All posts by Dale Yeager

About Dale Yeager

F.L.E.T.C trained - Forensic Profiler U.S. DOJ DoD Federal Law Enforcement SME and Instructor HIDTA - MAGLOCLEN.

ALERT: Appalling ‘Rape Kit’ Backlog

There aren’t enough “sexual assault nurse examiners” in Las Vegas or throughout most of the country, according to Brittany Bronson in The New York Times.

Bronson points out that there’s one Vegas hospital that can process the kits, and two nurses trained in doing so — clearly insufficient for the 718 sexual assault examination performed last year. Ideally, victims shouldn’t go to the bathroom or shower or change clothes before the rape kit is taken, which is a tall order if they have to drive across a state to do so.

“It’s impossible to know how many victims may have chosen not to obtain a rape kit because of these limitations,” she writes.

Oliver Stone Says Blame The Jews!

Hard-left filmmaker Oliver Stone recently found himself at a loss for “a plausible response” when Stephen Colbert pressed his defense of Vladimir Putin over Russia’s election hacking, says Alan Dershowitz at the Gatestone Institute.

So Stone “resorted to an age-old bigotry: blame the Jews — or, in its current incarnation, shift the blame” to Israel. As Page Six reported, Stone replied: “Israel had far more involvement in the US election than Russia” — an “absurd” claim Dershowitz says would be “laughable” if it didn’t reflect “a growing anti-Semitism by the intolerant hard left, of which Stone is a charter member.”

Says Dershowitz: “The essence of anti-Semitism is the bigoted claim that if there is a problem, then Jews must be its cause. This is the exact canard peddled by Stone — and is extremely dangerous if unrebutted.”

New York Post June 19, 2017

OSS 75th Anniversary: Why You Should Care

OSS 75th Anniversary

Director Pompeo Delivers Remarks at OSS 75th Anniversary Ceremony

Remarks by CIA Director Mike Pompeo at the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) 75th Anniversary Ceremony

June 16, 2017


On the night of 13 August, 1944, a three-man team of highly trained Allied commandos known as “Jedburghs” parachuted into the French countryside southeast of Paris. The group, codenamed Team Bruce, soon realized that they had been dropped far from where the Resistance had been waiting for them, but getting a bearing on their position proved difficult.

Heavy thunderstorms set in shortly after they landed, and the fields were a muddy morass. It was so impenetrably dark that the men tied their pistol lanyards together so they wouldn’t get separated and lost.

After hours of slogging along a compass course and not making much headway, a lightning flash revealed a lone farmhouse. They took a chance by knocking at the door, and it paid off—they’d stumbled into a radio post for the French Resistance. London was notified of their position, and the next day they were driven the remaining fifteen miles to their intended drop zone.

The team linked up with the Resistance and began to channel weapons and ammunition to their networks by arranging airdrops. They’d know when to expect them by listening for the coded messages that followed the “Victory” theme from Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony, which played on the nightly BBC news broadcast to France.

With arms pouring in and the Allies advancing from their Normandy beachheads, the uprising that Team Bruce sought to kindle was well underway. The Jedburgh slogan—“Surprise, Kill, Vanish”—was put to action as the team and their French partners ambushed patrols, attacked convoys, blew up supply depots, and then vanished.

As General Patton’s Third Army quickly advanced just to their north toward Germany, Team Bruce recognized that his right flank was open to counterattacks. The Jedburghs took on the job of protecting it by directing Resistance forces to occupy towns along its path, blowing up bridges, and doubling harassment of German units in the area.

By the second week of September, 1944, Team Bruce’s section of France was completely liberated. They went to Paris for a gathering of the surviving Jedburghs, and the team’s American officer met up with an old college friend who also had signed up with the OSS. His friend had “liberated” the black Cadillac owned by the head of the Vichy government.

Team Bruce’s American officer was Captain William Colby of the Office of Strategic Services, who would become the eighth Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Despite his successful mission in France, the war was far from over for Captain Colby. He would go on to volunteer for a treacherous assignment in Nazi-occupied Norway—one that nearly got him killed just as the war in Europe was ending.

This week, as we celebrate the 75th anniversary of the OSS, we not only commemorate the founding of America’s first intelligence agency and its successors at the State Department, DoD-Special Operations, and CIA. We pay tribute to an exceptionally talented, courageous, and resourceful group of Americans who rose to the challenge of the greatest conflict in history.

OSS officers like William Colby took on the toughest, most dangerous assignments, and carried them out with a rarefied level of excellence, valor, and skill. And just as we at CIA and our brothers and sisters in the Special Operations Community have inherited the missions and attributes of the OSS, the OSS in turn took on the traits of its founder—the soldier, statesman, and Medal of Honor recipient General William “Wild Bill” Donovan.

Fearless, smart, creative, determined, and decisive, General Donovan knew exactly what he wanted in every OSS recruit. As he once said, “This is no place for a guy bound by the law of averages.”

The General cast his net wide across the great American talent pool. In the words of his biographer, the OSS recruited safecrackers, college boys, steel-mill workers, economists, the heirs of old-line American families, and recent immigrants from Europe. As General Donovan said, “Every man or woman who can hurt the Hun is okay with me.”

They included officers like:

Frederick Mayer, a German Jew who fled to the United States before the war and was recruited as a Special Intelligence Branch spy. Masquerading as a German officer in Austria, he obtained construction details of command bunkers beneath Berlin and provided targeting information on military supplies flowing through the Brenner Pass. Caught by the Gestapo and tortured, he never talked, and was awarded the Legion of Merit by Allen Dulles.

Frederick was well-known to many here today, and he passed away last year at 94. His motto, reflecting the essence of the OSS, and what I hope still applies at CIA, was “If you don’t risk, you don’t win.”

Dr. Archie Chun-Ming, a medical doctor and demolition specialist who, when asked if he wanted to join the legendary Detachment 101 in Burma, answered “Heavens no—what happened to the other 100 detachments?” He did go to Burma, of course, and contributed mightily to OSS operations there, which inflicted heavy losses on Japanese forces in the region.

Dr. Ralph Bunche, the brilliant African-American diplomat, civil rights leader, and Nobel Prize winner, served as the top Africa specialist for the OSS. He foresaw the end of colonial power on the continent and the wave of nationalism that would dominate African politics for decades.

And Virginia Hall, a former State Department officer who, despite losing a leg in a hunting accident, volunteered for wartime service with the British Special Operations Executive and then the OSS. Operating deep behind enemy lines in France, Virginia was the only female civilian to receive the Distinguished Service Cross during the war, and she would become one of the first women to serve as an operations officer at CIA.

The stunning achievements of the men and women of the OSS, from the mountains of Norway to the jungles of Burma, set the standards for our CIA officers who are taking on the national security challenges of the 21st century—and who are writing some history of their own on the counterterrorism battlefields of the Middle East and South Asia and all across the world.

The CIA and Special Ops officers of today confront a very different world than that of our OSS predecessors, but Pearl Harbor and 9/11 made kindred spirits of us all. The patriots of 1941 and 2001 were summoned by the same clarion call, and responded with the same gallantry, resolve, and sacrifice.

Only 15 days after the September 11th attacks, CIA teams were the first Americans on Afghan soil. Like the Jedburghs before them, they made common cause with local forces and took the fight directly to the enemy.

The targets have changed over the years, but that expeditionary campaign continues, wherever our mission leads us. And General Donovan’s playbook remains very much in effect.

We aggressively steal our adversaries’ secrets. We rely on our agility and light footprint to operate in hard and dangerous places, regardless of whether a Station or Base is present. We apply the most advanced technology to our mission. And we rigorously produce the most accurate, timely, and insightful intelligence for our President.

Last month, we added eight stars to our Memorial Wall, which stands in our Headquarters lobby directly across from a statue of General Donovan. There are now 125 stars under his watch, representing CIA officers who lost their lives in the line of duty.

Having served in two World Wars—and having lost so many close friends in both conflicts—General Donovan saw more than his share of tragedy during his lifetime. In drawing up plans for a central intelligence agency, he envisioned a service that would help prevent another world war, and that would contribute directly to the security of our citizens.

At CIA, we are all under General Donovan’s watch. We seek to do justice to his vision every day. We will always endeavor to live up to the magnificent example he set, and to be worthy successors to the men and women of OSS that he so ably led.

Thank you all very much. God speed.

GOOD NEWS! The End of Global Poverty?

 

The End of Poverty?

Most people are “unaware that extreme poverty has been declining over time” across the globe — a development economist Charles Hughes at Economics21 hails as “one of the greatest accomplishments of the modern world.” Fact is, “more people live longer, healthier, more peaceful lives today than anytime in the past.”

Yet polls show most Americans actually believe global poverty is increasing, rather than having been “halved in the past 20 years.” True, many nations in Africa are moving in the wrong direction.

But the fact remains that “in 1970, about 60 percent” of the planet was “still relegated to extreme poverty. Now, the figure is under 9 percent.”

Congress Shooter James T Hodgkinson: Bernie Sanders Campaigner – Violence Against Children And His Clueless Family

James T. Hodgkinson

So Hodgkinson had a long history of violence and anti social behavior. But I want to focus on his clueless family members who did nothing to stop his actions that led to the serious injury of numerous people.

James Hodgkinson, the Illinois man accused of shooting lawmakers and aides during a congressional baseball practice Wednesday, was pronounced dead by the president. Here’s what we know so far.

Michael Hodgkinson, the suspect’s brother, told the New York Times that James had become upset about the election of President Donald Trump and had moved to the Washington DC area “out of the blue” to protest.

Former Alexandria mayor Bill Euille told the Washington Post that he had seen James Hodgkinson every morning for the last month and a half at the local YMCA gym, using the showers.

Mr Euille said he was helping Hodgkinson look for a job in the area and that it appeared he may have been homeless.

“He’d open up his gym bag and in it, he had everything he owned. He was living out of the gym bag,” the mayor told the paper. “He sat in the Y’s lobby for hours and hours.”

Hodgkinson’s wife told the ABC News that her husband moved to Virginia two months ago.

A history of trouble with the law

On March 19, police responded to reports of shots fired in the woods near Hodgkinson’s home. Hodgkinson was advised not to discharge his weapon in the area.

Hodgkinson letters: “I have never said ‘life sucks,’ only the policies of the Republicans.”

Derik Holtmann/Belleville News-Democrat, via AP

Hodgkinson has written a number of letters to the editor of the Belleville News-Democrat.

In them, he often railed against Republicans and tax policies, and at least once advocated for legalizing marijuana. A sampling is below.

AUG. 28, 2012

An idea worth repeating

“…We need to bring our country out of today’s recession by raising the number of tax brackets from six to 20 or more and the top marginal rate of 35 percent on $380,000 to 60 percent on $20 million or more. In 1938 we had 33 brackets from 4 percent for most of the country to 79 percent for income over $79 million.

JULY 8, 2012

Obama’s for U.S. workers

“I can’t believe how many people are upset with our president. You’d think that the world was full of rich millionaires. Why else would these people talk badly about a guy who has their best interest at heart?

I believe anything near these rates would be fair and balanced. In rebuttal: I have never said “life sucks,” only the policies of the Republicans.”

JAN 24, 2012

Money-making ideas

“I believe to stimulate the economy, it is time to legalize or at least decriminalize marijuana use.

Also to fund the government deficit I hope the Obama administration raises the income tax rate for the rich to 70 percent or more. If a person has an annual income of more than $10 million, he should be proud to be an American and proud to live in a country that would allow this kind of income, and proud to pay his fair share of taxes.

JAN 28, 2011

Greedy instead of grand

“There’s a new version of what GOP stands for. It’s not the Grand Old Party anymore. It’s the Greedy One Percenters….

…We need to vote all Republicans out of office. Let’s work to get this country back. Let’s all push for 20 brackets to $20 million with a top marginal rate of 60 percent.

— Belleville News-Democrat →

Hints of an anti-Scalise stance

Facebook

On October 16, 2015, Hodgkinson “liked” this anti-Scalise cartoon on Facebook, posting “Here is a Republican who should Lose His Job, but they Gave Him a Raise.” Hodgkinson’s Facebook page has since been deactivated.

“Trump is a Traitor”

Facebook

On March 22, Hodgkinson posted that he had just signed a Change.org petition calling on the Senate to remove the president and vice president. “Trump is a Traitor,” he wrote, “Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”

“I want Bernie to Win the White House”

Facebook

On August 12, 2016, Hodgkinson posted his support for Bernie Sanders.

POLITICO STAFF | 06/14/2017 and Jessica Lussenhop BBC News

FATHERS Your Daughters Are Suffering!

Father and Daughter – Dale Yeager Blog

The Link Between Detached Dads and
Risk-Taking Girls

How much do fathers matter to the personal development of their daughters? Scientists studying families have long suspected that domestic instability and insufficient fathering predispose girls to risky sexual behavior, but there was no hard evidence for this view.

A study published in the journal Developmental Psychology in May used an ingenious research design to get some answers. Danielle DelPriore and Bruce Ellis of the University of Utah, working with Gabriel Schlomer of the State University of New York at Albany, teased
apart the effects of fathers within families.

They studied 101 pairs of adult sisters from families that had either remained intact or had broken up by the time the younger sister turned 14. In each family the sisters were distant enough from each other in age—at least four years—that they would have had different experiences of their father, especially if he had separated from the family before the younger one reached maturity.

This research design made it possible to control for variables that might interfere with clear conclusions about the effects of fathering. Both sisters randomly received half their genes from the mother, half from the father, so inherited genes couldn’t explain systematic
differences. Sibling order could matter: As teens, younger sisters could for some reason be more risk-prone. But that was the point of including intact families. If the sisters differed in sexual risk-taking only in the disrupted families, it would be possible to zero in on how the difference arose.

The researchers used retrospective questionnaires to probe parenting and sexual experiences that the women—who were between 18 and 36 at the time of the study—recalled from high school. Sexual risk-taking included promiscuity, unprotected sex and sex while intoxicated.

Older and younger sisters reported similar levels of mothering quality, whether their families were intact or disrupted.

But the most striking finding was in older sisters with a large age gap in the disrupted families. The father’s behavior, for better or worse, usually affected the older sister much more than her younger sibling. If these older sisters communicated well with their fathers and felt close to them, they experienced much more parental monitoring and hung out far less with sexually risk-prone peers. But this kind of fathering had much less effect on the younger sisters, many of whom didn’t have enough contact with their father for him to make much of a difference.

These factors explained the older sisters’ behavior. “The prolonged presence of a warm and engaged father can buffer girls against early, high-risk sex,” Dr. DelPriore said. This doesn’t mean that divorced fathers can’t provide quality care. “A silver lining,” she adds, “is that what dad does seems to matter more than parental separation.” In other words, a divorce may be less harmful for a girl than more years with a bad dad.

The growing field of evolutionary child psychology adds interesting context to these findings. Biologists find that organisms in unstable environments grow up faster and start reproducing earlier than those in stable ones. Theoretically, in a stable environment you can take more time growing into your reproductive activities, focusing on longterm quality rather than on getting an early start. Conversely, in an unstable situation, it might “pay” (in Darwinian terms) to begin reproducing earlier, since in those girls’ worlds, a good man is hard to find.

This doesn’t rule out more familiar psychological explanations, but in a child’s development, family instability—which, again, is something different from divorce—might provide a catalyst setting off a psychological change and risky behavior.

As Dr. DelPriore phrased the question, “What is it that dad does that shields a daughter from sexual risk?” Dr. Ellis phrased the answer: “It’s all about dosage of exposure to dads; the bigger the dose, the more fathering matters—for better and for worse.”

By Melvin Konner WSJ

OUTRAGEOUS! Bernie Sanders Hell Questions Prompt Backlash

Sen. Bernie Sanders

A low-profile confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill this week raised eyebrows when the questioning turned to theology — specifically, damnation.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont pressed Russell Vought, nominated by President Trump to be deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, about his beliefs.

“Do you think that people who are not Christians are condemned?” Sanders repeatedly asked, challenging that belief as Islamophobic.

Christian organizations have denounced Sanders’ questioning as amounting to a religious test for public office — one that would disqualify millions of people.

Polls show about half of all Christians in the U.S. believe that some non-Christians can go to heaven. But particularly among evangelicals, the traditional view of damnation remains widespread.

A confirmation showdown rooted in college dispute

How did hellfire come up in a confirmation hearing in the first place?

In 2015, an evangelical Christian college suspended a tenured professor who said that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. That’s a belief shared by many Christians, but not all; Wheaton College said it contradicted the school’s statement of faith.

Vought, an alumnus of Wheaton, wrote a blog post last year expressing support for his alma mater. He quoted a theologian who said non-Christians have a “deficient” theology but could have a meaningful relationship with God. Vought disagreed.

“Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology,” Vought wrote. “They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned. ”

Ahead of Vought’s confirmation hearing, that quote was picked up by advocacy groups concerned about whether Vought could serve all Americans fairly.

Sanders brought up the passage, again and again, in the hearing. He asked Vought if he thought his statement was Islamophobic.

“Absolutely not, senator,” Vought said

“Do you believe people in the Muslim religion stand condemned?” Sanders asked. “What about Jews? Do they stand condemned, too?”

“I’m a Christian,” Vought repeatedly responded.

“I understand you are a Christian,” Sanders said, raising his voice. The senator is Jewish and has said he’s not particularly religious. “But there are other people who have different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?”

“I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs,” Vought said, while also emphasizing “the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation.”

“This nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about,” Sanders said, announcing that he’d vote against him.

Did focus on a nominee’s faith cross a line?

Sanders was criticized almost immediately for focusing on a nominee’s religious principles instead of qualifications or behavior. His office has defended the senator’s questions.

“The question at hand is not about Mr. Vought’s freedom to hold certain religious beliefs,” a spokesman for Sanders said. The spokesman said Vought’s post expressed his views in an “inflammatory way” and said Sanders is concerned if Vought can “carry out the duties of his office in a way that treats all Americans equally.”

Many news outlets — religious, conservative and mainstream — highlighted the exchange as a possible application of a religious test, which is prohibited under the Constitution. U.S. News & World Report spoke to legal experts who say Sanders is on solid legal ground. “Senators can vote against nominees for any reason or no reason at all,” one law professor told the magazine. “It may be atrocious, but it’s not unconstitutional,” another said

Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, called Sanders’ comments “breathtakingly audacious and shockingly ignorant,” and deeply troubling even if they are legal.

“This is not some arcane or obscure private opinion being held by this one individual,” Moore told NPR. “The language that Sen. Sanders, finds so disturbing — ‘stands condemned’ — is language right out of the New Testament.”

Moore says there’s nothing hostile about Vought’s comments. “In Christian theology, no one is righteous before God,” he said. “[Evangelical] Christians don’t believe that good people go to heaven and bad people go to hell. Christians believe that all of humanity is fallen.”

And Moore argues there’s a fundamental misunderstanding at play: Secular people often assume that beliefs are “just ideas and opinions” that can shift. But for religious people, he says, “we don’t believe that we are constructing our faith. We believe that it’s been handed to us by God.”

A question of belief, or a question of behavior?

Scott Simpson, public advocacy director for Muslim Advocates, defended Sanders’ questions and said it’s important to keep Vought’s comments in context — both his original post and the broader political climate. “This isn’t some personal expression of how he feels in his heart about theology,” Simpson said. “This is the type of speech that was being used against somebody” to argue a professor should lose her job.

He also says the Trump administration has a “pattern of appointments” of people with anti-Muslim views and rhetoric. “We’re very sensitive to the concept of religious liberty, because Muslims’ religious liberty is under attack every day,” Simpson said. “But we’re talking about something very specific. … When a nominee calls the faith of millions of Americans deficient, that is something that should be questioned. That is what hearings are for.”

Meanwhile, James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, said the belief that vast swaths of people are damned might, in fact, be inherently problematic for certain government positions. “If [someone] believe these people are to be condemned … is that the person who ought to be making budgetary decisions for the country as a whole?” asked Zogby, who is a Maronite Catholic. “Can you be a fair adjudicator of decisions?” he asked.

Hussein Rashid, founder of the religious literacy consultancy Islamicate L3C, doesn’t agree that the belief itself is a problem.

“I think we have to accept that there are theologies that are what I would call exclusionary, that only certain people will go to heaven and certain people will go to hell. They are not inherently Islamophobic or anti-Semitic,” Rashid said. “It’s when it turns into action that we start getting worried. ”

He, like Moore, emphasized that these beliefs are not particularly unusual.

“Exclusionary theologies are far more prevalent than I think we realize,” Rashid said, noting many Americans’ reticence to talk about religion in public. A substantial number of Christians believe Catholics are going to hell, he noted.

Belief in hell is widespread, but views differ on who is damned

Different Christian sects, and individuals, have varying interpretations of damnation. The traditionalist view is that eternal suffering awaits all who do not accept Christ; on the other end of the spectrum is the universalist belief that everyone will be saved. And then there are disagreements about what hell actually is.

In short, it’s hard to pin down exactly how many Americans believe non-Christians are going to hell — but polling data suggests a strong minority.

The Pew Research Center’s Religious Landscape Study in 2014 polled more than 35,000 adults.

The Pew Research Center recently found that nearly 60 percent of Americans surveyed believe in hell. And among Christians, 48 percent of Protestants and 56 percent of evangelicals believe Christianity is the only path to eternal life. (Catholics and mainline Protestants were far more likely to believe that other faiths can get into heaven.)

A LifeWay Research survey, conducted online with a much smaller sample, found that 40 percent of Americans believe those who do not accept Jesus are bound for hell. But it’s complicated: Some of those people appear to also believe other faiths can attain salvation.

At any rate, Vought’s belief is not a fringe view. “Most conservative evangelical churches believe that faith in Christ is necessarily for salvation,” Moore says.

And it’s not unique to evangelicalism or Christianity. The Quran is quite clear that there is a hell, says Mohammad Hassan Khalil, a professor of religious studies at Michigan State University and author of Islam and the Fate of Others. The general view is that those who reject the message of Muhammad are damned, he says, but just like in Christianity, there’s a vast spectrum of beliefs.

You’ll see “a popular preacher who has many YouTube hits saying that all non-Muslims go to hell,” he says, and at the same time, “you’ll get other people who say there are multiple paths to heaven.”

Khalil says belief in hell does not have a clear-cut implication for behavior on Earth. “If I believe all non-Muslims go to hell … it can lead me to look down upon them, see them as just fuel for hell, and not really take them too seriously. Or I could be motivated to want to save them,” he says, “and be unusually kind and nice to them in the hopes that they will convert.”

NPR asked Sanders’ office if the senator would have challenged a devout Muslim who believed non-Muslims are condemned to hell, in the same way he challenged Vought. Sanders’ spokesman said yes.

Moore of the Southern Baptist Conference says Sanders confronting a Muslim would be equally problematic.

“We’ve been working for religious freedom for everyone,” said Moore, who has spoken up in defense of mosques. Rejecting a nominee for their religious doctrine is “a troubling trend, and if this were the direction that American public officials were to go this would be very dangerous for American democracy,” he said.

“We’ve seen what happens when the state sets itself up as a theological referee.”

“Wonder Woman” Feminism Without Man Hating

Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman

‘Wonder Woman’ wins by being feminist without bashing men

 

Warner Bros.’ “Wonder Woman” continues to break records as the most successful female-led superhero action movie ever — with New York packing theaters along with the rest of the country.

So what, exactly, is winning everyone over?

What is it about this film that seems to be bringing together both men and women from all backgrounds and critics in praise?

The film’s well made, sure, with dazzling special effects and vivid scenes (see the 3-D version if you can) that create a striking contrast between worlds: from a breathtaking, female-only island where Amazons live in a fiercely athletic and secluded harmony, to the merciless front lines of World War I, where man’s inhumanity to man wrought great destruction and suffering.

The film features Israeli actress Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, whose dark eyes sparkle with mischief, mirth and, yes, wonder, and whose compassion and determination infuse her character with a depth beyond Hollywood’s standard spirited heroines’.

At New York City theaters this week, many girls and women said they turned out because the character of Wonder Woman has been a personal inspiration in their lives, and they wanted to support the film’s director, Patty Jenkins.

“It’s nice to see a woman director given a big-budget action film, not just a rom-com,” said Mariel Conway, 30, media manager for Discovery Studios TV network, who was visiting New York from Los Angeles and attended a daytime showing at a Kips Bay theater.

Conway said that in tapping a female director, Warner Bros. is not, in Conway’s view, pandering to women but choosing the individual whom they believe to be best skilled to bring Wonder Woman to the big screen, because the company “is staking its future on the DC Comics universe.”

But the film was also striking, some noted, for what was missing: the man-hating grievance politics that sometimes accompanies a projection of female empowerment.

“It’s not a negative film, not against men, but shows women and men working together,” said Elizabeth Liumbruno, 30, an architect from Forest Hills after an evening screening in Union Square.

“Her leadership style seemed more collaborative than the typical superhero’s,” said Ellie Bastani, 33, of Morningside Heights, an assistant dean at Columbia University. “It was more about working together . . . than one person being this hero.”

“Usually you see females in supporting roles or just as sex symbols [in action films], so it’s really important for little girls to see a female in the lead,” said Bhumika Dyal, 20, a student at FIT from Ozone Park, Queens.

The film resonated with women and girls of all ages. “She did what she believed and didn’t just follow her mom,” said Chelsea Brooks, 8, of the Lower East Side, adding: “She wasn’t actually fighting, because she did want to help.”

“I loved her determination, her strength, and her compassion,” said Josie Lawrence, a retiree in Murray Hill. “I thought, ‘Yay!’ when she crossed No Man’s Land.” Lawrence added that the film is a reminder that “being a hero is not male or female.”

The film’s workmanlike plot provides sufficient momentum to carry the viewer through charming scenes in which our heroine encounters a man for the first time (Chris Pine, who plays British spy Steve Trevor, Wonder Woman’s partner in the fight to save humankind), tries on dresses in early-20th-century London and uses both her superpowers and what appears to be krav maga to fight German spies and soldiers.

But what really distinguishes the story is its heroine’s idealism, and its suggestion that the good and evil that exist in human nature cross all divides, including gender (one of the film’s chief antagonists, the sociopathic scientist Dr. Poison, is a female).

“You don’t think I wish I could tell you it’s one bad guy to blame?” Steve Trevor pleads with Wonder Woman toward the end of the movie. “We are all to blame.”

We’re facing a time when political polarization threatens civil discourse, dehumanization of one side by another cuts both ways and culture wars have recently brought millions of Americans, women prominently among them, to the streets in protest.

Perhaps the resurrection of “Wonder Woman” — an icon of female strength whose righteous anger is driven, and tempered, by compassion and love for the world — is offering little girls and women a role model for cooperative leadership, and a positive vision of empowerment they’re not seeing enough of in the real world.

Heather Robinson New York Post