Thursday, April 30, 2009

Obama Aligning With Iran at Israel's Expense

According to Debka, the Obama administration is in talks with Iran to provide a corridor for U.S. troops and supplies into Afghanistan. Assuming this story is accurate, then Obama has every intention of allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, threatening not just Israel's security but a second holocaust. And all for what? Whatever gains Obama thinks he will make with regard to the war against terrorism in Afghanistan will be moot, since empowering Iran, the world's number one terrorist state, with nuclear weapons, will make the world a far more dangerous place then it is even now. At that point muslim terrorist groups will operate under an Iranian nuclear shield and likely Iran will provide them with nuclear bombs. This makes Obama treacherous as well as ignorant and naive in the extreme. Israel has no choice now but to act on its own and bomb Iran's nuclear facilities,

Talks on Iranian corridor for US troops, supplies to Afghanistan on fast track
On March 27, DEBKA-Net-Weekly 390 revealed exclusively Barack Obama’s plans “to transform the Khomeinist Islamic Republic’s clenched fist against America into a helping hand by formally asking Tehran to permit the passage to Afghanistan of fresh US troops, weapons and supplies across Iranian territory.”

In its follow-up of April 3, our military sources reported that US defense secretary Robert Gates, Chief of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and transport command chief Gen. Duncan J. McNabb, have laid before the president a detailed plan, which had been cleared in back-door meetings between US and Iranian officers.

DEBKAfile’s sources ask how much leverage against Iran’s drive for a nuclear bomb will be left to Washington when the US becomes dependent on Tehran for its war supplies to Afghanistan.

Tuesday, April 28, US envoy Dennis Ross set out on an extensive tour for pouring oil on troubled waters in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Bahrain and Qatar. He is accompanied by the deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, Lt. Gen. John R. Allen, and National Security Council official Puneet Talwar.

Like secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who promised in Beirut this week that the US was not selling Lebanon out by dealing with Syria, Ross will try and reassure America’s Arab friends that Washington’s new ties of friendship and strategic cooperation with Tehran will not be at their expense.

Egypt is signally its willingness to team up with Israel to counter those ties, with Saudi Arabia quietly following suit.

According to DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s April 3 report, the US Air Base at Al Udeid in Qatar would be the main hub for the air corridor taking US transport planes over the Persian Gulf, crossing the Iranian border and flying over southern and central Iran up to their destination, the US airbase near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan.

The sea route would hinge on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ main naval base at Chah-Bahar, which is situated on the Arabian Sea near Iran’s border with Pakistan.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Iranian sources note that Chah-Bahar has two sections, a small, run-down civilian harbor for small craft arriving from India and Pakistan, and a spanking new, modern military facility, home to Iran’s main submarine force.

The US planners rated this section of Chah-Bahar an ideal port of call for US provisions to reach Afghanistan by a predominantly sea route. From this Arabian Sea port, consignments would head north through Iran’s Sistan-va-Baluchistan up to the Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan border intersection and then turn east by convoy to their destination at Kandahar.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Another Radical Muslim Appointee

Here's yet another example of how political correctness, the fixation on multiculturalism and reaching out to the muslim community takes priority over what is in the country's best interest. President Obama appointed Dalia Mogahed to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. She is a muslim with ties to a group that advocates engagement with the radical, terrorist supporting muslim brotherhood. She was also involved in whitewashing a poll which concluded a large percentage of muslims in America hold radical views. All too often it turns out that muslims who are hailed by the media and government as moderates, are really radicals. Political correctness and fear of the racist and islamophobic labels prevent any kind of probe into the background and connections of muslim appointees or groups the government works with. This is why the FBI was involved with CAIR for so long. With regard to Obama and the democratic party, they obviously don't have a problem being involved with the likes of the muslim brotherhood or its advocates. Its conservative patriotic Americans who they see as their enemy.

When a left-wing, Obama adoring publication hails an action by this President of the United States it is always prudent to research the facts.

This week the LA Times, celebrates Obama's appointment of Dalia Mogahed to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Mogahed is a self described expert on studying the way Muslim's think.The left-wing media has dubbed her a Muslim moderate.

The American Daily Review questions these descriptions of Mogahed.It turns out that Mogahed is associated with a group that advocates engaging the very troublesome and radical Muslim Brotherhood.

And in addition, she was involved in a polling project that deliberately sought to sanitize the image of Muslims by distorting the facts of her survey. Perhaps you remember a Gallup survey that supposedly showed that Muslims supposedly have the same attitudes as the rest of America? This survey, conducted by Mogahed, declared that only 7% of Muslims are radical (only 7%!) while the same survey concluded that 36% of Muslims approved the attack on the World Trade Center.

Mogahed and a notorious colleague were exposed by Robert Satloff writing for the Weekly Standard.The respected Mr. Satloff takes a detailed look at the faulty conclusions Mogahed presented to the world, conclusions that are not support by the data she presents.

Satloff's article is informative reading.When it was published in 2008 it caused quite a stir. In other words, the Obama White House knew about this controversy before they appointed Mogahed to her new post.One wonders why they would chose a Muslim with a checkered record rather than someone without controversy. But, then again, one wonders why President Obama announced his support of Muslim Turkey entering the Euroipean Union even though our NATO allies oppose this proposition.

Jihad Watch offers more analysis of Mogahed.

Persecuting Our Protectors

Obama is a treasonous punk for releasing these documents. The democrats are equally treasonous for pursuing a criminal investigation over this issue. Fuck moveon.org, the ACLU and the rest of the looney left who are out to persecute the people that protected this country and saved thousands of lives because of their efforts. I don't suppose when the next major terrorist attack occurs and hundreds if not thousands are killed, the left will have a pang of concience about placing the comfort of the worst terrorists in the world over the lives of innocent people. Disgraceful. Obviously the left only has compassion for terrorists and mass murderers and innocent people be damned. If dunking a terrorist's head in water can save innocent lives, then it should be done and much harsher treatment if necessary. For those who think they hold the moral high ground because they oppose enhanced interrogation techniques, they are actually taking a very immoral position because they place massive numbers of innocent lives at risk. The democrats are compromising national security in the name of partisan politics, its sick. Instead of being subjects of a criminal probe, the agents involved should be treated as heroes.
WASHINGTON – Congressional Democrats turned up the pressure on the Obama administration Tuesday to start a criminal investigation by a special counsel into harsh interrogations of terrorism suspects.

It would be a conflict of interest for President Barack Obama's Justice Department to investigate lawyers from the Bush administration, even though they no longer work for the government, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee said.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, the Democrats wrote, "It is impossible to determine at this stage, and before conclusion of the necessary investigation, whether additional conflicts of interest might exist or arise."

The letter said a special counsel's investigation would insulate the department from accusations that the investigation was politically inspired.

Most of the 16 signers were Democratic liberals. Seven committee Democrats did not sign the letter, nor did any of the 16 Republicans.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said the letter will be reviewed, but he pointed out the department's Office of Professional Responsibility is investigating whether the memos are consistent with professional standards required of department lawyers.

"As with any issue, we will follow the facts where they lead," Boyd said. "As the attorney general has said, it would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department."

Obama has said it would be up to Holder to determine whether "those who formulated those legal decisions" should be prosecuted. The methods, described in the Bush-era memos, included slamming detainees against walls and subjecting them to simulated drowning known as waterboarding.

The president said he would not seek to punish CIA officers and others who carried out interrogations.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, also has proposed that independent investigators determine whether Bush administration officials ought to face charges.

Conservative Republican senators have characterized the Democratic effort as counterproductive and politically motivated at the least and, at worst, damaging to national security.

Levin recommended that the Justice Department select up to three people outside the department, such as retired federal judges, to recommend any charges or other actions against lawyers and others who developed the policies.

In addition to lawmakers, a coalition of liberal groups delivered petitions to Holder demanding that he name an independent counsel. The groups included the American Civil Liberties Union, MoveOn.org, and the Center or Constitutional Rights.

The ACLU obtained four of the Justice Department memos that provided the legal framework for the interrogation policies.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Leave it to the Israelis to Get the Job Done

Pirates who tried to board an Italian cruise ship were thwarted by private Israeli security forces hired by the cruise line. The security forces were former IDF and fired on the pirates with water hoses and pistols.

NAIROBI, Kenya (April 26) - The small white skiff approached the Italian cruise ship Melody after dinnertime as it sailed north of the Seychelles, the pirates firing wildly toward the 1,500 passengers and crew on board.
What the pirates didn't expect was that, in the darkness, the crew would fire back.

In a new twist to the increasing scourge of Somali pirate hijackings, the private Israeli security forces aboard the MSC Cruises ocean liner fired on the pirates Saturday with pistols and water hoses, preventing them from clambering aboard, the company's director Domenico Pellegrino said.

"It was an emergency operation," Pellegrino told The Associated Press. "They didn't expect such a quick response. They were surprised."

Passengers were ordered to return to their cabins and the lights on deck were switched off. The massive vessel then sailed on in darkness, eventually escorted by a Spanish warship to make sure it made it to its next port.

"It felt like we were in war," the ship's Italian Commander, Ciro Pinto, told Italian state radio.
Continued

Benefits of the U.S.-Israel Relationship

This would come as a big surprise to Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer and like-minded creeps who think breaking off our ties to Israel would only harm Israel. Here is a transcript from a Middle East Radio Forum program on how the U.S. benefits from our relationship with Israel.

What Israel does for the U.S.

A few weeks ago I posted a link to a MERF program in which Dr Steve Carol dealt with the question

“What Israel Does for the United States, Parts I & II”

Here’s the transcript of the answer.

[Part I - April 5, 2009]

William Wolf: Let’s take that question. Eddie from New Jersey, you’re on the air.

Eddie: Thank you very much. And Dr. Carol, so many are anti-Israeli. They just seem to want to reduce or cut off the aid to Israel, which will essentially pressure Israel to stand alone. Can you please give the listeners an idea of what Israel does as a strategic ally of the United States?

Steve Carol: That’s a great question Eddie. At least I’ll start. That could easily take up the rest of the show, so I’ll get involved in a piece of it and I promise the listeners when I come back in two weeks, I’ll conclude this.

Throughout the six decades since the Jewish people reestablished their sovereignty in the land of Israel, an often-repeated claim has been made, indeed we hear it now coming out of the Obama administration, that Israel is a draining liability on the United States. This claim is bogus, and an examination of the facts, hopefully, will consign this charge to the trashbin of history where it belongs.

Further adding to the problem, however, were the statements made by, and the conduct of, Israeli leftist leaders since the 1993 mis-named Oslo Peace Process that created the false impression that Israeli-Ameican ties constitute a one-way relationship. The impression that the leftist governments of Israel gave was that the U.S. government gives and Israel merely receives, and thus Israel must constantly bow, quote “to American pressure,” end of quote, as personified by the U.S. State Department.

WW: Okay. Before we get to the next break I would like to add that people think that Israel is somehow just being benefitted solely. The United States acts in its own interest. All countries act in their own interest in foreign policy.


Welcome back to the final segment of today’s very interesting and important edition of Middle East Radio Forum…Dr. Carol, do you want to finish your response to my comment?

S.C.: Yes. As we signed off you made a statement. Let me quote it as it was originally given. Lord Palmerston, British Foreign Secretary in 1848, said, it’s one of my favorite quotes, “A nation has no eternal friends, no perpetual enemies, only eternal and perpetual interests.” And that’s why you can be Germany’s enemy and then Germany’s friend, Japan’s friend, then Japan’s enemy, then Japan’s friend. This is the nature of international relations.

WW: Okay. Dr. Carol, do you want to continue with the discussion?…

SC: I want to get to some examples of proof that Eddie had asked about in his question. Alright, the truth is the relationship between the U.S. and Israel is a two-way partnership. For example, in 1952, as the Cold War got started, U.S. Army Chief of Staff, Omar Bradley, called for the integration of Israel, which was only four years old, into the Mediterranean basin area in light of the country’s location and unique capability. In 1967, Israel defeated a radical Arab pro-Soviet theater offensive, which threatened to bring about the collapse of a pro-American Arab regime in the region, disrupt oil supplies, and thus severely undermine the American standard of living. The U.S. gained valuable military information from an analysis of the Israeli-captured Soviet equipment, including SAM 2, SAM 12, Mig 21 aircraft, Soviet T54 battle tanks. In fact, Israel gave an entire squadron of Mig 21’s to the United States, which was dubbed the “Top Gun Squadron” and was used by the U.S. Air Force and naval forces for training purposes.

Since 1967, Israel [has] transferred captured Soviet weaponry systems to the United States Pentagon after every conflict: ‘67, ‘67-’70, ‘73, ‘82, 1990. They even transferred SCUD remnants from the Gulf War that had been fired on Israel, and the 2006 Hezbullah war against Israel, where they transferred missile components supplied by Iran, to the United States.

In the 1967-’70 thousand day War of Attrition, The Israeli armed forces, armed with American aircraft successfully defeated a Soviet-suppplied air defense system, pointing out the deficiencies in Soviet air defense doctrine to U.S. defense planners. Israel shared captured military equipment, including a P2 radar, [for] which they stormed an island, Green Island, dismantled this two-ton radar and had it helicoptered, airlifted out, off the island, back to Israeli lines, and then they turned it over to the United States.

In 1970, Israel brought about the withdrawal of Syrian forces from Jordan, at a time when the U.S. was tied up by wars in Viet Nam, Laos and Cambodia, thus preventing the fall of the pro-American Hashemite regime and the installation of a pro-Soviet, radical Palestinian terrorist regime.

In 1973, thanks to U.S. resupply, but without U.S. forces, Israel defeated Soviet-trained and equipped Egyptian and Syrian forces. Israel again shared captured Soviet equipment, including battle tanks, with the U.S. Israel emerged as the only reliable ally, where U.S. troops could land, where U.S. equipment can be prepositioned, where the U.S. has friendly port facilities in Haifa and Ashdod, in the entire Middle East region. This too has saved the United States billions of dollars. And the list goes on. I promise the listeners we’ll come back to this on my next appearance…
Continued

Monday, April 27, 2009

Muslims Declare FBI Off-Limits

Leave it to the muslim community to use their mosques and schools for radical activities and then play the victim card when they find out those mosques and schools are under FBI surveillance. Muslim leaders are now declaring that their mosques will be off-limits to the FBI since it was revealed they had an informant at the islamic center in Irvine, California. Their religious rights end at the point where they are using their religious institutions to incite violence or get involved with terrorist activities.

Some influential Muslim groups question FBI's actions
Revelations that the agency has been surveilling popular leaders and infiltrating mosques and schools has many organizations turning away from their post-9/11 cooperation.
By Paloma Esquivel
April 20, 2009
As they sipped tea and nibbled on dates, more than 100 men and women listened to a litany of speakers sounding the same message: The FBI is not your friend.

"We're here today to say our mosques are off limits," Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations for Greater Los Angeles, told the crowd last month at an Anaheim mosque.

"Our Koran is off limits," Ayloush said. "Our youth, who they try to radicalize, are off limits. Now is the time to tell them, 'We're not going to let this happen anymore.' "

Such strong words from a man who once was a vocal advocate of ties with federal law enforcement was yet one more signal that the fragile relationship between Muslim American groups and the FBI is being tested.

In the months and years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, FBI officials met privately with Muslim leaders, assuring them that a spate of hate crimes would be vigorously investigated and at the same time asking for help in the campaign against terrorism. Local leaders promised to encourage cooperation.

But even as relations warmed, a series of revelations -- including allegations that the FBI sent an informant into a mosque in Orange County, surveilled community leaders and sent an agent to UC Irvine -- caused some to begin questioning the FBI's real intentions.

Now, the leaders of several Muslim organizations say they feel betrayed. Because Orange County has been at the center of many of the revelations, local leaders have taken a lead in challenging the FBI, but the issues are resonating nationwide.

On Sunday, a coalition of the nation's largest Muslim organizations, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Islamic Society of North America, issued a statement demanding that the Obama administration address FBI actions, including what they describe as the "infiltration of mosques," the use of "agent provocateurs to trap unsuspecting Muslim youth" and the "deliberate vilification" of the council.
Continued

Walt Advises Obama to Cut Ties With Israel

Stephen walt recommends that the Obama administration end the special relationship the U.S. has with Israel. He advises that we suspend the military and intelligence dialogue between our countries.
WASHINGTON — A leading ally of President Barack Obama and critic of the Israel lobby in the United States has outlined a proposed U.S. campaign to pressure Israel that would suspend the intelligence dialogue between the two countries.

The timing is good.

Israel’s “special relationship” with the United States has been low-hanging fruit for the unrelenting and politically victorious critics of the Bush administration’s War on Terror which targeted militants in Iraq, Iran and Syria in coordination with Israel’s security agencies.

Stephen Walt, a U.S. professor of international affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, who co-authored with John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago a controversial study on the Israeli lobby in the United States, has drafted recommendations for the Obama administration to pressure the new Israeli government of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank.

Walt, regarded as influential in the U.S. diplomatic community, said the campaign should begin by administration criticism of Israel and support for United Nations resolutions that condemn the Jewish state.

“U.S. officials could even describe Israel’s occupation [of the West Bank] as ‘contrary to democracy,’ ‘unwise,’ ‘cruel,’ or ‘unjust,’” Walt wrote in the U.S. magazine Foreign Policy.

“Altering the rhetoric would send a clear signal to the Israeli government and its citizens that their government’s opposition to a two-state solution was jeopardizing the special relationship.”

Netanyahu was scheduled to fly to Washington to meet Obama in May 2009. But on April 16, the Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot reported that Netanyahu was expected to cancel his visit amid an assessment that Obama would refuse to meet the Israeli prime minister.

“Within four years there will be a permanent settlement between Israel and Palestinians,” White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was quoted by Yediot as saying. “We don’t care who the prime minister is.”

Walt’s report, titled “Can the United States Put Pressure on Israel: A User’s Guide.” marked the latest recommendations to the Obama administration to revise U.S. policy toward Israel.

Does Walt not consider that the U.S. itself might be hurt by ending the dialogue between Israel’s and America’s intelligence community?

Anyway its quite clear that walt is a vicious anti-Semite, not simply a “critic” of Israeli policies as the media likes to describe him. How else can one describe a person who is so anxious to end our relationship with Israel, the only free state in the Middle East, but has no problem with us having friendly relations with Egypt for example, which persecutes its Christian Copt minority. With saudi arabia which funds mosques and madrassas which incite hatred and violence against us, and is an otherwise repressive regime which practices brutal misogyny and outlaws any religion other than islam. Or how about our “friends” in Pakistan who we are sending billions of dollars to, all the while they make deals with the taliban and undermine our war effort in Afghanistan. No, stephen walt does not recommend we reaccess our relationship with those countries, he doesn't consider our alliance with those countries to be against America's best interest, but rather our problems stem from being allied with Israel. But of course we musn’t refer to him as an anti-Semite, merely a “critic” of Israel.

Sunday, April 26, 2009

This Week's Haveil Havalim

Edition # 214 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is being hosted by The Rebbetzin's Husband.

Pro-Zionist Rally in Geneva

Proud European Jews, unafraid to proclaim they are Zionists, protest in Geneva against the anti-Semitic Durban II hatefest under the orwellian moniker called an anti-racism conference.

Shouting "I'm a Zionist" in English and French, several thousand pro-Israel activists rallied Wednesday in Geneva against the United Nations' week-long anti-racism conference, which opened with a call from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to eradicate Zionism.

Standing on a makeshift podium, in the concrete square just outside the UN building where Ahmadinejad had stated that Zionism was "the paragon of racism," historian Gil Troy of McGill University told the crowd he was proud that Israel was a country where Pessah Seders were held with Darfur refugees who had found a home there.

To his left, a number of protesters held a large sign that stated: "Zionism is our response to racism."

It was one of a host of activities held by Jewish groups from all over the world, who this week headed to Geneva determined to combat the kind of anti-Semitism that dominated the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which was held in Durban, South Africa.

The Geneva Jewish community, with the help of Chabad, opened a visitors' center a short distance from the conference venue, where they handed out coffee, sandwiches and provided meeting rooms as well as computers.

Fearful that people might be traumatized by what they saw and heard at the conference, the community even had a psychologist on call.


But although Durban II was preceded by a two day anti-Israel conference by non-governmental groups and a number of small anti-Israel rallies were held - including one that compared Israel's actions in Gaza with those of the Warsaw ghetto - the atmosphere around the conference did not replicate Durban I.

A federation of 20 Jewish groups headed by the World Jewish Congress and B'nai B'rith International lobbied diplomatically behind the scenes to influence the conference proceedings.
continued

Saturday, April 25, 2009

islamic nazis Verbally Abuse Elie Wiesel

islamo-nazis representing the illegitimate mullahcratic Iranian regime at Durban II verbally abused Elie Wiesel by shouting "Zion-nazi" at him.

Treason

I am livid that now the Obama administration is going to release photos of these interrogations. The CIA agents involved are concerned that their covers will be blown. Also our enemies are now privy to the tactics we have been using and will train terrorists to withstand water boarding or whatever other methods were used. All of this out of spite against the former Bush administration or to pander to the democratic party's far left base headed by moveon, which put them in power. Or perhaps something far more sinister, that Obama truly is the manchurian candidate I said he was and is purposely aiding our enemies. Nancy Pelosi knew about these methods and apparently approved of them as did other democrats. She made the right decision then but now for political expediency is condemning the tactics and pretending she had no idea they were being used. If those agents are going to be punished so should people in congress like Pelosi. The democrats have opened up a can of worms in which they will be very sorry for doing because its going to come back and bite them in the ass.

I don't give a damn whether terrorists suffer. My concern is with innocent people. Its quite obvious that the ACLU, moveon and other demented leftists are more concerned with the well-being of terrorists and are willing to let innocents die rather then inflict any discomfort on the most hard-core terrorists. Such a view is not rational. Mark my words, we will be attacked again because of these political shenanigans on the part of the obama administration and democrats catering to the party's far left moveon base which put them in power, as well as for the purpose of sticking it to former Bush administration officials. The people who have dedicated themselves to serving and protecting this country are being persecuted, so many of them will quit or just not bother to put themselves at risk to protect America. Our country's defenses have been seriously compromised. This is malicious and treasonous on the part of the obama administration and the demorats. Obama could not be doing this unless he is deliberately out to harm America. Thanks to the democrats, anti-American bastards like moveon have been allowed the kind of power which enables them to undermine America's national security.

Friday, April 24, 2009

The Orwellian Farce of Durban II

The orwellian farce that is the Durban II "anti-racism" conference was exposed when Libyan representative, Najjat al-Hajjaji, chairing the Durban II Preparatory Committee was confronted by a victim of torture at the hands of the qaddafi regime. She interrupted him three times, telling him to stick to the objective of the conference or he would not be given the floor again. Of course the conference claims its objectives are to deal with racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance, which is exactly what this doctor and five Bulgarian nurses were victims of. They were arrested, persecuted, imprisoned and tortured. Here we have the world's dictatorships, terror states and human rights abusers getting together to accuse free societies, Israel, the US and the west of practicing racism.

UN Hypocrites

The hypocrites of the UN have berated Israel over what they deemed "collective punishment" regarding measures such as border closings to Gaza in response to hamas rocket attacks and weapons smuggling. Well it turns out that the UN itself used collective punishment against the population of Somalia in response to pirates who kidnapped UN aid workers:

Eventually, after long and heated internal discussion, the United Nations security team persuaded the United Nations country team that the most effective approach would be to use humanitarian aid and assistance as a lever to gain release of hostages.

Somalia is pretty much a stateless state. Humanitarian aid and clan association are major centers of gravity. In fact, clan leaders stay in power in part by controlling the distribution of aid. Our strategy was therefore simple: United Nations assistance was withheld from the Somali clan or region by which or in which hostages were being held until those hostages were released. In every case there was a release, and in no case were hostages harmed or ransom paid. (On the downside, no pirates were brought to trial or punished in any way.)

In 1995, for example, the water supply for Mogadishu, the capital, was shut off by the United Nations humanitarian agencies until a hostage who worked for another aid organization was released.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Afghan "Men" Demand the Right to Rape

Last week a mob of Afghan "men" threw stones at women protesting a law which allows men to rape their wives. Perhaps rape is the only way these hideous creatures are able to get sex. Have you ever taken a look at these foul beasts? Would any woman willingly have sex with them? What a depraved primitive culture. What a sick "religion". It's hard to believe this sort of thing takes place in the 21st century.

KABUL — Dozens of young women braved crowds of bearded men screaming "dogs!" on Wednesday to protest an Afghan law that lets husbands demand sex from their wives. Some of the men picked up small stones and pelted the women.

"Slaves of the Christians!" chanted the 800 or so counter-demonstrators, a mix of men and women. A line of female police officers locked hands to keep the groups apart.

The warring protests highlight the explosive nature of the women's rights debate in Afghanistan. Both sides are girding for battle over the legislation, which has sparked an international uproar since being quietly signed into law last month.

The law says a husband can demand sex with his wife every four days, unless she is ill or would be harmed by intercourse. It also regulates when and for what reasons a wife may leave her home without a male escort.
Continued

Water Boarding

These documents were released in order to take the heat off of Obama and his disasterous policies and place it onto the former Bush administration, or so he thought that would be the effect. However many Americans are livid that with the release of these documents, the president has aided our enemies, compromised national security and has done harm to those who are working diligently to protect us. So it might just backfire. Also, only select documents were released purely for spiteful political reasons which would do the most harm to members of the former Bush administration. To release the documents in full might prove the Bush administration was correct in its methods. In fact, Dick Cheney is calling for the full release of the documents.

Media degenerates such as marie cocco and other columnists and pundits who are claiming this is immoral, are really the morally repugnant ones. It is highly immoral that these bastards prioritize the well-being and comfort of the worlds worst terrorists over the lives of innocent Americans. If any members of their families were to be victimized by a terrorist attack, I'll bet they would be in favor of waterboarding and wished it would have been used to prevent said attack. There is no constitutional rights for foreign enemies captured on foreign battlefields, there is no fucking Geneva convention rights for non-uniformed terrorists who don't represent a country. Anyone who acts to protect mass murderers like al qaeda are directly responsible for the deaths of innocents. Those criticizing and working to end these interrogation tactics enable terrorism and therefore should be held accountable for any future attacks. They are traitors as well accomplices to mass murder.

As contained in the documents, there were three detainees water boarded twenty to forty seconds at a time with a doctor present. Khalid sheik mohamed revealed a plot to attack L.A. after having been water boarded. George Tennet, appointed by Clinton, said we had more information revealed through this than at any other time. Dick Morris was on Bill O'Reilly and brought up that water boarding has been used as a hazing ritual in the military, Sean Hannity said that Ollie North was water boarded. This is not torture. Enough already.

Hamas Executes Gazans

Human Rights Watch reports that hamas executed 32 Gaza Arabs during and after Operation Cast Lead, who they accused of collaborating with Israel. They also maimed and beat several members of fatah, not that I have a problem with terrorists killing rival terrorist gangs. While false reports of Israeli "war crimes" were plastered all over the front pages of major newspapers, this story has received scant attention. We also have yet to hear from those who champion the cause of the "palestinians" and who pretend to care about their human rights being violated. They only speak up in feigned outrage when their deaths can be blamed on Israel.

During Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip, Hamas security forces or masked gunmen believed to be with Hamas extra-judicially executed 18 Palestinians, mainly those accused of collaborating with Israel, and beat and maimed dozens of political rivals, especially members and supporters of Fatah, according to Human Rights Watch.

The internal violence in the Gaza Strip has continued since Israel withdrew its forces and Palestinian human rights groups have reported 14 more killings between January 18 and March 31, Human Rights Watch said in a report released on Monday.

The 26-page document, "Under Cover of War: Hamas Political Violence in Gaza," presents a pattern of arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture, maiming by shooting and extrajudicial executions by alleged members of Hamas security forces. The report is based on interviews with victims and witnesses in Gaza and case reports by Palestinian human rights groups.

The majority of Palestinians executed by other Palestinians during Israel's military operations were men accused of collaboration with Israel. Along with others, they had escaped from Gaza City's main prison compound after the IAF bombed the facility on December 28, 2008. In addition to the 32 killings mentioned above, the relatives of one suspected collaborator shot him to death "to restore the family's honor."

Hamas security forces have also used violence against Fatah members, especially those who had worked in the Fatah-run security services of the Palestinian Authority.

"Of particular concern is the widespread practice of maiming people by shooting them in the legs, which Hamas first used in June 2007, when it seized control of the Gaza Strip," the report said.

According to the Independent Commission for Human Rights, the human rights ombudsman organization of the PA, unidentified gunmen in masks shot least 49 people in the legs between December 28, 2008 and January 31, 2009.

In January and February 2009, Human Rights Watch interviewed three men who had been shot in the legs, apparently by Hamas security forces. Two of them were Fatah supporters, including a former member of the Fatah-dominated Preventive Security Service. The third man had been overheard on the street criticizing Hamas.

Abductions and severe beatings are another major concern. According to the Independent Commission for Human Rights, unidentified perpetrators physically abused 73 Gazan men from December 28, 2008, to January 31, 2009, causing broken legs and arms.
Continued
Also see Elder of Zion who reports that no fewer than 152 killed by the IDF who were reported as civilians, were actually terrorists. Also see PTWatch, which monitors palestinian terrorist attacks against Israel.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Undercutting National Security

It is an abomination that liberals are out to persecute the previous administration for protecting this country since 9/11, while working diligently to protect the world's most hard core terrorists. This is twisted. It's disgraceful that the country turned against Bush for keeping them safe. It's a guarantee that we will see a major muslim terrorist attack on this country during obama's term because they will have put a stop to interogation techniques which worked. Will the liberals be patting themselves on the back for their self-righteous stance while thousands of their countrymen perish? Anytime you act to protect the wicked, the innocent are further endangered. They may claim they are taking a moral stance but in effect it is highly immoral.

Even Obama's own Director of National Intelligence, Blair, admitted that waterboarding resulted in providing information which prevented terrorist attacks. But it may be that the Obama administration will do away with this method of extracting information anyway. So basically they are placing the comfort of hard core terrorists ahead of the very lives of American citizens. This is treason. The thing is that none of these terrorists were the least bit physically harmed, merely frightened into providing information to protect Americans, but liberals obviously think that these mild methods are even too harsh. They obviously feel that putting at risk the lives of millions of Americans is preferable to any discomfort that terrorists might face at the hands of CIA agents. I’ve come to the conclusion that liberalism is devoid of any sanity or common sense. These are the terrorists that liberals are protecting.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Diplomats Walk Out on Iranian Dictator

Good for those western diplomats who walked out on the vile UN speech in Geneva given by Iran's dictator. For those punks who claim that those who did so, do not really believe in free speech, the notion of free speech does not oblige people to sit and listen to the paranoid ravings of a genocidal madman. Those people used their free expression to show what they thought of Iran's hatemongering dictator. Its ironic that Iran's dictator and his defenders use the cover of free speech to justify giving this nazi pipsqueak a platform to spew anti-Semitic and anti-American hate speech, when free speech is non-existent in Iran. Criticizing the brutal mullah regime will lead to one being imprisoned and tortured.

GENEVA – Dozens of Western diplomats walked out of a U.N. conference and a pair of rainbow-wigged protesters threw clown noses at Iran's president Monday when the hard-line leader called Israel the "most cruel and repressive racist regime."

The United States decried the remarks by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as hateful — reinjecting tension into a relationship that had been warming after President Barack Obama sought to engage Iran in talks on its nuclear program and other issues.

Ahmadinejad — the first government official to take the floor at the weeklong event in Geneva — delivered a rambling, half-hour speech that was by turns conciliatory and inflammatory. At one point he appealed for global unity in the fight against racism and then said the United States and Europe helped establish Israel after World War II at the expense of Palestinians.

"They resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering," he said.

Jewish groups had lobbied heavily for a boycott of the conference, warning it could descend into anti-Semitism or other anti-Israel rhetoric, which marred the last such conference eight years ago in South Africa.

The meeting turned chaotic almost from the start when the two wigged protesters tossed the red clown noses at Ahmadinejad as he began his speech with a Muslim prayer. A Jewish student group from France said it had been trying to convey "the masquerade that this conference represents."

One of the protesters shouted "You are a racist!" before he and the other demonstrator were taken away by security.

Ahmadinejad interjected: "I call on all distinguished guests to forgive these ignorant people. They don't have enough information."

During his speech, he accused Israel of being the "most cruel and repressive racist regime" and blamed the U.S. invasion of Iraq on a Zionist conspiracy.

At the first mention of Israel, about 40 diplomats from Britain and France and other European Union countries exited the room.
Continue

No to a Two-State Solution

I'm tired of talk about a two-state solution. It will most certainly not lead to peace, but more war and terrorism. Does anyone believe for a nanosecond that this state with be anything other than an islamic terror state? Does anyone really believe they will cease waging war on Israel once they have statehood or will they use that territory as merely a platform from which to further attack what remains of Israel? The arab-muslims want Israel to cease to exist as a Jewish state and Jewish people ethnically cleansed from the Middle East. The palestinian cause was never about self-determination for the people who call themselves palestinians, who are really simply Arabs who could and should be absorbed into the other Arab countries. They are not a distinct ethnic group like the Kurds, a persecuted ethnic minority in Iraq, Syria, Iran and Turkey and who really should be the ones to be given statehood. Yet the world community isn't clamoring for the creation of a Kurdistan. This is how perverse things are. Anyway, the palestinian movement has always been about the obliteration of Israel as a Jewish state. In the hamas charter it calls for the elimination of all Jewish political, economic and cultural existence. The Charter states: "Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish, and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims." Yet liberals in the west just fail to grasp this and insist Israeli intransigence is to blame for the lack of peace in the region and even to blame for islamic terrorism around the world. That is why there is such pressure by Europe and some in our own government for Israeli concessions because they believe this will pacify the muslim world, just as Europe foolishly believed that selling out Czechoslavakia to hitler was going to bring peace. We know how that turned out. No one learns from history. Besides, Israel is the national homeland of the Jewish people and the only people who have the right to sovereignty in all parts of Israel. Past presidents understood this. It's a shame that these days we have craven cowards for leaders who seek to appease the muslim world at the expense of the right of self-determination for the Jewish people in their own homeland.

The U.S. 2009: "Two-state solution is the only solution"
Congress 1922: One Jewish National Home in Palestine

April 20, 2009 | Eli E. Hertz

For a PDF printable version please click HERE
The current U.S. administration that is so persistent on the need to honor 'past agreements' seems to ignore unwavering support for reconstructing the Jewish national home in Palestine by our past presidents and both Houses of Congress:
U.S. Resolution 322: A joint resolution of both Houses of Congress unanimously endorsed the "Mandate for Palestine," confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine - anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. June 30, 1922.

President Woodrow Wilson: "I am persuaded that the Allied nations, with the fullest concurrence of our own government and people, are agreed that in Palestine shall be laid the foundation of a Jewish Commonwealth." March 3, 1919.

President Warren G. Harding: Signed the Lodge-Fish joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. September 21, 1922.

President Calvin Coolidge: Signed the Convention between the United States and Great Britain in respect to British rights in Palestine. The convention was ratified by the Senate on February 20, 1925, and by the president on March 2, 1925. The Convention was proclaimed on December 5, 1925 . The convention's text incorporated the "Mandate for Palestine " text, including the preamble. By doing so, the U.S. government recognized and confirmed the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine - anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – as is spelled out in the Mandate document.

The following text was selected from the U.S. Congressional Record (1922) and exhibits the powerful sense of the Member of Congress in favor of reestablishing the Jewish national home in Palestine:

"Palestine of to-day, the land we now know as Pales tine, was peopled by the Jews from the dawn of history until the Roman era. It is the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. They were driven from it by force by the relentless Roman military machine and for centuries prevented from re turning.

"At different periods various alien people succeeded them, but the Jewish race had left an indelible impress upon the land. To-day it is a Jewish country. Every name, every landmark, every monument, and every trace of whatever civili zation remaining there is still Jewish. And it has ever since remained a hope, a longing, as expressed in their prayers for these nearly 2,000 years. No other people has ever claimed Palestine as their national home. No other people has ever shown an aptitude or indicated a genuine desire to make it their homeland. The land has been ruled by foreigners. Only since the beginning of the modern Zionist effort may it be said that a creative, cultural, and economic force has entered Pales tine . The Jewish Nation was forced from its natural home. It did not go because it wanted to. A perusal of Jewish history, a reading of Josephus, will convince the most skeptical that the grandest fight that was ever put up against an enemy was put up by the Jew. He never thought of leaving Palestine.

"But he was driven out. But did he, when driven out, give up his hope of getting back? Jewish history and Jewish literature give the answer to that question. The Jew even has a fast day devoted to the day of destruction of the Jewish homeland. Never throughout history did they give up hope of returning there. I am told that 90 per cent of the Jews to-day are praying for the return of the Jewish people to its own home. The best minds among them believe in the necessity of reestablishing the Jewish land. To my mind there is something prophetic in the fact that during the ages no other nation has taken over Pales tine and held it in the sense of a homeland; and there is some thing providential in the fact that for 1,800 years it has remained in desolation as if waiting for the return of its people."
U.S. Congressional Records 9801 (1922)

Monday, April 20, 2009

Obama is Boycotting Durban II

I'm relieved that we are going to boycott Durban II. Seven other democratic nations are following suit. Unfortunately the dhimmi British government has announced it will send a delegation. How can any free country even think of attending that abomination being called a conference on racism run by the world's worst racists and human rights violators indulging in an anti-Semitic hate fest? It should never have been this difficult a decision to make.

GENEVA – The United Nations opens its first global racism conference in eight years on Monday with the U.S. and at least seven other countries boycotting the event out of concern that Islamic countries will demand that it denounce Israel and ban criticism of Islam.

The administration of President Barack Obama, America's first black head of state, announced Saturday that it would boycott "with regret" the weeklong meeting in Geneva, which already is experiencing much of the bickering and political infighting that marred the 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa.

The Netherlands, Germany and New Zealand announced their boycotts Sunday and Monday, while Australia, Canada, Israel and Italy already had said they would not attend.

"I would love to be involved in a useful conference that addressed continuing issues of racism and discrimination around the globe," Obama said in Trinidad on Sunday after attending the Summit of the Americas.

But he said the language of the U.N.'s draft declaration risked a reprise of Durban, during which "folks expressed antagonism toward Israel in ways that were often times completely hypocritical and counterproductive."

"We expressed in the run-up to this conference our concerns that if you adopted all of the language from 2001, that's not something we can sign up for," Obama said.

"Hopefully some concrete steps come out of the conference that we can partner with other countries on to actually reduce discrimination around the globe, but this wasn't an opportunity to do it," he said.

Some European countries are still deciding whether to attend the U.N. conference, which runs through April 24. Britain said it will send diplomats, despite concerns the meeting could become a forum for Holocaust denial or anti-Semitic attacks.

At the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI said the conference is needed to eliminate racial intolerance around the world. Asia News, a Catholic news agency that is part of the missionary arm of the Vatican, said of the pope's comment: "The Holy See is distancing itself from the criticisms of some Western countries."
Continued
Shame on the Vatican for submitting to islam instead of standing up against anti-Semitism.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Haveil Havalim

Edition # 213 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is being hosted by The Real Shliach.

Obama Plans to Punish Israel if it Attacks Iran

The Obama administration continues with its perverse machinations. While coddling and befriending the world's dictators, it is acting to restrain Israel and treating it as an adversary. Instead of threatening Iran and N. Korea to end their nuclear programs, the Obama administration may impose sanctions on Israel or cut military aid should it dare to save itself from nuclear annihilation by attacking Iran preemtively.

There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth on the part of Europe and the Obama administration when Israel is inevitably forced to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. But its their own cowardice which has forced Israel into a situation in which it must, on its own, confront Iran militarily or risk its annihilation. So the Obama gang and Europe have no business telling Israel to back off Iran and commit national suicide for their convenience.

US Weighing Punishing Israel if it Attacks Iran

Having taken military action against Iran off the table, the Obama administration is considering ways of punishing Israel if it attacks Iran to end its nuclear arms program (and prevent a second Holocaust).

In other words, having failed to contain Iran, the United States is concentrating on restraining Israel.

Administration contingency plans include condemnation of Israel, support for a United Nations Security Council resolution that could include sanctions on Israel, and suspending or seriously cutting military aid to the Jewish State.

One of President Obama's closest foreign policy advisers, National Security Council member Samantha Power, is a proponent of ending military aid to Israel in order to force it to negotiate with Iran's Palestinian Islamist proxy, Hamas, and withdraw from all lands taken during the Six-Day War of June 1967. Power also advocates shifting aid to a Palestinian state. Overall, she views Israel as a liability and a historic mistake, in line with the European left position (and that of old-line, right-of-center, American isolationists and anti-Semites). Her antidemocratic admirers in the Democratic Party's (Hillary-hating) left wing agree and are eager for an opportunity to paint Israel as a Jewish North Korea (although they actually have more sympathy for North Korea than for Israel).

The big question is how the Obama administration would react if Iran retaliated against Israel indirectly as well as directly--by making good on its repeated threats to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East and shut down the strategic, 29 mile-wide Strait of Hormuz, through which an estimated 20% of the world's crude oil is transported by tanker ships. Would the U.S. fight back with real ferocity or respond in a limited way while blaming Israel for preemptively attacking Iran and appealing to "the Muslim world" for "understanding?"

One wonders how the Apologizer-in-Chief would react.

Holocaust-denying Iran and its Lebanese Islamist Shiite proxy, the Hitlerian Hezbollah, have also vowed to "burn Tel Aviv" if attacked by either Israel or the U.S. Jerusalem's clerical fascist foes have amassed arsenals of ballistic missiles and rockets to bombard Tel Aviv and Haifa. Israel's political-military leadership must be taking this into consideration; a "six-hour war," designed to eliminate Iranian missile installations and nuclear sites could be the result.

Three decades of attempts to appease and accommodate Islamist Iran have led to the present countdown to conflict. Obama's so-called diplomatic surge--which transcends appeasement in downgrading and ultimately abandoning Israel in order to try to strike a "grand bargain" with Iran for pacification of the Middle East--has put Jerusalem on a political collision course with Washington.
Continue

Saturday, April 18, 2009

CIA Interrogation Techniques

I don't consider "torturing" terrorists to be war crimes. The safety of innocent people far outweighs the brief discomfort that a terrorist might face through various interrogation techniques. Thousands of innocent lives have been saved by information gained from these techniques. The CIA agents involved are not going to be punished for trying to protect us but its absolutely disgraceful that this information was even released at all. This aids our enemies. Even liberal Leon Panetta opposed the release of these documents. No reasonable person can possibly consider any of these interrogation methods to remotely be torture. A centipede is torture? Please! Give me a break! The Obama administration and liberals oppose even the mildest methods used to gain information to protect us from future terror attacks. I just can't fathom the misquided concern liberals have for the well-being of terrorists as well as their desire to punish those people who have worked to protect our safety. This is perverse and they ought to back off. I can't think of any reason they would do this other than they want to harm America. I used to think conservatives were way over the top when they claimed that liberals were enemies of America who sought to destroy us. But frankly I cannot come up with any other logical explanation as to why they consistently work to undermine our national security. Mark my words, we will have another major attack in the next few years and it will be their fault.

Rahm Emanuel, Obama Mafia Enforcer

So either Israel relinquishes its sovereignty and acquiesces to an islamic terror state on its border, or the obama gangsters will allow the threat of a nuclear holocaust to hang over Israel. Ted Belman of Israpundit reports:

The Obama mafia to make offer to Israel she can’t refuse

BUT SHE MUST

Obama vs. Yesha

Israel largest newspaper, Yediot Acharonot, reported on Thursday that the Obama Administration is hinting that if Israel gives up Judea and Samaria (Yesha), the U.S. would help in dismantling the Iranian nuclear threat. The paper reports that Administration officials are speaking of a “Bushehr in exchange for Yitzhar” plan, implying that if Israel gives up Yitzhar and the other approximately 170 Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria, the U.S. will help in neutralizing Iran’s Bushehr and other nuclear plants.

Obama vs. Israel

The paper further reports that Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s hard-hitting Jewish Chief of Staff, recently told a Jewish leader in Washington, “In the next four years, there will be a final status agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, based on ‘two states for two peoples,’ and we couldn’t care less who the Prime Minister is.”

This is the Chicago mafia at work. Rahm Emanuel is a disgrace. This douchebag’s father was born in Israel yet he would act to harm it in service of the obama crime family's agenda. He has no shame. He is what I would call a kapo. Israel's response should be: ” There will be no state of palestine, and we couldn't care less who the president is". Israel must attack Iran's nuclear facilities regardless of whether or not the obama mob approves. It's better to have to deal with political fallout then nuclear fallout.

Friday, April 17, 2009

The Tea Parties and the Media

Unsurprisingly, aside from FOX, the media's coverage of the tea parties was dismissive and contemptuous. This is in line with the media elites contempt for ordinary Americans in general. Over at CNN a man being interviewed at one of the tea parties brought up the fact that the president claims he believes in what Lincoln stood for, yet Lincoln believed that people had the right to liberty, at which point he was rudely interrupted by the female reporter who said to him "what does that have to do with taxes"? Then she went on to describe the protesters as "anti-government", "anti-CNN", as if there's something wrong with being anti-CNN, and "highly promoted by right wing conservative network FOX". But this highly unprofessional "reporter" was very mild compared to the vicious gang over at MSNBC which was outright crude and vulgar in its description of ordinary Americans who dared to take issue with how their money is being spent. I go out of my way to avoid watching that sorry excuse for a "news" outlet. It enrages those malcontents that these protesters have not fallen in line to worship their messiah. Bill O'Reilly aptly referred to the gang over at NBC as "gutter snipes". Politicians like Nancy Pelosi also expressed contempt for the folks at the tea parties and dismissed their significance.

The bottom line is that these left wing elitists are one-worlders who reject the idea of American exceptionalism, they seek to diminish American power and sovereignty and Americans individual liberties. They want foreign policy decisions to be overridden by the EU and UN and even domestic issues to be decided by European and UN courts. This is because they believe the average American is a dumb yahoo and that they themselves and the Europeans are sophisticated, enlightened and intelligent and should be the ones in power to make the decisions for the rest of us. They believe America should be more like socialist, secular and appeasing Europe. I'm sure they also don't have a problem if sharia law were to be instituted in America since they have the twisted view that islam is a peaceful religion while Christian conservatives are really the ones who threaten us.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Homeland Security Report

As you know by now Homeland Security has come out with a report regarding imaginary terrorist threats emanating from "right wing extremists." Presumably these are people who dare to criticize the Obama administration, are pro-life, support the right to bare arms etc. Disgracefully, even soldiers who come back from Iraq and Afghanistan are among those mentioned in the report as being susceptible to becoming right wing terrorists.

I really think this coincides with Obama's attempt to placate muslims both here and abroad by pretending we are equally threatened by terrorism from groups other than muslims. By focusing on this fake "right wing" terror threat, what the administration is essentially saying to the muslim world is "see I told you we aren't at war with you, we aren't singling out muslims, we're being evenhanded". Meanwhile we have muslim camps training for jihad right here on our soil, Somali students in Minnesota who went missing and are believed to have traveled abroad to train for jihad etc. But yet the Obama administration is diverting its focus and resources to these other non or minimal threats to our country in the name of political correctness. And also I believe, to intimidate critics of the Obama administration and anyone who might take to the streets and protest his policies. And its possible that real threats to us will be neglected.

The Latest on Durban II

This administration lacks any principles. Its top priority is to placate and ingratiate itself with the muslim world rather than taking a principled and moral stand for what is right. If that means remaining silent in the face of muslim anti-semitism so as not to rock the boat with the muslim world, then this is what the obama administration will do. I am predicting that in the end they will attend durban II with cosmetic changes made to the conference document to give the administration cover to justify its attendance, all the while publicly pretending these are real changes which took place through the effort of the Obama administration itself.

RJC Calls for “Clear, Principled, and Final” Durban 2 Position Equivocating and Flip-Flopping Must Stop

RJC, April 14, 2009

Washington, D.C. (April 14, 2009) The Republican Jewish Coalition today called on President Obama to end the guessing game about whether the administration will follow through on its pledge not to participate in the United Nations’ discredited World Conference Against Racism (Durban 2) next week in Geneva.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported Sunday: “Senior U.S. officials in Washington and New York are leaning in favor of participating” in Durban 2. Yesterday, the State Department issued a statement that applauded revisions that have apparently been made in the working group draft statement upon which the conference will be based. The statement concluded by expressing the hope “that the United States can re-engage the conference process with the hope of arriving at a conference document that we can support.” The Jerusalem Post reported that “the wrangling over the contents of the draft outcome document for the Durban review could continue throughout the week, leaving the US presence up in the air until right before the conference begins.”

This is very disturbing news for American Jews and others who support Israel, since it raises the prospect that the Obama administration will renege on its previous commitment to boycott this conference. Durban II is a follow-up to the original Durban conference of 2001, and is expected to be a venue for the same kind of anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, and anti-Western tirades that led President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell to withdraw the U.S. from the first conference.

Yesterday, Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) wrote to Secretary of State Clinton to warn that “the latest working group draft statement is still fundamentally unacceptable. The very first clause reaffirms the hate-filled declarations of the 2001 Durban Conference, which singled out only one country in the world for condemnation - Israel.” The bipartisan pair urged Clinton to “reaffirm” the Obama administration’s “pledge not to attend the hate-filled Durban conference.” [4] The RJC strongly agrees with this bipartisan congressional sentiment.

Concerns that the 2009 conference would devolve into an anti-Israel gathering have been further fueled by the news that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahamadinejad will join the proceedings. Ahmadinejad’s long history of Holocaust denial and genocidal threats against Israel make his plans an ominous signal as to the real trend in Geneva.

The latest administration signals leave an impression of a new diplomatic team determined to turn what could have been an opportunity for principled leadership into a fiasco that promotes disarray within the UN’s democratic bloc.

We urge President Obama to act quickly and unambiguously: End this guessing game and affirm the pledge he made to be resolute in opposition to anti-Semitism in the international arena by issuing a clear, principled, and final statement that the United States will not participate in this dangerous and discredited conference.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Tony Blair Boosts hamas

I've become increasingly disrespectful and contemptuous of former British PM Tony Blair who is a useless fool trying to make himself appear relevant at the expense of Israel. As the quartet's envoy to the farce known as the "peace process", Blair is going out of his way to grant legitimacy to the genocidal hamas terror gang who's very reason for being, is to destroy Israel and kill Jews. Blair intervened with Ehud Barak to allow the IRA's Gerry Adams into Gaza where he met with top hamas terrorist ismail haniyeh for a photo-op.

Tony Blair is the former two-faced prime minister of the UK, called Tony Phoney by his fellow Britishers. After leaving his PM's office, he was appointed as envoy to the "peace process" [that is, to Israel and the palestinian authority] by the Quartet to see how its "Road Map to peace" was being implemented. Yet, true to form, Tony Phoney has disregarded those items in the "Road Map" that required corrective action by the PA. Moreover, he has shown his contempt for peace by promoting the anti-peace Hamas whose very charter openly calls on Muslims to kill Jews. That is, Blair aids a genocidal Islamic jihad gang. One way that he helped them very recently was to intervene with the Israeli government to allow one Gerry Adams into Gaza in order to have a photo op with Hamas leaders and proclaim his "solidarity" with them. Our foreign ministry had wisely --for once-- opposed letting Adams into Gaza, understanding what he was likely to do. Thwarted by the Foreign Ministry, Blair turned to Defense Minister Barak [Labor Party] who complied with Blair's hysterical urgings:
Tony Blair intervened directly with Defense Minister Ehud Barak to enable Northern Ireland politician Gerry Adams through the Erez Crossing and into the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, where he met Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

The decision to let Adams into the Gaza Strip came against recommendations by the Foreign Ministry, which had urged that Israel not facilitate his passage because he was unwilling to promise not to meet with Hamas representatives.

The Foreign Ministry was concerned that high profile meetings of international politicians with Hamas would only grant the organization legitimacy.

Defense officials said the decision to allow Adams into Gaza was taken by Barak after Blair brought a personal request to him during a meeting earlier this week.

The officials said Blair had told Barak that Adams, the leader of the Irish Republican Army-linked Sinn Fein party, had experience as a mediator, and could pass messages and act as a go-between for Israel and Hamas.

Israeli officials refused to meet with Adams because he was willing to meet with Hamas representatives.

Adams is scheduled to go to Ramallah for talks on Friday.

Adams's meeting with Haniyeh, at an undisclosed location in Gaza City, was not announced ahead of time.

TV footage from a local news outlet showed Adams sitting in an armchair next to Haniyeh. "We want to help. We support the Palestinian people," Adams said.
Continued

Afghan Women Prefer the Enslavement of islam

This Afghan woman is contradicting herself by saying on the one hand westerners should stay out of the issue of women's rights in Afghanistan which she says are the business of Afghan women to which we don't understand, and that Afghan women don't want total freedom anyway. But she also says if NATO doesn't protect democracy and human rights then the country will end up with extremism. Well which the hell is it lady? Do you want your freedom and rights or do you want us to stay out? This is in reference to a proposed rape law which is being condemned by western nations. If Afghan women want to be enslaved by islam, then to hell with them. We ought to cease being in the business of nation-building and no more American blood should be spilled to give these people freedom in Afghanistan or any other muslim country. We ought to just stick to dealing with threats to ourselves and the rest of the free world.

KABUL - As Afghanistan's Parliament debated ways Monday to protect female politicians from assassination, young women attending Kabul University expressed surprise and bewilderment at the debate raging in Canada and Europe over a proposed law that seems to allow men from the Shiite Hazara minority to sexually enslave their wives and imprison them in their homes.

The nearly unanimous view on the campus - arguably the most progressive institution in Afghanistan - was that the West should not involve itself in the country's cultural and religious affairs.

"This is not a good law. Women should be allowed to do what they want," said Hamida Hasani, 18, a Hazara architecture student at Kabul University. She said she was familiar with the controversial legislation, which President Hamid Karzai has pledged to urgently review in the face of strong complaints from western governments.

"But we do not want total freedom. We wanted it to be limited and to be within Islam."

Told of the furor the proposed law has caused in Canada and elsewhere, and about the murder of women's activist and Kandahar provincial council member Sitara Achakzai on Sunday, Hasani said the problem of women's rights in Afghanistan belongs to Afghan woman - no one else.

"They don't know anything about us and our problems," she said. "If they faced what we have faced with hunger and war, they'd realize what is most important to fight for here. Before they come here they should . . . experience our difficulties."...

"NATO is here to fight terror but if you do not protect democracy and human rights we may not end up with terrorism but with extremism, which is just as bad," she said, minutes after condemning Achakzai's murder in Parliament. "If you speak of human rights or women rights in Afghanistan you get accused of having converted to Christianity."...

"This law is not something that Karzai should sign because there must be mutual agreement within a marriage, but what westerners have to realize is that it is much better for us than it was before when the Taliban behaved so badly towards us," said Shapera Azzizulah, 41, a married Tajik Sunni pharmacist who had dropped by for a cup of coffee after picking up a copy of her university degree....

"But westerners want to change Afghanistan for their benefit, not for ours. They have a bad view of our culture. Some of our women imitate their clothes and their ways. Our freedom must come within Islam."...

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

The Rescue of Captain Phillips

While president Obama will try to bask in the glory and take credit for the successful rescue of Captain Phillips by the navy seals, it turns out that his indecisiveness allowed the crisis to last longer than it should have. The president's shoot to kill order only applied if the captain's life was in clear, extreme danger. If the president shows weakness during a relatively minor crisis, how is he going to deal with far bigger crises such as a standoff with Iran? The credit for this successful mission goes solely to the awesome skill and bravery of the Navy SEALS and the bravery of captain Phillips. Of course Obama's sycophantic followers in the media will attempt to overplay Obama's role in order to boost his standing as commander and chief.

We’ll see what Obama is really made of when it comes to the far more politically volatile situation with Iran. Will he have the guts to order strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities with the risk of incurring the wrath of the international community, especially the muslim world?

After four days of floating at sea on a raft shared with four Somali gunmen, Richard Phillips took matters into his own hands for a second time. With the small inflatable lifeboat in which he was being held captive being towed by the American missile destroyer USS Bainbridge, and Navy Special Warfare (NSWC) snipers on the fantail in position to take their shots at his captors as soon as the command was given, the captive captain of the M.V. Maersk-Alabama took his second leap in three days into the shark-infested waters of the Indian Ocean.

This diversion gave the Navy Special Warfare operators all the opening they needed. Snipers immediately took down the three Somali pirates still on board the life raft, SEAL operators hustled down the tow line connecting the two craft to confirm the kills, and a Navy RIB plucked Phillips from the water and sped him to safety aboard the Bainbridge, thus ending the four-day-and-counting hostage situation.

Phillips’ first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn’t worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country’s Navy possible, Phillips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken. The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage’s life was in clear, extreme danger.

The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution” would be acceptable.
Continued

Saudi Child Brides

While Obama bows to the maggots who rule saudi arabia, it is legal for little girls in that country to be forcibly married off to middle aged and old "men" by their fathers as a debt payment. Now why should such a primitive misogynistic culture of pedophiles be respected much less bowed down to?

It isn’t much, but with the appointment of less radical ministers in the Saudi Government, there could finally be a law that would make 17, the minimum age at which girls could marry.

An appeals court in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, has rejected and refused to certify a court ruling allowing a 47-year-old man’s marriage to an 8-year-old girl, said a relative of the girl with knowledge of the proceedings. Under the Saudi legal process, what the appeals court ruling means is that the controversial marriage is still in effect, but a challenge to the marriage by the girl’s mother is still alive. The appeals court action now sends the case back to the earlier judge, who will decide whether to stand by his original decision.

The case, which has garnered much criticism from rights groups within and outside Saudi Arabia, came to light in December when the Onaiza judge refused to annul the marriage on a legal technicality. Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib’s dismissal of the mother’s petition for annulment sparked immediate outrage.

Monday, April 13, 2009

Geert Wilders Responds to Dutch Labor Party's Threat Against Israel

God bless Geert Wilders, the best friend Israel and America has in Europe. Wilders and his Freedom Party will fight the radical left Dutch labor party's attempt to impose economic sanctions on Israel if it doesn't capitulate to Arab demands. With Wilders leading the fight, I expect the labor party to fail in its effort to throw Israel under the bus to appease the muslim ummah.

One staunch opponent of the left’s effort to threaten Israel’s existence is Dutch politician Geert Wilders.

Wilders PVV (Freedom Party) recently surged to take the leading position in recent Dutch polls, read here. His Freedom Party is campaigning in the upcoming EU Parliamentary elections and might make a critical difference to thwart the Eurabian left’s positions on Israel if the party wins with significant seats in Holland. Can Wilders take on these dhimmi useless idiots of the Islamists in Holland?

In an exchange of email, today, Wilders said:

Of course we can. We already fought this stupid social democrats and there even more stupid ideas in our parliament last week. But yes it is a threat indeed so we should talk about it loud and clear!

This attempt by the Dutch Labor party to sanction Israel will doubtless be a topic of interest at a forthcoming event in South Florida on April 27th to honor Wilders, which is co-sponsored by the Florida Security Council and Red County, the on-line news service. Among those who will introduce Wilders are Lt. Col. Alan West and Florida House of representatives Majority Leader, Adam Hasner.

Wilders is the best friend of the fight against Islamist stifling free speech both in Eurabia and here in America. He’s one of the best friends that Israel and the Jewish people have in these darkening times.

Wilders is ‘aux barricades’ fighting for us to preserve Judeo Christian values of free speech, liberty and freedom. Let us protect and defend him, as well.

Sunday, April 12, 2009

The latest haveil Havalim

Edition # 212 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is hosted by Shtetl Fabulous.

Dutch Labor Party Threatens Israel With Sanctions

While Europe and now the U.S. is prepared to engage some of the world’s worst regimes, Syria, Iran, Cuba, and even terror groups like the Taliban, hamas and Hezbollah, free and democratic Israel is coming under increasing isolation and threats from the west. The Dutch labor party has threatened sanctions against Israel if it thwarts “peace”. To translate what the Dutch labor party means by “peace”, it means Israeli capitulation to all arab demands. So essentially what the Dutch labor party is demanding of Israel is to give the arabs everything they want or else. Basically they are demanding Israel commit suicide so the Dutch can placate its own hostile muslim population as well as muslim regimes and terrorist groups abroad. Israel cannot allow itself to be a sacrificial lamb for European geopolitical and domestic interests.

These vile euro politicians are pandering to the growing muslim populations within their own countries and obviously have been willing to even sell out their own countries for muslim votes, so it should come as no surprise that these scoundrels will throw Israel to the wolves in a heartbeat. As far as I'm concerned, these bastards deserve everything they get from the hordes of muslim invaders destroying their country. Europe doesn't learn from history and will never change. Israel must stand strong in the face of growing pressure. It fought the war of independence with help from no one and a ragtag fighting force and beat multiple arab armies.

Why has the Dutch labor party not threatened sanctions on the arabs for thwarting peace? After all, it is the Arabs who are solely responsible for the lack of peace.

Key Dutch party: Sanctions against Israel if it thwarts peace
By Cnaan Liphshiz, Haaretz Correspondent

The Netherlands must impose economic sanctions against Israel if the new government in Jerusalem thwarts the peace process with the Palestinians, the Dutch Labor party said last week.

Members of Labor, which is a member of government as the country's second largest party, said they intended to write a manifesto on the matter to the foreign minister, Maxime Verhagen, from the centrist ruling CDA party, who is largely seen as a staunch supporter of Israel.

In an interview for Radio 1, Labor's Martijn van Dam said his party insisted that Verhagen and the European Union take "concrete" action that demands Israel accept Hamas as a partner for dialog. Van Dam also lamented the Netherlands and the European Union's decision to blacklist Hamas.

Van Dam went on to call Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman "an extremist who is on the brink of racism," adding: "This is not a government with much prospect for peace."

Responding to calming statements attributed to Verhagen concerning Benjamin Netanyahu's new government, van Dam said: "The only one who thinks that the positions of the [new] Israeli government will not have any consequences is Maxim Verhagen."

Discussions on the matter between the cabinet and Labor's representatives in parliament are expected to continue this week.

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Obama Curtailing American Power

Hussein Obama is the greatest danger this country has ever faced. He is committed to relinquishing American power and gutting our defenses, including missile defense, at a time when North Korea and Iran are developing nuclear weapons. He is also abandoning all of our democratic allies in order to appease our enemies. He has no business being president and America lost its collective mind when it voted for him and we are going to pay a steep price. I hold the media and the democratic party fully accountable for whatever tragedies befall America, Israel and the free world as a consequence of their relentless pursuit of placing this fraud hussein obama in the White House.

Column One: Surviving in a post-American world
Apr. 9, 2009
Caroline Glick , THE JERUSALEM POST

Like it or not, the United States of America is no longer the world's policeman. This was the message of Barack Obama's presidential journey to Britain, France, the Czech Republic, Turkey and Iraq this past week.

Somewhere between apologizing for American history - both distant and recent; genuflecting before the unelected, bigoted king of Saudi Arabia; announcing that he will slash the US's nuclear arsenal, scrap much of America's missile defense programs and emasculate the US Navy; leaving Japan to face North Korea and China alone; telling the Czechs, Poles and their fellow former Soviet colonies, "Don't worry, be happy," as he leaves them to Moscow's tender mercies; humiliating Iraq's leaders while kowtowing to Iran; preparing for an open confrontation with Israel; and thanking Islam for its great contribution to American history, President Obama made clear to the world's aggressors that America will not be confronting them for the foreseeable future.

Whether they are aggressors like Russia, proliferators like North Korea, terror exporters like nuclear-armed Pakistan or would-be genocidal-terror-supporting nuclear states like Iran, today, under the new administration, none of them has any reason to fear Washington.

This news is music to the ears of the American Left and their friends in Europe. Obama's supporters like billionaire George Soros couldn't be more excited at the self-induced demise of the American superpower. CNN's former (anti-)Israel bureau chief Walter Rodgers wrote ecstatically in the Christian Science Monitor on Wednesday, "America's... superpower status, is being downgraded as rapidly as its economy."

The pro-Obama US and European media are so pleased with America's abdication of power that they took the rare step of applauding Obama at his press conference in London. Indeed, the media's enthusiasm for Obama appeared to grow with each presidential statement of contrition for America's past uses of force, each savage attack he leveled against his predecessor George W. Bush, each swipe he took at Israel, and each statement of gratitude for the blessings of Islam he uttered.

But while the media couldn't get enough of the new US leader, America's most stable allies worldwide began a desperate search for a reset button that would cause the administration to take back its abandonment of America's role as the protector of the free world.

Tokyo was distraught by the administration's reaction to North Korea's three-stage ballistic missile test. Japan recognized the betrayal inherent in Defense Secretary Robert Gates's announcement ahead Pyongyang's newest provocation that the US would only shoot the missile down if it targeted US territory. In one sentence, uttered not in secret consultations, but declared to the world on CNN, Gates abrogated America's strategic commitment to Japan's defense.

India, for its part, is concerned by Obama's repeated assertions that its refusal to transfer control over the disputed Jammu and Kashmir provinces to Pakistan inspires Pakistani terror against India. It is equally distressed at the Obama administration's refusal to make ending Pakistan's support for jihadist terror groups attacking India a central component of its strategy for contending with Pakistan and Afghanistan. In general, Indian officials have expressed deep concern over the Obama administration's apparent lack of regard for India as an ally and a significant strategic counterweight to China.

Then there is Iraq. During his brief visit to Baghdad on Tuesday afternoon, Obama didn't even pretend that he would ensure that Iraqi democracy and freedom is secured before US forces are withdrawn next year. The most supportive statement he could muster came during his conversation with Turkish students in Istanbul earlier in the day. There he said, "I have a responsibility to make sure that as we bring troops out, that we do so in a careful enough way that we don't see a complete collapse into violence."

Hearing Obama's statements, and watching him and his advisers make daily declarations of friendship to Iran's mullahs, Iraqi leaders are considering their options for surviving the rapidly approaching storm.

Then there is Europe. Although Obama received enthusiastic applause from his audience in Prague when he announced his intention to destroy the US's nuclear arsenal, drastically scale back its missile defense programs and forge a new alliance with Russia, his words were anything but music to the ears of the leaders of former Soviet satellites threatened by Russia. The Czech, Polish, Georgian and Ukrainian governments were quick to recognize that Obama's strong desire to curry favor with the Kremlin and weaken his own country will imperil their ability to withstand Russian aggression.
Continued

Israel Can't Surrender the Golan Heights

IDF general Giora Eiland issues a report which explains why Israel cannot surrender the Golan Heights to Syria.

Five Dangerous Assumptions
Gen. Eiland outlines five dangerous assumptions on which the solution is based, in addition to three additional problems for which this security arrangements solution provides no answers.


The five problematic assumptions can be summed up as follows:

1. “When the war erupts, it will begin with a situation in which both sides are located where they are obligated to be.” In fact, it is almost impossible to verify the location of anti-tank missiles, certain types of anti-aircraft missiles, and small rockets.

2. “The warning will be issued in real time.” The plan gives Israel only one warning station on Mt. Hermon, which will certainly be restricted in various ways – as opposed to its current two large stations on Mt. Hermon and an additional three stations along the entire length of the Golan Heights.

3. “A correct interpretation will be made with regard to any Syrian violation.” Prior to the Yom Kippur War, for instance, Israeli intelligence correctly identified the Egyptian military concentration in the Suez Canal, but it was thought to be only a military exercise. The Syrians have many options for subterfuge, for example, dispatching the army under the pretext of responding to civilian riots.

4. “The Israeli government will react speedily and vigorously to any serious violation.” Even if a warning is correctly provided and interpreted, the Israeli government will still have to decide, in a matter of hours, whether to dispatch forces into the Golan – which will be within sovereign Syrian territory, thus effectively declaring war.

5. “The IDF will fulfill its plan by outracing the Syrian force” – even though the Golan will likely be filled with new Syrian cities and towns around the principal transportation arteries, and possibly with anti-tank obstacles and the like.


Three additional problems, Eiland states, are these:

1. The increased effectiveness of advanced anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

2. The expected urbanization of the Golan Heights, including many “policemen” who can be expected, together with many other “civilians,” to operate thousands of anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles that will be stored in those cities, thus impeding the advancement of Israeli forces.

3. The Syrian strategic threat. More than Syrian ground forces, the major Syrian threat involves ground-to-ground missiles and large quantities of chemical weapons. In the discussions that took place in 1999-2000, no attempt was made to reduce the presence of these two capabilities


Seven False Beliefs
Finally, Eiland argues, “a dangerous tendency has been created in recent years by fostering the belief that a peace agreement with Syria would have positive repercussions in seven additional areas” – but these are either far from guaranteed or not very important, or both. The seven beliefs are:

1. “An Israeli-Syrian peace agreement will drive a wedge between Syria and Iran.”
2. “A peace agreement between Syria and Israel will weaken Hizbullah.”
3. “An Israeli-Syrian peace agreement will prevent Hizbullah from arming.”
4. “A peace agreement with Syria will assist the Israeli-Palestinian track.”
5. “A peace agreement between Syria and Israel will compel Syria to banish Hamas headquarters from Damascus.”
6. “The agreement will improve Israel’s relations with the Arab world.”
7. “The peace agreement with Syria would enhance international support for Israel.”

This proposed outcome as a result of a peace agreement with Syria is pure fantasy. Here's a future scenario which I see unfolding. Syria starts firing rockets at Israel from the Golan Heights, Israel responds by sending its forces to the Golan and is immediately accused and villified by the international community of being the aggressor by having "invaded" sovereign Syrian territory and violating the "peace" accord. You all know the drill. Ceding the Golan Heights will be catastrophic for Israel and lead to a major war.

Friday, April 10, 2009

Obama Advances islamic Agenda

We need to impeach this muslim in the White House. He is clearly a usurper. What obama said in his speech in Turkey and his other actions such as bowing to the saudi king and giving respect to islamic theocracies at the same time downplaying America’s Judeo-Christian heritage, reveals that his affinities lie with the muslim world while disdaining the Judeo-Christian west, especially America and Israel. If this article doesn't make his agenda and priorities crystal clear to Americans, then nothing will. And his priorities clearly are not to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America, but to advance the agenda of the muslim jihadists and submit America to its will. You've gotta read this post from Atlas Shrugs, you'll be shocked and outraged about where Obama intends to take this nation. Then again you probably won't be shocked but certainly you'll be outraged.

OIC'S ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS MAKES ITS MOVE IN TURKEY: Obama Advances Islamic New World Order

hat tip Randall

President Hussein rejected a trip to pay his respects to the American dead in Normandy. Barack Obama, concerned about offending Britain and Germany, refused despite attempts by vigorous President Nicolas Sarkozy of France to persuade the new American president ..... instead he went mosque hopping.
Obama ends Europe trip with tour of mosque AFP

(Agence France-Presse) The president smiled when he was shown a scripture mentioning the Prophet Mohammed's grandson Hussein, Obama's middle name ...

And he made it a priority to attend the 2nd Forum of Alliance of Civilizations in Istanbul:
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyeb Erdogan opened Monday The 2nd Forum of the UN Alliance of Civilizations UNAOC in Istanbul with the participation of Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem and Presidents and Prime Ministers of 83 countries.

This is the forum where President Hussein Obama invited the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, to the White House. The encounter took place during the official reception given by the Turkish Prime Minister, Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdo─čan, where the President reiterated to the Secretary General the willingness and readiness of the US Administration to explore areas of cooperation with the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
A UN-sponsored group called the Alliance of Civilizations, created last year to find ways to bridge the growing divide between Muslim and Western societies, released a first report Monday that says the conflict over Israel and the Palestinian territories is the central driver in global tensions. (here)

The objective of the OIC is described this way by Bat Ye'or: The Islamic Conference, which is a group that brings together 57 Muslim countries, has decided to bring into the international forefront and into the Western world, this rule of Dhimmitude that imposed the respect of Islam by non-Muslims. This is what we see now, and they have decided too, that the Muslims who are integrated in non-Muslim countries are a part of the universal Ummah, and that their rights to be respected must be applied.

In reviewing the DOHA Compact and the US Muslim engagement, it is the template for President O's action plan, rhetoric and strategy. His action and deed is so close to these documents, it seems as if O's speechwriters lifted copy straight from the document.

Basically a group of Muslims were signatories to the Doha compact. Why we are allowing Muslims to dictate our foreign policy and domestic acquiescence to Islam is beyond me. Has everyone lost their cotton pickin' mind?