and difficult night for the Labour Party," he told supporters after retaining his own parliamentary seat in Doncaster, northern England.
UKIP's surge into third place in the overall vote tally, mirroring the rise of similar populist groups elsewhere in Europe, failed to yield it a strong presence in parliament under Britain's system in which candidates must place first in districts to win seats. It racked up scores of second place finishes across the country.
One other loser is the opinion polling industry, which is likely to face an inquest over its failure to predict the outcome. Before the election, virtually all opinion polls had shown the Conservatives and Labour neck-and-neck.
(Writing by Guy Faulconbridge; Additional reporting by Paul Sandle, Ahmed Aboulenein, Kate Holton, Andrew Osborn, David Milliken, Maytaal Angel, Angus MacSwan, Alistair Smout, Andy Bruce; Editing by Peter Graff)



It’s Back! Oil Breaks $60 Per Barrel

Published Fri, May 8, 2015   Commodity Strategist
Naysayers, doomsday theorists, and sell-in-May advocates are eating their words after forecasts of $20 oil proved to be dead wrong.
Yes, crude oil continues to gallop higher, with prices rising 50% in just over three months.
This week, West Texas Intermediate (WTI) soared above $60 per barrel to $62.58, the highest point so far this year. While Brent Crude went up to $69.93 per barrel.
So how the heck did this happen… and – more importantly – will the momentum continue?
Well, a series of sequential events just happened to fall like a stack of dominos and drove the price of global crude oil up.
You see, U.S. oil production has dropped from its peak and continues to fall. At the same time, rising demand, which has materialized since the collapse of crude oil prices, is allaying a global glut and driving a rebound in crude prices.
Since April’s price rally of between 20% and 25%, oil bulls have been driving the market up on the notion that a supply glut was easing from tightening world production, despite continuous builds in U.S. crude stockpiles.
Meanwhile, the deflation scare has receded as prices have bounced back, with cheap oil helping to spur consumer demand and economic growth.
An unlikely sequence of four events made conditions perfect for this jump.
First Event: The Disruption in Libyan Crude Exports
Protestors seeking state jobs stopped crude flows to the eastern Libyan oil port of Zueitina on Tuesday. Libyan output is already below 500,000 barrels per day (bpd), one-third of what the country pumped prior to 2010.
Zueitina’s closing is particularly harmful to Libya’s oil exports because it was one of only a few Libyan ports still exporting oil. Now, there’s even less oil leaving the country.
Second Event: Saudi Arabia Raised Prices for Northwest Europe
The Saudis increased the official selling prices for its Arab Light grade crude to Northwest Europe to reflect the recent price rally in rival grades.
Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Ali Al-Naimi was quoted by CNBC as saying that no one can set the price of oil, as “it’s up to Allah.” His remark came amid widespread speculation over how long the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) member would stick to its decision not to cut production, a move that could prop up prices further.
Readers can recall that last year’s oil price collapse accelerated after OPEC refused to cut its output limit of 30 million bpd in favor of defending its market share. That shift in policy was driven by Saudi Arabia, the top exporter in the cartel. The country raised its output to a record high, along with other members.
Third Event: A Weak U.S. Dollar
A weaker dollar tends to inflate commodity prices. The dollar is continuing to drift lower in a mixed batch of U.S. economic data, boosting dollar-denominated commodities, including oil.
Fourth Event: The Civil War in Yemen
The civil war in Yemen has kept the oil market on edge, boosting worries about the security of oil supplies in the broader Middle East. Traders fear supply disruptions from the nation’s northern neighbor, Saudi Arabia, or from the other Middle East producers.
America and Europe Fueling the Fire
On top of these four events, favorable activity in the United States and Europe is adding fuel to oil’s upward momentum.
Economic data from both the United States and Europe has been strong, indicative of greater demand for oil. In April, U.S. data showed that services activity rose more than expected. And, the trade deficit soared 43% in March, heightening expectations for tightening, as the Fed is expected to raise U.S. interest rates later this year for the first time since 2006.
Furthermore, the European Commission raised its economic growth forecast for the eurozone to 1.5%, up from a previous forecast of 1.3%.
Weekly inventory data was also bullish for crude.
Oil prices gained again late Tuesday after the American Petroleum Institute (API) data showed a fall of 1.5 million barrels of U.S. crude supply for the week ending on May 1. A Platts survey of analysts had forecasted a climb of 1 million barrels.
Then, on Wednesday, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported an inventory fall of 3.9 million barrels.
Both reports further strengthened crude’s price and added credence to the argument that U.S. output is peaking.
But, while the upward trend looks like it’ll continue for crude, investors should not lose sight of the headwinds that’ll prevent crude prices from soaring back to $100 per barrel any time soon.
Nevertheless, the $75 level is quite feasible…
What to Watch For
Some still argue that the market is oversupplied due to OPEC’s pumping almost 2 million bpd above demand. But, OPEC will meet on June 5 in Vienna to discuss production policy.
Some members will likely demand a reduction in the amount of oil being produced so that the price will rise. Yet, even officials from countries who favor a curb know it’s unlikely. Current lower prices are stimulating global demand and putting a brake on more expensive supply sources, such as U.S. shale.
There’s also the prospect of Iranian crude coming back onto the market if sanctions are lifted as part of an international nuclear deal.
If it succeeds in reaching a final deal with Britain, China, France, Russia, Germany, and the United States for its nuclear program, Iran will want other OPEC members to make way for a rise in its exports. The deadline for an agreement is June 30, but it would take time for Iran to raise production.
In fact, the markets receded later this week over concerns that Iranian sanctions may be lifted.
Iran is OPEC’s fifth-largest producer and could produce 4 million bpd in under a year, according to Bloomberg News.
Finally, focus on weekly U.S. inventory statistics. Even as we enter the driving season, producer output may rise due to more favorable prices.
Good investing,
Shelley Goldberg
Shelley Goldberg is a global resources, commodities and environmental sustainability strategist with over 20 years of sector experience in energy, metals and mining, agriculture, and infrastructure.


ISIS CLAIMS TO HAVE ’71 TRAINED SOLDIERS’ IN TARGETED U.S. STATES

MAY 7, 2015 BY RANDY DESOTO COMMENTS (36)
Purported ISIS jihadists issued threats against the United States Tuesday, indicating the group has trained soldiers positioned throughout the country, ready to attack “any target we desire.”
The online post singles out controversial blogger Pamela Geller, one of the organizers of the “Draw the Prophet” Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, over the weekend, calling for her death to “heal the hearts of our brothers and disperse the ones behind her.”
ISIS also claimed responsibility for the shooting early Tuesday, which marked the first time the terror group claimed responsibility for an attack on U.S. soil, according to the New York Daily News.
“The attack by the Islamic State in America is only the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah [authority or governance] in the heart of our enemy,” the ISIS post reads.
As for Geller, the jihadists state: “To those who protect her: this will be your only warning of housing this woman and her circus show. Everyone who houses her events, gives her a platform to spill her filth are legitimate targets. We have been watching closely who was present at this event and the shooter of our brothers.”
ISIS further claims to have known that the Muhammad cartoon contest venue would be heavily guarded, but conducted the attack to demonstrate the willingness of its followers to die for the “Sake of Allah.”
The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, in fact, issued a bulletin on April 20 indicating the event would be a likely terror target.
ISIS drew its message to a close with an ominous threat:
We have 71 trained soldiers in 15 different states ready at our word to attack any target we desire. Out of the 71 trained soldiers 23 have signed up for missions like Sunday, We are increasing in number bithnillah [if God wills]. Of the 15 states, 5 we will name… Virginia, Maryland, Illinois, California, and Michigan…The next six months will be interesting.
Fox News reports that “the U.S. intelligence community was assessing the threat and trying to determine if the source is directly related to ISIS leadership or an opportunist such as a low-level militant seeking to further capitalize on the Garland incident.”
Former Navy Seal Rob O’Neill told Fox News he believes the ISIS threat is credible, and the U.S. must be prepared. He added that the incident in Garland “is a prime example of the difference between a gun free zone and Texas. They showed up at Charlie Hebdo, and it was a massacre. If these two guys had gotten into that building it would have been Charlie Hebdo times ten. But these two guys showed up because they were offended by something protected by the First Amendment, and were quickly introduced to the Second Amendment.”
Geller issued a statement regarding the ISIS posting: “This threat illustrates the savagery and barbarism of the Islamic State. They want me dead for violating Sharia blasphemy laws. What remains to be seen is whether the free world will finally wake up and stand for the freedom of speech, or instead kowtow to this evil and continue to denounce me.”
Fox News…


Feds: VA official stole cash for stripper sex, gambling