Obama: Republicans drove the economy into a ditch, kicked dirt upon us - Shovel-Ready projects

During a campaign rally in Chicago on Saturday, President Obama told the crowd that Republicans had driven the economy into a ditch, compelling the Democrats to lower themselves into the ditch to dig out the economy, while the Republicans fanned themselves, sipped slurpees and kicked dirt upon the Dems:

Obama tells Chicago supporters: "We don't have amnesia!"

Speaking at a campaign rally in Chicago on Saturday, President Obama said that Republicans were counting on voters' "amnesia" to win the midterm elections:

State Dept. Spokesman tweets Birthday Greetings to Ahmadinejad!

The Obama adminstration has now reached a new low in its policy of appeasement. Now they're sending birthday greetings to Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's top spokesman, P.J. Crowley, sent a birthday message to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad via Twitter Friday, prompting a response by former Governor Sarah Palin who described the post as "mind boggling" foreign policy.

Crowley posted two short messages directed at the Iranian president, who turned 54 this week.

"Happy birthday President Ahmadinejad," the first tweet reads. "Celebrate by sending Josh Fattal and Shane Bauer home. What a gift that would be.

Fattal and Bauer were arrested near the Iranian border with Iraq in July of 2009 and have been held in Iran since on charges of espionage.

The second tweets reads: "Your 54th year was full of lost opportunities. Hope in your 55th year you will open Iran to a different relationship with the world.

Sarah Palin took issue with the message. Shortly after Crowley's post appeared she wrote, "Happy B'day Ahmadinejad wish sent by US Govt. Mind boggling foreign policy: kowtow & coddle enemies; Obama Doctrine is nonsense..."

The third tweet from the State Dept. will likely read as follows:

Dear Mahmoud,

Happy Birthday! We love you!

As a token of appreciation for all the assistance you've provided to our Taliban allies, we've permitted high-ranking Iranian officials to attend in-depth briefings [given] by American military commanders. It's our birthday gift to you!

Best wishes.

P.J Crowley

P.S. Please try to release the American hikers [detainees, aka hostages], preferably some time in the not so distant future; at your own convenience, of course. Thanks.

Obama offers a 60 Vote contradiction

President Obama voiced displeasure with the 60 vote Senate majority rule on Wednesday saying, "I would love not to have a 60 vote requirement."

The President suggested that procedural obstacles, like the aforementioned requirement, have made it difficult for him to advance his Progressive agenda.

The former Chicago pol added: "There are all kinds of things that happened during the course of these two years, in terms of process, that I would like to see changed."

Obama's words, however, appeared to contradict some of his past statements.

In an interview with CBS in 2004, Mr. Obama emphasized the importance of using a 60 vote Senate majority "to move an American agenda forward," rather than "a Democratic or Republican agenda." In a speech to the Center for American Progress in 2006, then-Senator Obama criticized the notion that: "We" can "identify our core base..., throw 'em red meat" and rely "on a 50 plus 1 victory."

"If we want to transform the country," he said, "that would require a sizable majority."

The President's contradictory statements, however, should come as no surprise, for indeed the rhetorician par excellence has been known to alter his statements according to the specific situation he is facing and the particular offensive/defensive strategy he is seeking at a given moment in time.



Update: I just discovered that "Naked Emperor News", from whom I culled the videos from '04 and '06, posted a similar video - to the one above - on Thursday, using new footage from '05 [as a juxtaposition], instead of the '04, '06 footage. As strange as this may seem, I was unaware of this.

DNC Asks Pentagon for Info on Potential Obama Challengers

Ed. Note: Also read "'Dirt Digger', Shauna Daly, Joins Obama's Legal Team", cited at the end of this post

From ABC News:

The Democratic National Committee formally has asked the Pentagon for reams of correspondence between military agencies and nine potential Republican presidential candidates, a clear indication that Democrats are building opposition-research files on specific 2012 contenders even before the midterm elections.

An internal Army e-mail obtained by ABC News indicates that the DNC has filed Freedom of Information Act requests for "any and all records of communication" between Army departments and agencies and each of the nine Republicans -- all of whom are widely mentioned as possible challengers to President Obama. [Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Haley Barbour, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, John Thune, Mitch Daniels and Bobby Jindal.]

The agencies are asked to respond to the request by this Friday, just four days before Election Day...

The DNC's request is intriguing for its timing as well as for the singling out of nine particular Republicans who are expected to vie for the GOP presidential nomination.

In addition, the FOIA request provides a window into how deeply into potential candidates' pasts opposition researchers are looking, even at this early stage.

The request for information on Gingrich stretches back to 1979, when he was a freshman member of the House. The DNC is asking for information related to Palin's service on the Wasilla, Alaska, City Council in the early 1990s...

The requests for Daniels and Thune specifically reference their time as staff members for U.S. senators. Democrats are trying to learn more about Jindal's career going back to 1996, when he was secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Human Services.

According to the memo, the DNC's request asks for "Any and all records of communication (including but not limited to letters, written requests, reports, telephone records, electronic communication, complaints, investigations, violation and memos) between your department (and all divisions and agencies under your jurisdiction)."...

In February of 2009, in a post entitled, "'Dirt Digger' Joins Obama's Legal Team", I reported via the Washington Times as follows:

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.

I then went on to note the following:

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.

Looks like Shauna Daly, Barack Obama and the DNC are back to their old tricks again. The midterm elections has them sweating profusely, and they're getting desperate - really desperate!

Did BofA bail out DNC with illegal campaign loans?

From Habledash:

It's been revealed by an exclusive by Pajamas Media that Bank of America loaned $32 million to Democratic campaign committees without any tangible collateral put up against the loan. The allegation is simple: This could be an illegal campaign contribution that would affect the election outcome.

After Labor Day, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), led by former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine..., took out a $15 million loan after polls suggested the election was going to be a tough battle. A few weeks later, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) followed suit with a $17 million loan, for a total of $32 million lent from Bank of America to Democratic campaign committees.

Without having anything to put up against the loan (their headquarters, an asset valued at $13.7 million, is owned by another entity), the DNC used their private email donor list as collateral. Sneakily, two days prior to the loan being approved, the DNC changed their online privacy policy to meet the requirements for their loan, stating that private information may be shared if it's the result of "an asset sale or in any other situation where personal information may be disclosed or transferred as one of the assets of the DNC."

During the '08 presidential election, John McCain attempted to secure a $3 million loan by using his campaign email list as backing, but the bank denied him. There is no way to put a value on an email list, especially without independent documentation, which wasn't included in this particular loan...

Pajamas Media notes:

The Democrats’ long-time sweetheart relationship with the banking world and with the Bank of America in particular creates the appearance of an insider deal.

BofA was very generous to Barack Obama when he ran for President. Campaign finance records show that in the 2008 election cycle, Senator Barack Obama was the top recipient of Bank of America campaign donations, reaping $421,000.

BofA’s new CEO, [Brian Moynihan], is considered one of the Obama administration’s top Wall Street allies on a whole host of issues, from the creation of a consumer regulatory agency to the defense of the administration’s home mortgage fiascoes...

As of this posting, the DNC has not replied to our inquiries...

Read article in full at PJM

Obama: Child Soldiers vs Child Obesity

President Obama is extremely concerned about Child Obesity, but when it comes to children being conscripted into military service, well, he's okay with that, as long as they're slim and fit.

The President issued a memorandum on Monday exempting several African countries from restrictions set forth by the Child Soldiers Prevention Act, which prohibits US military assistance to governments implicated in the recruitment and use of child soldiers:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, pursuant to section 404(c) of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008..., I hereby determine that it is in the national interest of the United States to waive the application to Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, and Yemen.

Par for the course, I suppose. After all, this is a President who never expresses any concerns about human rights violations - except when a child's dietary and weight management program are being violated by rogue restaurants and brutal school cafeterias - then he speaks up.

Tea Party candidates funded by BP and other major polluters? HEH

The Guardian-UK published a misleading article on Sunday, entitled "Tea Party climate change deniers funded by BP and other major polluters". The sub-headline of the article reads "Midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favorites DeMint and Inhofe have received over $240,000."

This misleading statement is based upon an analysis made by the Climate Action Network which alleges that 8 major European industrial companies - emitters of carbon dioxide - contributed - via PACs - almost exclusively to the 2010 campaigns of senators who are opposed to climate change reform.

The aforementioned companies are actualy American companies whose parent companies are based in Europe. Nevertheless, the Climate Action Network alleges that these companies contributed $240,200 - almost 80% of their total spendings in the 2010 senate race - to senators who are opposed to climate change legislation. However, the Guardian's headline and sub-headline misleadingly, [perhaps unintentionally], states that Senators DeMint and Inhofe received the entire $240,000, when in truth, the money was spread out among many candidates, and Sen. Demint and Inhofe received only a fraction of that money.

Secondly, the Climate Action Network never suggested that the aforementioned companies were contributing to Tea Party candidates. In fact, many of the Senators listed as receiving money from these companies are indeed Democratic candidates, whom the Climate Action Network alleges are opponents of climate change reform, but certainly not Tea Party candidates

I perused the Open Secrets' website - the source of the Climate Action Network's analysis - and found that the aforementioned companies contributed approximately $112,500 to Democratic candidates and $175,000 to Republican candidates. Not much of a difference.

What's more, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) received roughly $11,000 from the aforementioned companies, while Democratic Sen. John Hall, another staunch proponent of climate change legislation, received $6,000 - as well as many other Democratic Senators, who received various sums of money from these companies.

Nevertheless, the Guardian-UK did a disservice to its readers [perhaps unintentionally] by misstating the facts.

Incidentally, according to the Open Secrets' website , foreign-connected PACs donated $6,271,803 to Democratic candidates in 2010 and $5,281,638 to Republican candidates.

It should also be noted that, during his time in the Senate and while running for president, Barack Obama received a total of $77,051 from BP - a British [foreign] based company and an emitter of carbon dioxide. Obama has also been the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.

It goes without saying, that were we to thoroughly vet the 2010 campaign contributions of all the Democratic Senate candidates, we would find wagon-loads of special interest money. But right now, when the Tea Party candidates are headed toward victory, the MSM can ill afford to vet the Dems, and Obama can ill afford to vet himself.

Iran funnels millions to Afghan Pols, while Obama cedes Afghanistan's future to Iran

As the President blindly and desperately gropes for an exit strategy in Afghanistan - in an effort to solidify his left-wing base before the onset of the 2012 Presidential campaign - even going so far as to allow Iranian officials to attend in-depth briefings by American military commanders on NATO’s strategy for transition in Afghanistan - the Iranian government is conducting an aggressive [financial] campaign inside Afghanistan to undermine the US and NATO mission and to gain influence inside the country, according to Afghan and Western officials.

Although the U.S. State Dept., American military commanders and Afghan officials have already attested to the fact that Iran is training and arming Taliban fighters, the latest reports - from the Boston Globe - indicate that Iran is also funneling cash into Afghanistan's Presidential coffers to advance its own interests and facilitate its global agenda:

One evening last August, as President Hamid Karzai wrapped up an official visit to Iran, his personal plane sat on the airport tarmac, waiting for a late-running passenger: Iran’s ambassador to Afghanistan.

The ambassador, Feda Hussein Maliki, finally appeared, taking a seat next to Umar Daudzai, Karzai’s chief of staff and his most trusted confidant. According to an Afghan official on the plane, Maliki handed Daudzai a large plastic bag bulging with packets of euro bills. A second Afghan official confirmed that Daudzai carried home a large bag of cash.

"This is the Iranian money,’’ said an Afghan official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Many of us noticed this.’’

The bag of money was part of a secret, steady stream of Iranian cash intended to buy the loyalty of Daudzai and promote Iran’s interests in the presidential palace, according to Afghan and Western officials here. Iran uses its influence to help drive a wedge between the Afghans and their US and NATO benefactors, they said.

The payments, which officials said total millions of dollars, form an off-the-books fund that Daudzai and Karzai have used to pay Afghan lawmakers, tribal elders, and even Taliban commanders to secure their allegiance, the officials said.

“It’s a basically a presidential slush fund,’’ a Western official in Kabul said of the Iranian-supplied money. “Daudzai’s mission is to advance Iranian interests.’'...

Daudzai and Karzai declined to respond to written questions about their relationship with Iran....

The Iranian payments are intended to secure the allegiance of Daudzai, a former ambassador to Iran who consistently pushes an anti-Western line on Karzai, the officials said. Daudzai briefs Karzai each morning....

The payments to Daudzai illustrate the degree to which the Iranian government has penetrated Karzai’s inner circle...

A senior NATO officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, declined to discuss whether Daudzai was receiving money from Iran. But he said the Iranian government was conducting an aggressive campaign inside Afghanistan to undermine the US and NATO mission and to gain influence in politics.

The NATO officer said Iran’s intelligence agencies were playing both sides of the conflict, providing financing, weapons, and training to the Taliban. Iranian agents also financed the political campaigns of several Afghans who ran in last month’s parliamentary election, the NATO officer said.

Nevertheless, President Obama seems intent on having Iran dictate Afghanistan's future, which is why Iranian officials were permitted to attend a meeting with the US and NATO-dominated International Contact Group last week on the future of Afghanistan, and why Iranian officials were permitted to attend Gen. Petraeus' in-depth briefing on NATO’s strategy for transition in Afghanistan.

Obama's Afghan/Iran strategy may seem a bit confusing to the casual observer, but it is, nonetheless, consistent with his far-left ideology and pacifist foreign policy - and more importantly, it will help him retain the extreme left-wing base that got him elected in '08.

WikiLeaks' Reports Detail Iran’s Aid for Iraqi Militias

The attacks continued during Mr. Obama’s first year in office, with no indication in the reports that the new administration’s policies [toward Iran] led the Quds Force to end its support for Iraqi militants. The pending American troop withdrawals, the reports asserted, may even have encouraged some militant attacks.

During the administration of President George W. Bush, critics charged that the White House had exaggerated Iran’s role..., but the field reports disclosed by WikiLeaks, which were never intended to be made public, underscore the seriousness with which Iran’s role has been seen by the American military.

From the New York Times:

On Dec. 22, 2006, American military officials in Baghdad issued a secret warning: The Shiite militia commander who had orchestrated the kidnapping of officials from Iraq’s Ministry of Higher Education was now hatching plans to take American soldiers hostage.

What made the warning especially worrying were intelligence reports saying that the Iraqi militant, Azhar al-Dulaimi, had been trained by the Middle East’s masters of the dark arts of paramilitary operations: the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps in Iran and Hezbollah, its Lebanese ally.

“Dulaymi reportedly obtained his training from Hizballah operatives near Qum, Iran, who were under the supervision of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force (IRGC-QF) officers in July 2006,” the report noted, using alternative spellings of the principals involved. Read the Document »

Five months later, Mr. Dulaimi was tracked down and killed in an American raid in the sprawling Shiite enclave of Sadr City in Baghdad — but not before four American soldiers had been abducted from an Iraqi headquarters in Karbala and executed in an operation that American military officials say literally bore Mr. Dulaimi’s fingerprints.

Scores of documents made public by WikiLeaks, which has disclosed classified information about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, provide a ground-level look — at least as seen by American units in the field and the United States’ military intelligence — at the shadow war between the United States and Iraqi militias backed by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards.

During the administration of President George W. Bush, critics charged that the White House had exaggerated Iran’s role to deflect criticism of its handling of the war and build support for a tough policy toward Iran, including the possibility of military action.

But the field reports disclosed by WikiLeaks, which were never intended to be made public, underscore the seriousness with which Iran’s role has been seen by the American military.

[Snip}

The field reports recount Iran’s role in providing Iraqi militia fighters with rockets, magnetic bombs that can be attached to the underside of cars, “explosively formed penetrators,” or E.F.P.’s, which are the most lethal type of roadside bomb in Iraq, and other weapons. Those include powerful .50-caliber rifles and the Misagh-1, an Iranian replica of a portable Chinese surface-to-air missile, which, according to the reports, was fired at American helicopters and downed one in east Baghdad in July 2007.

Iraqi militants went to Iran to be trained as snipers and in the use of explosives, the field reports assert, and Iran’s Quds Force collaborated with Iraqi extremists to encourage the assassination of Iraqi officials.

The reports make it clear that the lethal contest between Iranian-backed militias and American forces continued after President Obama sought to open a diplomatic dialogue with Iran’s leaders and reaffirmed the agreement between the United States and Iraq to withdraw American troops from Iraq by the end of 2011.....

The attacks continued during Mr. Obama’s first year in office, with no indication in the reports that the new administration’s policies led the Quds Force to end its support for Iraqi militants. The pending American troop withdrawals, the reports asserted, may even have encouraged some militant attacks.

A June 25, 2009, report about an especially bloody E.F.P. attack that wounded 10 American soldiers noted that the militants used tactics “being employed by trained violent extremist members that have returned from Iran.”...

An intelligence analysis of a Dec. 31, 2009, attack on the Green Zone using 107-millimeter rockets concluded that it was carried out by the Baghdad branch of Kataib Hezbollah, a militant Shiite group that American intelligence has long believed is supported by Iran...

Obama's abandonment of Iraq compels Iraqi leaders to turn to Iran for guidance

"Iranian ambassador has a bigger role in Iraq than Biden," says Kurdish lawmaker

White House sees Iraq as "the bane of everyone's existence", says senior administraion official

As President Obama fulfills his campaign pledge to reduce America's role in Iraq, political leaders in Iraq say they are turning to neighboring countries - like Iran - for support:

American influence has so dwindled in Iraq over the last several months that Iraqi lawmakers and political leaders say they no longer follow Washington's advice for forming a government.

Instead, Iraqis are turning to neighboring nations, and especially Iran, for guidance — casting doubt on the future of the American role in this strategic country...

"The Iraqi politicians are not responding to the U.S. like before. We don't pay great attention to them," Shiite lawmaker Sami al-Askari, a close ally of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said Thursday. "The weak American role has given the region's countries a greater sense of influence on Iraqi affairs."...

"The Iranian ambassador has a bigger role in Iraq than Biden," said a prominent Kurdish lawmaker, Mahmoud Othman. He said the Americans "will leave Iraq with its problems, thus their influence has become weak."...

Washington, which has its hands full with the war in Afghanistan..., sees Iraq as "the bane of everyone's existence lately," said one senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the diplomatic issues...

The days of the U.S. calling the shots in Iraq are long over — largely because of President Barack Obama's intent to scale back America's presence [in Iraq]... That's led Iraqi leaders to reach out to Mideast neighbors for support and advice on brokering a new government....

It is Iraq's newly warmed alliance with Iran that worries the United States.

In a development that may have assured him a second term, al-Maliki this month won al-Sadr's backing. And this week, top Iranian officials gave al-Maliki their clearest nod of support yet during his trip to Tehran...

"There is U.S. influence in the political process..., but less so than before," said Sunni lawmaker Osama al-Nujaifi. "As they (the Americans) begin to withdraw their military, the Iranians are taking advantage of the empty space, and are ready to fill the vacuum."

Lebanon is Crumbling, Obama is Bumbling

It wasn't too long ago when Syria's influence in Lebanon appeared to be on the wane. In 2005, the Syrian army, at long last, packed up its bags and exited Lebanon, as a result of George W. Bush's bold and visionary foreign policy initatives.

As one commentator described the dramatic turn of events:

The United States was at war in Iraq, and Washington had accused Damascus of opening up its eastern border to the jihadis that were flooding into Iraq to fight and kill US troops. There are few things the U.S. government takes more seriously than another country facilitating the transportation of their enemies to battle American soldiers [obviously this commentator was not referring to the current administration], and Syria soon found itself in the United States’ cross-hairs.

As a result, the U.S. put its full weight on Syria to secure its border - and to punish Syria, the U.S. firmly backed the calls to end that country’s occupation of Lebanon. Massive anti-Syrian protests, dubbed the Ceder Revolution, took place in the street of Beirut, and in the spring of 2005, Syria bowed to the pressure and recalled its troops, ending its nearly 30-year occupation of Lebanon.

In April of 2005, the Guardian-UK reported as follows:

The US will press Syria to "get completely out of Lebanon", President George Bush said in an interview with Lebanese television last night.

"The United States can join with the rest of the world, like we've done, and say to Syria, get out - not only get out with your military forces, but get out with your intelligence services, too; get completely out of Lebanon, so Lebanon can be free and the people can be free," he told viewers of the LBC channel.

Under intense international pressure, Syria began withdrawing its forces from Lebanon in March and closed most of the offices used by its intelligence agents.

With George W. Bush standing on the side of freedom and Democracy, voicing his strong support for a free and sovereign Lebanon - unfettered by outside interferences from tyrannical regimes the likes of Syria - Lebanese Prime Minister Sa'd Al-Hariri felt at ease to speak out fiercely against the Syrian regime, who, in unison with Hezbollah, were responsible for the assassination of his father, the former Prime Minister of Lebanon.

But ever since Barack Obama set foot in the Oval Office and began to both reestablish U.S. diplomatic ties with Syria and ignore Syrian intransigence, the scene has taken a dramatic turn. The Syrians have begun to re-exert their influence in Lebanon, and Mr. Hariri has been forced to temper his criticism of Syria for fear that he might meet the same fate as his father. In September, the now-spineless Lebanese Prime Minister, who for years blamed Syria for his father's death, asserted that it was a mistake to accuse Syria of killing his father.

Tension has recently escalated in Lebanon following reports that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon will soon issue its indictment into the 2005 assassination of Hariri's father. Syria and Hezbollah have been calling for the abolition of the Special Tribunal.

Meanwhile, Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, recently returned from a visit to Lebanon where he delivered words of encouragement to Hezbollah. Upon returning from Lebanon, Mr. Ahmadinejad and Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz - via telephone - discussed, among other things, the volatile situation in Lebanon.

And, now, according to reports in the Arab media, Hariri is said to have told U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman, that, upon Saudi counsel, he is considering stepping down from office. Mr. Hariri, however, expressed apprehension that such a move would lead to Hezbollah forming a new government under its leadership.

Now, let's follow the dots:

The Saudis held discussions with the Iranian President about the future of Lebanon, and shortly thereafter, they reportedly advised Mr. Hariri to step down from office.

The Saudis, [for whatever reason] - at least as far as Lebanon is concerned - seem to be taking their cue from President Ahmadinejad. Only time will tell how far Hariri will be willing to go to accommodate Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration recently announced plans to sell $60 billion in advanced weaponry to Saudi Arabia - apparently, as an expression of gratitude to the Saudis, who magnanimously advised Prime Minister Hariri to step down, thereby easing angst among Hezbollah and its allies.

Will President Obama, the ultimate appeaser, continue to give Syria, Iran and Hezbollah full reign in Lebanon, so as not to rock the boat - in an effort to pacify Iran and its allies - and thereby bring about his unique vision of world peace and stability? Aka, Obama's New World Order?

Once again, only time will tell.

But one thing is for certain: During his short tenure in office, Obama has succeeded in creating an amazing and complete turnabout in Lebanon.

Undoubtedly, the President and his left-wing cronies, right now, are beaming over this incredible feat... and wondering how in the world they managed to accomplish all of this in such a short period of time.

Bill Clinton Lost Nuclear Codes while in office, say Former Military officials

For several months, during the Clinton administration, the nuclear launch codes were missing, writes Hugh Shelton, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Bill Clinton - in his newly released memoir, Without Hesitation, ABC News reported on Wednesday.

Several years ago, Retired Air Force Lt. Col., Robert Patterson told a similar account in his book Dereliction of Duty. Patterson says it was Bill Clinton who misplaced the codes.

"We called upstairs," Patterson told ABC News on Wednesday, "we started a pretty thorough search around the White House for the codes. And Clinton finally confessed hours later that he had in fact misplaced them. He couldn't recall when he had last seen them."

"Today, Clinton's office is not commenting," says ABC correspondent, John Donvan, "same as no one is confirming or denying" whether "Jimmy Carter once left his biscuit [containing the codes] in a suit that got sent to the cleaners."

Link to ABC News Report - VIDEO

Obama surrenders to Iran, hoists the White Flag to Ahmadinejad

As I noted yesterday: Iranian officials on Monday attended a meeting in Rome with the US and NATO-dominated International Contact Group to discuss the future of Afghanistan. Attendees at the meeting also included Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan.

Mr. Holbrooke admitted that the United States had been forewarned of the Iranian presence.

“We were asked if we had any problems with that, and we said no,” he said.

Holbrooke went on to defend the Obama administration's decision to hook up with the Iranians saying: Tehran "has a role to play in the peaceful settlement of the situation" and that "for the United States today there's no problem with their presence."

The New York Times reported that Mahmoud Ali Qanezadeh, a high-ranking Iranian diplomat, "even attended an in-depth briefing Monday morning by the American military commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, on NATO’s strategy for transition in Afghanistan."

"Incredible!", I noted, "the Iranians, who are facilitating attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan, are now privy to NATO's strategy [for transition] in Afghanistan. Splendid!"

Iran is supplying insurgents in Afghanistan with weapons, ammunition and explosives. Taliban fighters have been training in Iran.

The US State Department, in its annual report on State Sponsored Terrorism stated that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps have "provided training to the Taliban on small unit tactics, small arms, explosives, and indirect fire weapons. Since at least 2006, Iran has arranged arms shipments including small arms and associated ammunition, rocket propelled grenades, mortar rounds, 107mm rockets, and plastic explosives."

I had also noted yesterday that the aforementioned decision to hook up with the Iranian regime in Rome was a foolhardy decision.

But, in truth, a more significant and larger point needs to be made - namely, that this was not merely a foolhardy decision. The Obama administration, in essence, surrendered to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, hoisted up the White Flag to the Iranian regime, and emboldened the aforementioned thugs to further pursue their pernicious aspirations.

Here's the deal:

President Obama, ever fearful of alienating his left-wing base, refused to employ the necessary manpower in Afghanistan to overcome the insurgency. Consequently, the U.S military is currently unable to defeat the Taliban. And, now, Obama - out of political expediency - in an effort to further appease his base - is desperately seeking an exit strategy from Afghanistan before the 2012 Presidential election. At all costs!

The delusional and illusionary hope of the Obama administration is that a more moderate element of the Taliban will agree to join a future government in Afghanistan and also agree to shut the door on Al Qaeda. However, since Iran is largely pulling the Talibans' strings, unless President Ahmadinejad gives his stamp of approval to all of the above, no such deal can be reached, and Obama subsequently will lose both his left-wing base and the 2012 election.

Hence, the President and his cronies decided it was in their best interest that Mr. Holbrooke and Gen. Petraeus meet with the enemy in Rome and hoist up the White Flag.

However, as I have noted previously: Contrary to conventional Left-Wing propaganda, the Iranian regime has deep ties to Al Qaeda that predates the 9/11 attacks in the U.S.; and there is no reason to assume that this cozy relationship will end anytime soon. Iran and the Taliban now have their hands wrapped tightly around Afghanistan's throat - thanks to Obama, the ultimate appeaser.

Meanwhile, all indications seem to suggest that Iran is steadily exerting its influence in Iraq. It goes without saying, that President Obama is largely to blame for the inevitable downfall and collapse of Iraq, for it is he, who, during his run for the Presidency, selfishly, put the U.S. withdrawal from the region on the front burner and used it as a pathway to ascend to the Oval Office.

And, now, President Obama is sacrificing the future of Afghanistan - and ultimately America's future - for his own political expediency.

Make no mistake about it, this is nothing less than a complete victory for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and a total surrender for the good ol' USA.

Mr. Ahmadinejad has now succeeded in garnering his first victory against the US. Consequently, he has now been emboldened to pursue the rest of his goals.

Indeed, the Iranian leader will never be satisfied until he brings home the World Cup - the World Championship in all its glory!

Iran joins US, NATO to address Afghanistan situation‎

Despite the fact that Iran is supplying insurgents in Afghanistan with weapons, ammunition and explosives [in boxes marked "Food, Toys and Kitchenware"], and that Taliban fighters have been training in Iran, the Obama administration on Monday said it had "no problem" participating in high-level talks with Iranian representatives in discussions over the future of Afghanistan:

Iran took part in a high-level meeting on Afghanistan on Monday after the United States said it has no problem with its participation. [Attendees also included Richard Holbrooke, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan.]

The international "contact group" met in Rome amid a renewed push to end the nine-year-old war in Afghanistan, including bringing Taliban into peace talks. The group gathers the Afghan government, NATO, the EU, U.N. and other key players — including Iran this time — to assess progress in Afghanistan.

Richard Holbrooke, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said Washington was asked about possible Iranian involvement and responded it had no problem with it...

Other main topics of discussion were the transition process... and the process of reconciliation — or talks aimed at involving insurgents into the fold, including the Taliban...

Citing Iran's long border with Afghanistan and its problem of drugs and immigrants coming in from Afghanistan [like the Taliban "immigrants" who've been training in Iran. Heh], Holbrooke said that Tehran "has a role to play in the peaceful settlement of the situation" and that "for the United States today there's no problem with their presence."

Fools!

From the New York Times:

The Iranian, Mohammed Ali Qanezadeh, a high-ranking diplomat, even attended an in-depth briefing Monday morning by the American military commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, on NATO’s strategy for transition in Afghanistan.

Incredible! The Iranians, who are facilitating attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan, are now privy to NATO's strategy [for transition] in Afghanistan. Splendid!

Richard C. Holbrooke, the Obama administration’s special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, said the United States had been forewarned of the Iranian presence. “We were asked if we had any problems with that, and we said no,” Mr. Holbrooke said.

What about the American hikers who've been detained in Iran since July of 2009? No problem with that one either?

Apparently, this administration has no problem with anything - except for the Tea Party..., and the midterm election/GOP landslide.....

The Obama ['08] campaign website and foreign contributions

At a campaign rally for Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick on Saturday, President Obama railed against Republicans and accused the GOP of accepting foreign donations [stealing democracy]. On the donation page of Barack Obama's Presidential campaign website [2008], a drop down list with the names of foreign countries, allowed foreign donors to contribute to the then-Presidential hopeful. Video below:

Obama undercuts Bush's AIDS initiative, offers disingenuous response to AIDS activists, Hecklers

In an interview last year, Dr. Peter Mugyenyi, director and founder of the Joint Clinical Research Center in Uganda, said that the U.S. President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief [PEPFAR] - launched in 2003 by George W. Bush - had saved millions of lives. But now, he said, AIDS patients were being deprived of life-saving treatments because the Obama administration had begun flat-lining funding for PEPFAR.

And yet, despite his administration's horrific HIV/AIDS funding policies, Obama responded to a group of AIDS activists who heckled him Saturday - during a campaign rally for Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick - by accusing the Republican leadership of turning its back on the very AIDS patients he himself has callously ignored. - Video below:

Biden: We're beginning to grab hold of the National Debt!

Speaking at a fundraiser for Democratic Senate candidate Chris Coons on Friday, Vice President Joe Biden proclaimed that, as a result of President Obama's fiscal policies, "we have gone from hemorrhaging in debt to beginning to grab hold of the debt!"

On the same day that Mr. Biden was issuing his rosy proclamation [on Friday], the administration announced that the federal deficit had reached $1.29 trillion for the just-completed budget year. The government had to borrow 37 cents out of every dollar it spent as tax revenues continued to lag while spending on food stamps and unemployment benefits went up as unemployment hovered near double-digits.

Gibbs: I don't think Michelle Obama violated electioneering rules

A reporter on Thursday asked White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, if Michelle Obama might have broken the law and violated electioneering rules when she encouraged a voter to vote for her husband while standing within a 100 feet of a polling place.

Sounds like a minor technicality to me; a bit lame, and certainly not an earth shattering event, considering that her husband is alleged to have accepted illegal [foreign] contributions when he ran for President. Nevertheless, here's the exchange - for all its worth:

Q: "Michelle Obama voted in Chicago today. [According to the pool report], one of the people, Dennis Campbell, whom she met, said, 'she was telling me how important it was to vote to keep her husband's agenda going'. Some people raised the possibility of this being against laws, as far as electioneering rules, not campaigning within 100 feet of [polling places], can you respond to that?"

Gibbs: "Obviously, I wasn't in Chicago today. I'd point you the First Lady's staff. I don't think it would be much to imagine that the First Lady might support her husband's agenda...."

Video

Update: Drudge has latched onto this story now:

A top Ilinois State Board of Elections official tells the DRUDGE REPORT that Mrs. Obama -- a Harvard-educated lawyer -- may have simply been ignorant of the law and thus violated it unintentionally.

"You kind of have to drop the standard for the first lady, right?" the official explained late Thursday. "I mean, she's pretty well liked and probably doesn't know what she's doing."

I still think this is non a issue. But the illegal campaign contributions and the illegal activities that took place during the Presidential campaign, those incidents should have been vetted by the Feds.

The following is but one example of illegal activities that took place in polling places - on behalf of Obama - during the Presidential campaign. Bear in mind, this is a mere drop in the bucket of all the illegal activities that occurred, as many of you may recall.

May - 2008: Obama Campaign Activity in Polling Place:

Gibbs, Biden: Obama spends next to no time/some time thinking about 2012

"I tell you what, there’s real trust, that’s why [the President] asked me to run again. Look, he said, ‘We’re going to run together, are you going to run?’ I said, ‘Of course, you want me to run with you, I’m happy to run with you.’... It’s just been self-evident, the way he talks with staff. The way he talks: ‘When we go into this second term, Joe’s going to have to do blah blah blah.’ It works, I trust him. He trusts me.’ ”
Vice President Joe Biden, in an interview with the New York Times, October 12, 2010, confirming that the President had asked him to be his running mate again in 2012 and had also conversed with staff members about Biden's future role during the second term of his Presidency

"I think the president, if he were here, would tell you that he spends next to no time thinking about his reelection in 2012 and spends his time with his team here working on how to strengthen our economic recovery."
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, during a press briefing briefing, September 21, 2010

“If he has, he hasn’t told me."
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, during a press briefing - October 14, 2010 - responding to a reporter's question about whether the President has begun contemplating his reelection in 2012

Rep. Jim McGovern: 'I think the Constitution is wrong'

"A lot of the campaign finance bills that we have passed have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I think the Constitution is wrong..."
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), during a debate - October 13, 2010 - Video

"Shovel-Ready This, Shovel-Ready That" - Video

President Obama recently sat down for an hour-long interview with the New York Times’ White House correspondent, Peter Baker.

"During our hour together," writes Baker, "Obama told me he had no regrets about the broad direction of his presidency. But he did identify what he called 'tactical lessons'."

Among the lessons gleaned by the President: "He realized too late that 'there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects' when it comes to public works."

To commemorate this historic moment in time, when the President finally fessed up and admitted to making a mistake [although he says he only made a 'tactical' mistake], I decided to post the following Youtube video. Enjoy!:



Here's another one:

Andrew Sullivan: Obama "has fired more gay people than any other employer in America"

The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan believes President Obama is anti-gay because he did not issue a stop-loss order to put a temporary hold on the Military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and its 17-year-old ban on openly gay troops. Apparently, Mr. Sullivan has forgotten that the President appointed Kevin Jennings as his Safe Schools Czar. Mr. Jennings is not only promoting the gay lifestyle to today's youth, he is also promoting pornographic reading material in classrooms for 7-12 grade students. Nevertheless, here's Andrew Sullivan Tuesday on CNN:

[Don't Ask, Don't Tell] was legislated by the Congress in '93 and signed by Clinton.... But since he was elected, Barack Obama has had the power, as a Commander in Chief, to issue a Stop-Loss order, to just say, "we're just holding it for a minute, we'll have the debate, the legislation, but I am not enforcing this." And he has not done so. He has fired more gay people than any other employer in America, just because they're gay.

Hey Andrew! Kevin Jennings is gay, and he's still working for Obama, despite the fact that he's dishing out despicable, pornographic filth to young school children . How many employers, or previous U.S. President's - other than Obama - would allow a filthy pervert - the likes of Jennings - to retain his post as Safe Schools Czar? Hmmm?

Obama sets sights on midterm elections, lifts drilling moratorium

The Obama administration Monday lifted its ban on deepwater drilling, which was initially scheduled to end November 30:

The timing of the announcement - six weeks ahead of schedule and three weeks before congressional and state elections - could give Democrats a boost at the polls. The moratorium has been blamed for thousands of lost jobs in an already damaged economy and posed a potential drag on some Gulf-area Democrats' election prospects...

Greenpeace USA Executive Director Phil Radford called the decision "pure politics of the most cynical kind."

"It is all about the election season, not safety and environmental concerns," Radford said. "The White House wants us to believe that they have solved all the dangers of offshore drilling and we can return to business as usual. It is a false promise, if not a big lie..."

From the New York Times Dot Earth blog:

Obama’s Haste On Resumed Offshore Drilling:

This year’s Gulf of Mexico gusher seemed to pose potent political perils just a few months ago, but all along its significance was blunted by the reality that it did not affect oil or gas prices, which have stayed relatively low. So while it was upsetting for shrimpers, marine biologists and coastal communities, it was really a yawn for the average American.

That lack of political punch is crystal clear now, as the Obama administration, perhaps hoping to help embattled Democrats at the polls next month, has ended its moratorium on offshore oil drilling...

Obama sips; chows down; attends star-studded fundraisers; and still finds time to 'pull the car out of the ditch'

Speaking at a rally in Philadelphia on Sunday, President Obama used his, now-famous, Slurpee analogy to vent frustration at his GOP detractors:

"They drove our economy into a ditch, and we got in there and put on our boots, and we pushed and we shoved, and we were sweating... These guys were standing, watching us, sipping on a Slurpee and they were pointing at us saying 'how come you're not pushing harder? How come you're not pushing faster'?"

And, on Monday, while his detractors in Congress spent their day [presumably] taking in the Sun and shooting the breeze, the President - working, as hard as ever, to save the nation's economy and to keep the proverbial car out of the ditch - traveled to Miami, where he attended a star studded fundraiser and also found some time to partake in a sumptuous meal at the El Mago De Las Fritas restaurant. Reporters, meanwhile, stood around, and watched him sip a soft drink. They did not, however, point at him. Nor did they ask him why he's not 'pushing harder', and 'faster', or how he finds the time to traverse the country; attend star studded fundraisers and partake in delectable, high calorie food binges, and still manages to find the time to pull the proverbial car out of the ditch.

'Stealing Democracy' - Response to DNC Ad

"Stealing Democracy" - DNC Ad



It should be noted that the DNC did not cite the slightest shred of evidence to back up their allegations. The Liberal-leaning website, Factcheck, stated that "Democrats [and the President] have produced" no evidence to back up their claim.

Obama's FEC records, on the other hand, were parsed during the presidential campaign and found to be rife with questionable donations. What's more, during the Presidential campaign, it was discovered that Obama's electronic contribution site had been accepting donations from countries like China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Somalia...

'Stealing Democracy' - Response to DNC Ad:

How Barack Obama and the Democrats are "stealing Democracy" by accepting political contributions from foreign sources and by accepting donations that far exceed the $2300 maximum allowed by law:



Text:

October 6, 2008 - An auditor for the Federal Election Commission is attempting to have his bosses seek a formal investigation into the collection by Obama for President campaign of more than $200 million in potentially illegal political donations, including millions of dollars of illegal, foreign donations, and has sought a request for assistance from the Department of Justice or the Federal Bureau of Investigation. But the analyst's requests have largely been ignored. "I can't get anyone to move," he said. "I believe we are looking at a hijacking of our political system and no one wants to touch it."

The reason cited by his superiors, says the analyst, is that involvement by the Justice Department or the FBI would be indicative of a criminal investigation, something the FEC would prefer not take place a month before the presidential election.

The analyst, who declines to be identified for fear of retribution, says that on four different occasions in the past three months, he sought to open formal investigations into the Obama campaign's fundraising techniques, but those investigations have been discouraged. "Without formal approval, I can't get the resources I need, manpower, that kind of thing. This is a huge undertaking." He believes that campaign finance violations have occurred.

The Obama campaign has already had to deal with several FEC complaints about fraudulent donors and illegal foreign contributions. The Obama campaign has been cagey at times about the means by which it has made its historic fundraising haul, which now is almost $500 million. The Hillary Clinton campaign also raised questions about the huge amount of e-retail sales the Obama campaign was making for such things as t-shirts and other campaign paraphernalia, and how such sales were being tracked and used for fundraising purposes. While the profits of those items counted against the $2,300 personal donation limit, there have always been lingering questions about the e-retail system.

In this case, there is no way the Obama campaign will be held accountable before Election Day, unless someone raises holy hell."

The FEC analyst says that Obama's filings indicate that he has received large, bundled sums of donations from overseas, sometimes exceeding a quarter millions dollars. "It's suspicious, but it's the small donations made by credit card that need to be examined. We've raised red flags on many of these and the Obama campaign just ignores us.

What is frustrating is the lack of desire on the part of his bosses to act, and the major media outlets have totally ignored his story etc....

White House Oil Spill Cover-Up - Summary

The video below is a compilation of several videos I had previously posted. The video summarizes the various efforts made by the Obama administration to cover up the true extent of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill:

Oil Spill Commission reveals WH Cover-Up

Update: The White House is now pushing back against the oil commision's report. But anybody who's been keeping score knows the Obama administration tried to hide the extent of the oil spill; tried to silence Samantha Joye and her colleagues from revealing that underwater plumes of oil were gushing from the BP oil well; and that the White House allowed BP to conceal the video feed of the gushing oil pipe from the public for three weeks, all the while that same video played live in the White House Situation Room. Unfortunately, the Liberal, mainstream media allows the WH to disseminate its pack of lies, rather than treat "Oil-Gate" [the cover-up] as it should be treated, like a major scandal.

And now back to our regularly scheduled program:

A panel appointed by President Obama to investigate the oil spill produced the following report. Bear in mind, however, that the panel obfuscated the full extent of the WH cover-up in deference to the President. [Also, as far as I can tell, there is no mention in the report about the administration's push - prior to the oil rig explosion - to allow the Deepwater Horizon project to continue despite safety concerns.]

From the New York Times:

The Obama administration repeatedly underestimated how much oil was flowing into the Gulf of Mexico from the stricken BP well, contributing to public fear about the accident and a loss of faith in the government’s ability to handle it, according to a sharply critical report from the presidential commission appointed to study the disaster.

The report, one of four made public on Wednesday, is sharply critical of senior administration officials for a series of inaccurate estimates of the amount of oil spewing from BP’s Macondo well and how much of it remained in the Gulf of Mexico after the well was capped...

The government figure was continually revised upward, even as independent scientists using more sophisticated methods were estimating a discharge rate many times higher than the official numbers...

“By initially underestimating the amount of oil flow and then, at the end of the summer, appearing to underestimate the amount of oil remaining in the gulf, the federal government created the impression that it was either not fully competent to handle the spill or not fully candid with the American people about the scope of the problem.”...

In August, top administration officials proudly proclaimed that 75 percent of the oil had evaporated, dissolved or been collected..., But the commission staff said that the government’s own data did not support such sweeping conclusions. A number of respected independent researchers have concluded that as much as half of the spilled oil remains suspended in the water or buried in seafloor and coastal sludge.

The report also says that about two weeks after the BP rig exploded, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration asked the White House for permission to make public its worst-case models for the accident. The White House Office of Management and Budget denied the request, according to government officials interviewed by the commission’s staff...

"The absence of trust fuels public fears," the report goes on to say, "and those fears in turn can cause major harm, whether because the public loses confidence in the federal government‟s assurances that beaches or seafood are safe, or because the government‟s lack of credibility makes it harder to build relationships with state and local officials, as well as community leaders, that are necessary for effective response actions."

There's is a lot more critique in this report, including many of the things I mentioned during the course of this harrowing ordeal while the "White House Oil Spill Cover-Up" continued to linger on and on and on. I posted several videos on YouTube pertaining to this subject, which included investigative reports from ABC's Brian Ross and the findings of Skytruth founder John Amos, and more - all of which revealed how the White House clearly covered up the extent of the oil spill from the get go. [Unfortunately, almost all of the aforementioned videos were deleted - inadvertently - by yours truly.]

Question: If George W. Bush had been in the Oval Office while a cover-up of this magnitude had occurred, if he were President, right now - as this report is being released to the public - do you think the mainstream media would treat this matter as if it were merely a minor infraction, as they will surely do in the coming days?

Related Posts:

White House will try to silence me again on oil spill, says marine scientist

Oilgate? Obama and BP hiding the 'spill'?

The White House, Ken Salazar and the Oil Spill Cover-Up - Part 3

Obama colluded with BP to hide video of the oil spill

Gulf Oil Spill - Obama administration still spinning the facts

BP Lobbyists, the Obama Cash Machine and the Gulf of Mexico calamity

Obama kowtows to Labor Unions, allows Oil Spill to wreak havoc on the Gulf

Is Tony Hayward more heinous than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

Ahmadinejad, like Obama, offering military aid to Lebanon [aka Hezbollah]

President Obama is not alone in his quest to bolster the military might of the Lebanese army. According to Arab news sources, who quoted Iranian officials, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is planning to offer military equipment and supplies to the Lebanese Army during his [planned] visit to Lebanon next week.

In February, a Lebanese daily reported that the U.S. offered to provide Lebanon with attack aircraft, including Hawker-Beechcraft AT-6 or Embraer Super Tucano planes. Soon after, Russian authorities followed suit and agreed to supply 10 Mi-24 advanced military helicopters to Lebanon.

In August, lawmakers in Congress announced that they had frozen 100 million dollars in military assistance to Lebanon over concerns the weapons could be used by Hezbollah. However, in September, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Michele Flournoy, was quoted as saying that "we are working closely with members of the US Congress to resolve the concerns they have over this assistance."

Forbes Magazine describes Mr. Flournoy as "a key shaper of strategic thinking within President Barack Obama's administration," and suggests that Flournoy might be on the short list to succeed Defense Secretary Robert Gates upon his planned retirement in 2011.

Nevertheless, the Iranian President's decision to equip the Lebanese army with military supplies would seem to suggest that Mr. Ahmadinejad shares Michele Flournoy's view that the prospect of Iranian and U.S. military aid being diverted to Hezbollah is highly unlikely and that such trivial matters should be of little concern to the Iranian regime and the Obama administration.

It is also worth noting what Barack Obama's chief adviser on counter-terrorism, John Brennan, said during a press conference at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington on August 6, 2009:

"Hezbollah started out as purely a terrorist organization back in the early ’80s and has evolved significantly over time. And now it has members of parliament, in the cabinet; there are lawyers, doctors, others who are part of the Hezbollah organization... And so, quite frankly, I’m pleased to see that a lot of Hezbollah individuals are in fact renouncing that type of terrorism and violence and are trying to participate in the political process [in Lebanon] in a very legitimate fashion. "

Hence, even if U.S. made weapons eventually become part of Hezbollah's arsenal, these weapons - and military aid - would likely fall into the hands of the lawyers, doctors and parliamentarians, rather than the terrorists - if there remain any terrorists still residing among the ranks of Hezbollah - which is highly unlikely.

What's more, upon receiving these weapons, Hezbollah will undoubtedly begin to look more favorably upon the Obama administration, which, in turn, will strengthen the hands of the doctors, lawyers and parliamentarians, and weaken the hands of the terrorists, if there remain any terrorists still residing among the ranks of Hezbollah - which, as I stated, is highly unlikely.

Additionally, with U.S military aid now in the hands of Hezbollah, there'll be less hopelessness and despair in the hearts of these downtrodden men, consequently, these former terrorists will morph into the good Samaritans that Obama and Brennan had envisioned.

All of this, of course, bodes well for the U.S.; just ask Michele Flournoy.

Iranian toys, explosives, the Club-K and 40 foot shipping containers

When I read the following news item, specifically the part about a 40 foot shipping container, I couldn't help but think about the The Club-K Container Missile System and the prospect of Iran obtaining this system in the near future. More on that later, but first, the aforementioned news item:

Afghan police have seized 22 tons of Iranian explosives in boxes that were marked "food, toys and kitchenware," reports said Wednesday...

"We found these materials hidden in a 40 foot shipping container that had come from Iran. The explosives were disguised as merchandise like food, toys and kitchenware," deputy provincial police chief Mohammad Musa Rasouli told the news agency.

Roadside bombs, called "improvised explosive devices," or IEDs, are a primary offensive weapon used against U.S. and coalition forces..., causing most of the casualties.

Military officials and police in Afghanistan have accused Iran of supplying weapons to the Taliban and other insurgents.

Now, about that Club-K Container Missile System and 40 foot shipping containers; as reported earlier this year:

A Russian company is marketing a devastating new cruise missile system which can be hidden inside a shipping container, giving any merchant vessel the capability to wipe out an aircraft carrier.

Defense experts say the system is designed to be concealed as a standard 40foot shipping container that cannot be identified until it is activated.

Potential customers for the formidable Club-K system include Kremlin allies Iran and Venezuela, say defense experts. They worry that countries could pass on the satellite-guided missiles, which are very hard to detect, to terrorist groups.

Iran and Venezuela have already shown an interest in the Club-K Container Missile System which could allow them to carry out pre-emptive strikes from behind an enemy's missile defenses.

Some experts believe that if Iraq had the Club-K system in 2003 it would have made it impossible for America to invade, with any container ship in the Gulf a potential threat.

"Potential clients [of the Club-K] include anyone who likes the idea," said [Mikhail Barabanov, a defense expert at Russia's Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies]. "It is known that the United Arab Emirates has shown interest in buying the Club."...

"It's a carrier-killer," said Hewson of Jane's. "If you are hit by one or two of them, the kinetic impact is vast...it's horrendous."

Word association: Food, toys, explosives, 40 foot shipping containers, Ahmadinejad, captive American hikers, Uranium, Russia, nuclear weapons, assistance, development, Iran, Obama, appeasement, negotiations-without preconditions, European Missile-defense system, U.S. President, pacifism, timetable, Afghanistan, deadline, Taliban, capitulation, escape clause, chaos, exit strategy, elections-2012, political calculations-aspirations, oh my!......

Mondale: Obama uses 'idiot boards [teleprompters] to read speeches on television'

In an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Monday, former Vice President Walter Mondale spoke about President Obama's use of teleprompters, or as he referred to them: "Idiot Boards".

"He uses these idiot boards to read speeches on television," said Mondale, "and I think he loses the connection that he needs emotionally with American voters."

No need for private body guards, tax payers footing the bill for Raufs' security

The wife of Ground Zero mosque developer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, says she and her husband are receiving death threats, the AP reported today:

"For the record, my life is under threat," Daisy Khan said Sunday during a town hall debate on Islam broadcast on ABC's "This Week" news program.

Khan said her husband's life also is under threat but, "We do not walk around with bodyguards because we love this country."

It goes without saying that any U.S. citizen who issues death threats to another individual deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law. However, there are a few points that need to be addressed, even if Daisy Khan's allegations are true.

Firstly, Ms. Khan stated, rather deceivingly, that although she and her husband have been receiving death threats, "We do not walk around with bodyguards because we love this country."

But in truth, the real reason the Raufs do not 'walk around with body guards' has very little to do with love of country and more to do with the fact that the NYPD is providing police protection for them - hence there's is no need for them or their supporters to foot the bill for security - since American tax dollars are being used for this very purpose.

The Boston Herald reported over a week and half ago that the Raufs have been receiving [NYPD] police protection. A "law enforcement source who didn’t want to be identified" confirmed this report.

Apparently, the law enforcement official felt the need to protect himself and thus chose to remain anonymous. Heh.

But more importantly - aside from Ms. Khan's blatant prevarication - is the following point[s].

There are various individuals and groups, other than the Imam and his wife, who've been receiving death threats as of late. Hence, the question arises: Are these individuals [and groups] being afforded the same police protection as the Raufs? Or, are the Raufs the only U.S. citizens entitled to special police protection as a result of [alleged] death threats? Are they the only U.S. citizens who've been exonerated from spending their own money on their own security needs, and/or soliciting funds for this purpose, thus enabling them to allocate these funds for other pressing needs, such as building a 15 story Islamic center on Ground zero? [Or, to cover the cost of legal fees pertaining to building codes that the Imam is accused of violating in some of the dilapidated apartment buildings he owns?]

Now, let's compare the Raufs' situation to other individuals [and groups] who've received similar death threats:

One of Washington's principal supporters of the Tea Party movement, former GOP Majority Leader Dick Armey's FreedomWorks, has been receiving death threats and profanity-laced phone calls as it gets involved in the fall elections...

"FreedomWorks and Dick Armey receive dozens of threatening and harassing calls and E-mails each day. Many imply violence and use of weapons," spokesman Adam Brandon tells Whispers. "As we get closer to the election we expect the harassment to increase."

He says that FreedomWorks will hire additional security, meaning less money for its election-eve, get-out-the-vote, or GOTV, campaign. "Unfortunately, we may have to use resources for security guards that we would rather use for GOTV," he said...

FreedomWorks provided some of the recordings of the threatening calls to Whispers and they include physical threats and profanity aimed at the group, Tea Party spokesmen and even conservative talkers. "You guys better watch it," says one caller. "Now, we are going to destroy and obliterate Rush [Limbaugh] and Sean Hannity," said another. "Those two guys are dead."

Are Freedom Works and its members receiving police protection?

And what about Sabri Husibi, a former Muslim who's received death threats after publishing an article which was critical of Islam. According to Tulsa World, Mr. Husibi has been receiving calls from people who were cursing him, calling him a traitor and threatening him. Most were foreign-born, Tulsa-area Muslims whom he knows, he said. One caller told Husibi that if he spoke at an upcoming meeting and said anything against Shariah (Islamic law), he would be killed.

"Someone from Tulsa called my 76-year-old mother in Syria and said, 'You're not going to see your son anymore,' " he said.

Is Mr. Husibi receiving free, tax-payer funded police protection?

And then there is Molly Norris, the Seattle cartoonist who was forced to go into hiding as a result of the "Everybody Draw Mohammad Day" contest she created.

The Seattle Weekly reported that : "On the insistence of top security specialists at the FBI, she is, as they put it, 'going ghost': moving, changing her name, and essentially wiping away her identity... She is, in effect, being put into a witness-protection program--except, as she notes, without the government picking up the tab."

Feisal Abdul Rauf - unlike the aforementioned individuals - has accused the U.S. of engaging in acts of terrorism, and yet, despite this inflammatory rhetoric, the Imam [unlike the others] is receiving police protection, compliments of NYC and the tax payers who are picking up the tab. Apparently, the U.S., who, according to Rauf, is guilty of state terrorism, is deeply concerned for the Imam's safety.

If only the simple folk among us could receive the same royal treatment as Rauf.

Ah, how sweet it is to be Imam Rauf; perks, fringe benefits and all.....