Archive for February, 2015

Via David Codrea..

The Wednesday ruling that the federal ban on interstate handgun transfers is unconstitutional, and that Attorney General Eric Holder and ATF Director B. Todd Jones have been enjoined from enforcing that provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968, is unquestionably huge news. While no one knows at this point what an appeal will result in, the “strict scrutiny” standard employed by U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor and his definitive opinion that the ban “is unconstitutional on its face” is sending shock waves through the citizen disarmament community, trying its best to downplay the significance of this setback to their goals.

Case in point: Here’s the Everytown Twitter feed. Do you see any mention of the Feb. 11 ruling? Ditto, not a word on their Facebook page. And here’s Everytown’s “In the News” web page. How about there?

It’s almost like they don’t want people to know something in order to protect an agenda.

Guess which “Gray Lady” that reminds me of?

In fairness, the online edition of The New York Times did post a Reuters filing on Feb. 11, but nothing from The Times’ staff. Funny thing though. I just got back from my hometown library, where they have a subscription to the national edition of The Times, and I couldn’t find the story in their print edition. I looked through copies from Wednesday, Thursday and today.

I found their editorial where they were Mugwort VPC-Steaming each other over the chances of being murdered by a “concealed carry killer” notching up a thousandth of a percentage point over lightning strikes. I even found something about such a lightning strike, that North Carolina nutjob all the “progressives” are glossing over an SPLC connection on (so no mention of that, of course). There was a feature on the “American Sniper” trial, and another on an “Only One” from Colorado who shot a skateboarder in the back, and even a front page feature today memorializing a dead, drug-abusing Times employee swearing he’d done a lot of bad things in his day, but carrying a [GASP!] gun isn’t one of them (until he was contradicted by witnesses who remembered it).

But a landmark decision that could nullify a major piece of “gun control” the antis have been counting on infringing with for almost half a century? If it’s in there, it managed to elude my old eyes. Of course, it could be a new feature, a “find the article” game for those no good at snobbishly obscure crossword puzzles, and in fairness, I didn’t look in the “Food” section.

What did I say a couple paragraphs back?

It’s almost like they don’t want people to know something in order to protect an agenda.

Then again, maybe I’m not being fair. Maybe, just like when Fast and Furious could have brought down an administration had the “legitimate news media” been doing its job instead of running interference for criminal government activity, this just isn’t their scoop.

Yeah, because after all, they’re “the newspaper of record.” That must be it.

http://www.examiner.com/article/new-york-times-anti-gun-agenda-not-limited-to-editorial-page?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Sierra Leone quarantines 700 homes after Ebola case

Posted: February 13, 2015 by gamegetterII in ebola
Tags:

Freetown (AFP) – Sierra Leone placed hundreds of homes in the capital under Ebola quarantine Friday, in a huge blow for its recovery less than a month after it lifted all restrictions on movement.

The government said 700 properties had been locked down in Aberdeen, a fishing and tourist district of Freetown, after the death of a fisherman who tested positive for the deadly tropical virus.

“We are on top of the situation and people should not panic,” said Obi Sesay of the government’s National Ebola Response Centre, adding that a special control centre had been set up to deal with the incident.

He told reporters Aberdeen had been “flooded” with surveillance officers and contact tracers to ensure the death didn’t turn into a serious outbreak.

The west African nation of six million has seen almost 11,000 cases and 3,363 deaths during the epidemic which has raged in west Africa for more than a year.

President Ernest Bai Koroma had pointed to a “steady downward trend” in new cases on January 23, lifting country-wide quarantines affecting half the population and declaring that “victory is in sight”.

But optimism gave way to fresh alarm on Wednesday as the World Health Organization (WHO) reported the number of new cases rising across Sierra Leone and neighbouring Guinea for the second week running.

Transmission remains “widespread” in Sierra Leone, which reported 76 new confirmed cases in the week to February 8, according to the WHO.

Read more @   http://news.yahoo.com/sierra-leone-locks-down-700-homes-ebola-death-162551911.html

Robotic building by Contour Crafting won the grand prize in a NASA magazine's Create the Future contest.

In the not-too-distant future, building a new home may be as simple as printing it out.

The process of wielding 3D printers to make homes is in its infancy today, but someday soon you may look out your window at a large-scale printer, swiftly spitting out a whole home under the instruction of just one operator.

“Generally, they’ll be much cheaper, much faster, much safer and with much nicer architectural features [than traditional homes],” says Dr. Behrokh Khoshnevis, creator of and lead researcher for Contour Crafting, one of the leading companies working on scaling 3D-printed homes for the masses.

A 3D printer from the WASProject (which stands for World's Advanced Saving Project) builds walls at the Maker Faire Rome.

A 3D printer from the WASProject (which stands for World’s Advanced Saving Project) builds walls at the Maker Faire …

It’s really not as crazy as it sounds. There are 3D printers making dishes, building furniture and repairing appliances right now. But a home needs a much bigger printer.

On any scale, 3D printing works like this: Someone creates a three-dimensional digital design and sends it to the printer, where it’s translated into something called a “G-code” file that slices a 3D design into thin layers.

The printer also contains the building material, which in the case of large-scale printing can be plastic or cement – any sturdy material that can go from solid to liquid and back again. The material is melted or liquefied within the printer, and layer by layer the printer follows a path until the object in the 3D digital design is completely constructed. The layers build upon one another and solidify as they cool.

Using this kind of technology for home construction may be a few years out, but it’s already in use in a few select projects around the world, from an artistic, design-driven canal house in Amsterdam to a utilitarian operation that can churn out a house in just one day in China.

Still, a lot of details have to be worked out before this technology is launched on a large scale. Factors like fireproofing, insulation and waterproofing are still in testing stages for many projects.

And in most cases, no building codes regulate the materials and construction processes used to print buildings, nor are there industry standards or best practices yet that builders can rely on. Every element — printers, software, building materials — is evolving.

Here are some of the more notable projects…

When DUS Architects in Amsterdam was looking for new ways to make home design interesting, the firm decided to craft an experimental 3D printer. They wanted to build something grand, so they selected a spot along the Buiksloterkanaal to build a traditional canal house, mimicking the iconic traditionally-built canal homes throughout the city.

The KamerMaker on site in Amsterdam at night.

The KamerMaker on site in Amsterdam at night.

The group came up with the KamerMaker (or room-builder in English). It works exactly like a small-scale 3D printer, with a digital design being translated into a G-code. The printer moves along the designated path and spits out the material – in this case a special bioplastics granulate.

Although the technology is a work in progress, DUS has designed a house that will use the KamerMaker to print rooms using the recycled bioplastic materials. The 13 rooms will form a nearly 50-foot-high, 20-foot-wide, plastic house when they are stacked on top of each other.

Construction on the actual house began in March and is expected to last for about three years – not a quick process. But the process is a vehicle for learning, DUS says.

According to Tosja Backer, who manages the project for DUS, people started coming by to watch and offer advice before construction on the house even began. That’s when the project became a “co-creation platform.”

A rendering of what DUS Architects hopes to create with its 3D Print Canal House.

A rendering of what DUS Architects hopes to create with its 3D Print Canal House.

“We are a platform much more than we are just a firm building a house,” Backer says. “We don’t know all the answers yet, but we now have lots of people to help us with that. The key to it is research by doing. It’s really a research project. We find solutions we couldn’t have found if we didn’t print it.”

In the end, Backer says, the idea is to be able to create an adequate living space fairly quickly using reusable plastics. That way, the technology could be used to help people, particularly after disasters. In that case, the homes could be built quickly and cheaply and then melted down when they’re no longer useful. The very same plastic that was used to build those temporary homes could be used to build more homes after another disaster.

Total Kustom’s cement castle

Though not technically a home, contractor Andrey Rudenko built this DIY small castle using a 3D printer he designed himself.

Though not technically a home, contractor Andrey Rudenko built this DIY small castle using a 3D printer he designed …

A contractor in Shorewood, Minnesota, had an interest in 3D printers and decided to go out and design one of his own using a computer, steel rails, motors and chains.

The printer – invented by contractor Andrey Rudenko, who calls it an “extruder” – spits out a special, very viscous blend of concrete and sand. The printer currently fits inside a two-car garage, although Rudenko is looking to make it smaller as he improves on the design.

Rudenko can program this self-made printer to print layers of concrete in patterns he designs.

Recently, he used his printer to create a large-scale, 12-foot-tall, 3D castle in his backyard, which, while technically not a home, operates on the same principles as 3D-printed homes and is the most notable example of how 3D-printed structures could become DIY projects.

Just like the homes, the castle is printed in parts and then assembled.

Just like the homes, the castle is printed in parts and then assembled.

The castle stands mostly on its own, but Rudenko did place steel bars throughout the structure as extra support for the cement-printed parts. He also added some tower details on top of the castle after the fact, which were printed separately and then lifted onto the main structure. The castle was finished in late August.

Rudenko says his next project will be a two-story, 32-foot-by-50-foot, 3D-printed house.

Fine-tuning architectural features is also one of the main focuses of the 3D Print Canal House project, Backer says.

“With the technique that we use, you can create lots of different forms that you can’t get when you use a cast or mold. … Different structures that we’ve printed, you can integrate into your design,” she says. “The cool thing is you totally bridge the gap between design and production. You can make each design unique again.”

Win Sun’s printed-overnight homes

A Win Sun home can be printed in 24 hours.

A Win Sun home can be printed in 24 hours.

Arguably the project with the most real-world results is one by Win Sun, a company in China that has already printed 10 houses in Shanghai.

All 10 houses were printed in less than 24 hours at a cost of about $5,000 each.

Unlike Rudenko’s castle project, Win Sun created building blocks instead of layering the base of the whole home at once. Using a cement and glass mixture in diagonally reinforced patterns, the huge printer (about 22 feet tall and 33 feet wide) can very rapidly put out these building blocks.

Win Sun's 3D printing in progress.

Win Sun’s 3D printing in progress.

The company used its large-scale 3D printer in a factory, then transported the fabricated blocks to the housing site where they were assembled into actual homes.

Win Sun hopes to use the technology for cheap, fast, low-income housing. According to Runji Shen, a marketer for the Win Sun project, 3D-printed homes of the future will be constructed in weeks – and for far less money than homes cost to build now.

The company says it’s in talks with several construction companies in the U.S. about potentially exporting printers and technology.

Read more @  https://homes.yahoo.com/blogs/spaces/3d-printing-homes-223421156.html

Big Brother Is Watching - Public Domain

The control freaks that run our government always seem to want to “regulate” things that they do not like.  And so it should be no surprise that there is a renewed push to regulate independent news websites.  Sites like the Drudge Report, Infowars.com and The Economic Collapse Blog have been a thorn in the side of the establishment for years.  You see, the truth is that approximately 90 percent of all news and entertainment in this country is controlled by just six giant media corporations.  That is why the news seems to be so similar no matter where you turn.  But in recent years the alternative media has exploded in popularity.  People are hungry for the truth, and an increasing number of Americans are waking up to the fact that they are not getting the truth from the corporate-controlled media.  But as the alternative media has grown, it was only going to be a matter of time before the establishment started cracking down on it.  At the moment it is just the FEC and the FCC, but surely this is just the beginning.  Our “Big Brother” government ultimately wants to control every area of our lives – and this especially applies to our ability to communicate freely with one another.

The Federal Election Commission is an example of a federal rule making body that has gotten wildly out of control.  Since just about anything that anyone says or does could potentially “influence an election”, it is not difficult for them to come up with excuses to regulate things that they do not like.

And on Wednesday, the FEC held a hearing on whether or not they should regulate political speech on blogs, websites and YouTube videos…

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is holding a hearing today to receive public feedback on whether it should create new rules regulating political speech, including political speech on the Internet that one commissioner warned could affect blogs, YouTube videos and even websites like the Drudge Report.

If you do not think that this could ever happen, you should consider what almost happened at the FEC last October

In October, then FEC Vice Chairwoman Ann M. Ravel promised that she would renew a push to regulate online political speech following a deadlocked commission vote that would have subjected political videos and blog posts to the reporting and disclosure requirements placed on political advertisers who broadcast on television. On Wednesday, she will begin to make good on that promise.

“Some of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,” Ravel said in an October statement. “As a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.”

“In the past, the Commission has specifically exempted certain types of Internet communications from campaign finance regulations,” she lamented. “In doing so, the Commission turned a blind eye to the Internet’s growing force in the political arena.”

As our nation continues to drift toward totalitarianism, it is only a matter of time before political speech on the Internet is regulated.  It is already happening in other countries all around the globe, and control freak politicians such as Ravel will just keep pushing until they get what they want.

The way that they are spinning it this time around is that they desperately need to do something “about money in politics”

Noting the 32,000 public comments that came into the FEC in advance of the hearing, Democratic Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub said, “75 percent thought that we need to do more about money in politics, particularly in the area of disclosure. And I think that’s something that we can’t ignore.”

And it isn’t just a few control freak Democrats that want these changes.

The Brennan Center for Justice, the Campaign Legal Center, the League of Women Voters and Public Citizen were all expected to testify in favor of more government regulation on the Internet at the hearing.

Fortunately, other organizations are doing what they can to warn the general population.  For example, the following comes from the Electronic Frontier Foundation

Increased regulation of online speech is not only likely to chill participation in the public debate, but it may also threaten individual speakers’ privacy and right to post anonymously.  In so doing, it may undermine two goals of campaign finance reform: protecting freedom of political speech and expanding political participation.

As we stated in our joint comments to the FEC back in 2005 [pdf], “the Internet provides a counter-balance to the undue dominance that ‘big money’ has increasingly wielded over the political process in the past half-century.” We believe that heightened regulation of online political speech will hamper the Internet’s ability to level the playing field.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama and the FCC are using net neutrality as an excuse to impose lots of new regulations on Internet activity.

Ajit Pai is an FCC commissioner who is opposed to this plan.  He recently sent out a tweet holding what he calls “President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet“…

President Obama's 332-page plan to regulate the InternetRead more @ http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/feds-hold-hearing-whether-regulate-sites-like-drudge-infowars-economic-collapse-blog

Robert Gore's avatarSTRAIGHT LINE LOGIC

From Brandon Smith, at alt-market.com:

Our era is a strange one when considering how social attitudes have developed in such a contrary fashion to the rest of history. I think that our forefathers would look upon our current culture with bewilderment when confronted with the fact that our generation has all but abandoned the option of physical rebellion as a tool for social change. Even among the most enslaved of nations and peoples, the idea of revolution has been held in regard as an entirely moral and principled affair involving every individual, no matter their age or economic station. Today, however, that which we call “revolution” has been delegated mostly to college-age intellectuals and has been so watered down and whitewashed with politically correct restrictions that the concept is hardly recognizable.

I believe the civil rights movements in America and in India in the 20th century have in many ways…

View original post 372 more words

(Reuters) – A U.S. ban on the interstate sales of handguns by federal firearms dealers to buyers from other states violates the U.S. Constitution, a federal judge in Texas ruled on Wednesday.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor stemmed from a challenge to the ban brought by a Texas firearms dealer and a couple from the District of Columbia in July 2014.

The federal law prohibits a dealer from transferring a handgun, but not a rifle or shotgun, to an individual who does not live in the state in which the dealer’s business is located.

“While we expect the government to appeal, we are confident that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will agree with Judge O’Connor’s sound ruling,” attorney William Mateja, who represented the challengers, said in a statement.

Andrew and Tracey Hanson met with licensed firearms dealer Fredric Mance Jr. in Texas about buying two handguns, but did not complete the transaction because they could not take immediate possession of the weapons, according to court papers.

Federal law required Mance to transfer the handguns to a federally licensed dealer where the Hansons live, Charles Sykes in the District of Columbia, where they could complete the purchase after paying shipping and transfer fees.

The Hansons and Mance, all members of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, argued in their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas that the ban limits consumer choices and infringes on their rights.

O’Connor found that the ban violated the second and fifth amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He also distinguished the ban from other firearms restrictions such as those that target specific people, such as felons or the mentally ill.

“As law abiding, responsible citizens, the Hansons likely do not pose the threat to public safety that motivated Congress to enact the federal interstate handgun transfer ban,” O’Connor wrote in his decision.

O’Connor said the government demonstrated a compelling interest in preventing handgun crime, but failed to show how the transfer ban alleviates the problem of prohibited people acquiring handguns by crossing state lines.

On April 12, 2013, the IRS seized every penny of a nearly $1 million business account held by Georgia gun shop owner Andrew Clyde.

His misdeed — if you can call it that: depositing business checks into his bank account in increments under $10,000.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers on House Republicans are on Wednesday preparing to shine a spotlight on the government’s practice of seizing small business civil assets without charging them with a crime, signaling a new oversight focus on an issue gaining more attention and hinting at new legislation backed by both parties.

In one instance, a U.S. attorney suggested to one witness’s attorney that he may be getting a harsher punishment because the witness spoke to the press, according to an email reviewed by POLITICO.

“There is a strong indication that the IRS has been involved in civil forfeiture that has hurt innocent people,” said House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee chairman Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) in a brief interview, calling it an “abuse by the federal government against citizens.”

The hearing was the first for Roskam, who takes over the subcommittee that in the past year focused nearly exclusively on the IRS tea party targeting controversy.

But Wednesday’s hearing struck a rare bipartisan accord as Democrats joined their counterparts in lecturing the IRS.

“Whether or not it is within the law, it is wrong to, without any criminal evidence, seize somebody’s property,” New York Democrat Charles Rangel fumed. “Common sense and decency says that when the Congress screws up, we expect you people to come back and say this is not working.”

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in the hearing apologized to “anyone who got caught up in this,” calling lawmaker’s concerns “legitimate and appropriate.” But he also said his agents were merely following the law.

Under the law, banks must report cash bank deposits of $10,000 or more to the federal government — a provision aimed at catching illicit traffickers. Criminals have tried to sidestep the reporting requirement by keeping their deposits under the $10,000 threshold that triggers the reports, a practice called “structuring” that is also illegal.

The IRS — like other agencies that engage in the practice, such as the DEA or FBI — has sweeping authority to take assets, having to prove only “preponderance of evidence.”

They don’t have to charge anyone with a crime or present any evidence that shows guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but can get a seizure warrant solely by presenting bank statements showing that a business has deposited amounts under $10,000.

The I was just following the law bullshit is exactly that-bullshit-the IRS,FBI,DEA,BATFE,state police,county sheriffs and city police forces have been doing this shit for years-very few people complained-or they didn’t complain loud enough,or to the “right people”.
Only recently has this kind of theft by .gov inc. been getting any media coverage at all. This is so out of control,and those seizing the $$$ known damn well it’s wrong-yet they keep right on doing it-didn’t they ALL swear an oath to defend the Constitution?
Last time I checked,under the Constitution,your property could not be seized without there having been court procedures followed PRIOR to .gov inc. just taking peoples hard earned cash.
Then there’s the fact that this is being done by .gov inc. spying on citizens bank accounts without first obtaining a warrant.
The IRS does it,BATFE does it,DEA does it,FBI does it-WTF? How many different .gov inc. agencies are spying on our bank accounts?
 This is clearly unconstitutional,yet no one has challenged it in court?
Kinda hard to fight it in court when .gov inc. has taken all your $$$ isn’t it?
I’m sure there some extra added bullshit about .gov inc. liens being placed on every house,car,truck,piece of land,retirement account,safe deposit box and anything else a citizen could convert into $$$ to fight the illegal, unconstitutional actions of .gov inc. in court.
So,the politicians are gonna make a law-big effin’ deal .gov inc. will just make up some more bullshit about how they must be able to use these tactics to win the “war on drugs” the “war on terror” “to protect the public”-or the best one-“it’s for the children”.
People should be marching on DC with pitchforks and torches over this bullshit-but no one’s doing anything other than what I’m doing right now-complaining about it from behind a keyboard.
We’ve got to start standing up for the people-for ourselves-for our rights to life,liberty,and the pursuit of happiness-for our freedom-for rightful liberty.
Stand up !
Speak out !
Fight back !
A government can only govern with the consent of the governed-I did not give my consent to the government to do any of this shit-for any reason.
Did you?

Here come the anti-gun zealots-“if they can ban guns why can’t we”

“It’s not just the gunners upset at the sudden ban on the open carrying of firearms at the state Capitol. Some cities are saying: “Hey, why can’t we do that, too?”

“When lawmakers unexpectedly banned the open carrying of guns in parts of the state Capitol recently, some gun owners were upset. But they weren’t the only ones.

Gun-control advocates were also irked. Though for an entirely different reason.

“It’s ironic, isn’t it?” said Seattle City Councilman Bruce Harrell. “We can’t as a city do what the state just did. Why? Because they won’t let us.”

When about 20 protesters went into the House viewing gallery in Olympia last month and waved around their rifles and pistols, our typically pro-gun Legislature suddenly got very uncomfortable. Both the House and Senate abruptly banned the open display of firearms in their chambers and hearing rooms (concealed carry with a permit is still OK).

“I don’t want the people who are on the floor being fearful of doing their jobs,” said Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, who runs the Senate.

That seems like kind of a no-brainer. Citizens shouldn’t be allowed to stand over elected officials with guns anymore than your boss should stand over you with one, while you work. Most state capitols don’t allow any guns inside, unless carried by law enforcement.

But because the Legislature did this by private rule, it applies only to them. Anyone is still free to sling a semi-automatic rifle over his or her shoulder and head on into a meeting of the local city council, planning commission or library board.

“What the Legislature did is the height of hypocrisy,” says Scott Missall, a lawyer for Short, Cressman and Burgess in Seattle, who works as a contract city attorney for some small cities around the region. “If it’s so obvious that guns have no place in the House or Senate, how is it any less obvious in our local city and county council meetings?”

It’s not a purely symbolic issue. In 2013, a dozen citizens armed up for some meetings of the Oak Harbor City Council, standing in the back with M1 rifles and the like while lawyers told the council it had no authority to do anything about it. State legislators can be “fearful of doing their jobs.” The rest of you just have to man up.

Seattle City Hall especially is face-palming over this. In 2008, then-Mayor Greg Nickels barred guns from the city’s public buildings and parks.

That order also covered concealed guns, so it admittedly went farther than the recent Capitol ban. But when it was thrown out by the courts, the judges said the reason was that only the Legislature can give the city the power to pass a gun restriction, which it has not done.

Harrell tried to be diplomatic about how lawmakers now are doing for themselves what they won’t let Seattle do. Gaining the “ability to regulate firearms in public places” is listed as the city’s No. 1 legislative priority this year.”

Read the rest of the anti-gun drivel  @

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2025668806_westneat11xml.html

Mosquitos At the Picnic, by Robert Gore

Posted: February 11, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized

Robert Gore's avatarSTRAIGHT LINE LOGIC

Perhaps the journalistic situation is not hopeless (see “Lies, Damn Lies, and the Mainstream Media,” SLL, 2/9/15). Monday, The Wall Street Journal printed two guest columns in its Opinion section that amounted to an admission that the outside-the-mainstream media is drawing blood. The first, “The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’,” was from Laurence H. Silberman, a federal judge who was the co-chairman of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. Mr. Silberman asserted that President George W. Bush did not knowingly lie about Iraqi WMDs to get the US into war with Iraq, but rather in good faith relied on faulty intelligence, which Silverman’s commission concluded was “dead wrong.”

Give Mr. Silberman his contention that Bush acted in good faith. The column still concedes defeat on what was a fringe position back then but which has become the accepted truth…

View original post 563 more words

Sisters in arms: Kurdish women in front line against IS

Posted: February 11, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized

Paris (AFP) – Meet Nassrin Abdallah. With her diminutive height and broad smile, it doesn’t seem like she should strike fear into the hearts of hardened Islamic State jihadists.

But this 36-year-old Syrian Kurd woman has been at the tip of the spear of the Kurdish forces that last month liberated the symbolic city of Kobane from IS militants.

“In Kobane, women were fighting on all fronts, in all the trenches against a brutal enemy,” she told cheering crowds during a visit to Paris this week.

As the head of the armed wing of the Kurdish PYD, “commander” Nassrin has led both men and women into battle against Islamic State fighters who have overrun large areas of Iraq and Syria.

“We kept the promise we made to the people and we won the day,” she said to thunderous applause.

According to Nassrin, around 40 percent of the Kurdish fighters battling over the town on the Syrian-Turkish border were women.

Some, like her, are hardened warriors but also joining their ranks were mothers who sent their children over the border to the safety of Turkey, then rushed off to join their sisters in arms.

Fighting alongside Nassrin are other powerful female commanders who have achieved legendary status on the battlefield.

Women like Narine Afrin, who played a key role in the defence of Kobane. Or Arin Mirkan, who blew herself up on October 5, killing dozens of IS fighters encircling the town, according to Kurdish sources.

In total, there are 4,000 women fighting in the armed wing of the PYD, say Kurdish officials, who refuse for strategic reasons to disclose the total number of people who have taken up arms.

More @

http://news.yahoo.com/sisters-arms-kurdish-women-front-line-against-145252809.html