THE MARCH TO SOCIALISM THROUGH REGULATIONS

Obama's new Financial regulations that he will propose today will in my opinion wreck the incentive of innovation and risk taking that has made this country great over the last two hundred plus years.

One of the "nanny" state goodies being proposed by the Obama administration to address what they say were the causes of the financial meltdown.Is his plan to overhaul the nation's "outdated" financial system.

Obama's plan seeks to overhaul the nation's system of financial regulations. The White House makes its case for this approach in an 85-page white paper that describes the roots of the crisis. Gaps in regulation allowed companies to make loans many borrowers could not afford. They believe that funding came from new kinds of investments that were poorly understood by regulators. They further believe and are saying that big firms paid employees massive bonuses, while setting aside little money to absorb potential losses.

By vastly expanding the mandate of the Federal Reserve, Obama is giving the quasi-independent agency regulatory power, that is not not answerable to Congress.Just as all 15 other Czars of Obama creation have no one to report to other than the president.
If you're a company and have a complaint about how the Fed is regulating your business,good luck. You will get no satisfaction from our lawmakers.Ask the minority bond holders in the Chrysler and Gm "rapid" bankruptcy, or the dealers ho were summarily "fired" by the now government run car companies, how much satisfaction they got by complaining. It is said that some dismissed dealers were even given a gag order from the government! So much for free speech!

This is a nightmare for those who value free, independent markets. And it will get worse as time passes. Interpreting Obama's broad goals will be the job of federal regulators who may take the opportunity to impose even more draconian restrictions.

I see no other end result from these regulations except the loss of American pre-eminence in world finance. What set us apart from other nations was the freedom enjoyed by companies large and small to generate capital for investment, for business and job creation, and for new industries and technologies. Obama will mostly destroy that. Risk taking will be frowned upon, perhaps even made illegal in some ways. It was risk taking by entrepreneurs, financiers, markets, and investors that greased the wheels of capitalism and created a financial system where the entire world was welcome to join in the joy of wealth creation.
Where would be today if Henry Ford listen to government regulators who told him he could not risk the millions he spent developing the first assembly line for automobile production?
Or if the government regulators had told Bill Gates or Steve Jobs that their ideas for personal computers were not worth the risk of asking people to invest in their dreams?

Obama is marching us directly into government control of all forms of business and the way we live our lives, even how and when we die if he gets his socialised medicine scheme passed!
There is no doubt in any ones mind who examines what he has done and what he proposes to do. That Obama is a hard core progressive who believes in the government control over our lives. He and his band of sycophants believe we "rubes" do not have the brains to fend for ourselves, so they will tell us( really demand us) how we should live from cradle to grave!

OBAMA SPIN IS USED ONCE AGAIN!

The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is...Winston Churchill

During a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in the White House Oval Office yesterday.
President Barack Obama welcomed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's endorsement of Palestinian independence as a way to restart peace talks and called on Arab neighbors to join the discussion.

Obama also downplayed, as he does with anything that doeS not make him look good, the criticism from Arab neighbors that Netanyahu's conditions were predictable.
Obama was quoted as saying: "Well, first of all, I think it's important not to immediately assess the situation based on commentary the day after a speech."
This despite the fact that aides distributed glowing reaction to his US-Muslim speech the day after he delivered it in Cairo.

"I think any time an Israeli prime minister makes a statement, the immediate reaction tends to be negative on one side. If the other side is making a statement, oftentimes the reaction is negative in Israel," Obama said

However,Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the speech "closed the door to permanent status negotiations".
He added: "We ask the world not to be fooled by Netanyahue's use of the term Palestinian state because he qualified it.
"He declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel, said refugees would not be negotiated and that settlements would remain."

Yasser Abed Rabbo, an adviser to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, said: "The international community should confront this policy, through which Netanyahu wants to kill off any chance for peace.

"They must isolate and confront this policy which Mr Netanyahu is adopting and exert pressure on him so that he adheres to international legitimacy and the road map," he added, referring to a US and European-supported 2003 peace plan.

The Palestinians are irate over Mr Netanyahu's condition that they recognise Israel's legitimate right to exist as a Jewish state, ensuring Palestinian refugees and their descendents who have lived outside of Israel's borders since 1948 are not allowed to return.

Mr Netanyahu also said such a state must be demilitarised and promised that all of Jerusalem would remain as Israel's capital despite the Palestinian desire to make the eastern part of the city, a traditionally Arab area, their future capital one day.

The speech was intended as an answer to President Barack Obama's address to the Muslim world in Cairo earlier this month in which he said he expected Israel to make significant moves towards peace with its Palestinian neighbour.

By staying firm to his commitment to what he calls "the natural growth" of existing settlements, he bucked Mr Obama's call for a blanket settlement freeze. In embracing settlers as the country's "brothers and sisters" and reiterating his support for a united Jerusalem, he hoped to hold off a potential storm of dissent from Right-wing partners that keep his government from collapsing.
SOURCE: JERUSALEM POST

However a White House spokesman, trying to make a "purse out of a sows ear", said that Mr Obama "welcomed" Mr Netanyahu's speech and that his endorsement of the eventual creation of a Palestinian state was "an important step forward".Once again Obama spins a negative to an apparent positive to make him look like he is on top of the situation. This is not unlike his assertion that his "spendulus" program has saved hundreds of thousands of jobs despite the fact that the unemployment rate at 9.4% is the worst in the last 30 years!

A FOX GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE, AKA-WHITE HOUSE

The short Bio. on Norman Eisen shows that he worked for the prestigious law firm of Zuckerman Spaeder. He was a classmate of the sitting president. Just one more of the Harvard boys running the day to day operations of the Obama administration.
His professional history reveals that he spent much of his time defending people who were accused of ethical crimes and misdemeanors.
Therefore, it is understandable that Obama picked him for his "ethics" transitional team and now he heads the ethics "department" of the Obama White House.

The only problem with this picture is that apparently he did not do a very good job of vetting some of the choices Obama made for his Cabinet positions, and now it would appear that he has taken over the job of covering up dirty tricks perpetrated by "friends of Obama"!
At the end of only his second full week in office, President Barack Obama's administration slammed into Washington's unwritten law( pay your taxes) as two key government nominees withdrew under a cloud of tax problems.
Former Sen. Tom Daschle pulled out Tuesday as Obama's pick as Health and Human Services secretary, citing a growing chorus of criticism over his failure to fully pay taxes from 2005 through 2007He has since paid more than $140,000 including interest, then there was News of Nancy Killefer pulling her candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for the federal government, saying she didn't want her failure to submit payroll taxes for household help to be a distraction for the president. She had faced but subsequently settled a Washington city government tax lien of $946.69 on her home.
The one that slipped by, because he was described as being to valuable to turn down is Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. He had failed to pay taxes on a portion of his income when he worked for the International Monetary Fund. Geithner's tax history was the first to raise red flags in the Senate, but the Ethics man did not raise an objection so we have a tax "cheat" running the IRS!

The Obama administration pledged to focus on ethics and government openness and transparency.Apparently this has become a forgotten promise, as the firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin shows.

"The White House's decision to fire AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin came amid politically-charged tensions inside the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that runs AmeriCorps. Top executives at the Corporation, Walpin explained in an hour-long interview Saturday, were unhappy with his investigation into the misuse of AmeriCorps funds by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California and a prominent supporter of President Obama. Walpin's investigation also sparked conflict with the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento amid fears that the probe -- which could have resulted in Johnson being barred from ever winning another federal grant -- might stand in the way of the city receiving its part of billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. After weeks of standoff, Walpin, whose position as inspector general is supposed to be protected from influence by political appointees and the White House, was fired.

Walpin learned his fate Wednesday night. He was driving to an event in upstate New York when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform. "He said, 'Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it's time to move on,'" Walpin recalls. "Eisen said, 'You can either resign, or I'll tell you that we'll have to terminate you." Source: Amereican Thinker

Mr. Walpin, a 78 year old attorney known for his honesty and decisions that have never been influenced by politics over his more than 50 years in the law, had also just sent a report to the White House that he just finished. A report on the misuse of "stim" funds by the City University of New York. The two reports taken together would have placed Obama cronies in the sights of a criminal investigation. Hence, we have to be a least a little suspicion that the timing of his firing was "very interesting" as Walpin put it.

In case anyone thought this was still America, have a look at the official White House blog of Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, who addresses the problem of people exercising their First Amendment rights and speaking up against the way the government has been wasting our money under the guise of "stimulus":

"First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program." Source: Washington Examiner

A White House spokesman says the administration would not immediately offer any more details of Eisen's role in the White House Counsel's office. Now we know he is one of BHO's "hatchet" men!

Eisen, was co-founder of the good government group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW),and has previously represented federal officials and agencies on ethics issues.

According to his bio on Zuckerman Spaeder's Web site, Eisen was co-chairman of the firm's public client practice. He has assisted public officials investigating the subprime lending crisis; examining student loan marketing activities; and managing complex securities litigation.

Eisen also has represented government clients to "conduct internal investigations of their offices, represented them in disputes with the federal government and translated their policy ideas into statutes, regulations, executive orders, and programs."

Additionally, he has defended cases involving violations of government ethics rules and related misconduct, and now he is a point man for cover ups for Friends of Obama and their crimes!

OFF THE BOOKS DEAL WITH RUSSIA?

IT IS NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT OUR COUNTRY HAS A MORE THAN 13 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT, AND IT IS GROWING BY MORE THAN 3.8 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY.

Now comes the news that the Obama administration, that is restricting our exploration of crude oil resources, is helping Russia develop a pipe line to aid the Russians in selling gas to Western Europe to the tune of billions of dollars.

A report in the Tokyo Times, June 9, 2009, demonstrates the way Obama is furthering his "one world" vision at the expense of the U.S. taxpayers. It appears that he is He## bent on bankrupting this country while destroying the free enterprise system!


"Germany's ex-Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a legend in Russia. He serves Gazprom's interests for a measly couple of million euros a year, sits in on sessions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and writes books about his staunch friendship with "Genosse Wladimir," who, in the not-so-distant past, earned himself the well-deserved nickname of "Stasi" among business circles in gangster-ridden St. Petersburg.

But it is not immediately obvious whether it is Schroeder licking Vladimir Putin's boots nowadays or vice versa. The two are building, or trying to build, the Nord Stream gas pipeline, an exceptionally costly project that satisfies twin strategic objectives. Demonstratively hostile to the interests of both Belarus and Ukraine, the pipeline is intended to ensure that these countries are under Russia's energy thumb, regardless of who is in power.

As a bonus, the pipeline will also consolidate the Russian economy's status as an appendage of Germany's — its supplier of natural resources. Some of Schroeder's predecessors as German chancellor sought to attain the same objective by rather different means.

The Kremlin's achievements in securing the help of Americans willing to offer their influence are equally impressive. Indeed, the Obama administration's Russia policy is being nurtured with advice from people who have no official position in the administration but who do have close business ties to Russia and the Kremlin: Henry Kissinger, James A. Baker, Thomas Graham and Dimitri Simes.
The first two are major geo-politicians; Graham and Simes are respected as outstanding Russia specialists. They write key reports for the administration, and shuttle between Moscow and Washington, coordinating the parameters of the Obama administration's effort to "reset" the bilateral relationship.

Like Schroeder, all these people are not economically disinterested. Baker is a consultant for the two companies at the commanding heights of the Russian economy, Gazprom and Rosneft. The Kissinger Associates lobbying group, whose Russian section is headed by Graham, feeds into the Kissinger- Primakov working group, a quasi- private sector effort, blessed by Putin, to deepen ties between Russia and the United States.Is this deal even known by the U.S. Congress, that is the big question?

It is highly instructive to read the recommendations of these people and groups, as they unobtrusively render the objectives of their Kremlin clients into a language familiar to American leaders.

Graham's latest contribution, "Resurgent Russia and U.S. Purposes," is most revealing in this respect. The author finds the government of a "Russia getting up off its knees" to consist of progressive modernizers fully aware of the challenges facing their country as it attempts to "return to the great powers club."

To become a genuinely developed and "modern country," Graham continues, "in the coming decade Russia will need to invest at least one trillion dollars in modernizing its infrastructure. America and the West in general have a vital interest in seeing the modernization of Russia succeed. The lion's share of the technologies, knowhow, and a substantial proportion of the investment, needs to come from Europe and the U.S."
In addition to the technology and investments, Graham quietly slips in a foreign policy suggestion for the Obama administration that is sure to please the Kremlin: "Finlandizing" Ukraine. Unless that sort of appeasement is pursued, he warns, Russia will continue to oppose the U.S. "wherever and whenever it can."

According to Graham, "At the extreme, a weak Russia, with its vast resources and sparse population east of the Urals, could become the object of competition among the great powers, notably China and the U.S."

That unspoken help-us-develop-or- we'll-let-the-Chinese-do-it threat is a logical development of Putin's homily at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, where he advocated decisive action to end the world economic crisis. His recipe? Western countries should write off half a trillion dollars' worth of debt owed to them by the Russian state corporations run by his pals from the Dresden KGB and the Ozero dacha cooperative. But no amount of money will succeed in modernizing Putin's kleptocratic regime, which has already squandered trillions in oil wealth.

Simply put, the Putin system is institutionally and intellectually antithetical to the task of modernization.

Graham's only error in his presentation is his attempt to frighten the administration with a hypothetical confrontation between the U.S. and China over Russian resources. This is not his area of specialization. Kissinger works personally with the Chinese account, jointly propounding with his longtime rival Zbigniew Brzezinski the notion, so seductive for an America growing weary of its imperial burden, of a global Big Two.

Here is a recent sample of Kissinger's geopolitical arts: "The role of China in a new world order is crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system.
The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations" after the war.

No doubt Kissinger believes every word he wrote, but his ideas also honestly articulate the aspirations of his customers. It's just that not all customers have the same motives.

One wants to get his hooks into a further trillion dollars that it can pick away at, while the other wants to become "a central construct of the system of international relations." In both cases, the customers are getting the influence for which they are paying".

This is certainly not a story you will find in our newspapers or on TV, as the propaganda arm for Obama does not want to let the people in the USA know that he is more concerned with One World success through Progressive-ism, than he is OUR own Constitutional government as it stands today!

DISTURBING INFORMATION FROM JAPAN ABOUT OBAMA'S PROGESSIVNESS

IT IS NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT OUR COUNTRY HAS A MORE THAN 13 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT, AND IT IS GROWING BY MORE THAN 3.8 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY.

Now comes the news that the Obama administration, that is restricting our exploration of crude oil resources, is helping Russia develop a pipe line to aid the Russians in selling gas to Western Europe to the tune of billions of dollars.

A report in the Tokyo Times, June 9, 2009, demonstrates the way Obama is furthering his "one world" vision at the expense of the U.S. taxpayers. It appears that he is He## bent on bankrupting this country while destroying the free enterprise system!


"Germany's ex-Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a legend in Russia. He serves Gazprom's interests for a measly couple of million euros a year, sits in on sessions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and writes books about his staunch friendship with "Genosse Wladimir," who, in the not-so-distant past, earned himself the well-deserved nickname of "Stasi" among business circles in gangster-ridden St. Petersburg.

But it is not immediately obvious whether it is Schroeder licking Vladimir Putin's boots nowadays or vice versa. The two are building, or trying to build, the Nord Stream gas pipeline, an exceptionally costly project that satisfies twin strategic objectives. Demonstratively hostile to the interests of both Belarus and Ukraine, the pipeline is intended to ensure that these countries are under Russia's energy thumb, regardless of who is in power.

As a bonus, the pipeline will also consolidate the Russian economy's status as an appendage of Germany's — its supplier of natural resources. Some of Schroeder's predecessors as German chancellor sought to attain the same objective by rather different means.

The Kremlin's achievements in securing the help of Americans willing to offer their influence are equally impressive. Indeed, the Obama administration's Russia policy is being nurtured with advice from people who have no official position in the administration but who do have close business ties to Russia and the Kremlin: Henry Kissinger, James A. Baker, Thomas Graham and Dimitri Simes.
The first two are major geo-politicians; Graham and Simes are respected as outstanding Russia specialists. They write key reports for the administration, and shuttle between Moscow and Washington, coordinating the parameters of the Obama administration's effort to "reset" the bilateral relationship.

Like Schroeder, all these people are not economically disinterested. Baker is a consultant for the two companies at the commanding heights of the Russian economy, Gazprom and Rosneft. The Kissinger Associates lobbying group, whose Russian section is headed by Graham, feeds into the Kissinger- Primakov working group, a quasi- private sector effort, blessed by Putin, to deepen ties between Russia and the United States.Is this deal even known by the U.S. Congress, that is the big question?

It is highly instructive to read the recommendations of these people and groups, as they unobtrusively render the objectives of their Kremlin clients into a language familiar to American leaders.

Graham's latest contribution, "Resurgent Russia and U.S. Purposes," is most revealing in this respect. The author finds the government of a "Russia getting up off its knees" to consist of progressive modernizers fully aware of the challenges facing their country as it attempts to "return to the great powers club."

To become a genuinely developed and "modern country," Graham continues, "in the coming decade Russia will need to invest at least one trillion dollars in modernizing its infrastructure. America and the West in general have a vital interest in seeing the modernization of Russia succeed. The lion's share of the technologies, knowhow, and a substantial proportion of the investment, needs to come from Europe and the U.S."
In addition to the technology and investments, Graham quietly slips in a foreign policy suggestion for the Obama administration that is sure to please the Kremlin: "Finlandizing" Ukraine. Unless that sort of appeasement is pursued, he warns, Russia will continue to oppose the U.S. "wherever and whenever it can."

According to Graham, "At the extreme, a weak Russia, with its vast resources and sparse population east of the Urals, could become the object of competition among the great powers, notably China and the U.S."

That unspoken help-us-develop-or- we'll-let-the-Chinese-do-it threat is a logical development of Putin's homily at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, where he advocated decisive action to end the world economic crisis. His recipe? Western countries should write off half a trillion dollars' worth of debt owed to them by the Russian state corporations run by his pals from the Dresden KGB and the Ozero dacha cooperative. But no amount of money will succeed in modernizing Putin's kleptocratic regime, which has already squandered trillions in oil wealth.

Simply put, the Putin system is institutionally and intellectually antithetical to the task of modernization.

Graham's only error in his presentation is his attempt to frighten the administration with a hypothetical confrontation between the U.S. and China over Russian resources. This is not his area of specialization. Kissinger works personally with the Chinese account, jointly propounding with his longtime rival Zbigniew Brzezinski the notion, so seductive for an America growing weary of its imperial burden, of a global Big Two.

Here is a recent sample of Kissinger's geopolitical arts: "The role of China in a new world order is crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system.
The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations" after the war.

No doubt Kissinger believes every word he wrote, but his ideas also honestly articulate the aspirations of his customers. It's just that not all customers have the same motives.

One wants to get his hooks into a further trillion dollars that it can pick away at, while the other wants to become "a central construct of the system of international relations." In both cases, the customers are getting the influence for which they are paying".

This is certainly not a story you will find in our newspapers or on TV, as the propaganda arm for Obama does not want to let the people in the USA know that he is more concerned with One World success through Progressive-ism, than he is OUR own Constitutional government as it stands today!

WHAT IS THERE IN THE UN RESOLUTION THAT CHEERS HILLARY?

All the media are highlighting the fact that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is pleased with the UN resolution "condemning" North Korea for the nuclear tests and the provocative missile launches.

But it appears to me that Clinton is either putting on a good face for the Obama administration, or is naive enough to believe that the UN resolution is more than just useless words on paper!

The Wall Street Journal has an article on the Web today that illustrates how weal the watered down version of the UN reprimand had to be to get China, Russia and other Communists nations who sit on the UN Security Council, to sign on to the worthless document.

"Friday's UN resolution was weaker than the one the U.S. and its allies initially sought.

The new text prohibits the export of all North Korean weapons and the import into North Korea of all arms, excluding small arms, if they are reported to the U.N. That exception was a key demand of China, which exports small arms to North Korea, a Western diplomat said.

Moscow and Beijing agreed to the U.S. draft after language on inspecting North Korean cargo ships in international waters was diluted. Russia and China feared that inspections on the high seas could spark a military conflict with Pyongyang, a Western diplomat said.

"We believe sanctions such as cargo inspections are very complicated and sensitive and countries involved must act prudently and with sufficient grounds," said Zhang Yesui, China's U.N. envoy.

Under the compromise, the resolution says the Security Council "calls upon" -- instead of the earlier "authorizes" -- all U.N. nations to inspect the ships for nuclear-related material and other contraband, with the consent of the vessel's flag state. Flag states that refuse to have a ship boarded must direct the vessel to "an appropriate and convenient port" for inspection -- a loophole that could allow nations both to avoid inspections or to deny ships entry.

At a White House news conference, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., acknowledged that the sanctions don't guarantee a North Korean ship will divert to a nearby port, and the resolution doesn't allow the use of military force"
So essentially the sanctions are worthless!



Complicating the North Korean nuclear situation,until now, South Korean presidents have unreservedly backed the six-party talks -- a forum that includes the U.S., the two Koreas, Japan, China and Russia. The multilateral group was launched by the Bush administration in 2003 after Pyongyang withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and it has been enthusiastically supported by the Obama White House. All six parties say they agree about the need to "denuclearize" the Korean peninsula. Yet the North is believed to have two nuclear programs: a plutonium program and a highly enriched uranium program that Pyongyang alternately denies or boasts about.

The talks -- only the latest iteration of an over twenty year effort to stunt North Korea's nuclear program,haven't worked. And Mr. Lee, speaking at the president's private offices, is the first national leader to publicly acknowledge their failure.

"The North Koreans have gained, or bought, a lot of time through the six-party-talks framework to pursue their own agenda. I think it's important now, at this critical point in time, for us not to repeat any past mistakes," he says. Now, it's "very important for the remaining five countries -- which excludes North Korea -- to come to an agreement on the way forward."

Mr. Lee is obliquely referring to the conflicting goals of the six-party talk participants. South Korea's stated goal is the denuclearization and ultimate reunification of the Korean peninsula. This was the U.S. position under Bush, but now that Obama has indicated that we can accept Iran having a nuclear program.It is not clear that the Obama administration will strive for this result.

China and Russia don't want to see the Kim regime fall, fearing floods of refugees, weapons proliferation, and, most importantly, the potential collapse of a buffer state between them and the democratic nations of North Asia. China has proved an especially difficult negotiating partner since it has served as the North's main economic support since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
And I believe that Putin's Russia was complicit in aiding North Korea with their nuclear program.

South Korea's President, Mr. Lee says, "the United Nations resolution calling for increased sanctions looks weak".

What about stricter financial sanctions, like the kind the U.S. Treasury successfully leveled against Banco Delta Asia (a North Korea enabler) in Macau in 2005? That is "one type of sanction that we can level." Should the U.S. add the North to the list of terror-sponsoring nations? "That in itself may have some symbolic meaning. But in actuality, having North Korea on the list or not will not make really much of a difference," he says.

Mr. Lee added that the bottom line: "Our ultimate objective is to try to convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program, but we must also ask ourselves: What do the North Koreans want in return for giving up their nuclear weapons program? I think this is the type of discussion that the five countries should be engaging in now."

It is not even on the table for consideration, but I believe the USA cannot talk, talk, talk until the North Koreans have the nuclear weapons that can be fitted to the long range missiles that they are developing, before we consider a pre-emptive strike on their missile bases. Or do we wait until the missiles start falling on Alaska and Hawaii?

And to highlite the type of reaction that North Korea had to the UN sanctions there is this from the Japoanese News Agency,Kyodo News Agency.
"North Korea reacted with anger Saturday to a U.N. resolution meant to punish the country for its latest nuclear test, saying it will ''weaponize'' more plutonium, begin uranium enrichment and react militarily to blockades.
In a Foreign Ministry statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency, North Korea also called the resolution, "yet another vile product of the U.S.-led offensive aimed at undermining North Korea's ideology and system".

NOW WE ARE NEGOTIATING WITH TERRORIST GROUPS

From the "Long War Journal" I learned that not only is Obama planning on closing Gitmo prison, there are other releases little noticed by the Main stream media.
The following is an excerpt from an article detailing the release of a leader of a known Iranian terrorist group affiliated with and a direct connection to Hezbollah.
It illustrates that the Bush and Clinton doctrine of not negotiating with terrorists who hold hostages is now being abrogated by the Obama administration.
It appears the technique of extending the hand of friendship and open dialog, now is extended to known terrorist leaders and groups

"The US military has released a senior member of a deadly terror group backed by Iran that has been directly implicated in the kidnapping and murder of five US soldiers in Karbala during a complex operation in early 2007.

Laith al Qazali was freed last weekend "as part of a reconciliation effort" as well as an attempt to secure the release of captive British hostages, according to a report in The New York Times.

Laith is the brother of Qais Qazali, the commander of the Qazali network, which is better known as the Asaib al Haq, or the League of the Righteous. Qais Qazali was a spokesperson and senior aide to Mahdi Army leader Muqtada al Sadr. The terror group, which was part of the Mahdi Army until the spring of 2008, has received extensive financial and military support from Iran's Qods Force, the external division that backs Hezbollah and is tasked with supporting the Khomeinist Islamist revolution.

The League of the Righteous was directly implicated by General David Petraeus as being behind the January 2007 attack on the Provincial Joint Coordination Center in Karbala as well as other high-profile terror attacks in Iraq. Five US soldiers were killed during the Karbala attack and subsequent kidnapping attempt. The US soldiers were executed after US and Iraqi security forces closed in on the assault team.

The attack on the Karbala Provincial Joint Coordination Center was a complex, sophisticated operation. The assault team, led by tactical commander Azhar al Dulaimi, was trained in a mock-up of the center that was built in Iran. The unit had excellent intelligence and received equipment that made them appear to be US soldiers. Some of the members of the assault team are said to have spoken English.

Also detained during the raid was Ali Mussa Daqduq, a senior Hezbollah operative who was tasked by Iran to organize the Special Groups and "rogue" Mahdi Army cells along the lines of Lebanese Hezbollah. Daqduq is a 24-year veteran of Hezbollah, and he commanded both a Hezbollah special operations unit and the security detail of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Azhar al Dulaimi was killed in a raid in Baghdad in May 2007.

The US military claimed that Laith's release is part of a reconciliation effort with the League of the Righteous, but the real aim appears to be the release of five British hostages who were captured by the group.

"As part of a reconciliation effort between the government of Iraq and Asaib al Haq, the decision has been made to release Laith Qazali," Lieutenant Colonel Brian Maka told The New York Times. "Asaib al Haq has pledged to representatives of the Iraqi prime minister to give up violence and move the group towards peaceful integration into Iraqi society. An unconditional cease-fire will be undertaken by the group."

But the League of the Righteous has long demanded that the US military release Qais, Laith, and other members of the terror group in exchange for the five Britons captured in March 2007 during another complex operation at Iraq's Finance Ministry.

The real purpose of the release of Laith was explained by Sami al Askari, a spokesman for Prime minister Nouri al Maliki. The issue of reconciliation is merely a pretext for a prisoner / hostage exchange.

"This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners," Askari told The New York Times. "So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join in the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned."

A one-to-one exchange of Shia terrorists for the British hostages will take place over the next week. It is unclear if Qais or Daqduq will be released in the exchange, but in the past, the League of the Righteous has been adamant that they be released.

The release of the League of the Qazalis and other senior leaders of the terror group does not bode well for the improved security situation in Baghdad and wider Iraq as the US prepares to withdraw from Iraq's cities. The Iraqi military dealt the terror group and its Iranian backers a deadly blow during the offensive against the Shia terror groups in central and southern Iraq that began in Basrah in March 2008 and resulted in thousands of Mahdi Army fighters killed and thousands more wounded, and the death of several of its senior military leadership. The movement itself was fractured and was forced to pull out from provincial elections.

The League of the Righteous still conducts operations against Iraqi and US forces in Baghdad and central and southern Iraq. The group has not honored previous ceasefire agreements, and the release of its senior leadership may give the group new life.

Both the Iraqi government and the US military have said Iran has backed various Shia terror groups, including elements of the Mahdi Army. While the Iranian government has denied the charges, Iraqi and US forces have detained dozens of Iranian Qods Force officers and operatives, captured numerous Shia terrorist leaders under Iranian command, and have found ample documentation as well as Iranian-made and Iranian-supplied weapons.

US and Iraqi forces have captured several high-level Qods Force officers inside Iraq since late 2006. Among those captured are Mahmud Farhadi, one of the three Iranian regional commanders in the Ramazan Corps; Ali Mussa Daqduq, a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative; Qais Qazali, the leader of the Qazali Network which is better known as the Asaib al Haq or the League of the Righteous.

Since mid-October 2008, Iraqi and US forces have killed one Qods Force operative and captured 14 during raids throughout southern and central Iraq.

Qods Force, the special operations branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, has supported various Shia militias and terror groups inside Iraq, including the Mahdi Army. Qods Force helped to build the Mahdi Army along the same lines as Lebanese Hezbollah. Iran denies the charges, but captive Shia terrorists admit to being recruited by Iranian agents and then transported into Iran for training.

Iran established the Ramazan Corps immediately after the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime to direct operations inside Iraq. The US military says Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah have helped establish, fund, train, arm, and provide operational support for Shia terror groups such as the Hezbollah Brigades and the League of the Righteous. The US military refers to these groups as well as the Iranian-backed elements of the Mahdi Army as the "Special Groups." These groups train in camps inside Iran.

US military officers believe that Iran is ramping up its operations inside Iraq after its surrogates suffered a major defeat at the hands of the Iraqi military during the spring and summer of 2008. Iraqi troops went on the offensive against the Mahdi Army and other Iranian-backed terror groups in Baghdad, Basrah, and central and southern Iraq. More than 2,000 Mahdi Army members were killed and thousands more were wounded.

The League of the Righteous receives funding, training, weapons, and direction from the Qods Force. The League of the Righteous conducts attacks with the deadly armor-piercing explosively formed projectiles known as EFPs, as well as with the more conventional roadside bombs.

The size of the League of the Righteous is unknown, but hundreds of members of the group were killed, captured, or fled to Iran during the Iraqi government offensive against the Mahdi Army from March to July of 2008, according to the US military.

Sadr is looking to pull the rank and file of the League back into the fold of the Sadr political movement. Earlier this year Sadr issued a message rejecting the US-Iraqi security agreement and said he "extends his hand to the mujahideen in the so-called Asaib but not their leaderships who have been distracted by politics and mortal life from the [two late] Sadrs and the interests of Iraq and Iraqis."

The Hezbollah Brigades, or Kata'ib Hezbollah, has been active in and around Baghdad for more than a year. The terror group has increased its profile by conducting attacks against US and Iraqi forces, using the deadly explosively-formed penetrator land mines and improvised rocket-assisted mortars, which have been described as flying improvised explosive devices. The Hezbollah Brigades has posted videos of these attacks on the Internet.


The terror group is an offshoot of the Iranian-trained Special Groups, the US military said last summer. Hezbollah Brigades receives funding, training, logistics, guidance, and material support from the Qods Force.

The US and Iraqi military believe the Special Groups are preparing to re-initiate fighting as their leaders and operatives are beginning to filter back into Iraq from Iran. On Feb. 4, Lieutenant General Lloyd Austin, the deputy commander of Multinational Forces Iraq, said that Iran continues to arm, fund, and train the Special Groups, and that munitions traced back to Iran continue to be uncovered in Iraq. Recent intelligence and the finds of new Iranian caches "lead us to believe that Iranian support activity is still ongoing," Austin warned.

In my not so humble opinion this is just another example of the way the Obama administration is making our country and our troops in harms way less safe. This is all wrong, and it must stop!!

ANTI-WAR SENTIMENTS PROVOKE MURDER OF ARMY RECRUITER

The media is full of the claim that the murder of the guard in the Holocaust Museum and the shooting death of late term abortion doctor Tiller, was the result of right wing policies. Most Media "twitts" laid the blame at the feet of Conservative personalities like O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Hannity. An absurdity beyond comprehension, but typical of the left, and reminiscent of the sly way that president Clinton tied the can to the Conservative movement after the bombing in Oklahoma City.
It also is unbalanced reporting that the television has for two days shown a picture of the white killer, but a search of the scant coverage by TV and Media of the killer of the Army recruiter shows no picture of the Black Muslim perpatrator!

But the media has assiduously omitted any references to the killing of the Army recruiter and the wounding of his Army buddy at the recruiting center in West Little Rock, Ark.shopping center. I absolutely believe the media and politicians with the aid of the anti-war demonstrators have a lot to do with the mind set of the converted Muslim killing of the Army recruiter, as this article excerpt from the New Media Journal illustrates.

"A Muslim convert charged with fatally shooting an American soldier at a military recruiting center said Tuesday that he doesn't consider the killing a murder because US military action in the Middle East made the killing justified. "I do feel I'm not guilty," Abdulhakim Muhammad told The Associated Press in a collect call from the Pulaski County jail. "I don't think it was murder, because murder is when a person kills another person without justified reason." Pvt. William Andrew Long, 23, of Conway had just completed basic training and was volunteering at the west Little Rock recruiting office before starting an assignment in South Korea.

Muhammad told the AP he admitted to his actions to police and said he was retaliating against the US military. "Yes, I did tell the police upon my arrest that this was an act of retaliation, and not a reaction on the soldiers personally," Muhammad said. He called it "a act, for the sake of God, for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the world, and also a retaliation on US military." In the interview, Muhammad also disputed his lawyer's claim that he had been "radicalized" in a Yemeni prison and said fellow prisoners that some call terrorists were actually "very good Muslim brothers." He also said he didn't specifically plan the shootings that morning. "It's been on my mind for awhile. It wasn't nothing planned really. It was just the heat of the moment, you know," said Muhammad.

Muhammad, 23, said he wanted revenge for claims that American military personnel had desecrated copies of the Quran and killed or raped Muslims. "For this reason, no Muslim, male or female, sane or insane, little, big, small, old can accept or tolerate," he said..."US soldiers are killing innocent Muslim men and women. We believe that we have to strike back. We believe in eye for an eye. We don't believe in turning the other cheek," he said. Asked whether he considered the shootings at the recruiting center an act of war, Muhammad said "I didn't know the soldiers personally, but yes, it was an attack of retaliation. And I feel that other attacks, not by me or people I know, but definitely Muslims in this country and others elsewhere, are going to attack for doing those things they did," especially desecrating the Quran. If the media had not reported the alleged desecration of the Koran by those in Aba Grab prison. This obviously disturbed Muslim would not have had the reason to kill!
Abdulhakim Muhammad of Little Rock told The Associated Press that FBI agents visited him in the Pulaski County Jail and asked if other attacks were planned. Muhammad said he told the agents he didn't know of any specific plans.

However, he warned of danger ahead!!!

"I don't know anything that's in the works," Muhammad said in a collect telephone call from the jail. "We're not going to turn the other cheek. It's definitely not the end of it." An FBI-Homeland Security intelligence assessment document obtained by the AP last week suggested the gunman may have considered targeting other locations, including Jewish and Christian sites in several eastern U.S. cities.

FBI-Homeland Security intelligence assessment on the suspect obtained by the news agency says officers found maps to Jewish organizations, a child care center, a Baptist church, a post office and military recruiting centers in the southeastern U.S., New York and Philadelphia.

It was common place for the propaganda arm of the Left, the Media, to highlight any negative news about the military. Especially when Bush was in the Oval Office. Now that Obama has become the "Messiah" for the left leaning Media, you do not see or read as many negatives about what is happening in Afghanistan or Iraq. Apparently the Media has taken the position that our Country is not at war with radical Muslims. Why not, Obama calls the terrorists by a absurd name that I will not even give credence in this blog!

Not only are we at war with radical Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are at war within our own country with those who are home grown radicals that were aided and abetted by the Media.

HOW CAN SO MANY LAWYERS BE SO DUMB!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Today's Americans, enticed, perhaps enchanted, by charismatic speeches, are ceding so much power to Washington, and like yesteryear's Germans are building the Trojan Horse for a future tyrant. SOURCE:WALTER WILLIAMS

A sage once said; "Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach. Those who can’t do either, “raise consciousness”. Those who can’t do anything go into politics. Meaningful term limits are long overdue.

The burning question in my mind is how can we have 60 lawyers in the U.S. Senate and 204 Lawyers in the U.S. Congress, who do not object to the obvious violation of the Constitution being perpetrated by the president.
Obama has created 17 czars and the 18th is waiting in the wings. He will be the czar for compensation.
All of these czars are responsible only to the president, and that makes them a government within the Constituted government.
The House of Representatives is supposed, by our Constitution, to appropriate all funds for government programs.

The framers of the Constitution detailed the duties and reasons for the delegation of those duties to the Congressional House of Representative.The House has an equal status with the Senate on most matters, but a superior status in tax and spending.

House of Representatives, Duties as detailed by our Constitutional framers includes the following.

15 May 1789 Annals 1:65
"The Constitution, having authorized the House of Representatives alone to originate money bills, places an important trust in our hands, which, as their protectors, we ought not to part with. I do not mean to imply that the Senate are less to be trusted than this house; but the Constitution, no doubt for wise purposes, has given the immediate representatives of the people a control over the whole government in this particular, which, for their interest, they ought not to let out of their hands.

The Constitution places the power in the House of originating money bills. The principal reason why the Constitution had made this distinction was, because they were chosen by the people, and supposed to be the best acquainted with their interest and ability. In order to make them more particularly acquainted with these objects, the democratic branch of the legislature consisted of a greater number, and were chosen for a shorter period; that so they might revert more frequently to the mass of the people".

As lawyers, each and every one of the 264 current members of the U.S. House and Senate must certainly understand that what Obama has done by appointing czars, who are responsible to no one but him, is a direct violation of the Constitution the president swore to uphold when he took the office of President.
He has appointed special "advisors" who will work from inside the White House on healthcare, the economy, energy and urban issues, with more to come.
Source: Answers.com

Why then, has no one objected to Obama taking away from the House of Representatives their Constitutional rights? He appears to be subverting the authority of Congress, and concentrating too much power in the presidency! These "petty dictators" apparently plan to expand government's tentacles into nearly every nook and cranny of American government, business, and personal life,and control the purse strings of trillions of tax payers money.

In my un-legal opinion, Obama has committed an impeachable offense and nobody in Congress is even voicing an objection! Apparently, the virtue of decency and respect for the rule of law has been subverted by the quest for power, and in so doing we may loose our Country as our parents and grandparents experienced it!

Our government, while having neither moral nor constitutional authority, has the legal and physical might to take the property of one American and give it to another. And Obama has been doing this since taking over the Oval Office at a rate that exceedes all the money spent by Bush for the Iraq war and his Tarp program!

The unanticipated problem with this agenda is that as Congress uses its might to take what belongs to one American to give to another, what President Obama calls "spreading the wealth around," more and more Americans will want to participate in the looting. It will ultimately produce something none of us wants: absolute control over our lives. They call it fascism!

THEY SAY HE LOOKS LIKE KING TUT AND HE ACTS LIKE HE IS!

Not only our Media and Press were impressed with Obama's speech in Cairo. The Arab world, and especially his audience at Cairo University were impressed and pleased with what our president said.
In part the credit for the thunderous reception Obama's words received was due to his Muslim advisor who had the following input into his speech.
The Der Spiegel newspaper interviewed Ms.Mogahed, who is part of the Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, not a direct adviser. Her role is to provide ideas, mostly in the form of memos and reports. But she volunteered that she played a role in making recommendations to the speechwriters.

She told Der Spiegel the following:
"I suggested three main themes. One is to continue building on the theme of mutual respect. My recommendation was to recognize that Islam has made and makes a positive contribution to civilization. The second major theme was that of cooperation and the idea of equal partnership. A third theme that I referred to was empathy: Even if we do not share their opinion, we should try to understand their point of view". She didn't have to tell him that, since he has already bowed to king Abdullah!

Ms.Mogahed said she really felt very satisfied, because much of what we recommended made it into his speech. The president tried to heal a deep wound that Muslims have.What about the wounds Americans have from 9/11/01?She said at the same time, he didn't deny what America stands for. His tone and his respect exceeded the expectations of most Muslims. It was a real surprise that our president made no mention of the sacrifices Americans made for Muslims in Bosnia, and that Americans rid the world of the killer tyrant Saddam.

He got a standing ovation in Cairo. People were yelling out: "We love you, Obama. Actually, it reminded me of Obama's inauguration in Washington. It was the same excitement".

When asked by the reporter if it was an historic speech?
Ms. Mogahed said: "From the minute he came on stage, I knew that it was an historic moment, especially because he began the speech by saying (the Arabic greeting) "assalaamu alaykum." I knew that it has never happened before -- and perhaps it won't happen again -- that an American president addresses the people like this".
An American president who says our Constitution is flawed, hardly surprises me that he uses Arabic language from the Koran to please his audience and feed his large ego!

President Obama never used the word terror in his speech. Instead he chose to use the term "violent extremism." This was an insult to the families who had relatives killed by terrorists on 9/11/01!
When a Muslim with obvious biased opinions advises the U.S. President, Barack Obama, on Muslim affairs.
It appears that Obama is more concerned with the feelings and opinions of Muslims than he is of the concerns of all other religions who experience religious persecution in most Muslim Countries.
Obama depicted radical Islamic extremism as a neutral threat, and didn't connect it with Islam. He mentioned it as a threat that affects Muslims at least as much at it does the US, and he even mentioned that Muslims are the main victims of violent extremism! WRONG!!

It seems to me that Obama confuses the victims of collateral damage with the victims of naked aggression caused by terrorists. One need only recall that although the fundamentalist Islamic perpetrators of the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 were unsuccessful at mass slaughter, the mastermind of the plot said he was attempting
to kill 250,000 people by collapsing the towers to punish the United States for its policies in the Middle East. (In a follow-on attack, the group planned to blow up buildings and key transportation nodes in New York City--UN headquarters,
a U.S. government building, two tunnels underneath the Hudson River, and the George Washington Bridge--which would have inflicted substantial casualties.)

Plans for another such catastrophic attack on the United States were also uncovered.
Muslim terrorists planned a nerve gas attack at Disneyland when it was most crowded, during a fireworks display. Fortunately, U.S. law enforcement officials, tipped off by Japanese police,apprehended members of the group before they could perpetrate
the attack.

Two of the best known Muslim terrorist incidents were the suicide bombings by Hezbollah of the U.S. embassy and the Marine barracks in Beirut. Beirut barracks bombing (October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon) two truck bombs struck separate buildings housing United States and French military forces—members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon—killing 299 servicemen, including 220 U.S. Marines. The organization Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the bombing, but that organization is thought to have been a "nom de guerre" for Hezbollah, or a group that would later become part of Hezbolla receiving help from the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In Somalia in 1993 the now-infamous Osama bin Laden trained the Somali tribesmen who conducted ambushes of U.S. peacekeeping forces in support of Somali clan leader Mohammed Farah Aideed. The result of the attack was 18 dead U.S.Army Rangers and U.S. withdrawal from Somalia. Osama bin Laden, a Saudi, did not merely object to U.S. intervention in Somalia. His main reason for attacking U.S. targets was
the American presence in Saudi Arabia and Washington's support for Israel. Bin Laden was allegedly linked to the 1996 truck bombing of the U.S. military apartment complex, Khobar Towers, in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 U.S. airmen and
wounded 515 others. He was also allegedly linked to the
simultaneous bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania
in 1998 and other attacks.

It seems to me that Obama ignores those things that make Muslim terrorists look like the monsters they are! His sympathy is directed toward the wrong people!

DOUBLE TALK FROM OBAMA ADMINISTRATION RE: ISRAEL

In Israel, free men and women are every day demonstrating the power of courage and faith. Back in 1948 when Israel was founded, pundits claimed the new country could never survive. Today, no one questions that. Israel is a land of stability and democracy in a region of tyranny and unrest...Ronald Reagan

That is until now! Sunday, PA officials said the Palestinian Authority will not return to the negotiating table with Israel unless Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu endorses the two-state solution and freezes construction in the West Bank settlements.

The officials said Abbas had relayed this position to the US during his recent visit to Washington, where he held talks with Obama.

One of the officials expressed hope that the looming crisis between the Obama administration and Netanyahu over the future of the peace process would lead to the collapse of the Israeli government.

"Netanyahu's government is bad for the peace process," the official told The Jerusalem Post. Peace for the sake of accomplishing a political promise is no peace at all! But it appears to me that Obama sides with the Arabs more than any previous president.

Now that the campaign for the Oval Office has been won by Obama, he has begun to use his middle name, Hussein. During the campaign it was conspicuously absent, and anyone who referred to his middle name was accused of trying to identify him as a Muslim.
But in his trip to Saudi Arabia and Egypt Obama repeatedly mentioned his childhood learning from the Koran which he quoted frequently.
He used his relatives Muslim experience to ingratiate himself with King Abdulla and the Egyptian attenders at his speech in the auditorium of Cairo University. Which was broadcast over AlJazeera to the Arab World.


And now by direct orders from BHO, George Mitchell is on his way to Israel, the Palestinian territories and Jordan to talk about stopping the Israeli settlements.
On his way he stopped off at the Donors to the Palestinians Group meeting.
He spoke at the PA donors' conference in Oslo, Norway. A group dedicated at providing support for the Palestinian Authority.
Mitchell said it was important to build up Palestinian institutions so that an independent and viable Palestinian state could soon be in place.
Mr Mitchell also said that President Obama has made clear to him and his administration, that a two-state solution is the only viable one.
The president reinforced this position by repeating his call for a two-state solution and a halt to Jewish settlement activity during a visit to Germany and Egypt last week.

But on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he would make a major speech on peace and security issues later this month. He has also said he is ready to meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and pursue a three-track peace process focusing on economic, security and political issues. This indicates he does not intend to be pushed into a hasty agreement!
Mr Abbas replied that renewed negotiations would be pointless unless Mr Netanyahu first endorsed the notion of Palestinian statehood,and halted the expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank.

How about Mr. Abbas and the rest of the Palestinian leaders renouncing their threat to annihilate Israel, and stop their terrorist incursions into Israel as they did today when they attempted to perpetrate a bomb attack that involved horses strapped with explosives.Israeli soldiers reportedly came under attack by the militants before returning fire, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Source: CNN.Com


And just who is the present day major force in the Palestinian group? It is Hamas, a terrorist organization. Branded as a terrorist organisation by Israel, the US and the EU(BO), before Obama was elected.
It is seen, however, by its supporters as a legitimate fighting force, defending Palestinians from a brutal military occupation by Israel
It is the largest Palestinian militant Islamist organisation, formed in 1987 at the beginning of the first intifada, or Palestinian uprising against Israel's occupation in the West Bank and Gaza.
The group's short-term aim has been to drive Israeli forces from the occupied territories. To achieve this it has launched attacks on Israeli troops and settlers in the Palestinian territories and against civilians in Israel.

It also has a long-term aim of establishing an Islamic state on all of historic Palestine - most of which has been contained within Israel's borders since its creation in 1948.This of course, would destroy Israel!

Hamas became increasingly involved in Palestinian factional politics, both in the occupied territories and with a political branch in exile.
Hamas remained outside the main Palestinian political structure of the PLO, but it took part in, and won Palestinian Authority (PA) legislative elections in the occupied territories in 2006.
Hamas came to prominence after the first intifada as the main Palestinian opponent of the Oslo accords. The US-sponsored peace process that oversaw the gradual and partial removal of Israel's occupation in return for Palestinian guarantees to protect Israeli security.
Despite numerous Israeli operations against it and clampdowns by Yasser Arafat's Palestinian National Authority, Hamas found it had an effective power of veto over the process by launching suicide attacks.This fact has not been publicly discussed by either president Obama, nor Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Both of whom now are ignoring letters of intent from presidents Bush an Clinton, acknowledging the right of Israel to build as necessary, for growth, within the so called occupied territories of Gaza.

The prime minister, briefing the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on his recent trip to Washington, said, "it is likely that we are not going to reach an agreement with the Americans" regarding settlement construction, but did his best to portray his meeting with US Obama in a positive light.

A source in Jerusalem said it must be clear that the "proposed settlement policy of the Netanyahu government is more or less identical to that of previous governments, and that if someone is changing the ground rules, it is not Israel." It appears to me that it is Obama.

The source, alluding to understandings on settlement construction that existed at the time of Bush administration, said if on the one hand Washington was calling on Israel to abide by all previous understandings, then "shouldn't the person asking be abiding by previous commitments and understandings as well?"

When reporters asked whether the letter former president George W. Bush wrote to then-prime minister Ariel Sharon in 2004 speaking of expectations that Israel would retain these blocs still applied.
The answer was typical of spokes person for Obama, vague and semantic!
"The United States lives up to its obligations," he said. "Right now, we are focused on, as I said, trying to get both sides to adhere to the road map so that we can move forward toward that two-state solution. And it's not going to be easy, as you know. We've spoken to that many times. And we're going to continue to try to do that."

Asked again if the Bush letter was binding, Wood said, "This administration has, as I said, laid out its proposals, its strategy for moving forward. And that's about the best I can help you with on that." Source: Reuters and Jerusalem Post

THINGS OBAMA SHOULD HAVE SAID IN CAIRO

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan"

In 1973, Muslim terrorists attacked the American embassy in Sudan and murdered our country's ambassador, Cleo Noel, and the chief deputy of the mission, George C. Moore. Later in 1973, the Arab oil embargo against America sent my country into a long and painful recession. In 1977, Muslim militants murdered the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon, Frances E. Meloy, and Robert O.Waring, the U.S. economic counselor.

In 1979 radical Muslims violently attacked our country's embassy in Teheran, and for 14 months held American diplomats hostage, often in appalling conditions. In 1998, Muslim militants bombed the American embassy in Nairobi, killing 12 Americans and 280 Kenyans, and bombed our embassy in Tanzania, killing another 11 Americans. Then, on Sept. 11, 2001, 19 Muslims who had been living in America slit the throats of American pilots and flight attendants and then flew airplanes into civilian buildings in New York City, burning 3,000 innocent Americans to death.

Remember that less than a week after thousands of Americans were slaughtered in the name of your religion, President Bush went to the Islamic Center in Washington, D.C., and announced that Islam was a religion of peace. Moreover, in a country of 300 million people, of whom only a few million are Muslim, there is virtually no recorded incident of anti-mosque or other anti-Muslim violence despite the butchery of 9/11 and the popular support for Osama Bin Laden that we saw in the Muslim world after 9/11.

Unfortunately, in much of the Muslim world today anti-Jewish speeches and writing are frequently identical to the genocidal anti-Semitism one heard and read in Nazi Germany. This is a blight on your civilization. How can you seriously charge that America is at war with Islam when in fact it is much of the Islamic world that is at war with Jews and Christians?

Americans would feel more confident in American-Muslim relations if they had ever seen a large demonstration of Muslims anywhere against all the terror committed by Muslims in the name of Islam — whether in London, Madrid, New York, Bali, Cairo, or Mumbai. The mark of a great civilization — and Arab civilization was indeed once great — is a willingness to criticize itself.

Every president since Harry Truman, Democrat and Republican, has been passionate about enabling Israel to defend itself from those who wish to destroy it. And that is the issue. America SHOULD continue to support a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli dispute, but the issue has never really been about two states. It has always been about Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims recognizing Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

We cannot accept the radical Muslim premise that Israel has no right to exist, and our President should be clear about this issue!

A RIDICULOUS AND HURTFUL COMPARISON

During Obama's speech in Cairo, he made the comparison of the Holocaust to the suffering that the Palestinians have endured in their conflict with the Israelis.
"In his Cairo speech, immediately after talking about the Holocaust, Obama said that "on the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people, Muslims and Christians, have suffered in pursuit of a homeland."

"Obama shockingly equated the destruction of European Jewry to the suffering Arabs brought upon themselves when they declared war on the nascent state of Israel.
"Obama ignored the fact that the Palestinians have not abandoned terror," Habayit Hayehudi chairman Daniel Herschkowitz said during a tour of settlements south of Hebron. "The government of Israel is not America's lackey. The relations with the Americans are based on friendship and not submission, and therefore Israel must tell Obama that stopping natural growth in the settlements is a red line."
Source:Jerusalem Post

I really do not know where to begin to explain the obtuse comparison of the Holocaust and the plight of the Palestinians. But one way to begin is to compare the plight of millions of people being rounded up, herded into train boxcars and shipped off to "death Camps", just because they were of a race that was detested by a megalomaniac who needed a scapegoat to further his quest for power!
Of course many innocent Catholics and other Christians have suffered during the protracted conflict between the terrorist followers of Hamas and the Israelis. But let us not forget that despite all the cease-fires and Camp David agreements. The radical element of the Palestinians keeps firing rockets into Israel and there is the occasional suicide bomber that blows up some public place killing innocemt women and children.

But never did any of the Jews, Catholics or gypsies that were killed by the millions in the "death camps", kill anyone or incite violence in Germany, Poland and or any other country. The genocide that was perpetrated by the Holocaust was unprovoked and should never be compared to the conflict between the Muslim terrorists who call themselves Palestinians!

During the recent war between Israel defense force and Hamas in Gaza
There were 4,747 Palestinian deaths.This was during the second intifada, the Palestinian uprising that began in September 2000. Hardly an apt comparison of the millions killed in Nazi death camps!

Perhaps when Obama toured the death camp at Buchenwald in eastern Germany, where 56,000 people died at the hands of the Nazis, he realized the absurdity of his analogy. But do not hold your breath to wait for an apology!

It was obvious from the speech he gave to students and dignitaries
at Cairo University that "President Barack Obama succeeded in delivering a message of respect to Muslims across the world, as was printed in an editorial in the United Arab Emirates-based Gulf News.

His familiarity with Islam and his ability to quote comfortably from the Quran (he did it four times) is bound to resonate in this part of the world.

I only hope the open hand that Obama offers Hamas, the Palestinians and the Muslim world does not result in those radical Muslims who hate the USA and Israel,returning it with the "clenched fist" of aggression. Highlighting the hostility that Obama faces from some quarters, al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, in a message on a website, warned Muslims against alliance with Christians and Jews, saying it would annul their faith. Source: Reuters News Service


Unless the Muslim world renounces the radical intent of eradicating Israel. There can be no peace in the Middle East despite all the pious platitudes that Obama is so adept at delivering!