Obama calls ISIS 'killers with good social media'

                                                     
        Since the Paris attack from ISIS Obama responds with a comment about the group  calling them '' a bunch of of killers with good social media''.  Obama goes on to talk about how ISIS is only trying to get us afraid and wants to keep us always on alert for attacks. There is no war with the entire religion because the United States will not fight a religion because we are made up on multiple religions. Obama claims that sending troops to fight ISIS would be a mistake. Obama is not willing to give the war that ISIS wants. The House has passed a bill that won't allow Syrian and Iraqi refugees.

       What should Obama do to keep ISIS under control?

        Do you think that troops should be sent to fight ISIS even though Obama sees it as a mistake?

A vote to discriminate in car sales

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-car-dealers-racism_564e440ae4b0258edb30ba10

       Car businesses in america, have been accused, and sued for raising interest rates on car sales towards African Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics. After multiple law suites against this issue, car business and banks were ordered to reimburse over 100 million dollars in total to those who were racially discriminated against. However Banks and car businesses found difficulty in this matter and later tried to implement a law, that would curb the anti-discrimination law, to allow them to discriminate in the car sales business. This law was put into action, but was greatly opposed by president Obama, and the congressional progressive urged lawmakers to vote against the law. The law was later passed with a 332 to 96 vote, with 88 democrats voting for the law and no republicans voting against it.

1) In what ways could this law be considered unconstitutional?
2) Why do you think so many democrats voted for this law?

High School coach files discrimination in lawsuit against Huntsville schools

http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2015/11/former_coach_claims_discrimina.html

Summary:
Former African American high school basketball coach for Johnson High School, Maurice Ford, led his team to a state championship game this year. He was later fired without reasoning, and a new, caucasian coach was hired shortly after. The school claims that the new coach, Mr. Doss, had an amazing coaching background and that the move was in the best interest of the student athletes, but were unable to come up with any reasonable actions leading to Ford's replacement. Ford later took a stand and sued the school for racial discrimination. Ford filed a charge of discrimination with the equal employment opportunity commission in 2013 and Ford received his right to sue that September.       The jury ruled that he was protected under the civil rights act of 1994 leading him to win the case.

Do you think it was right for Ford to have won the case?



Do you believe that there was racial discrimination involved in the firing of Ford?

'We Cannot Succumb to Fear': U.S., France Unite Against ISIS

President Barack Obama explains his opinion on the ISIS terrorist attacks. He says that the U.S. stands in "total solidarity" with France, "in the wake of the deadly terror attacks there and pledged to do more to crush ISIS." Obama, standing alongside visiting French President Francois Hollande, said the types of attacks that left 130 just under two weeks ago in Paris "can not be tolerated." "This was an attack on our free and open society," Obama said and stressed "Americans will not be terrorized."  

Do you believe that Obama's plan to "do more than crush ISIS," is a good plan? What do you believe is the best way for America to handle this situation? Should we live in terror or continue to ignore the situation with ISIS? 

Rachel Bresnick Blog Post

"State Department issues worldwide travel alert"

           The United States' State Department has issued a worldwide travel alert. They said that terrorist groups such as ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram continue to plan attacks in many areas throughout the U.S. and the world. After the Paris Massacres it is important to ensure Americans the greatest safety possible especially when traveling.

Question: Do you trust the government's intell to keep you safe? What are your thoughts on this topic?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/23/politics/state-worldwide-travel-alert-paris-terrorist-attacks/index.html

Hotel in Mali attacked by several gunmen

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/21/africa/mali-hotel-attack/

Two or Three gunmen fired upon anything that moved in the unexpecting hotel in Mali. The Attackers did not say a word to anyone as they opened fire in the hotel. By the time Malian U.N. forces arrived the hotel was layered with bullets, and bodies spread across the floors of the Radisson Blu Hotel in Bamako. The reports coming in have said at least 22 people were killed. The hotel had been hosting delegations there attending peace talks. Bamako is a main center for international guests being 15 minutes away from the airport. ISIS has claimed the responsibility of the attack alongside Al Queda. The reason the hotel was attacked was most likely because of the diplomats meetings there. This tragedy was not a loss for one lone nation. The victims were from around the world of all nationalities.
What do you think the correct response to this attack should be, along with the recent attacks in Paris?
What can we do in the future to prevent the increase in prevalence of these attacks?

After Paris attacks: France and U.S. struggle with Syrian refugee issue

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/19/world/paris-attacks-us-france-refugees/

             The attack by ISIS that killed 129 people in France has has left a lot of leaders and citizens  questioning whether or not to continue to let Syrian refugees, fleeing from civil war, into their country. Because it is believed that the ISIS terrorist was able to enter the country by posing as a Syrian refugee, a lot of the countries fear for their citizens safety and their overall national security. Although France refuses to hault what they feel is their "humanitarian duty" of accepting the refugees into their country, some Americans have a different outlook on the situation. Some believe that suspending the program allowing Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the U.S. is crucial until key national security agencies certify they don't pose a security risk.

  Do you think that countries should discontinue programs to let in Syrian refugees? Why? Do you believe we have a duty to help Syrian refugees or do you believe that national security is more important? Why?

The Real Story About Syrian Refugees

      

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4628875313001/the-real-story-about-syrian-refugees/?intcmp=hpvid1#sp=show-clips
  In recent news the big topic is syrian refugees. Democrats view Republicans hard nose with immagrations and, Republicans view Democrats to soft, open and kind. The truth is that americans do not trust Obama to keep them safe in the month of October alone 5,000 children where cought trying to cross the Mexico border. And in the past six years 88,000 illegal imagrants where caught doing crimes and let go. Now is that safe for us? In a recent poll 43% of people support allowing refugees in and 54% oppose even affter background checks. With holes in our security system already is letting 10,000 refugees into the U.S. going to harm us or are the bad people already here?  

FDA Approves GMO Salmon Despite Widespread Opposition

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/fda-approves-gmo-salmon-despite-widespread-opposition/
11/23/2015

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first genetically modified animal for human consumption, GMO salmon. According to Greenpeace's article, FDA Approves GMO Salmon Despite Widespread Opposition, the biotech company, AquaBounty, genetically engineered salmon eggs that produce growth hormones, which will make them grow faster than wild salmon. Although "AquaBounty says it's safe," farmed salmon escapes are common, and can genetically contaminate the already stressed Atlantic stocks. "California has already banned GMO salmon..." because they threaten their wild counterparts. Thousands of grocery stores, such as Trader Joe's, have committed not to sell GMO salmon. However, consumers might not know if the salmon they're eating is modified or not because "the FDA does not require this new health experiment to be labeled." 

Questions:
 Is this morally right? What could be the pros of genetically modified salmon?

Paris Attacks Complicate Hillary Clinton’s Alignment With Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/18/us/politics/paris-attacks-complicate-hillary-clintons-alignment-with-obama.html?ref=topics

In this recent debate, Hillary Clinton has her audience questioning her former ties with President Obama. With the ISIS attacks on Paris, Clinton has started to estrange from Obama, although she needs the democratic party’s support in order to succeed into the general presidential election. In attempt to keep close ties with her democratic supporters, Clinton declined a question concerning whether Obama had underestimated ISIS. She later contradicted Obama’s belief that ISIS is confined to Iraq and Syria. While Clinton stated that “it’s not our fight”, Obama argued that “it is our fight, and without our leadership in building a coalition to destroy ISIS, it won’t happen.” Evidently, Obama and Clinton do not share the same views on foreign affairs.

Questions:

What is your opinion? Should Hillary Clinton keep her ties and agree with President Obama to have the democratic vote? Or should Clinton outwardly state the different actions she would pursue when it comes to foreign affairs?

Meet the Woman Suing Anheuser-Busch Over Equal Pay

http://www.marieclaire.com/career-advice/tips/a9523/francine-katz-anheuser-busch-equal-pay-lawsuit/

Francine Katz was a former executive of a brewing company until she resigned from the company in 2008.  She claims that she was paid less than half the base salary of her male coworkers; however, she was turned away every time she complained about the wage gap. In 2014, she sued her former employer for exclusion and salary discrimination due to her gender.  Her case went through many appeals and eventually was refused to be heard.  She was considered “ungrateful” when she brought up this discrepancy.  Michelle Chen, from The Nation, questioned whether or not employees’ salaries should be kept a secret, and their survey shows that around 50% of workers are already restricted to withholding this information. The only reason why Francine Katz was able to take her fight to court was because she found out about her coworker’s compensation package.  Not many employees are allowed to know such information at work.   

1.) In your opinion did the company do anything wrong?

2.) Should employees be allowed to know what their coworkers earn?

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby

On November 25, 2013, Burwell sued Hobby Lobby for not providing certain health benefits for women. Hobby Lobby is a for profit company that is also a Christian owned company. They believed that they could exercise a right to deny female employee a complete female oriented healthcare(abortion, birth control, etc.). They used the Religious Freedom Act in order to argue their conservative belief toward pro life. On June 29, 2014, The Supreme Court decided with a  5-4 favoring Hobby Lobby because they believed that as a Christian organization they did not need to pay for certain women’s health benefit since it goes against their religion ideals.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2013/13-354

Question:

How does this case promote women’s equality in the society? Does this court case benefit more women or not?

Korematsu v. U.S.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/personality/landmark_korematsu.html

Summary: 

During WWII, February 19th, 1942, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued an executive order forcing all US-Japanese citizens alien or non alien into internment camps for the remainder of the war. This precaution was taken in order to insure that the Japanese did not attempt to sabotage the US in anyway especially since Japan had just declared war on the United States by joining the Axis Forces. "In a 6-3 court decision the supreme court upheld Korematsu's conviction." The Supreme Court sided with the military in that the country's national security outweighed the constitution's promise of equal rights.

Question(s): Is it fair to the Japanese American citizens to be wrongfully justified as enemies of the country if the ancestral country was the one that declared war? Does the president issuing an executive order to intern the Japanese American people considered an emergency power or was his decision a little too hasty?

Stand Your Grounds: A license to kill

In 2005, Florida was the first state to adopt the Stand Your Ground law. It is a law that authorizes you to use deadly forces in cases of self-defense without the duty to retreat in the face of any perceived threat to their life or property. On February 26, 2012 a tragic event occurred where the young African-American, Trayvon Martin was murdered by George Zimmerman. George Zimmerman was freed later that night by having this law make his actions constitutional. The law was adopted by 33 states to lower the homicide rates. Instead the percentages of murders have gone up, most of them coming from white males. Many people are now having second thoughts about this law. Some people believe that there are people out there, who are racially bias, and are taking advantage of this law. http://www.phillytrib.com/stand-your-ground-laws-a-license-to-kill/article_03172c17-c334-5c08-a95c-cb9c281ed29c.html

Is this law constitutional in your opinion? If not what amendment does it violate? Should the states repeal this law or keep it? 

Hassan V City Of New York

Hassan v. City of New York is a federal lawsuit filed against the City of New York that challenges the New York Police Department’s suspicions surveillance of Muslim Americans in New Jersey solely because of their Muslim identity.

Summary

A diverse group of American Muslim plaintiffs filed suit to end the New York Police Department’s invasive and discriminatory spying program. The first legal challenge against the NYPD for intrusive practices targeting American Muslims, the lawsuit seeks an immediate end to the unlawful surveillance and the purging of files maintained by the NYPD.

As documented by the Associated Press, the NYPD has been conducting unlawful surveillance of innocent American Muslims simply because of their faith.  American Muslims were targeted in New York City, as well as in towns, mosques, businesses, and college campuses throughout the northeast, including New Jersey.  Records show that the NYPD took copious notes on the details of American Muslims’ daily lives.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are as diverse as the American Muslim community itself: they include a decorated U.S. Army reservist, a small business owner who is also a Vietnam veteran, students and imams.  

Question:  Do you believe the NYPD has the authority/right to spy on American Muslims just because of there race? 

Capital Punishment and the Supreme Court

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/06/capital-punishment-and-supreme-court

Summary: Glossip v. Gross
On April 29, 2014, Oklahoma executed Clayton Lockett an inmate on the death penalty using three lethal drugs they injected in to him.One of the drugs was untested called Midazolam. The procedure went horribly, Lockett woke up after the injection of the drugs that were supposed to make him unconscious. He said  “This shit is fucking with my head,” and did not die until about 40 minutes later. European companies wont sell drugs to be used in executions, and American companies don't want their brands linked to lethal injections.So Oklahoma and other states have been playing around with the 3 drug protocol in some cases. Using a drug called Midazolam, which botched Lockett’s execution and several others.The case was brought to the court by three prisoners in death row in Oklahoma, who knew that the process of using Midazolam is painful. But in a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that the three prisoners failed to prove that Midazolam offers a "substantial risk of serious harm". 

Question: Is using the three drug process with Midazolam against the 8th amendment? Is it right to use an untested drug on a prisoner on the death bed?  

Supreme Court Sides With Police Dog In Search Case-Florida v. Harris

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/19/justice/supreme-court-search/

Summary: Florida v. Harris was a court case questioning weather a dog sniff by a trained narcotics dog was sufficient enough to enforce probable cause for a search and seizure of a car under the Fourth amenedament of the united states Constitution. On June 24 2006, Harris was initially pulled over due to expired tags, when approaching the vehicle the officer noticed harris shaking, breathing heavily, and agitated, the officer proceeded with the regulatory traffic stop. He noticed an open container of alcohol in the center consul cup holder, immediately the officers ask for consent to search the vehicle harris refuses at that point due the shaking and heavy breathing and open container of alcohol the officer deployed Aldo his K-9 companion, the officer then performed a "free air sniff" of the trucks exterior, the dog alerted his handler to the drivers side door handled. With "Probable cause " from aldo exterior sniff the officer then searched the car and found 200  pseudo-ephedrine pills in a plastic bag under the passenger seat and materials that seemed as if harris was producing large amount of methamphetamine.
Question: Was the officer justified to use Aldo (police dog) to do an exterior sniff of the vehicle due to the open container of alcohol in the front seat cup holder? Also how do we determine the consistency and reliability of a dogs nose throughout the years of service?

U.S. Supreme Court will hear Utah case involving drug search

10/1/2015

link: http://fox13now.com/2015/10/01/u-s-supreme-court-will-hear-utah-case-involving-drug-search/

summary:The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a  a case involving reasonable suspicion during a search for drugs in Utah.The case is about an incident in 2006 when police got an anonymous tip alleging drugs being sold out of a South Salt Lake home. A detective had the home under surveillance and stopped Edward Strieff, Jr. to question him. During that stop, Detective Doug Fackrell arrested Strieff on an outstanding warrant and found methamphetamine and a drug pipe.Strieff challenged his arrest, claiming the officer lacked reasonable suspicion. The district court allowed the evidence in, the Utah Court of Appeals upheld that decision but the Utah Supreme Court reversed it.

question: what do you think the supreme court's decision will be?

Congress Against the World

US reportedly may abstain from UN vote condemning Cuba embargo

Summary - After 54 years of isolation the embargo placed on Cuba from the U.S might possibly be lifted. The UN vote for the lift in the embargo could be in a month, following four administration officials who weren't allowed to speak on the matter hinted at the unprecedented abstention of the U.S for the vote. Obama has had his mind set on the embargo lift since last December and been acting on it for the last few months, announcing that Washington and Havana would normalize diplomatic relations, re-opening both countries embassies, and chipping away at U.S restrictions on trade and travel to Cuba. Obama and Castro have been meeting recently talking about the cooperation individually and together they could be take to end the blockade policy for the benefit of both peoples, and though they have not mentioned the UN vote, Cuba will introduce a resolution, as it has for the last 23 years, at the upcoming General Assembly criticizing the embargo and demanding it's end. The U.S has lost each vote by increasing margins with only Israel's support in last year's vote. U.S has not decided how to vote but according to officials the U.S is more likely to vote against the issue rather than abstain. It will mostly rely on what's in the resolution, the resolution will not be pre-judged before it's final.

 Question(s) - President Obama has complete disapproval from Senate, what do you think
 we should do? What are the repercussions if we go through with lifting the embargo?

Why is America viewed as the biggest threat to world peace?

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Why-the-US-is-the-Biggest-Threat-to-World-Peace-20150117-0024.html

Summary: Our nation as a whole has always centered it's exceptional history on things that leave our citizens with pride and a patriarchal essence. Roughly 405,000 people have been killed as a result of the violence and infrastructure damage of the U.S.-led War in Iraq. The U.S. leads the world in military spending, with more than $7.6 trillion spent on the military and homeland security since 9/11. The rise of ISIS in Iraq has been traced to the US war in the country. In an article on ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the New York Times explained, “At every turn, Mr. Baghdadi’s rise has been shaped by the United States’ involvement in Iraq – most of the political changes that fueled his fight, or led to his promotion, were born directly from some American action.” Almost every current issue within and out of our nation has rooted back to the United States in some way. war crimes and military industrial complex are consistently propped up by the concept of U.S. exceptionalism. These bullets and beliefs make the U.S. the biggest threat to world peace. 

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
 "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Why-the-US-is-the-Biggest-Threat-to-World-Peace-20150117-0024.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
 "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Why-the-US-is-the-Biggest-Threat-to-World-Peace-20150117-0024.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
 "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Why-the-US-is-the-Biggest-Threat-to-World-Peace-20150117-0024.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
 "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Why-the-US-is-the-Biggest-Threat-to-World-Peace-20150117-0024.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

Kim Davis Loses Another Bid to Stall Gay-Marriage Case

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/kim-davis-loses-bid-stall-gay-marriage-case-33991752

Date: 10/24/15

Summary: After a federal judge gave Kim Davis a mandate to license all couples that are eligible for marriage after she defied him, she has been working to stall it, asking the judge to postpone the mandate. She had been in jail for 5 days after refusing to give marriage licenses, despite the recent legalization of gay marriage. While in jail, her deputies began to issue licenses to the couples who had been denied licenses and sued Davis with the American Civil Liberties Union, omitting Davis' information on the documents. Despite numerous appeals over the mandate by Davis saying that she shouldn't have to issue more licenses since the couples who sued her had received licenses, they were all rejected, whether on technicalities or based on the fact that it what she was asking for would deny the right of all eligible couples to get married. The  American Civil Liberties Union is also asking the district judge to make Davis reissue the licenses due to doubt over their validity. 

Question(s): Do you think that the judge should force Davis to reissue the licenses that may be invalid? Does the judge have the power to mandate Davis to license all couples? 

Appeals court reverses ruling that found NSA program illegal

Link - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/appeals-court-reverses-ruling-that-found-nsa-program-illegal/

Date- 8/28/2015

Summary - A federal appeals court, in a somewhat surprising move, overwhelmingly reversed a lower appeals court decision in May that said the NSA Surveillance Program was excessive.  The NSA program was created following 9/11, but the extent of phone collection was unclear until Edward Snowden's revelations in 2013 that the NSA collected the phone numbers of all calls made and received as well as the length of each call.  In 2013, a US District Judge ruled that collection was likely unconstitutional but allowed the program to continue while under appellate review.  The DC Circuit is the highest appeals court and all three of its judges spoke negatively of the case.  One judge said the government wouldn't provide the necessary information to help the challenge to the program while another judge said the challengers needed to show they were targeted by the surveillance program.

This decision is especially interesting because Congress passed a law in June that phases out the bulk collection of phone records by the NSA, even though the FISA (double secret classified court) court claimed the USA Patriot Act of 2001 allowed the program.  The new law from Congress requires phone companies to keep all phone records and allows the government to search the records without any warrant.  Any further judicial decisions are irrelevant as the program shifts according to the new law, however, big brother will be collecting all phone records until then.

Question (s) - Do you know what the NSA does?  Are you willing to give up some freedoms in order to have more security?  Is the mass collection of phone records worthwhile?

Obama Immigration 2015: Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Lawsuit Dismissed By Court, Citing ‘Unsupported Speculation’

Link - http://www.latintimes.com/obama-immigration-2015-sheriff-joe-arpaios-lawsuit-dismissed-court-citing-unsupported-335464

Date - 8/17/2015

Summary - President Obama announced an Executive Order on immigration in November of 2014.  His 2012 Order dealt with DACA, deferred action on children, in which the INS would not deport children brought illegally before the age of 18.  The 2014 Order dealt with DAPA, deferred action on parents, in which parents who entered illegally, but whose children are citizens, would not be deported.  A notoriously conservative and outspoken sheriff from Phoenix, Joe Arapaio, brought a suit against Obama by claiming DAPA would lead to an increase in crime.  The D.C. District Court of Appeals dismissed the suit, claiming that Arapaio does not have standing in the case, which means he cannot prove injury.  Arapaio's lawyer hopes the U.S. Supreme Court will agree, though the next step is the 5th Circuit Court in New Orleans.  Interestingly, the 5th Circuit is currently deciding a case brought by Texas against Obama for DAPA.  The Texas suit has been granted standing and a federal court issued a ruling in February against Obama's plan.  Texas reasoning was based on the claim immigrants will cost more money for public services, such as driver's licenses.  While the 5th Circuit has not rendered its final ruling, it did rule in May against lifting the hold on DAPA, arguing "public interest favors maintenance of the injunction" against DAPA.

Question(s) - Was Obama within his constitutional powers in implementing an action that is widely popular?  Why did Obama pass this executive order (what does cartoon say)?


By the way, here is a funny video on the bill, I mean executive action.