Saturday, September 12, 2009

WHY WAIT??

We all know that Iran has a megalomaniac leader and the puppet of the Mullahs who are sworn haters of America and Israel. What we o not no is when they get the BOMB will they use it on Israel or will they fashion a suitcase type bomb that they will give to terrorists to inflict serious damage on whom they call "the great Satan"--the USA!!
Iran is in a race to acquire a nuclear weapon, a political game changer for the Mid-East.

What we also should know is revealed in this statement."America’s Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Vienna-based watchdog group, correctly set the tone by stating that Iran now has sufficient material to produce a nuclear weapon. Glyn Davies added that Iran’s “ongoing enrichment activities moves Iran closer to a dangerously and destabilizing breakout capacity” These were the toughest remarks so far during the Obama Administration concerning Iran’s technical capacity to build a atomic bomb, and added to the anxiety that Teheran is really not negotiating seriously but instead buying time while playing the international community for a patsy".

We have dithered around with UN resolutions and threats of embargoes for eight years, but the Iranian's keep making their nuclear killer bomb!

Will we wait until we have another 9/11 only worse??
It is as my grandfather said to me "it is time to fish or cut bait"!

We have the capability to take out the known sites where thy are enriching the nuclear materials, and we should strike before they do!
Obama and his minions seem to be concentrated on socializing the USA more than he is concerned with his main job as President. To protect the citizens and be the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces who reacts appropriately to a threat to OUR safety!

But there are fascinating twists in the storyline since last year. President Barack Obama has offered to negotiate with Tehran without preconditions and earlier in the year set a September deadline for Iran to negotiate seriously or face renewed calls for economic sanctions. Obama’s Springtime offer essentially allowed Tehran’s scientists a further six months of uninterrupted work on their nuclear program. Yet, since that time, Ahmadinejad’s own authority has been challenged in the bitter aftermath of Iran’s fraudulent Presidential elections.

Now come September we confront our own arbitrary deadline but with some definite changes in the political landscape. The Obama Administration, despite initial optimism in dealing with this Charter member of Axis of Evil, feels it may be getting scammed by Ahmadinejad. The West Europeans, while decidedly nervous over a nuclear Iran, would just like to squeeze in a few more lucrative business deals before the next slap on the wrist. And neighboring Arab states are just plain scared.This is all being done with the threat of a nuclear attack on us by Iran never being mentioned .

If we are more concerned with what the rest of the World thinks of us then we are about protecting our citizens from a nuclear disaster that will make the Twin Towers pale in comparison.
Then we should give the green light to the Israelis to take out the threat. Each day we hesitate and talk they are building air defense systems that will cost more lives of the pilots who eventually have to do the air strike. And we risk the nuclear disaster that hangs over the heads of every major city in the USA unless this madman is stopped!
Source: World Tribune. com

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Like the weather if it doesn't suit you stick around and it will eventually change. Obama's positions and campaign promises have been unstable to say the least.
First there was his promise to release the photographs of the alleged torture of terrorist Muslim prisoners. He decided that their release would give aid and comfort to the enemy, so he blocked their release. Then there is his flip flop on the military tribunals.
Now his promise to close Guantanamo prison is apparently not going to be fulfilled, because Congress refuses to appropriate the funds needed to close the prison, and no U.S.Senator wants to have any terrorist imprisoned in his state, nor do foreign countries want them!
As a result, feeling political pressure, Senate Democrats said Tuesday that they planned to withhold funding( Obama asked for 80 million) to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, until President Barack Obama presents a plan for handling its 241 detainees. Source: Wall Street Journal

Then there was Obama's statement that he did not want to own and run the Detroit based car companies, but he fired the president of General Motors and brokered a deal where the Union holds 55% percent of the Chrysler Corporation, and has guaranteed the warranties on Chrysler cars with the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. treasury!

Obama has broken at least ten campaign promises, including seven promises in signing the economy-shrinking $800 billion stimulus package, and one promise in signing the Lilly Ledbetter law and the SCHIP tax increase.

After it covertly inserted language into the stimulus package to protect millions of dollars in bonuses at AIG, a major liberal donor, the Administration later switched course and sought to curry favor with an outraged public by praising the House for passing a 90 percent bonus tax, a tax broadened to cover not just AIG but also employees at other, healthy TARP banks. On March 22, the New York Times reported that the Administration wants to impose vague compensation limits on all banks and financial institutions, whether or not they receive any taxpayer money at all, and perhaps all public companies as well. To avoid stringent application of those limits, companies’ executives would have an incentive to curry favor with their federal masters, by making campaign contributions to Obama and his liberal Congressional allies (the way AIG did). Meanwhile, the Administration is now backtracking on its earlier praise for the legislation that would tax the AIG bonuses.
And Obama promised that the public would have 5 DAYS to look online and find out what’s in his proposed bills before he signs them. Well, another promise broken. Barack Obama signed the largest spending bill in US history andi t had only been posted online for 12 hours before it was voted on in the US House and Senate.


Obama also claimed the $800 billion stimulus package was needed to avert “disaster” and “irreversible decline.” But the Congressional Budget Office, controlled by his own Congressional allies, admitted that the stimulus package will shrink the economy over the long run, in reports and studies released before and after the bill’s passage.Source:OpenMarket.org

And yesterday he continued with his deception when he met with the Prime Minister of Israel.This quote from Press Secretary Gibbs illustrates my point.
"With each of them,( he is speaking about Israel, Syria and the Palestinians) the president will discuss ways the United States can strengthen and deepen our partnerships, as well as the steps all parties should take to help achieve peace between Israelis and Palestinians and between Israel and the Arab states,"

Given that with the exception of Syria, peace already exists between Israel and the Arab states, and Syria and Israel have been having bi-lateral secret talks without help from the U.S, Obama is setting up as a goal for himself something that already exists.

With regards to Israel and the Palestinians,Obama's statement of support of a two state solution, notwithstanding Netanyahu's political posturing against it is not exactly earth shattering since that has been the goal for years.

With the United States the most important broker of peace in the region, Obama so far has shown little imagination, little strategic thought, and nothing in the way of new initiatives to bring to the process. The only thing Obama has been able to do to date, is unite the Israelis and Palestinians in their mutual anger against him when he made a major diplomatic blunder during the Democratic primary in a speech regarding Jerusalem.

In a speech given before 7000 Jews in Florida, Obama stated that he supported a unified Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel. That of course brought a standing ovation since it meant a rejection of any idea of partitioning East Jerusalem to establish a capitol for a Palestinian state, an idea that is unacceptable to most Israelis and Jews.

But Obama's statement brought condemnation from the Palestinians within 24 hours and in what has lately become an almost daily occurrence with Obama, he reversed himself saying "that he was misunderstood and that what he meant by a unified Jerusalem was a Jerusalem with no barbed wire".

In February of 2008,less than a month after his inauguration, Obama released the statement, "Small businesses are the backbone of our nation's economy and we must protect this great resource. It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."

Since making that statement almost a year ago, President Obama has consistently refused to make good on his campaign promise, and support legislation to stop Fortune 500 firms from hijacking federal contracts designated for America's nearly 27 million small businesses.

Not only has President Obama refused to propose even a single policy to address the problem, but he actually changed his Web site to remove the appearance that he had ever made the statement, "It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."
Is someone counting the broken promises? It's interesting to see how many it will add up until his re-election?

Modern politics seems to consist largely of the well-intentioned being fooled by scoundrels of one kind or another!

Monday, May 18, 2009

In my opinion, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE OATH THAT THE PRESIDENT ELECT TAKES when he is sworn in on inauguration day is "to preserve,protect and defend the Constitution". Is his apparent determination to assume that the Iranians developing nuclear weapons is no threat to the USA a huge mistake? I think so, and those who are confronted with the immediate threat, the Israeli's, are of the same opinion, as this excerpt from the Jerusalem Post will illustrate.

" US President Barack Obama underestimates the threat Iran poses to global security. Were this not the case, he would not have sent CIA Director Leon Panetta to Israel ahead of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's visit to the White House.

Director Panetta was reportedly dispatched to Israel to read the government the "riot act". Israel, he reportedly told his interlocutors, must not attack Iran without first receiving permission from Washington. Moreover, Israel should keep its mouth shut about attacking Iran. As far as Washington is concerned, Iran's latest threats to destroy Israel were nothing more than payback for statements by Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials regarding Israel's refusal to countenance a nuclear armed Iran."This of course is rediculous since Iran threatened to "wipe Israel of the face of the world map" long before the Israeli Prime Minister took office!

This would have some credence if it were not for the close relationship between Iran's madman and Venezuela and Nicaragua's dictators.
Over the past several weeks, we have learned that the administration has made its peace with Iran's nuclear aspirations. Senior administration officials acknowledge as much in off-record briefings. It is true, they say, that Iran may exploit its future talks with the US to run down the clock before they test a nuclear weapon. But, they add, if that happens, the US will simply have to live with a nuclear-armed mullocracy. Does this make us safer if a mad man has nulear weapons and has close association with other uuUSA haters in our hemisphere?

The administration's nonchalance about the threat of a nuclear armed Iran explains why the White House is so up in arms about the prospect of Israel acting independently to prevent Iran from building a nuclear arsenal. As far as the administration is concerned, the only reason Iran would threaten US interests is if Israel provokes it. As far as the administration is concerned, if Israel could just leave Iran's nuclear installations alone, Iran would behave itself. But if Israel preemptively takes out Iran's nuclear capabilities, and Iran in turn attacks Israeli and US targets in the region, the Obama administration will hold Israel - not Iran - responsible for whatever losses the US incurs. That was apparently the message Panetta wanted to transmit to Jerusalem during his recent visit.This not only crazy! But seriously naive.

Venezuela's military alliance with Iran places Iranian military personnel and Hizbullah operatives at every level of Venezuela's military, intelligence and law enforcement establishment. For example, as the Washington-based Center for Security Policy's Western Hemispheric Security Project documented in a recent report, Hizbullah agents control Venezuela's passport agency.

In 2003, Chavez appointed Tarek el-Aissami, a known Hizbullah member to head the country's passport agency. Last year Aissami was promoted to serve as Minister of Interior and Justice. Then too, last June, the US Department of Treasury designated Ghazi Nasr al Din, a Venezuelan diplomat who served as the deputy ambassador in Damascus and Beirut as a Hizbullah agent.

Hizbullah has a large and active presence in Venezuela. It operates openly throughout the country through both Lebanese cells and through native Venezuelan operatives who have converted to Islam. In 2006, a Hizbullah cell comprised of local converts staged an attempted bombing against the US embassy in Caracas.

This Hizbullah has developed a formidable economic presence in Latin America. Although it has run a web of businesses in the region for decades, since 2005 the economic importance of these businesses has been eclipsed by the terror group's involvement in worldwide cocaine distribution facilitated through its close ties with Chavez and FARC. According to the US military's Southern Command, Hizbullah in Latin America earns between $300-500 million per year. This dwarfs the $200 million a year it receives from Iran.

In 2007 Iran and Venezuela announced that they were investing $350 million to build a deep water port at Nicaragua's Monkey Point along the Caribbean Sea. Iran also announced its plans to upgrade Nicaragua's Pacific Port of Corinto. Finally, Teheran announced it would build a dry canal connecting the two ports. Such a building scheme would enable Iran to evade the Panama Canal; to build its own military infrastructure within the ports themselves; and to freely camouflage missile ships as civilian maritime traffic and use them to launch short and medium-range missiles against the US. Moreover, with its massive army of Hizbullah operatives on standby, Iran could launch attacks through its proxies - as it did in its 1992 and 1994 attacks against Israeli and Jewish targets in Buenos Aires - and so deny it had anything to do with the attacks.

None of this should suggest that anyone expects the US to attack Iran's nuclear installations. The administration's policies clearly rule out any such contingency. As for Israel, regardless of what the US does, it should be clear that Jerusalem will not stand by idly and allow existential threats to emerge and grow.

What people - and particularly Americans - could have expected is that the administration would take seriously the threat that Iran poses to the US in the Western Hemisphere. Depressingly however, the administration's apparent decision to abdicate America's position and responsibilities as the sole global superpower has led it to also abdicate its position and responsibilities as the most powerful nation in the Western Hemisphere. Indeed, what the administration's refusal to acknowledge the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran - rich with proxies and allies at America's doorstep - poses to America demonstrates is that in its haste to blame its predecessor for the fact that the US has real enemies, the administration is abdicating its responsibility to defend America

itself". Hat tip to Caroline Glick of Jerusalem Post

So is Obama living up to his swearing to support and defend the Constitution upheld when is apparently endangering the people covered by that document by "making nice" with avowed enemies of the USA? As he extends his hand to Iran, are they extending their threat by supplying missile capability and know how to outspoken enemies of the USA like Chavez and Ortega. These idea logs hate the USA not because of Bush, but because of whom we are and what we stand for. Obama's hope of seeking a diplomatic solution is like trying to make a deal with the Devil!

Even the Pope is being duped by the Palestinian Authority! Obama and most of the EU nations have advocated a two state resolution to the conflict between the PA and Israel.
The Pope said this yesterday; "Mr. President, the Holy See supports the right of your people to a sovereign Palestinian homeland in the land of your forefathers, secure and at peace with its neighbors, within internationally recognized borders," the pontiff said upon his arrival, standing alongside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
This despite the fact that Christians are a tiny minority among the 3.9 million Palestinians who live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In a trend seen throughout the Middle East, their numbers have dwindled as Christian Palestinians weary of occupation seek out new opportunities abroad.


The bloody conflict that has festered for over 40 years,partially because the PA and all Arab and the non-Arab Iran have refused to recognise the right of the State of Israel to exist!

Obama's closed door session with the Israeli advance man for Prime Minister Netanyahu indicated the lack of support that the Israeli's can expect from Obama. This despite the fact that the PA nad most Arab countries want to destroy Israek, and this story from Ramalla illustrates the contempt the Muskim world has for Israel and Jews in general.


"In the first case of its kind, a Palestinian Authority "military court" on Tuesday sentenced a Palestinian man to death by hanging after finding him guilty of selling land to Jews. The verdict came shortly after the PA's chief Islamic judge, Sheikh Tayseer Tamimi, issued yet another fatwa (religious decree) banning Muslims from selling land or houses to Jews. The death sentence is seen as an attempt by the PA leadership in Ramallah to deter Palestinians from conducting real estate transactions with Jews. It follows reports according to which Jewish individuals and organizations recently bought land and houses from Arabs in Jerusalem and some areas in the West Bank. The man sentenced to death is Anwar Brigith, 59, from the village of Bet Umar, north of Hebron. The three-judge panel found the defendant guilty of violating PA laws that bar Palestinians from selling property to "the enemy." In its ruling, the court, which convened in Hebron, said that Brigith had acted in violation of a Palestinian "military law" dating back to 1979, which states that it is forbidden for a Palestinian to sell land to Jews. The accused was also found guilty of violating a law dating back to 1958 that calls for a boycott against Israel, as well as another law from 1953 that bans trade with Israelis. The judges issued the verdict unanimously and pointed out that the defendant did not have the right to appeal. The death sentence, however, must be approved by PA President Mahmoud Abbas. The court was headed by Gen. Abdel Karim al-Masri, who sat together with two other PA security officers, Muhrez Atyani and Nabil Jaber. The court also decided to confiscate Brigith's money and property. Although the PA has never executed Palestinians accused of selling land to Jews, several "suspects" have been kidnapped and murdered by Palestinian security personnel or members of armed groups in the West Bank and Gaza Strip". source: The New Media Journal

Why do those who advocate dividing Israel not consider asking Egypt, Iran or Syria to deed land to the Palestinians so they can form a State of their own?

INDICATIONS THAT OBAMA PLANS TO COMPROMISE WITH OUR "ENEMIES"

In an interview between the German newspaper and Internet site provider, Der Spiegel, and former Clinton administration Ambassaddor to Israel, Mr. Martin Indyk. The question asked by Der Spiegel of Mr. Indyk was how he believed that the new Obama administration would resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Mr, Indyk said that President Clinton tried to use diplomacy, and President Bush tried to use force to get both sides to do things "our way".

His specific words were: "We Americans have this wonderful but frightening innocence, a belief that we have a mission to transform troubled parts of the world. Even more troubling is that we not only think it is our responsibility but that we can actually remake the Middle East in our own image as a peaceful, democratic place. It is that instinct which George W. Bush and Bill Clinton shared in the Middle East, even though they pursued the objective of transformation in two very different ways -- one by peace-making, one by war making. But they shared that basic naivety and they both failed. Now we have to be less naive and more humble. I am sure Obama has understood that".

My problem with this statement is that if Indyk is correct about Obama, it appears that our foreign policy will be one of concessions(aka, giving in to demands) rather than dealing from a position of strength AS THE PREMIER MILITARY POWER IN THE WORLD. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE IN FOR A REDUCTION OF OUR MILITARY POWER, and a massive increase in our diplomacy. In steps Hillary Clinton!

This will play right into the hands of Communist China and latent-Communist Russia! Two Countries that President Reagan correctly identified as the "forces of evil and our enemies!

If Obama plans to cosy up to the Chinese, how will our attitude of an independent Taiwan be affected? How will we cope with the expansion of Iranian and Islamic terrorist nuclear threats, if we abandon the idea of building anti-missile launchers in Poland, to accommodate Russian objections to the construction?

There are many other questions that relate to National defense and our economy that could be affected if Obama is too accommodating to any conflict that comes our way, instead of standing fast and defending our position as a World power the envy of the rest of nations and the UN.

Will Obama and his administration be more interested in becoming a member of the World Community than to protect the sovereignty of the United States. Is Mr. Indyk indicating that Obama will try to make the USA a new member of the European Union?

Posted by BILL at Tuesday, January 13, 2009 0 comments

AMERICAN JEWS REWARDED WITH TREACHERY

Obama has not even been sworn in as President , but he is already making promises that should give American Jewish voters pause. In a report printed in today's Jerusalem Post it is revealed that President -elect has promised the head of the Palestinians that he will work toward getting them their own Palestinian State. The only way he can do this is to convince Israel , or should I say coerce the Israelis to give up lands they have paid for with the blood of heir sons and daughters!

US president-elect Barack Obama on Tuesday spoke on the phone with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and pledged that his administration would back the peace process with Israel, a senior Palestinian negotiator said.

In a statement sent to reporters,spokesperson Saeb Erekat said that during the conversation Obama expressed support for the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

"Obama promised that he'll continue efforts to push the peace process forward in order to arrive at a two state solution," Erekat said. "He said he will work with both the Palestinians and the Israelis to achieve peace, which is in the interest of both parties."

Erekat said that Obama's remarks showed his determination to help reach a permanent status agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

It is important to understand that a sovereign state of Palestine did not exist before 1967 or 1948. Nor was a state of Palestine ever promised by UN Security Council Resolution 242. Contrary to popular understanding, a state of Palestine has never existed. Never!

Even as a nonstate legal entity, "Palestine" ceased to exist in 1948, when Great Britain relinquished its League of Nations mandate. During the 1948-49 Israeli War of Independence (a war of survival fought because the entire Arab world had rejected the authoritative United Nations resolution creating a Jewish state), the West Bank and Gaza came under the illegal control of Jordan and Egypt respectively. These Arab conquests did not put an end to an already-existing state or to an ongoing trust territory. What these aggressions did accomplish was the effective prevention, sui generis, of a state of Palestine. The original hopes for Palestine were dashed, therefore, not by the new Jewish state or by its supporters, but by the Arab states, especially Jordan and Egypt!

Both Israel and the United States will soon have new leadership. Neither Jerusalem nor Washington should be deceived by the so-called "Road Map To Peace in the Middle East," a twisted bit of highway that makes entirely inaccurate claims about "Palestinian Territories" and "Israeli Occupation." For substantially documented reasons of history and national security, it is imperative that a twenty-third Arab state never be carved out of the still-living body of Israel.

If anyone should still have doubts about Palestinian intentions, they need look only to former Prime Minister Sharon's "disengagement" from Gaza, an area that is now used by Hamas to stage rocket attacks upon Israeli noncombatants. Source: LOUIS RENE BERES

Now, are you still happy you voted for Obama?

Monday, September 01, 2008

The Jerusalem Post is reporting that Army Radio in Israel, monitored a talk between Senator Joe Biden in closed conversations with Jerusalem officials three years ago "that he was firmly opposed to an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities".
Biden, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, reportedly claimed "that Israel would likely have to come to terms with a nuclear Iran. He reportedly expressed doubt over the effectiveness of economic sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic and said he was against the opening of an additional military and diplomatic front, saying that the US had more pressing problems, such as North Korea and Iraq".
My sources could not confirm this talk, but it is apparent that the top half of the Democratic ticket is perceived as a man favored by the Palestinians in Gaza.
The same issue of the J.Post reported and showed a film strip of a phone bank of 25 Palestinian college age men making telephone calls using the Internet to influence voters in America to vote for Obama.
The Palestinian who "hatched" this scheme stated to reporters that "they are calling from Gaza to ask those that contact to vote for Obama because he is a man of peace"!

Army Radio said that "Jerusalem officials expressed amazement at the comments and were wondering which position to take seriously, that of Biden or Obama, who declared last Monday that the world must press Iran through sanctions and diplomacy to stop its nuclear program, so that Israel does not feel its "back is against the wall" and that it therefore has no choice but to attack".

"The position of the vice presidential candidate puts a huge question mark over the degree of empathy the Obama administration would display concerning one of the greatest threats Israel faces," they said.

Unfortunately a man of Peace at all costs has no business having the position of Commander in Chief of all USA forces during a time of war! And do not delude yourself, we are involved in a war. A conflict for the very existence of freedom and liberty in the Western Hemisphere and Israel.

Tyrants throughout the ages have attacked armed and unarmed, unprepared adversaries. This is true even in our own recent history. In World War I, Germany went to war with a well-armed France and England. In World War II, the Allies and Russia were not without arms. But that did not prevent Germany from once again attacking them.

MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD has stated clearly on numerous occasions that he plans to destroy the State of Israel and its inhabitants. Tyrants and madmen often disclose exactly what they intend to do if they get the opportunity. For example, Adolph Hitler clearly articulated his views on the Jewish people which he wrote in Mein Kampf and constantly espoused in public speeches. The problem is not non-disclosure of intent; it is the intended victim's leaden ears. Let us not bee fooled by slick talking politicians who offer change, but will be willing to concede anything to those who threaten us to maintain this false peace we find ourselves in today.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

Tuesday, July 01, 2008