US increases security at foreign airports, focus on cellphone, other electronic devices

Passengers taking international flights into the United States now must have their cell phones and other electronic devices pass additional inspection before boarding planes, as part of the Transportation Security Administration’s most recent strategy to protect against the threat of a new type of terror attack.
The TSA said Sunday it is requiring only some overseas airports to conduct the additional inspections. The agency also said devices that fail to power up won't be allowed on planes and that their owners might have to undergo extra screening before boarding.
“As the traveling public knows, all electronic devices are (already) screened by security officers,” the agency said in a release.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Wednesday ordered the TSA to put extra security measures in place at some international airports with direct flights to the U.S., based on intelligence that suggests new Al Qaeda efforts to produce a bomb that would go undetected through airport security.
Some experts have suggested such a device would be planted in a laptop or other such electronic devices.
“Our job is to try to anticipate the next attack, not simply react to the last one,” Johnson said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “So we continually evaluate the world situation. And we know that there remains a terrorist threat to the United States. And aviation security is a large part of that.”
Johnson said he and others in the Obama administration would continue to evaluate whether the increased security will be applied to U.S. domestic flights.
The beefed up security is almost certainly a response to recent intelligence reports suggesting that Al Qaeda-linked terrorists in Syria are working with members of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to blow up a commercial aircraft headed to the U.S. or Europe, as reported first by ABC News.
Americans and others from the West have traveled to Syria over the past year to join Al Nusra Front's fight against the Syrian government.
One fear is fighters with a U.S. or Western passport -- and therefore subject to less stringent security screening -- could carry such a bomb onto an American plane.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has long been fixated on bringing down airplanes with hidden explosives. It was behind failed and thwarted plots involving suicide bombers with explosives designed to hide inside underwear and explosives hidden inside printer cartridges shipped on cargo planes.
An American Airlines spokesman said last week that the company has been in contact with U.S. officials about the new requirements but declined to comment further.
The United Kingdom also said it is increasing security measures “in conjunction with international partners and the aviation industry.” Officials also said they don’t anticipate significant disruptions for passengers and that they will not raise the terror-threat level.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Nonprofits' contraceptive cases next for justices

WASHINGTON (AP) — How much distance from an immoral act is enough?
That's the difficult question behind the next legal dispute over religion, birth control and the health law that is likely to be resolved by the Supreme Court.
The issue in more than four dozen lawsuits from faith-affiliated charities, colleges and hospitals that oppose some or all contraception as immoral is how far the Obama administration must go to accommodate them.
The justices on June 30 relieved businesses with religious objections of their obligation to pay for women's contraceptives among a range of preventive services the new law calls for in their health plans.
Religious-oriented nonprofit groups already could opt out of covering the contraceptives. But the organizations say the accommodation provided by the administration does not go far enough because, though they are not on the hook financially, they remain complicit in the provision of government-approved contraceptives to women covered by their plans.
"Anything that forces unwilling religious believers to be part of the system is not going to pass the test," said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents many of the faith-affiliated nonprofits. Hobby Lobby Inc., winner of its Supreme Court case last month, also is a Becket Fund client.
The high court will be asked to take on the issue in its term that begins in October. A challenge from the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana, probably will be the first case to reach the court.
The Obama administration argues that the accommodation creates a generous moral and financial buffer between religious objectors and funding birth control. The nonprofit groups just have to raise their hands and say that paying for any or all of the 20 devices and methods approved by government regulators would violate their religious beliefs.
To do so, they must fill out a government document known as Form 700 that enables their insurers or third-party administrators to take on the responsibility of paying for the birth control. The employer does not have to arrange the coverage or pay for it. Insurers get reimbursed by the government through credits against fees owed under other parts of the health law.
Houses of worship and other religious institutions whose primary purpose is to spread the faith are exempt from the requirement to offer birth control.
The objections by religious nonprofits are rooted in teachings against facilitating sin.
Roman Catholic bishops and other religious plaintiffs argue that filling out the government form that registers opposition to contraceptives, then sending the document to the insurer or third-party administrator, is akin to signing a permission slip to engage in evil.
In the Hobby Lobby case, the justices rejected the government argument that there was no violation of conscience because the link between birth control coverage and the outcome the employer considers morally wrong was slight.
Just hours after the Hobby Lobby decision, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta granted a temporary reprieve to the Alabama-based Eternal Word Television Network. Judge William H. Pryor Jr. said in a separate opinion in that case that the administration "turns a blind eye to the undisputed evidence that delivering Form 700 would violate the Network's religious beliefs."
But the Supreme Court could draw a distinction between subsidizing birth control and signing a document to deputize a third-party to do so, said Robin Fretwell Wilson, a family law specialist at the University of Illinois College of Law.
"Think about how thinned down that objection is," Fretwell Wilson said. "The court might say that is a bridge too far."
Judge Karen Nelson Moore of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati said the document is a reasonable way for objecting organizations to inform the insurer, but that the obligation to cover contraception is in the health law, not the form.
"Self-certification allows the eligible organization to tell the insurance issuer and third-party administrator, 'We're excused from the new federal obligation relating to contraception,' and in turn, the government tells those insurance companies, 'But you're not,'" the judge wrote.
People on both sides of this argument are looking to the Hobby Lobby case for clues about how the justices might come out in this next round.
In a Supreme Court filing, the Justice Department said the outcome strongly suggested that the court would rule in its favor when considering the nonprofits' challenge.
"The decision in Hobby Lobby rested on the premise that these accommodations 'achieve all of the Government's aims' underlying the preventive-health services coverage requirement 'while providing greater respect for religious liberty,'" the Justice Department wrote, quoting from Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion. The legal filing was in opposition to an emergency plea from Wheaton College in Wheaton, Illinois, to avoid having to fill out Form 700. Wheaton is one of only a few nonprofits not to have won temporary relief in its court fight.
Rienzi, who also represents Wheaton, wrote in reply that the government is wrong to assume that the Hobby Lobby decision "blessed the accommodation." He noted that Alito specifically said the court was not deciding whether the administration's workaround for nonprofits adequately addressed their concerns.
On Thursday, the court, with three justices dissenting, allowed Wheaton to avoid using the form while its case remains on appeal. Instead, the college can send written notice of its objections directly to the Health and Human Services Department rather than the insurer or the third-party administrator. At the same time, the government can take steps to ensure that women covered by Wheaton's health plan can get emergency contraception the college won't pay for.
Several legal experts said that perhaps a simple revision to the government document at the center of the dispute could resolve matters.
"I think the question will come down to does the government really need them to tell the insurance companies or can you reword the form," said Marc Stern, a religious liberty specialist and general counsel for the American Jewish Committee. The faith-affiliated charities "might win a redrafting of the form. I don't think they can win an argument that says we can do absolutely nothing," Stern said.
___
Zoll reported from New York.

President Obama's pity party

Say this for President Obama: He’s got an uncanny ability to block out distractions and keep his eye on the ball.
Facing a horrific expansion of terrorism in the Mideast, a meltdown of public support at home and major rebukes by the Supreme Court, the president remains fixated on No. 1.

President Obama is right about one thing. His presidency and the country are at a crossroads. The problem is that his response — woe is me — means things almost certainly will get worse before they get better.

“I’m finding lately I just want to say what’s on my mind,” he told a Minneapolis audience Friday, and then ticked off a series of complaints about — surprise — Republicans.
“They don’t do anything, except block me and call me names,” he said. “If they were more interested in growing the economy for you and the issues that you are talking about instead of trying to mess with me, we would be doing a lot better.”
He wasn’t finished: “The critics, the cynics in Washington, they’ve written me off more times than I can count. But cynicism doesn’t invent the Internet. Cynicism doesn’t give women the right to vote.”
There you have it: the presidential mind in Year 6. Don’t cry for Argentina — cry for me!

Nevada sheriff says Cliven Bundy must be held accountable for standoff

A Nevada sheriff has said that rancher Cliven Bundy must bear responsibility for actions that led to a standoff between federal agents and militia members earlier this year, but added that the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) must reconsider some of its methods used prior to the confrontation.
Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie told the Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial board Thursday that he had warned Bundy prior to the April standoff that any protests over the BLM's attempt to round up more than 500 of the rancher's cattle must be peaceful. 
The BLM says that Bundy owes over $1 million in fees and penalties for trespassing on federal property without a permit over 20 years. Bundy, whose ancestors settled in the area in the late 1800s, refuses to acknowledge federal authority on public lands.
A federal judge in Las Vegas first ordered Bundy in 1998 to remove "trespass cattle" from land the bureau declared a refuge for the endangered desert tortoise. Bureau officials obtained court orders last year allowing the roundup.
Milita members descended upon the ranch after a video showing one of Bundy's sons being stunned by a Taser was circulated widely. Gillespie said that Bundy crossed the line by allowing his supporters onto his property to aim guns at law enforcement. 
"If you step over that line, there are consequences to those actions," Gillespie said. "And I believe they stepped over that line. No doubt about it. They need to be held accountable for it."
Gillespie blamed the BLM for escalating the conflict and ignoring his advice to delay the roundup after he had a confrontational meeting with Bundy's children a few weeks before it began.
"I came back from that saying, `This is not the time to do this,' " the sheriff told the Review-Journal. "They said, `We do this all the time. We know what we're doing. We hear what you're saying, but we're moving forward."'
Gillespie also claimed that the BLM lied to him by saying that they had a place to move Bundy's cattle after the roundup. The sheriff said he later discovered that was not the case.
The bureau backed down during the showdown with Bundy and his armed supporters, citing safety concerns, and released some 380 Bundy cattle collected during a weeklong operation from a vast arid range half the size of the state of Delaware.
A statement made to the Associated Press by the BLM Saturday said the agency continues to pursue the matter "aggressively through the legal system."
BLM spokeswoman Celia Boddington also criticized Gillespie for claiming that the agency mishandled the operation and claimed that the bureau acted in "full coordination" with the sheriff's office. 
 "It is unfortunate that the sheriff is now attempting to rewrite the details of what occurred, including his claims that the BLM did not share accurate information," she said. "The sheriff encouraged the operation and promised to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with us as we enforced two recent federal court orders."
"Sadly, he backed out of his commitment shortly before the operation - and after months of joint planning - leaving the BLM and the National Park Service to handle the crowd control that the sheriff previously committed to handling," she added.

The Statue of Dependence

Calif. town becomes flashpoint for national immigration debate

America Lost?

The Southern California town of Murrieta that gained national prominence when a crowd of protesters blocked buses carrying illegal immigrants being flown in from overwhelmed Texas facilities has become a flashpoint in what has become an intense national debate over immigration.
Earlier this week, approximately 200 protesters blocked buses carrying 140 illegal immigrants sent from a Texas to a US Border Patrol station, where they were to be processed before being moved to await deportation or asylum.
Days later, residents packed into a fiery town hall meeting, expressing their objections to the government sending any more illegal immigrants to Murrieta.
Rumors had swirled among anti-immigration activists near a U.S. Border Patrol station in Southern California that the agency would try again to bus in some of the immigrants who have flooded across the U.S.-Mexico border.
Instead, by late Friday afternoon, they got dueling anti- and pro-immigration rallies.
The crowd of 200 outside the station in Murrieta waved signs and sometimes shouted at each other. One banner read: "Proud LEGAL American. It doesn't work any other way." Another countered: "Against illegal immigration? Great! Go back to Europe!"
Law enforcement officers separated the two sides, leaving enough space for a bus to drive into the station.
Because of security concerns, federal authorities have said, they will not publicize immigrant transfers among border patrol facilities.
"This is a way of making our voices heard," said Steve Prime, a resident of nearby Lake Elsinore. "The government's main job is to secure our borders and protect us -- and they're doing neither."
Immigration supporters said the immigrants need to be treated as humans and that migrating to survive is not a crime.
"We're celebrating the 4th of July and what a melting pot America is," said Raquel Alvarado, a high school history teacher and Murrieta resident who chalked up the fear of migrants in the city of roughly 106,000 to discrimination.
"They don't want to have their kids share the same classroom," she said.
"What we're saying is right now [illegal] immigration needs to stop," Patrice Lynes, a retired nurse from neighboring Temecula who has organized the protests, told The Wall Street Journal.
"This is not just a Murrieta situation. This is a national situation," she said.
In recent months, thousands of children and families have fled violence, murders and extortion from criminal gangs in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras. Since October, more than 52,000 unaccompanied children have been detained.
The crunch on the border in Texas' Rio Grande Valley prompted U.S. authorities to fly immigrant families to other Texas cities and to Southern California for processing.
Burke Hinman, who has lived in the city for over 22 years, told The Wall Street Journal he wants to protect his community from being a "dumping ground" for migrants. As vehicles drove past the station, and Mr. Hinman raised his fist or shouted "U.S.A."
Protester Melinda Ward says Murrieta's processing station isn't equipped to handle such a large group of people, and worries that costs of housing and medical care will eat away at tax revenue.
"It all comes down to the tax dollars. We're paying for it," she said. "The government has dropped it on us and now we have to pay for it."
The crunch on the border in Texas' Rio Grande Valley prompted U.S. authorities to fly immigrant families to other Texas cities and to Southern California for processing.
The Border Patrol is coping with excess capacity across the Southwest, and cities' responses to the arriving immigrants have ranged from welcoming to indifferent.
In the border town of El Centro, California, a flight arrived Wednesday without protest.
In Nogales, Arizona, the mayor has said he welcomes the hundreds of children who are being dropped off daily at a large Border Patrol warehouse. Residents have donated clothing and other items for them.
In New Mexico, however, residents have been less enthusiastic.
At a town hall meeting this week, residents in Artesia spoke out against a detention center that recently started housing immigrants. They said they were afraid the immigrants would take jobs and resources from U.S. citizens.
Click for more from The Wall Street Journal

Biz executives pay fines for Florida vet facing eviction over flower pot flag

In an act of patriotism this Fourth of July, a pair of business executives has paid the fines for a Florida veteran who faced foreclosure for displaying a small American flag in a flower pot on his front stoop.
The two senior executives for Los Angeles-based Lear Capital had read the story of 73-year-old Larry Murphree, of Jacksonville, whose homeowners association at Tides Condominium at Sweetwater began hitting him with fines of $100 a day last year for violating his homeowners association’s flag display rules, and have offered to pay the bill which has climbed into the thousands.
“When we read his story  it offended our sensibilities,” Scott Carter, CEO of Lear Capital said to FoxNews.com. “The thought of him losing his home, we felt it was wrong. We wanted to help.”
Along with Lear Capital founder Kevin DeMerritt, the executives paid the $8,000 plus another $2,500 for tax adjustments.
“They [homeowner’s association were using the strongarm of money to get him to get rid of the flag,” Carter said. “They were skimming the money from his [paid] dues to pay the fines which created a lien on his house.”
“What was a small contribution from a company was a significant gesture in his eyes,” Carter added.
Instead of paying the fines for violating the association’s rules, Murphree let them pile up -- and kept his flag on display owing thousands.
FULL COVERAGE: PROUD AMERICANS
“The flag is worth fighting for,” Murphree, who served six years as an Air Force air traffic controller during the Vietnam War, said to FoxNews.com in June.
“If they want to foreclose, bring it on. I’m getting calls from all over the county to stand up. That’s what I'm going to do.”
The flag battle between Muphree and the association started back in 2011 and landed in court a year later where the two sides reached a settlement. Murphree had agreed to display his flag in compliance with association rules. But two weeks later, the board changed the rules, saying flags could only be displayed and that flower pots were only for flowers.
Murphree ignored the new rules and, in 2013, he started getting fined. He took the board to court again, this time to federal court where he claimed he had a right to fly his flag under the 2005 Freedom to Display the American Flag Act. A judge dismissed the case last March on technical grounds.
The board claimed Murphree owed $8,000 and had attached a foreclosure lien for nonpayment. 
An attorney for the condo board, Michelle Haines told FoxNews.com last month under Florida law the homeowner's association can fine a condo owner $100 a day, but the maximum amount is $1,000. She said the board is foreclosing on Murphree for being delinquent on his monthly assessment.

Ellis Island Immigrants to America

Jack E. Kemp
This Independence Day, my thoughts return to a tourist visit I made over decades ago to Ellis Island, the place where new immigrants were examined and processed roughly twenty million immigrants from the late Nineteenth to the early Twentieth Century in New York Harbor.

The most startling thing seen on that visit was the peeling paint of the main building, a problem not based on years of  age but on more recent neglect of the plumbing system. The old pipes had broken and flooded the building before anyone could realize what happened. The Ellis Island museum was then asking American citizens for - and they did receive - voluntary funds to fix the pipes and other structures as well as repaint the water damaged walls.

Ellis Island is, of course, a National Park Museum and if you go to the website http://www.nps.gov/elis/historyculture/people.htm ; you can read about inspectors, doctors, nurses who did a quick check of potential immigrant's paperwork to enter the U.S. and their health condition. Some were quarantined on the Island and would later enter into the United States. Others were sent back to their home country, failing to gain entry to the U.S. because of their poor health for such conditions as tuberculosis. The left keeps screaming about "white privilege" but if you contrast Ellis Island to the Central American illegal immigrants now flooding over the U.S. Southern Border, it is these Central Americans who are being allowed entry and the ability to move around the U.S. in a privileged state, with neither legal paperwork (as was required on Ellis Island) nor being required to pass any health inspection requirement of not having communicable diseases. The Central Americans should now be given the same "privileges" as the European and British Isle immigrants who came to Ellis Island around a century ago.

In the tour, our guide told us a funny story of an Eastern European Jew who was flustered by his meeting with stern looking uniformed immigration inspector. When asked his name, he said in Yiddish, "Shoen Fargessen" which means "(I) already forgot." The immigration inspector, wrote down what he heard - "Sean Ferguson" - and that was the new immigrant's legal name in his new country!

The large Ellis Island complex of inspection stations and employee housing and quarantine hospital facilities was not placed on Governor's Island, which was an actual nearby New York Harbor military base and Civil War prison in the Nineteenth and - in the Twentieth Century, it was a Coast Guard base. There was ample housing space on Governor's Island, but in those days the government felt they should keep immigrants, some of them quite ill, far away from the military base and its housing.

So if someone tells you that you are "old fashioned" to want the sanitary and legal safeguards of the Nineteenth Century, ask them if they think disease conditions, such as those that cause tuberculosis, are operating in an "enlightened, modern" way today or whether they operate very much like they did in earlier times - and would operate in that "outdated" fashion when the children carrying those diseases are given "temporary" asylum and placed in public schools and walk in the shopping malls where their own children congregate. Although some people will make an angry face and walk away, others will listen. Over a decade ago, there was a news story in New York City about a school bus company working for some fancy private schools had hired the lowest cost immigrant drivers, some of whom had tuberculosis. And the children who rode those buses had to be tested for the disease because apparently the disease did not have any regard for the family wealth or political convictions (be it liberal or conservative) of the children involved.

There is a similar immigration center on Angel Island in San Francisco Bay, now a museum, a place ofter referred to informally as "The Ellis Island of the West Coast." The immigrants arriving there between 1910 and 1940 were largely from Asia (mostly China). And they  were processed in the same manner as those on Ellis Island in a center with its own hospital. You can read about it at http://aiisf.org/

So on this Independence Day, it is worth taking a moment to consider what it took, in the last steps of their journey, for many of our ancestors to be officially allowed to enter the United States. Last week Lower Manhattan in New York City was full of tourists standing in line in Battery Park to get on the tourist boat going to both the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island, all to retrace the steps of perhaps their own ancestors who first saw the Lady in the Harbor and then had to pass her agents' inspections on Ellis Island before being allowed into the United States. No society can care for the health and well being of its citizens - and their children - by relying solely on the sentiments of Emma Lazarus' poetry written on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty's base.Would Lazarus write the same poem if new immigrants with tuberculosis were walking around her neighborhood coughing on Emma and her family?

Uncle Sam Cartoon

Tahmooressi's mother makes Fourth of July appeal to US ambassador to Mexico

On the eve of Independence Day, the mother of a Marine jailed in Mexico for three months appealed to America's top diplomat south of the border, asking for help winning the freedom of her 25-year-old son, Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi.
Jill Tahmooressi, of Weston, Fla., sent a letter June 30  to E. Anthony Wayne, the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, requesting his help in getting a Mexican federal judge to give an expedited review to her son's case, after his representation had been botched by two previous attorneys who failed to submit any evidence for the court to review.

"If any consideration can be made to expedite the reviews before the federal judge so that he will be closer to probable freedom, those actions would be much appreciated," Jill Tahmooressi wrote Wayne.
Her son has been held in Mexico since March 31, when he was arrested after accidentally crossing into Mexico with three legally-purchased guns in his pickup truck. Fox News has highlighted how poor signage, as well as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Tahmooressi got from serving two tours in Afghanistan, could have contributed to his mistake.

Tahmooressi hopes to have her son's case fast-tracked, but according to attorney Fernando Benitez, the Mexican judicial system will have to run its course, regardless of efforts made by the Marine's supporters.

But given a recent incident along the U.S.-Arizona border where a Mexican military helicopter allegedly fired upon U.S. Border Patrol agent mistaking them for drug smugglers, mistakes and apologies take on a different meaning.
Tahmooiressi was in San Diego receiving treatment for PTSD when he drove into Mexico. His apologies and explanation for the wrong turn into Mexico fell on deaf ears, resulting in his imprisonment.

FoxNews.com attempted to contact Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. A spokesman said he had received the media request and would provide a statement, but has not.
In her letter to Wayne, the worried mother appealed to sentiment of the Fourth of July.

"This Independence Day will be a bitter one for Andrew, his family and supporters as his freedom is bound by his felony arrest," Tahmooressi wrote.  "Freedom he valiantly fought for others to have, willing to die to combat the evil of oppression and violence, Andrew is experiencing captivity for the first time, in a foreign country as a result of one wrong turn."

Iran opposition compares its struggle to the American Revolution

The leader of the Iranian opposition likens its goal to overthrow the regime in Tehran to the war for American independence from Britain, the struggle to abolish slavery in the U.S. and the birth of the civil rights movement in the 1960's.
"I am confident that the Iranian resistance, which seeks the proven values of advanced societies, will reach its goal of a free, prosperous, democratic, just and non-nuclear Iran," declared Maryam Rajavi, the head of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, in an exclusive Fox News interview.
"The experience is out there, including in the history of the United States, such as George Washington and the people of America who decided to stand up to colonialism to gain independence, such as Abraham Lincoln and the price he paid and the war he waged to abolish slavery and the price the people of America paid during the time of Dr. Martin Luther King for civil rights and the struggle of the people of America for the freedom of women," she says.
"These are all historical experiences and I am, therefore, confident. My experience and that of the Iranian people tell us that when a people, a nation, decides to fight and pay the price for the rights it deserves, such as democracy, freedom and equality, when it decides to fight for these and pay the price, for values which shine in history of all human societies and in the progress of human society, it will certainly achieve it."
Rajavi, based outside of Paris, is the leader of the largest Iranian resistance group that opposes the current Tehran regime. She is calling for regime change, free, democratic elections, and a non-nuclear Iran. The group held a massive hours-long rally last week, in which a variety of speakers, including many prominent former U.S. government officials, also called for a democratic Iran and tougher restrictions on Tehran in advance of the looming July 20 nuclear agreement deadline.
It was Rajavi's group that first exposed the extent of Tehran's clandestine nuclear program back in 2002.
"If it weren't for the revelation of the Iranian resistance, the mullahs would have gotten the bomb right now," says Rajavi. She also says Iran should not be given the right of uranium enrichment, which is expected to be part of the agreement, despite six United Nations Security Council resolutions specifically prohibiting that.
"I believe any possibility left at the hands of the mullahs paves the way for them to quickly obtain what they want (nuclear weapons) at a time they so choose."
The Iranian government has branded the Council as a" terrorist group," a "cult," and has claimed that its allegations regarding its nuclear program have been fabricated.
In the aftermath of the Council’s rally in Villepinte, France, the spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry was quoted by the Associated Press as criticizing the group for "its violent and non-democratic inspirations," ''cult nature" and "intense campaign of influence and disinformation."
Rajavi reportedly called the comments, "a gift to the mullahs." Former French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, who attended the rally, told the AP that he was “ashamed” by the government’s statement.
In her Fox News interview, Rajavi rejected the Iranian government's criticism of her group, calling it "ludicrous."
"My call to the Iranian people has always been not to surrender to the religious dictatorship," she declares.
"We have an expression in Farsi that says, 'a viper never gives birth to a dove.’ No moderate will emerge from the mullahs and the clerical dictatorship. The Iranian resistance has said this repeatedly over the past 25 years, and it has been proven correct every time."
Follow Eric Shawn on Twitter: @EricShawnonFox

Supreme Court ruling revives ObamaCare backlash

Any time ObamaCare is in the headlines -- especially when its various mandates are concerned -- it reminds opponents why they don't like the law. 
This week's Supreme Court decision limiting the law's requirement on employers to provide free contraceptive coverage was no different. 
"I think it's a reminder of how many things ObamaCare regulates it would never have occurred to you a federal law should regulate in the first place," said Avik Roy, of the Manhattan Institute. 
The 5-4 decision ruled that certain "closely held" for-profit businesses can opt out of the mandate by citing religious objections. 
Two years ago, the court upheld the law's so-called "individual mandate" -- the requirement on individuals to buy health insurance. But together with a prior decision reining in the law's Medicaid expansion, the decision in the case brought by arts-and-crafts chain Hobby Lobby and other businesses marked a blow for the law and a reminder for critics of its reach. (Hobby Lobby provides coverage for 16 of 20 forms of contraception, but objected to those it claims can work after conception.) 
Joe Antos, of the American Enterprise Institute, said it "touches on issues related to what is the power of the president versus the power of the Congress to decide how we run our lives." 
Kellyanne Conway, who polls on issues affecting women, noted the health care law has struggled to win public approval. 
"The majority of the Americans in everyone's polling rejects the Affordable Care Act as way too intrusive and invasive and also way too expensive for them," she said. 
Several polls have uncovered deep skepticism about the law. A Fox News poll from late June found a 56 percent majority disapprove of President Obama's handling of health care while only 41 percent approve. 
A poll from early June found 55 percent wish the law had never passed, compared with 38 who said the opposite. 
In the same poll, 44-29 percent said the country will be worse off under the law, while 24 percent say it'll make no difference. 
The court case once again raises the issue ahead of looming midterm elections. Democrats are using the ruling to highlight the impact on women, and defend the law's intent of providing contraceptive coverage to female employees. 
But Republicans are likely to highlight the rebuke to the law itself. 
"The election isn't for another few months," Antos said, "and I think there will be other issues that will come up that will remind people that this is not the law that they would have hoped for." 
Roy added that "this whole case was really about showing that ObamaCare's ability to regulate every aspect of the way the private sector and private economy works was not appropriate." 
In mid-week, a poll by Bankrate.com found 68 percent of Americans say ObamaCare will play a role in deciding how they vote this fall. Thirty-two percent said they're more likely to vote Republican, while 26 percent said they're more likely to vote Democrat. 
And 52 percent, according to the poll, would like to see the new Congress make changes in the law, while only 12 percent of Americans want to keep it exactly as it is.

The Real Meaning of the Fourth of July.

It's the Fourth of July weekend. We’re supposed to be celebrating Independence Day. 

But what makes this day special?

What gives the Fourth of July its significance is that our Declaration of Independence was adopted by the Continental Congress in 1776. 

It was in Philadelphia, and the signers of that document, composed by Thomas Jefferson, knew that this declaration of independence from the dictatorial rule of Great Britain might also be — literally — their death sentence.

They knew full well that the wrath and might of the British army would be sailing across the Atlantic to descend on the relatively defenseless colonies. They knew their scattered “states” didn’t have the numbers or arms or training to stand against the British, much less defeat them militarily. Yet they put their signatures, and their lives, their families, their destiny, on that parchment.

And so, against all odds, and even against reason, that Declaration told the world that “these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states.” 

The only importance of the 4th day of July, then, is that it marks the birth of the United States of America.

 The very words should send awe-filled shivers up your spine, as they do mine. 

Most of the people living in those colonies had simply had enough of British domination, of working and virtually existing at the pleasure of a king they didn’t know and who obviously considered them his indentured servants. 

They wanted to be free, to make their own decisions, to govern themselves and breathe the sweet air of liberty. 

The first celebration of American Independence took place four days later in Philadelphia, where the Continental Congress was still meeting. 

The ceremony began with a public reading of the Declaration of Independence. Then, from the tower of the State House, now called Independence Hall, the Liberty Bell rang out.

The coat of arms of the king of England was taken down. And there was a parade. And cannons boomed. The people, though aware of what lay ahead, cheered! A new nation sprang to life.

That’s what this day is meant to be about.

John Adams, himself a signer of the Declaration, thought that Americans should henceforth celebrate a “great anniversary festival.” In a letter to his wife Abigail he wrote, “It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forevermore.”

So it began. A more elaborate celebration was held there in 1788, after the new Constitution had been ratified. Then there was a much larger parade, speeches and a dinner. 

But between those two celebrations, in 1776 and 1788, there was much horrible fighting, rivers of bloodshed, the deaths and bankruptcies of many of the signers of the Declaration, families torn apart and businesses and farms destroyed. The freedoms declared by the Declaration — and ushered into fact by the Constitution — were secured at a terrible cost.

Soon, across the growing nation, at sunrise on July 4, salutes were fired and bells were rung. Flags were flown from buildings, from homes, and along the streets. Shop windows were decorated with red, white, and blue. Churches held special services.

What’s Independence Day like today? Do most people you know actually make time to purposely celebrate our independence in meaningful ways?

Even while we’re again locked in a deadly combat on foreign soil  — still involving hundreds of thousands of our finest young men and women?

What are they fighting for now? Is it anything like what motivated our Revolutionary Army? 

Is it “freedom from religion,” the necessity to take “under God” out of our pledge, or even to do away with it altogether? Is it the “right” to end the lives of unwanted babies, or the “right” for two men or two women to “marry”? 

Or is it still the impossible dream of a nation under God, with unalienable rights endowed equally to all — among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Surely this weekend is a time for all of us who really cherish that original dream, the one for which so many have died, to individually and collectively re-declare our independence from tyranny, despotism, taxation without representation, and debts that no free society should ever bear. 

And allegiance to the blood-bought foundation of government of, by, and for the people . . . people who are determined to live free.


© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Obama Cartoon

'Wrong side of the Constitution'? Obama likely to delay deportations, say experts

Bailey: "Our problems with immigration is caused by the Mexican Government!"

One of President Obama’s first moves toward trying to “fix” the U.S. immigration system without Congress will almost certainly be to expand on his 2012 executive order postponing deportation for potentially millions of young illegal immigrants, say experts on both sides of the debate.
Obama will likely sidestep Congress on immigration reform by expanding on his so-called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals memorandum, which essentially allows young illegal immigrants to remain in the United States if they were brought into the country illegally by their parents and have not been convicted of a major crime, Federation for American Immigration Reform spokesman Ira Mehlman predicted.
“I expect him to continue to ignore U.S. immigration law,” Mehlman said. “This can all be traced back to the DACA program … under the guise of not splitting up families.”
Although many Republicans believe President Obama is overreaching on the issue by advancing his immigration agenda without the support of Congress, there is broad support among Latinos, labor groups and other Democrat constituencies for him to act unilaterally. 
The idea of extending delayed deportation to parents of young illegal immigrants also appears popular among Hispanic voters and will likely be recommended to the president by pro-immigration-reform groups with whom he has reportedly met in recent weeks.
A poll of registered Hispanic voters for the Center for American Progress Action Fund found strong support for renewing DACA as well as delaying deportation for the parents of young illegals protected under the program, people married to U.S. citizens and those living illegally in the United States for more than 10 years.
The respondents were “super excited” about such actions if they included the option of a work permit for illegals, said Gary Sugura of Latino Decisions, the opinion research group that conducted the poll. He also pointed out that Democratic candidates running in 2014 and beyond would benefit significantly from such changes.
The respondents were less supportive of so-called prosecutorial discretion, which essentially gives immigration officials say over which cases to pursue and prosecute.
As a sign of just how important the work permit issue is to pro-immigration advocates, particularly big business and organized labor, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Janet Murguia, head of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino advocacy group, on Tuesday called on Obama to provide work permits to everyone who would have been eligible for citizenship under the bipartisan immigration bill passed last year by the Senate.
Obama has already taken the first step in directing Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Attorney General Eric Holder to shift resources from the U.S. interior to the Mexico border. And he has asked both for recommendations by the end of summer on the types of executive actions he could take.
“And I intend to adopt those recommendations without further delay,” Obama said in his Rose Garden remarks Monday.
In addition, the Center for American Progress, the liberal-leaning think tank influential in shaping Obama administration policy, released a 42-page study, which Marshall Fitz, the group’s director of immigration policy, calls “a roadmap for executive action on immigration.”
The study claims Obama has authority to use enforcement reforms and affirmative relief to implement his immigration agenda in spite of opposition in the House.
Reform involves prioritizing how and whether enforcement is conducted when someone comes into contact with the authorities. And the relief focuses on identifying illegal immigrants considered low priority for deportation, then creating a procedure for them to seek temporary protection from being removed from the country, according to the report.
Sugura and Center for American Progress officials acknowledge that Obama cannot stop all deportations, that any executive action is temporary and only Capitol Hill legislation can provide a permanent solution, which they say should include a path to legal status and eventual citizenship for the roughly 11.7 million illegal immigrants living in the country. 
Obama argues he has been compelled to act in large part because of the recent surge in unaccompanied Central American children showing up by the thousands at the U.S.-Mexico border and the GOP-controlled House’s unwillingness to vote on the issue until at least after the November elections.
"American cannot wait forever ... ," Obama said Monday. "That is why, today, I am beginning a new effort to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress."
House Speaker John Boehner and other members of the House Republican Caucus argue the recent border problem is the result of executive actions that have enticed people to try to enter the U.S. illegally. And they plan to sue Obama over his use of such actions, serving notice that more moves by the president on immigration would only stiffen their opposition.
"If the president insists on enacting amnesty by executive order, he will undoubtedly face a lawsuit and will find himself, once again, on the wrong side of the Constitution and the law," said Texas GOP Rep. Lamar Smith.

U.S. Goalie Tim Howard Delivers World Cup Performance For Ages, Becomes National Hero

“I don’t want to be the hero,” U.S. goalkeeper Tim Howard told the London Times a decade ago when he was playing for Manchester United. “I don’t want to be the goat. Somewhere in the middle’s all right by me.”
But at the World Cup in Brazil over the past two weeks, the unassuming 35-year-old who would rather spend a quite night at home than go out partying, put himself so far over into the “hero” column. The middle may never be an option for him again.
After solid performances against Ghana and Portugal, Howard turned in arguably the finest work of his career in back-to-back matches against Germany—a 1-0 loss for the U.S.—and Tuesday’s 2-1 Round of 16 overtime loss to Belgium that sent the Yanks home.
Against Belgium, Howard kept the ball out of the net with slides, with dives and with leaps.
He just couldn't do it forever.
With the U.S. trying to reach the Cup quarterfinals for the first time since 2002, he saved 12 of Belgium's shots in regulation to keep the game scoreless. Some of them in truly spectacular fashion—with the tip of his foot or leaping to push the ball over the crossbar.
But Kevin De Bruyne finally got the ball past him a couple of minutes into overtime, and Romelu Lukaku did it again in the 105th minute to build a two-goal lead for the Red Devils, who hung on for a 2-1 win.
Howard finished with 16 saves, the most in a World Cup game since FIFA started keeping track in 2002. It was his finest performance in 13 years with the national team.
"I'm just trying to do all the things that have gotten me here and gotten us here," he said. "That's what I signed up to do — stick my face in front of balls. It's nothing startling."
Other people were a little more impressed.
"For my heart, please don't give me too many games like this," Belgium coach Marc Wilmots said. "He was in a state of grace."
U.S. captain Clint Dempsey was equally effusive.
"Tim was awesome for us," Demsey said. "As you would expect from him."
Howard yells a lot during games. More than most goalkeepers.
And his teammates love him for that.
"He's somebody that we rely on so much for his performances on the field but also his leadership and his presence," midfielder Michael Bradley said. "There's not enough good things to say about him as a player, as a man, as a leader."
Howard was born in North Brunswick, N.J., in 1979, and he suffers from Tourette’s—the neurological disorder that is characterized by physical and vocal tics.
“It’s never hindered me in any way,” he told the U.K. paper the Observer in 2004. “I kept quiet about it for 9 years, not telling my family as if I was ashamed But what’s the point in that?... I’ve never dropped a cross because of it. At least not yet.”
In high school, his first love was basketball, but at 6-foot-3 he didn’t have much of a chance of making it to the NBA. As a goalie, however, his height and agility proved a major asset.
“Basketball’s been good for me,” he told the Times. “The principles of defending are similar.”
After stretches with the New York/New Jersey MetroStars (as the Red Bulls were then known), Man U, and Aston Villa in the U.K., Howard has been the starter for Everton in the Premier League since the middle of the 2007-08 season.
He is signed with the team through 2018 and plans to play "as long as my body lets me," although he acknowledges, "That's obviously not a question that I can really answer now."
He also won't commit to continuing to play for the U.S. national team beyond Brazil.
"Those decisions will be made, obviously, when I'm less emotional and things settle down and I have a few important conversations with important people," Howard said.
Brad Guzan, who is Aston Villa's current goalkeeper, is Howard's No. 2 and, at 29, is positioned well for the 2018 World Cup—should Howard decide to retire from the national team, that is.
U.S. Soccer Federation President Sunil Gulati didn't sound as if Howard would be leaving anytime soon.
"I'm not sure Timmy is ready to not look towards Russia," he said. "He's one of the players that matters. And nobody goes into a tournament like this with our team and doesn't expect Timmy to play really well."
Howard was among the final American players to leave the locker room of the stadium in Salvador after the loss to Belgium, suddenly and unhappily facing a few weeks off before having to report to Everton for preseason training.
He carried a small silver-colored case, clearly not part of the gear he had when he arrived at Arena Fonte Nova. Despite the U.S. defeat, he was selected the Man of the Match and was given an award.

King Obama Cartoon

ObamaCare coverage for millions in jeopardy as watchdog finds widespread data flaws

The Obama administration is struggling to resolve data discrepancies that could jeopardize coverage for millions who sought health insurance on the federal exchange HealthCare.gov, according to a watchdog report on the still-rocky implementation of ObamaCare. 
Though the system's troubles have faded from the headlines since the problem-plagued launch last October, a report from the health department inspector general provided the first independent look at widespread issues the government is having effectively fact-checking the information applicants are putting in the system. 
According to the report, the administration was unable to resolve 2.6 million so-called "inconsistencies" out of a total of 2.9 million such problems from October through December 2013. 
The government needs to determine applicants' eligibility in order to verify they can enroll and, in some cases, get government subsidies. Without that step, coverage could be jeopardized. Critics fear these issues also could cause chaos during the 2015 tax-filing season, as many would have to pay back subsidy money they were not entitled to. 
According to the report, those running the federal marketplace are having trouble resolving problems "even if applicants submitted appropriate documentation." 
"The federal marketplace was generally incapable of resolving most inconsistencies," the report said, claiming the government could not resolve 89 percent of the problems. 
And of the roughly 330,000 cases that could be straightened out, the administration had only actually resolved about 10,000 during the period of the inspector general's audit. That worked out to less than 1 percent of the total.
The report said that most of the problems dealt with citizenship and income information supplied by consumers that conflicted with what the federal government had on record. The report said the government's eligibility system was not fully functional. 
The data above doesn't even reflect what's happening with the state-run exchanges. According to the same report, four of the 15 state marketplaces reported they were "unable to resolve inconsistencies." They are: Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon and Vermont. 
The findings come after President Obama celebrated 8 million sign-ups as proof that technical problems which initially kept many consumers from enrolling had finally been overcome. It now turns out that some of those problems continued out of sight. The inspector general said the efforts of the administration and states to clear up the discrepancies were complicated by lingering computer issues. 
The issue is one of the top challenges facing newly installed HHS Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell. 
Republicans pointed to this and one other IG report -- which questioned internal safeguards for checking eligibility -- as evidence the system still is not working, and fraudulent payments could be made. 
"This report is one more example of just how flawed the president's health care law is," Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement. "Whatever one's opinion of ObamaCare, the American public deserves to know that their tax dollars are allocated appropriately and that public officials take their responsibility to accurately and faithfully apply the laws enacted by Congress seriously." 
Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said the system has allowed "millions of Americans to enroll in a system that may be handing them the wrong subsidies -- too much or too little -- and they've left taxpayers vulnerable to fraud." 
But White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest downplayed the findings. 
"Resolving those inconsistencies is important, but isn't necessarily complicated and doesn't necessarily indicate any sort of problem with the application that someone has filed," he said Tuesday. 
The report was requested by congressional Republicans as a condition of ending the budget standoff that triggered a partial government shutdown last fall. Republicans say they are concerned that people who are not legally entitled to the law's government-subsidized private health insurance could nonetheless be getting it. 
The inspector general stopped short of drawing such conclusions. 
"Inconsistencies do not necessarily indicate that an applicant provided inaccurate information ... or is receiving financial assistance through insurance affordability programs inappropriately," the report said. 
However, the watchdog office called on the administration to publicly explain how and by what date it will resolve the data problems in the 36 states where Washington is operating new insurance markets. 
In a written response to the report, Medicare chief Marilyn Tavenner said the administration concurs with the recommendations and is working on a plan. Tavenner also said that some of the computer issues that were getting in the way of resolving the problems have now been overcome. 
"It is not surprising that there are inconsistencies between some information provided by application filers and the (government's) electronic data sources," she said. 
The law provides the administration with the option of extending an initial 90-day period for clearing up discrepancies.

Illegal immigrants already being released to neighborhood near you

Tens of thousands of immigrants who illegally crossed the Mexico border into Texas are in the process of being released into communities throughout the nation rather than being indefinitely detained or immediately deported, a congressman told Watchdog.org.
The releases have already started and the Border Patrol did not disclose how many. At least 60,000 Central Americans have entered the country illegally this year, though some news reports say the figure is as high as 170,000. An effort is under way to place children in foster homes or with relatives already living in the U.S., said Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas.
The adults are being given a “notice to appear,” something like to a traffic ticket that requires they show up for a deportation hearing. Following that notice, they are simply being released. Those who return for the hearing will face a federal immigration judge to determine their fate.
“You know good and well they won’t show up and we won’t go looking for them,” Gohmert said. “When they get their piece of paper saying report back on such a day at such a time, they take that as their legal permit to stay in the country and they go do what they want.”
A senior Los Angeles County Sheriff’s detective who routinely deals with illegal immigrants said a “massive number – 80 to 90 percent” do not show up for deportation hearings. Detention is not even being considered because Homeland Security facilities are not equipped to hold a large number of people, said the detective, who spoke on a guarantee of anonymity.

Medical staff warned: Keep your mouths shut about illegal immigrants or face arrest

Bailey: Knew this was coming!

A government-contracted security force threatened to arrest doctors and nurses if they divulged any information about the contagion threat at a refugee camp housing illegal alien children at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, sources say.
In spite of the threat, several former camp workers broke their confidentiality agreements and shared exclusive details with me about the dangerous conditions at the camp. They said taxpayers deserve to know about the contagious diseases and the risks the children pose to Americans. I have agreed to not to disclose their identities because they fear retaliation and prosecution.

My sources say Americans should be very concerned about the secrecy of the government camps.

“There were several of us who wanted to talk about the camps, but the agents made it clear we would be arrested,” a psychiatric counselor told me. “We were under orders not to say anything.”
The sources said workers were guarded by a security force from the Baptist Family & Children’s Services, which the Department of Health and Human Services hired to run the Lackland Camp.
The sources say security forces called themselves the “Brown Shirts.”
“It was a very submissive atmosphere,” the counselor said. “Once you stepped onto the grounds, you abided by their laws – the Brown Shirt laws.”
She said the workers were stripped of their cellphones and other communication devices. Anyone caught with a phone was immediately fired.
“Everyone was paranoid,” she said. “The children had more rights than the workers.”
She said children in the camp had measles, scabies, chicken pox and strep throat as well as mental and emotional issues.
“It was not a good atmosphere in terms of health,” she said. “I would be talking to children and lice would just be climbing down their hair.”
A former nurse at the camp told me she was horrified by what she saw.
“We have so many kids coming in that there was no way to control all of the sickness – all this stuff coming into the country,” she said. “We were very concerned at one point about strep going around the base.”
Both the counselor and the nurse said their superiors tried to cover up the extent of the illnesses.
“When they found out the kids had scabies, the charge nurse was adamant – ‘Don’t mention that. Don’t say scabies,’” the nurse recounted. “But everybody knew they had scabies. Some of the workers were very concerned about touching things and picking things up. They asked if they should be concerned, but they were told don’t worry about it.”
The nurse said the lice issue was epidemic – but everything was kept “hush-hush.”
“You could see the bugs crawling through their hair,” she said. “After we would rinse out their hair, the sink would be loaded with black bugs.”
The nurse told me she became especially alarmed because their files indicated the children had been transported to Lackland on domestic charter buses and airplanes.
“That’s what alerted me,” she said. “Oh, my God. They’re flying these kids around. Nobody knows that these children have scabies and lice. To tell you the truth, there’s no way to control it.”
I don't mean to upset anyone's Independence Day vacation plans, but were these kids transported to the camps before or after they were deloused? Anyone who flies the friendly skies could be facing a public health concern.  
The counselor told me the refugee camp resembled a giant emergency room – off limits to the public.
“They did not want the community to know,” she said. “I initially spoke out at Lackland because I had a concern the children’s mental health care was not being taken care of.”
She said the breaking point came when camp officials refused to hospitalize several children who were suicidal.
“I made a recommendation that a child needed to be sent to a psychiatric unit,” the counselor told me. “He was reaching psychosis. He was suicidal. Instead of treating him, they sent him off to a family in the United States.”
She said she filed a Child Protective Services report and quit her job.
“I didn’t want to lose my license if this kid committed suicide,” she told me. “I was done.”
The counselor kept a detailed journal about what happened during her tenure at the facility.
“When people read that journal they are going to be astonished,” she said. ‘I don’t think they will believe what is going on in America.”
So it was not a great surprise, she said, when she received a call from federal agents demanding that she return to the military base and hand over her journal.
She said she declined to do so.
“I didn’t go back to Lackland,” she said.
Both workers told me while they have no regrets, they want to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals.
“They’re going to crush the system,” the nurse told me. “We can’t sustain this. They are overwhelming the system and I think it’s a travesty.”
Baptist Family & Childen’s Services spokeswoman Krista Piferrer tells me the agency takes “any allegation of malfeasance or inappropriate care of a child very seriously.”
“There are a number of checks and balances to ensure children are receiving appropriate and adequate mental health care,” she said.
Piferrer said the clinicians are supervised by a federal field specialist from HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement. She also said BFCS have 58 medical professionals serving at Lackland.
“Every illness, whether it is a headache or something more serious, is recorded in a child’s electronic medical record and posted on WebEOC – a real-time, web-based platform that is visible to not only BFCS but the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,” she said.
As for those brown shirts, the BFCS said they are “incident management team personnel” – who happen to wear tan shirts.
My sources say Americans should be very concerned about the secrecy of the government camps.
“This is just the beginning,” one source told me. "It is a long-term financial responsibility.”

HILLARY CLINTON

HILLARY CLINTON IS being dogged by questions about her family's fortune as she sets out on her book tour and possibly a presidential run — but with the former first couple raking in millions in speaking fees, at issue is not just their net worth but how they've made that money.

Home Care Ruling

Obama sending 200 American troops to Iraq to secure US Embassy, airport

President Obama announced Monday that he is sending approximately 200 American troops to Iraq to reinforce security at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and the Baghdad International Airport, as the country wages a bloody battle against jihadists.
The troops will serve a different mission in Iraq than the 275 advisory troops sent to Iraq earlier this month in response to advances by the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant/Syria (ISIS). The additional troops will serve to solely augment security.
“The presence of these additional forces will help enable the Embassy to continue its critical diplomatic mission and work with Iraq on challenges they are facing as they confront (ISIS),” Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby said in a statement.
Obama notified House and Senate leaders in a letter on Monday. Obama said the additions include security forces, rotary-wing aircraft, and support for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.
Obama has ruled out sending combat troops back into Iraq, but he said the additional troops will be equipped for combat. He said their purpose is to protect U.S. citizens and property if needed.
Obama said the troops will stay in Iraq until security improves so that the reinforcements are no longer needed.
Fox News' Wes Barrett and The Associated Press contributed to this report

Obama pursuing executive actions on immigration, after House effort stalls

King Obama

President Obama (King) vowed Monday to bypass Congress and pursue unilateral changes to the country's immigration system, defying House Republicans who say his executive actions are part of the problem. 
The president, speaking in the Rose Garden, said he is forced to go it alone because the House has failed to act on a comprehensive overhaul. He said Speaker John Boehner informed him last week the House will not vote on an immigration bill this year. 
"America cannot wait forever for them to act," Obama said. He said he's launching a new effort to "fix as much of our immigration system as I can, on my own, without Congress." 
The president's announcement is sure to infuriate congressional Republicans. Obama is pushing for new executive actions in defiance of Boehner's vow last week to pursue a lawsuit against the president over alleged executive overreach. Even before Monday's announcement, Boehner and his colleagues alleged that the president has gone too far in making changes without Congress to immigration policy, the Affordable Care Act, environmental regulations and other issues. 
This new push would go further still. 
In a written statement, Boehner called Obama's announcement "sad and disappointing," and said executive orders "can't and won't fix these problems."
During his remarks in the Rose Garden, Obama cited the current surge of illegal immigrant children crossing the southern border and said the "crisis" should underscore the need to pass a comprehensive bill. But Boehner claimed that it was Obama's past executive orders -- those easing deportations for some illegal immigrants -- that "have led directly to the humanitarian crisis along the southern border." 
Boehner said "additional executive action from this president isn't going to stem the tide of illegal crossings, it's only going to make them worse." He also referred to last week's Supreme Court ruling that Obama overstepped in making recess appointments, saying the court "reminded us" that there are "sharp limits" to presidential power. 
As for his conversation last week with the president, Boehner said he only told Obama what he's been saying for months: that until the public and elected officials trust him to enforce the law, "it is going to be difficult to make progress on this issue." 
Obama, though, said he would still prefer to seek changes via Congress, and he'd continue to press the House to act. 
But for the time being, the president announced two steps. First, he's directed Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Attorney General Eric Holder to move "available resources" from the interior to the border to address security. Further, the president said he's directed a team to "identify additional actions my administration can take on our own within my existing legal authorities to do what Congress refuses to do and fix as much of our immigration system as we can." 
According to a White House official, those recommendations are due back by the end of the summer. 
Obama's decision effectively declares that a broad based change in immigration policy is dead for the year, and perhaps for the remainder of his administration. Changing immigration laws and providing a path to citizenship for about 11 million immigrants in the country illegally has been one Obama's top priorities as he sought to conclude his presidency with a major second-term victory. 
Meanwhile, the president is still grappling with the surge of illegal immigrant children and families along the border. Earlier in the day, Obama sent a letter to congressional leaders asking for more flexibility on that front, seeking increased powers to send unaccompanied children from Central America back from the U.S. border to the countries they're trying to flee. 
Obama also asked for increased penalties for people who smuggle immigrants who are vulnerable, such as children. And he is asking Congress for emergency money that would, among other things, help conduct "an aggressive deterrence strategy focused on the removal and repatriation of recent border crossers." Obama's letter to Boehner, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell says the administration is confronting the influx with a coordinated response on both sides of the border.
"This includes fulfilling our legal and moral obligation to make sure we appropriately care for unaccompanied children who are apprehended, while taking aggressive steps to surge resources to our Southwest border to deter both adults and children from this dangerous journey, increase capacity for enforcement and removal proceedings, and quickly return unlawful migrants to their home countries," Obama wrote.
The Border Patrol in South Texas has been overwhelmed for several months by an influx of unaccompanied children and parents traveling with young children from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. Unlike Mexican immigrants arrested after entering the U.S. illegally, those from Central America cannot be as easily returned to their countries. Obama is seeking authority to act more quickly
The Border Patrol has apprehended more than 52,000 child immigrants traveling on their own since the start of the 2014 budget year in October.
Immigrant advocacy groups, already frustrated by Obama's lack of executive action to ease record levels of deportations, immediately pounced on the administration's decision.
Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, said the influx of children across the border "really requires a humanitarian response, not an increase in deportations."