Saturday, February 28, 2009

The Obama Doctrine: 'America is Evil and the Terrorists are Helpless!'

"We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki. And we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye... America's chickens are coming home to roost!"
Obama mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright

"And what of America's lack of introspection about September 11? Instead of asking what might have caused the attack, or questioning the propriety of the national response to it, there is an ugly mood of chauvinism. Before Americans call on others to examine themselves, we should examine ourselves."
Chas Freeman - recently appointed by Barack Obama to chair the National Intelligence Council

"Now, the one thing that I think is very important is for us to have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil, because a lot of evil has been perpetrated [by us] based on the claim that we were trying to confront evil."
Barack Obama at the Saddleback forum - August 2008

"Such a failure of empathy [on the part of Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attackers]... is not... unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. Most often,... it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair... We will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe...."
Barack Obama, shortly after 9/11

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Eric Holder's Law Firm Defends Guantanamo Detainees

Attorney General, Eric Holder - who embarked on a "fact finding" visit to Guantanamo Bay on Monday - previously worked as a senior partner with Covington & Burling, a DC law firm that devotes considerable time defending Gitmo detainees, the New York Post reported on its website Thursday.

The job paid Holder $2 million a year, and he'll likely collect a similar amount this year as part of his separation package, the Post contends.

Holder and his Covington & Burling pals also defended Chiquita Brands International in 2004 against charges it funneled more than $1.7 million to terrorist groups.

Another former Covington & Burling attorney, Marc Falkoff, who represents several Gitmo detainees, published a selection of poems from some of the detainees.

In 2006 - as part of a "Guantanamo teach-in" sponsored by Seton Hall Law School - Falkoff recited a poem written by Abdullah Saleh Al-Ajmi, a former Gitmo detainee. Falkoff described Al-Ajmi and other detainee poets as "gentle, thoughtful young men" who, though frustrated and disillusioned, expressed an abiding hope in the future.

However, Al-Ajmi - who was released from American custody in 2005 - eventually returned to Iraq and committed a suicide bombing in the city of Mosul in March of 2008.

So much for Mr. Al-Ajmi's "abiding hope in the future".....

[Jihadist video of the suicide bombing commemorating Al-Ajmi.]

Covington & Burling also did some legal work on behalf of Osama Bin Laden's former bodyguard and driver, Mr. Salim Hamdan.

Another Obama appointee, Mr. Neal Katyal, was the lead plaintiff's counsel in defense of Salim Hamdan. Thanks to Mr. Katyal, Bin Laden's former bodyguard is now a free man. And to show his appreciation to Mr. Katyal for defending Hamdan, Barack Obama recently appointed Katyal principal deputy Solicitor General of the US.

So, if you're looking for a job in the Obama administration and you wish to enhance your resume in the eyes of the President, here's what you need to do:

Lend a helping hand to a terrorist and volunteer some of your free time working on behalf of a terrorist. And I guarantee you: You will soon land yourself a cushy and prestigious job in the Obama administration.......

Related posts:

Why does Eric Holder support Terrorists?

Eric Holder, Renowned Terrorist Sympathizer, named new Attorney General

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Helen Thomas on Obama's speech: It Lacked substance, but it gave us a lot of hope and inspiration

"I think it [Obama's speech] really lacked substance.... But... it gave us a lot of hope and it was very inspiring...."
Helen Thomas

Source - Houston Chronicle blogs

Iran "Unclenches its Fist", announces Plans to install 50,000 Centrifuges in 5 years!

Barack Obama's "policy of diplomacy" is already bearing fruit as evidenced by Iran's declaration on Wednesday that it plans to expand its uranium enrichment capacity nearly 10-fold over the next five years.

"Iran will install 50,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium at its Natanz plant up from the 6,000 now running," said Gholam Reza Aqazadeh, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization "Iran in the immediate future will install the new generation of centrifuges which are technologically more advanced than the operating ones."

“Our plans to install and run centrifuges do not depend on political conditions. Iran will not make any major changes in its projects in Natanz...," he added.

Aqazadeh also called on the West "to face reality and accept living with a nuclear Iran."

As long as Iran continues to "unclench its fist", I see no reason why Obama would object to its nuclear weapons program. And as long as Obama puts diplomacy ahead of belligerency, I see no reason why Iran wouldn't continue to keeps its fist unclenched.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Did Obama Send a Letter to Hamas via a Congressional delegation?

Last week, a UN official in Gaza gave Sen. John Kerry a letter from Hamas to deliver to President Obama.

Initially, a spokesman for Hamas denied that the terrorist organization had sent a letter to Obama. But eventually Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh, admitted that he had penned the letter with the endorsement of the "Hamas government".

On Saturday, Fox news reported that U.S. officials were "outraged at the UN relief agency for apparently handing the letter off to Kerry," saying the incident had "raised security concerns over how much Hamas knew about Kerry's travel plans."

But of course, this so-called "outrage" on the part of US officials seems dubious at best, considering the Gaza Strip and its security apparatus is controlled by Hamas, thus, it is inconceivable for US officials to have assumed that Hamas would not have had prior knowledge of Kerry's visit.

Meanwhile, a Kerry spokesman told FOX News that "the Democratic senator was not aware that the letter was from Hamas when he accepted it from the UN official."

However, according to the MEMRI blog, "Palestinian sources told the Filastin daily, which is close to Hamas, that the American delegation that visited Gaza brought with it a letter from President Barack Obama to Hamas, and that the Hamas movement had authorized one of its ministers in Gaza to receive the letter and to respond".

Here's an excerpt from the Filastin daily's article translated by Google [Keep in mind, Google's translation, like all web based translations, makes the text a bit incoherent]:

The article is entitled: "Exchange of letters between the Department for Obama and Hamas, Is it a New Policy in the US?"
This comes in the context of the modern so-called "diplomatic exchange of letters", which was heading to visit a U.S. Senate delegation to the Gaza Strip, which was the first visit of its kind in the Gaza Strip, since the control of the "Hamas in Gaza.

The State Department official said, on Friday, Senator John Kerry, who recently visited Gaza, received a letter from the "Hamas" addressed to U.S. President Barack Obama, and denied "Hamas" the news.

The private sources of "Palestine", yesterday, [said that] Obama sent a letter to the "Hamas" movement across the American delegation.
Like I said, the English translation is a bit incoherent, but the implication of the article and it's title is quite clear. And undoubtedly, Memri read the article in its original Arabic form.

Okay, so the question arises: Who's telling the truth? Hamas or Obama and company?

Well, admittedly, it's difficult to discern the truth, since both sides seem to be prevaricating over the matter.

I will also admit, however, that it's difficult to imagine that Obama, with his political savviness, would actually send a letter to Hamas, knowing full well that Hamas was liable to disclose the matter publicly. Thus, it's possible that Hamas is simply concocting the story to defend its recent overtures [the letter it had written] to Obama.

In November it was reported that former Obama adviser, Robert Malley [who had previously been sacked by Obama during the presidential campaign after the media disclosed he had met with Hamas officials] met with Hamas officials on behalf of the president-elect shortly after the election. Obama however, denied that Malley had acted on his behalf. And undoubtedly, he will also deny the Filastin daily's report concerning his alleged letter to Hamas.

But one thing is clear: Hamas likes Barack Obama! The venerable Ahmed Yousef even went so far as to extoll Obama during the presidential campaign, comparing him to John F. Kennedy and stating: "We like Mr. Obama and we hope that he will win the election...."

And with Obama currently shifting US foreign policy in support of a Hamas-Fatah unity government, you can be sure that Hamas is totally infatuated with him right now!

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Obama Snubs Katrina Victims once again, Nary a Peep from the Fawning Masses

First they chose to ignore Barack Obama's hypocrisy and his cold-hearted apathy toward the victims of Hurricane Katrina when he voted twice for the infamous Alaskan "Bridge To Nowhere"and specifically voted against giving that money to Katrina victims!

And now the fawning masses are ignoring the president's latest snub to the destitute victims of Katrina:

Obama recently allocated billions of dollars - money which was supposed to be used to stimulate the sagging economy - to fund a myriad of pork projects, including many of his own pet projects - but he couldn't cough up even a dime for the victims of Katrina.

Excerpted from MSNBC:
The economic stimulus signed by President Barack Obama will spread billions of dollars across the country to spruce up aging roads and bridges. But there's not a dime specifically dedicated to fixing leftover damage from Hurricane Katrina.

And there's no outrage about it.

Democrats who routinely criticized President George W. Bush for not sending more money to the Gulf Coast appear to be giving Obama the benefit of the doubt in his first major spending initiative...

"I'm not saying there won't be a need in the future, but right now the focus is not on more money, it's on using what we have," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who has criticized Democrats and Republicans alike over Katrina funding.

It's a significant change in tone from the Bush years, when any perceived slight of Katrina victims was met with charges that the Republican president... callously ignored the Gulf's needs...

Just last summer, Democrats accused Bush of putting Iraq before New Orleans when he sought to block Gulf Coast reconstruction money from a $162 billion war spending bill. Bush was pilloried for not mentioning the disaster in back-to-back State of the Union addresses.

Former Rep. Jim McCrery, R-La., who helped lead the fight for Gulf aid before retiring last year, said he was surprised over the lack of Katrina money in the bill, but figures lawmakers may be granting Obama leniency due to the magnitude of the country's current economic challenges.

"Any new president is going to have a little honeymoon," said McCrery...

Thomas Langston, a Tulane University political scientist, said Democrats may be "playing nice" to keep in good favor. But dire needs remain, he said.

"Hopefully they've gotten some promises behind the scenes about longer-term commitments," Langston said. "Like most people down here, I would hate for anybody to get the impression that, 'We're good, thank you.'"

The federal government has devoted more than $175 billion to the region since Katrina ripped through New Orleans in 2005, and billions remain unspent. It's unclear how much more money will be needed, but nearly everyone agrees that the federal government should continue investing heavily in the region's levees and other infrastructure to prevent a repeat of Katrina's devastation...

There was hardly a complaint as Obama and other Democratic leaders pieced together the package. Members of the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus, who have called Bush's Katrina funding a moral failure, said they were thrilled with the stimulus...
"We need a president that will wake up every day and ask, 'How will New Orleans be rebuilt?"
Barack Obama - July 2007

Yes indeed, I'm sure the victims of Katrina are first and foremost on Obama's mind - right after the "Alaskan Bridge To Nowhere" ....

Obama Turns Blind Eye toward Syria's WMD's

Democrats in congress maintain that the reason they voted in favor of going to war with Iraq was because President Bush led them to believe that Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons [WMD's]. But in truth, it was the the Dems who maintained Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons long before Mr. Bush even ascended to the oval office.

Nevertheless, if the Dems believe that chemical weapons in the hands of a rogue regime is sufficient reason to go to war, then why are they now making overtures to a despotic regime that possesses chemical weapons?

President Obama and Democratic lawmakers are currently trying to establish relations with Syria, a country that not only gives aid and sanctuary to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups - but a country that reportedly possesses chemical weapons.
Jane’s Intelligence Review used satellite images from commercial sources gathered between 2005 and 2008 to examine activity at the chemical weapons facility identified as Al Safir in northwest Syria.

Imagery from DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-1 satellite and GeoEye’s IKONOS satellite shows that the site contains not only a number of the defining features of a chemical weapons facility, but also that significant levels of construction have taken place at the facility’s production plant and adjacent missile base... Construction at the Al Safir facility appears to be the most significant chemical weapons production, storage and weaponisation site in Syria...
We know that the Syrians were in the process of developing nuclear weapons before the Israelis bombed their nuclear facilities. But now the Syrians are developing other weapons of mass destruction and the Democrats are rewarding their efforts by establishing ties with them.

Two delegations from the U.S. Congress recently visited Syria, and Sen. John Kerry is due to arrive in Syria this coming weekend.

This is the same John Kerry who in October of 2002 stated: "I will be giving the President of the United States authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

In 2002, Hillary Clinton issued a similar statement in explaining her rationale to authorize war with Iraq:
"Intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons.... He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare..."
But apparently, Syria's chemical weapons program and its support of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups is perfectly acceptable under the new "Obama Doctrine" - which clearly dictates that we must talk to our enemies - if only to show them how much we appreciate their tyranny.......

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Obama's Elf?

Here's an interesting YouTube video with no apparent message other than for you to figure out where the words of the song came from. Watch the video and see if you could come up with the answer:

Did you figure it out yet? No? How about the next video?


Tuesday, February 17, 2009

A-Rod for President in 2112?

Barack Obama recently admitted that he 'screwed up' when he tried to install tax cheat,Tom Daschle as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

A truly admirable confession, indeed.

However, some pundits are now claiming that New York Yankee baseball star, Alex Rodriguez - who recently admitted that he used steroids earlier in his career - outdid the president on Tuesday.

During a news conference at the Yankees spring training facilities, A-Rod spoke about his use of steroids and confessed: "I screwed up BIG TIME!"

It takes a great man like President Obama to admit that he "screwed up", but it takes an even greater man like A-Rod to admit that he "screwed up BIG TIME!".

Hence, there's no doubt in my mind that A-Rod will be elected US president one day. He certainly has proven that he has the moral integrity to lead this great nation of ours.

And I believe that even Brian Williams would agree with me on that.....

Monday, February 16, 2009

Valerie Lucznikowska - Part II

Barack Obama recently invited family members of victims killed on 9/11 to the White House to address their concerns about closing down Gitmo and delaying the trials for the 9/11 attacks. Family members had demanded the meeting.

But as I noted last week, one of the invitees, Miss Valerie Lucznikowska - whose nephew, Adam Arias, was killed in the terrorist attacks - happens to be an activist and vocal advocate in support of closing down Gitmo.

The New York Post reported last week that Mr. Arias' two brothers both sent letters to Obama protesting Miss Lucznikowska's invitation to the Oval Office "because she does not speak for or represent the Arias family. They complained that Lucznikowska is exploiting their brother's name to promote her own agenda."

A family member of Mr. Arias recently left a comment on this blog [comment No. 4], stating that the Arias family was greatly distressed over a recent New York Times piece which depicted "an apparently morally superior Valerie Lucznikoska..." in an article that "was badly researched and terribly biased."

The family member went on to excoriate the Obama administration for it's handling of the White House meeting and for the selection process it used to choose whom would represent the 9/11 families at the meeting:
"How does an estranged aunt gain access to Mr. Obama, (and the media attention that goes with it,) while Adam Arias' immediate family struggles to be heard despite ham-handed efforts of the administration to gag us?...

"...I shared a bedroom with Adam and grew up in the same household -- but in the Obama administration the crazy aunt is now next of kin. Adam's widow, mother, father and five sisters and brothers would love to talk with Mr. Obama. Ms. Lucznikowska is not an Arias family member and as such should not have been considered for a meeting of 9-11 family members. However, I am sure the corrupted process that deigned her a family member and gave her access to the President is of little interest to the White House or the New York Times."
The family member had plenty more to say about the debacle. You can read the full comment here.

However, it should also be noted that Miss. Lucznikowska's advocacy on behalf of the Gitmo detainees is only part of the story!

Bear in mind that when assessing a far left-wing advocate like Miss. Lucznikowska - who spends a great deal of her time defending the rights of terrorists - it's safe to assume that there's probably a deeper perversion lurking behind this cloak of so called "Liberal progressiveness".

And indeed, there is!

Miss. Lucznikowska not only supports Gitmo detainees, she's also a 9/11 truther!

In September of 2005, the World Socialist Website posted an article accusing the US government of having foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks "which may have allowed the attacks to take place."

Miss Lucznikowska is quoted in an interview as saying:

“My nephew was told that people in the South Tower didn’t have to evacuate because the collapse of the North Tower was an accident. I believe that NORAD [North American Aerospace Defense Command] knew that the South Tower was going to be attacked before it went down. Think of what this means... There were lots and lots of clues about the fact that the government had prior knowledge.

"It is not only September 11—the war in Iraq and now the catastrophe in New Orleans show time and again that the Bush administration is only concerned with empire, oil and corporate profits...

"I’m just beginning to read all the exposés of 9/11...
I would still like to know how the government knew so quickly after the attacks who the hijackers were... The 9/11 commission definitely did not get to the full truth.”

Read Miss Lucznikowska's complete tirade here.

The New York Times article, which we quoted earlier, concludes with the following statement issued by Barack Obama during the Presidential campaign:

"It’s not about the terrorists," Obama asserted. "It’s about us. It’s about what kind of country we are.”

However, shortly after 9/11, Barack Obama issued the following statement which was seemingly all 'about the terrorists - and their so called "helplessness and despair"!:
"Such a failure of empathy [on the part of the terrorists on 9/11]... is not... unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. Most often..., it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.... We will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe."
Thus, in Obama's view, it really isn't about us, but rather it's about raising the hopes of terrorists and casting the 9/11 families into an abyss of agony, helplessness and despair!

Ultimately, Barack Obama is snatching away our own hope and passing it on to the terrorists!

And in doing so, he's creating "Hope" and "Change" - in one fell swoop!

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Obama Takes a Shot at Judd Gregg During Lincoln Banquet

Apparently, the president wasn't too happy with Gregg's decision - as evidenced by the following video - so he felt the need to give him a little jab [I suppose Obama would call that 'retribution'!]:

Interview with Mother of USS Cole Victim who Refused to Meet with Obama

It Was Probably an Honest Mistake

Earlier this week, the New York Times reported that Valerie Lucznikowska - whose nephew, Adam P. Arias, was was among those killed at the World Trade Center on 9/11 - recently received a shocking phone call: She was invited to join a group that would sit down with President Obama at the White House two days later.
“I get this call out of nowhere,” Ms. Lucznikowska said. “First you get the flash in your mind: Is this a joke? Somebody you don’t know saying you’re invited to meet the president, you want to say, ‘Name, rank and serial number, please.’ ”

Although the 9/11 and Cole relatives said they were pleased that the president met with them, not all embraced his views on Guantánamo. Ms. Lucznikowska needed no convincing from him, however. For years, she felt that Guantánamo and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq had become intertwined as symbols of torture and of justice long delayed and therefore denied. They had, in her view, become symbols of revenge.

“I’m not interested in revenge,” Lucznikowska said. “Revenge is useless if you don’t uphold your own principles. What good is it to punish someone if you are not punishing them justly? That’s what America is all about.”

If political labels are necessary, Ms. Lucznikowska falls leftward, part of a group called September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows... She was invited to the Obama meeting, she said, because she had immersed herself in reading and writing about Guantánamo.
So, Ms. Lucznikowska alleges that the president invited her among the 9/11 relatives because she advocates shutting down Gitmo. Hmmm......

Nevertheless, the late Mr. Arias's two brothers reportedly weren't too happy when they learned that their aunt was among the 9/11 relatives invited to last week's meeting'. They were not invited.

Andy and Donald Arias, attended the hearings of five suspected plotters of the 9/11 attacks at Guantanamo Bay last month and support keeping the facility open and prosecuting the detainees immediately. By comparison, Lucznikowska has complained about alleged torture of Gitmo detainees and favors closing Gitmo.

The Arias brothers both sent letters to Obama protesting her presence in the Oval Office because she does not speak for or represent the Arias family. They complained that Lucznikowska is exploiting their brother's name to promote her own agenda.

h/t JamieWearingFool

Ultimately, I think Barack Obama was probably unaware of Miss Lucznikowska's views on Guantanamo and did not realize that Mr. Arias had two brothers - otherwise, in all likelihood, he would have invited them, and not her, to the meeting. Keep in mind, the president is not the kind of person who would go about exploiting a 9/11 victim like that. It's just not his nature to behave in such a callous manner. [Ahem.....]

P.S. A brother of the late Adam Arias comments on the JamieWearingFool blog:

"Was Valerie [Lucznikowska] representing her "own view" when she paraded in front of the U.N. and the White House with a poster of my brother with a caption reading, "Not in His Name?" Who is she to say what can be done in "his name?" Valerie is a carrion feeder and a liar." [h/t Jawa Report]

I just wish someone would have informed Obama and his staffers about Lucznikowska's leftist views.

Ultimately, the White House needs to do a better job of keeping abreast of these things, otherwise, the American people may start to believe that Obama is going soft on terrorists - which of course - is not true. [Ahem.....]

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Obama the Good Cop, Obama the Bad Cop

Americans United for Change and AFSCME will air a new ad on national cable TV Wednesday calling out GOP leaders for opposing Barack Obama's stimulus plan:

"Our economy in crisis. Millions out of work," says a voiceover on the ad. "That’s why 80 percent of Americans support a plan like President Obama’s to create jobs. But Republican leaders? They’re 'just saying no. No to changing the failed economic policies of the past 8 years. We’re in an economic crisis and Republican leaders are playing politics instead of doing what's right. Call the Republican Leadership – Tell them NO is not an option."

[The ad is at odds with the latest Rasmussen poll that finds only 37% of Americans actually favor the stimulus plan.]

The groups will also air a new radio spot targeting 21 House and Senate members. The spot, titled "Second Chance," reminds voters that the member mentioned voted against the Obama plan and that since that vote was taken, reports revealed that 600,000 jobs were lost in January.

The groups have aired 37 targeted radio or television spots, according to Brad Woodhouse, president of Americans United for Change. - Source - National Journal

Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post recently addressed a similar ad that was aired by Americans United for Change, saying as follows:
It remains to be seen whether Obama will allow these sorts of groups to grow and prosper as advocates for his agenda or whether he will use his own massive grassroots machine as the principal message driver of his legislative efforts...

...It's possible that Obama will [use his own grassroots organizations like] Organizing for America to play good cop (rallying people to support his agenda) while allowing outside groups like Americans United for Change... to play bad cop and hit GOP members for their opposition to his priorities.

Remember that much of Obama's strength as a politician is wrapped up in the idea that he is above politics -- a post-partisan prophet who is bringing much-needed change to Washington. Everything he has done to date... is aimed at reinforcing that message.

But, when the rubber hits the road (and it almost certainly will) on the passage of Obama's agenda who will be the partisan enforcer that every president needs? Can Obama do it himself or will these outside groups, who have been surprisingly active to date, be the ones who take on that responsibility?
But apparently, Chris Cillizza has forgotten what he reported back in June of 2008 - namely, that Barack Obama had installed Brad Woodhouse [president of Americans United for Change and the purveyor of these latest attack ads] as part of the DNC's communications staff to help coordinate the DNC's message with his own campaign message:
The takeover of the Democratic National Committee by Barack Obama's campaign continues apace with the hiring of communications operative Brad Woodhouse at the national party committee...

Woodhouse has a number of long-standing relationships with senior level staffers at the Obama campaign. Woodhouse did a stint in the consulting firm of Tewes and Steve Hildebrand, one of the lead strategists for the Illinois Senator, and has a relationship with Obama press operative Robert Gibbs that dates back to the late 1990s when the duo worked together in Rep. Bobby Etheridge's (D-N.C.) office...

Woodhouse's hiring is the latest sign that Obama's campaign is working to install operatives of their own choosing in key roles across the party to ensure that the brand the Illinois Senator has built during the primary season is preserved in the general election...
Thus, Mr. Woodhouse is clearly not an outsider, but rather an Obama operative and crony.

The airing of these latest attack ads [by Mr. Woodhouse's Americans United for Change] proves that Obama - contrary to Mr. Cillizza's assumption - is craftily playing both good cop and bad cop simultaneously!

How cunning, indeed!

Can Obama Save Julio Osegueda?

Sunday, February 8, 2009

'Dirt Digger' Joins Obama's Legal Team

Excerpted from the Washington Times:
Shauna Daly, a 29-year-old Democratic operative, was named last month to the new job of White House counsel research director. Though she is inside one of the most powerful legal offices in the land, Miss Daly holds no law degree and doesn't list any legal training on her resume.

Her sole experience has been as an opposition researcher for Democratic political campaigns: She helped dig up dirt on rivals, or on her own nominee to prepare for attacks.

Miss Daly has been doing opposition research for Democratic politicians since just after graduation in 2001 from Smith College. ... Before joining the Obama campaign, she was the deputy research director at the Democratic National Committee.

On the Obama campaign, Miss Daly specialized in preparing for political attacks against Mr. Obama. [like the Obama birth certificate controversy]...

If that is part of her job description, the timing of Miss Daly's hiring would appear to be a response to problems the Obama administration has experienced with several of its nominees, most recently the withdrawal of Tom Daschle for secretary of health and human services because of a tax problem.

Although the White House confirmed that the counsel's office has taken over the vetting process, it said Miss Daly has not been involved in any vetting of political appointees and will not do any work on future vetting. A separate team of people inside the counsel's office will handle that task, the White House said.
Read the full article.

In 2005, while working as opposition researcher for the DNC, Miss Daily, requested public records from state agencies on at least 11 potential candidates for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, including Mitt Romney, George Allen, Haley Barbour, Sam Brownback, William Frist, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Guiliani, Chuck Hagel, Mike Huckabee, John McCain and George Pataki. [Sources - Boston Globe and Government Attic, PDF file, page 25] During Sara Palin's run for governor of Alaska in 2006, Miss Daly requested copies of financial disclosure reports and ordinances for Palin's years as mayor.

When it comes to digging up dirt on the opposition, Shauna Daly is a consummate pro. She, undoubtedly, will prove to be a vital asset to the Obama administration.

Thursday, February 5, 2009

The Panetta "Renditions" Farce

CIA Director nominee Leon Panetta told a Senate committee on Thursday that the Obama administration will not conduct the same kind of "extraordinary rendition" that were allowed under the Bush administration.

But of course - as I've noted previously on this blog - Leon Panetta was Chief of Staff in the Clinton administration when the "extraordinary rendition" program actually began.

Nevertheless, some within the mainstream media - like the Examiner's Jay McDonough - have been duped by former Obama adviser, Richard Clarke, who maintains that the kind of "rendition" program that was permitted during Bush's tenure never took place during the Clinton years.

McDonough says that when it was first announced that Panetta would head up the CIA, he "praised Mr. Panetta as a great choice; a proven manager and a clear opponent to the use of torture." But, he says "when it was later reported that Mr. Panetta, as President Clinton's Chief of Staff, was involved in the expanded use of rendition" he started having second thoughts on the matter:
"Torture, whether conducted in our name in some rat filled basement in Cairo or some nice clean cell in Guantanamo is morally reprehensible and illegal. And those who engage in rendition or torture are unfit to occupy public office."
McDonough states that it was an op-ed column in the Boston Globe - written by Richard Clarke - that finally put his mind at ease about Panetta and his upcoming gig in the CIA.

Clarke, in his op-ed, cites several instances - primarily during the Clinton years - where terror suspects had been arrested abroad and returned to the US to stand trial. But according to Clarke, suspected terrorists were never moved to foreign countries during the Clinton administration.

"Although all renditions have become controversial," Clarke contends, "these examples did not involve dragging criminals to a third country for torture or interrogation. ... In these cases, the country in which the criminals were arrested waived their own extradition process and handed them over to US officials on the guarantee that they would be brought to the United States and afforded the same rights of the accused in the US justice system."

Unfortunately, Jay McDonough has allowed himself to be conned by Richard Clarke's chicanery. Hence, we will attempt to clear this matter up once again, and hopefully, Mr. McDonough will take heed and never again let himself be hoodwinked by shysters, the likes of Richard Clarke.

As I noted back in January, Michael Scheurer - a 22-year veteran of the CIA, who resigned from the agency in 2004 and headed the CIA unit that tracked Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999, developed and led the "renditions" program. According to Scheurer, the renditions program [during the Clinton years] included moving prisoners without due legal process to countries without strict human rights protections.

"In Cairo, people are not treated like they are in Milwaukee," Scheurer said in 2005. "The Clinton administration asked us if we believed that the prisoners were being treated in accordance with local law. And we answered, yes, we're fairly sure."

So, when it comes to defining the true nature of the 'renditions' program under Bill Clinton, who should we trust? Richard Clarke, an Obama adviser and avid critic of the Bush administration? Or Michael Scheurer, the CIA veteran who actually developed and led the "renditions" program?

I think you know the answer.........

Update: According to the New York Times, Mr. Panetta told the senate panel today that the CIA "would continue the Bush administration practice of “rendition” — picking terrorism suspects off the street and sending them to a third country. But he said the agency would refuse to deliver a suspect into the hands of a country known for torture or other actions “that violate our human values.”

But I suppose Mr. Panetta would be willing to ship off terror suspects to those "rat filled basements in Cairo", wouldn't he?

"In Cairo, people are not treated like they are in Milwaukee," Scheurer said in 2005. "The Clinton administration asked us if we believed that the prisoners were being treated in accordance with local law. And we answered, yes, we're fairly sure."

Ultimately, these people are nothing but a bunch of evasive, equivocal and fallacious phonies. But of course, the pundits in the mainstream media [who, for months on end, have eviscerated the Bush administration over this issue] will undoubtedly give the Obamalytes a pass on this one too....

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Who tried to Buy Off Rod Blagojevich?

In an interview Tuesday with Fox's Greta Van Susteren, former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich disclosed that shortly after his arrest on federal corruption charges, leading state senators from Illinois tried to strike a deal with him and sought to buy him off:

BLAGOJEVICH: ...Right after our world changed on December the 9th, there were offers made to me by leading state senators, some direct and some through emissaries, that if I stepped aside, they would agree to protect my pay for two years and give me a security detail for two years, but that part of the deal was that I could not pick the United States Senator.

I did not feel comfortable with doing that. I did not want to be a ghost payroll governor. I didn't want to be bought off, because I didn't do anything wrong and I did not feel [comfortable] stepping aside was the right thing to do. And when I chose not to do that, I was then told through intermediaries that they would accelerate the impeachment process and throw me out of office...

VAN SUSTEREN: ...Who made you those offers?

BLAGOJEVICH: They were purported from the Senate leadership through emissaries close to me. - [Read the full transcript here]

Several questions beg to be asked: Who tried to buy off Rod Blagojevich by offering to protect his pay for two years if he agreed to step aside? Where the deal makers [buyers]trying to protect Barack Obama and the reputation of the Democratic Party? Or where they simply trying to protect themselves and their own involvement in a possible pay-to-play scheme? And finally, does this kind of deal - providing two years' pay to a governor who agrees to step aside - conform with the law?

Blagojevich also revealed that shortly after his impeachment, Pat Quinn, the new governor of Illinois, promptly removed the security detail from him and his family:

BLAGOJEVICH: ...That is a little bit unprecedented, because, generally, it's my understanding that former governors are granted a period of adjustment for security purposes before the security detail is stripped away. But that too was part of, I think, the decision I made in December when I rejected their offer to get paid for two years, not work as governor, and keep a security detail. I think that was a response to the fact that I would not be bought off by them....

But who were those people who tried to buy Rod Blagojevich off? Will Patrick Fitzgerald look into this matter?

He should.

Click here to see the interview.

To view the first half of the interview, click here

Update: It seems there may be a loophole in the Illinois constitution that would have allowed Rod Blagojevich to temporarily step down from office and pass his governing powers to the Lt. Governor. Blagojevich would still be the Governor, he would collect his full salary and maintain his security detail, but the Lt. Governor would be the 'Acting Governor'.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Iran in Cahoots with Al Qaeda, 11 former Gitmo Detainees have rejoined terrorist groups abroad!

Last month, just five days after Barack Obama signed an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp [within a year], two Saudis released from the facility in 2007 appeared in an al Qaeda video, renewing their pledge to attack Western interests.

And now the New York Times informs us that 9 additional detainees - released from Gitmo - have rejoined their Jihadi friends:
Eleven Saudis who were released from Guantánamo Bay, and then passed through a Saudi rehabilitation program for former jihadists are now believed to have fled the country and joined terrorist groups abroad.

The 11 former detainees include two who were already identified last month as members of a Yemeni terrorist group. Their names were on a list of 85 wanted terrorism suspects made public Tuesday by the Saudi Interior Ministry.
It gets even more interesting than that. But first, the following tidbit from Nhatky News:
President Barack Obama’s administration is conducting a full policy review on Iran which is expected to include Tehran’s role in Afghanistan, while the head of NATO, which leads some 55,000 troops in Afghanistan, said dialogue with Iran was crucial to fighting the insurgency there.
In truth, this is already old news. Back in December, Barack Obama said the same thing, namely, that after he is sworn in as president, Tehran would have a role to play in bringing peace and stability to Afghanistan. And back then, I pointed out as follows:

Barack Obama plans to enlist the help of the Iranians to bring stability to both Afghanistan and Iraq, despite the 9/11 commission report detailing Iran's collaboration with Al Qaeda and other indications that Iran worked in Unison with Al Qaeda, and despite Iran's overall aggression and support of terror.

Sadly, Barack Obama fails to comprehend the true nature of global terrorism and its sponsors.

But even sadder than that is the fact that many Americans fail to understand just how naive Barack Obama really is.

Now, let's return to the New York Times' article:
In addition to releasing the list of 85 terrorism suspects, Saudi officials made a striking accusation: one of the men on it, Abdullah al-Qarawi, is a Saudi who has been operating from Iran for three years.

Mr. Qarawi, 35, is believed to have been behind some of the terrorist attacks in recent years inside Saudi Arabia, said a Saudi security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, saying he was not authorized to discuss the matter in public.

Known to followers as “the Star,” Mr. Qarawi is in charge of leading Al Qaeda’s operations in the Persian Gulf and Iran, and of bringing new members into Afghanistan, the official said. He is believed to have more than 100 Saudis working for him in Iran, where they move about freely, the official added.

Saudi Arabia and the United States have accused Iran in the past of harboring Qaeda members...
So why does Barack Obama keep insisting that Iran must play a role in the future of Afghanistan, when the Iranian regime is clearly supporting Al Qaeda's terrorist operations?

I can't answer that question, and neither can Obama. But apparently, he's not planning on changing his game-plan anytime soon.


Obama Throws Tom Daschle Under the Bus!

Obama Concedes: Bigwigs Should Pay Taxes Too

U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday acknowledged his mistake in appointing former senator Tom Daschle to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services after Daschle withdrew his nomination over tax problems:

"This was a mistake [on Daschle's part], Obama told NBC's Brian Williams. "I don't think it was intentional... but it was a serious mistake. He owned up to it. And I've got to own up to my mistake which is that ultimately it's important for this administration to send a message that there aren't two sets of rules. You know, one for prominent people and one for ordinary folks who have to pay their taxes."

Click here to see the Brian Williams interview.

And here's Obama's interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper:

Obama Throws Daschle Under the Bus - Russia, Kyrgyzstan throw Obama Under the Bus

From the AP:
Kyrgyzstan vowed Tuesday it would order the closure of a US airbase on its soil whose presence has irritated Moscow, on the same day it received a generous Russian financial aid package.

Coinciding with the announcement by Bakiyev, Russia agreed to a financial aid package settling an estimated 180-million-dollar debt owed by cash-strapped Kyrgyzstan to Moscow. Russia also agreed to extend an interest free grant worth 150 million dollars to Kyrgyzstan as well as a loan worth two billion dollars, Russian news agencies reported.

The Kommersant newspaper said Russia "has laid down a strict condition: the provision of Russian financial help should lead to an official announcement by Kyrgyzstan on renouncing its obligations on the presence of the US airbase." ...

However, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said in Washington, "We are hopeful that we can continue our good relationship with the Kyrgyz government, and can continue to use Manas in support of our operations in Afghanistan. It is a hugely important air base for us."
Perhaps we really should be "hopeful" about continuing "our good relationship with the Kyrgyz government", after all, we are now living in the new era of 'hope', aren't we?

Then again, we're also living in the new era of 'change' - Unfortunately, things may be changing sooner than any of us had expected.

Nevertheless, Mr. Morrell's boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, probably isn't too concerned with Russia's latest ploy. After all [as I noted last week], Gates seems to think that Russia's military maneuvers in Latin America is one big joke, so I suppose he would feel the same way about this latest maneuver:
Gates shrugged off Russian naval tours in places like Venezuela. He said that if Russia hadn't raised alarms by invading Georgia last year, he would have invited Russian ships to dock in Miami as well. He said the Russian sailors would have had more fun there than in Caracas.
I also noted last week how Mr. Gates casually glossed over Russia's recent arms sales to Venezuela:
During a June trip to Russia, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez signed a deal with the Kremlin for the purchase of five diesel-fueled submarines. The deal came one year after the purchase by Caracas of more than US$3 billion worth of military equipment from Russia.
One big joke, indeed.....

Meanwhile, the Weekly Standard opines:

"Let's hope Obama can take time out from his busy schedule of tossing his nominees under the bus to fulfill his duties as commander in chief of American forces."

Yes, indeed, "let's hope" - for more 'hope', and for more 'change'.



Graham: Eric Holder Understands the Threat of Terrorism and its Financial Backers

"Mr. Holder understands the threat to our nation posed by terrorism... Mr. Holder agreed with me as well that the battlefield in the War on Terror is the entire globe... [which] includes the financial system, through which terrorist networks are funded..."
Sen. Lindsey Graham on why he voted to confirm Eric Holder as US Attorney General.

"There is no clearly defined rule of international law prohibiting material support of terrorism. Indeed, there is not even consensus on the definition of terrorism."
Eric Holder in his defense of Chiquita Brands International against charges it funneled more than $1.7 million to terrorist groups.

[Video of FALN terrorists buiding a Bomb. Click on sidebar next to the video for additional info.]

Monday, February 2, 2009

Katrina Redux?

From PJM's Steve Gill:
Last week a massive ice storm struck the heartland of America, leaving at least 42 dead and millions without power or water. Days later there are still over a million people in Kentucky who have no power, no water, and no communications....The conditions are dire and getting worse, with some storm survivors carrying pails of water from creeks. Thousands more are living in shelters with no timetable for returning home... Amid this catastrophe, where is President Barack Obama?

On Thursday — while millions in Tennessee and Kentucky did not have access to shelter or food — Obama hosted a cocktail party at the White House and served up fancy martinis and an appetizer menu that featured mouthwatering wagyu steak costing $100 a pound.

Saturday night — as the governor of Kentucky called up the entire National Guard in his state to deal with the
ongoing crisis — President Obama slipped into his black tie attire to attend the exclusive Alfalfa Club dinner, where lavish cocktails and fine dining were the order of the evening. And on Sunday — when millions in Kentucky and Tennessee still lacked the basic necessities of power and water — the Obama family threw an extravagant Super Bowl party!

The devastating storm has been virtually ignored by the national media...President Obama has been living it up in the White House while people have been suffering and dying. Five days after the storm, he still has not traveled to the area to provide aid and comfort to the victims...
Meanwhile, Kentucky Emergency Management Director, Randell Smith said that FEMA was still a no-show days after the storm.

“I’m not saying we can’t handle it,” Smith said. “We’re handling it. But it sure would have made life a lot easier." [if FEMA had been there to help]

The Examiner's Amos Wright comments:
Had this been another administration, one might assume that Kentucky... was being punished for its general political views and skin color. One might hear reckless and awful accusations that... a state full of white people who voted against Obama – were being left in the disaster area without help because of the President's barely concealed racism...

From the White House website on Hurricane Katrina:

"He [Obama] and Vice President Biden will take steps to ensure that the federal government will never again allow such catastrophic failures in emergency planning and response to occur.”
But of course, let's not forget that Joe Biden and Barack Obama voted twice for the infamous Alaskan "Bridge To Nowhere", while specifically voting against giving that money to Katrina victims!

Majority of Americans Dissaprove of Obama's decision to fund overseas abortions

"Obama's decision to reverse the prohibition on funding for overseas family-planning providers may be the least popular thing he has done so far. This was an executive order that forbade federal government money from going to overseas family-planning groups that provide abortions or offer abortion counseling. Fifty-eight percent of Americans disapprove of Obama's decision to lift this ban, while only 35% approve of it."

From the Daily Record:

"All I hear and read is the serious financial problems of our country, and that President Barack Obama states that he will pull us out of our financial problems. Really?

"One of his first endeavors was... [to lift] President Bush's ban on federal funding for abortions in other countries at a cost of $4 billion!

"I am pro-life and now my tax dollars not only go for abortion in this country, they go to foreign countries, as well. Instead of giving us a life preserver to pull us ashore, he hands us an anchor. Obama said it wasn't going to be easy; now I see what he means!"

Related: Majority of Americans Oppose Guantanamo Closure