This interview with Wynn International CEO, Steve Wynn, is an excellent, concise portrayal of all that is wrong in Washington, DC. He articulates everything that is affecting every business owner in the US. Not only is he absolutely on the money with everything he says, but perhaps, finally, MSNBC may actually be starting to understand why so many people are pissed off.
A4 Driver
Monday, June 14, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
"Come Out of the Cave, America, It's Dark in There"
This young man does a great job of describing the thought process of the Muslim community. It's something I have felt all along but was never able to put my finger on it as I had never read the Koran/Quran/Qu'ran. He uses quotes from that book and it all makes sense now.
A4 Driver
A4 Driver
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Finally People May Be Getting It
The Wall Street Journal has the most effective and articulate op-ed writers. Ms Rabinowitz has captured the essence of why Zero is such a poor leader and why he cannot fathom the way most of the rest of America thinks. This is a little long but it is spot on.
A4 Driver
There should have been nothing puzzling about his response to anyone who has paid even modest critical attention to Mr. Obama's pronouncements. For it was clear from the first that this president—single-minded, ever-visible, confident in his program for a reformed America saved from darkness by his arrival—was wanting in certain qualities citizens have until now taken for granted in their presidents. Namely, a tone and presence that said: This is the Americans' leader, a man of them, for them, the nation's voice and champion. Mr. Obama wasn't lacking in concern about the oil spill. What he lacked was that voice—and for good reason.
Those qualities to be expected in a president were never about rhetoric; Mr. Obama had proved himself a dab hand at that on the campaign trail. They were a matter of identification with the nation and to all that binds its people together in pride and allegiance. These are feelings held deep in American hearts, unvoiced mostly, but unmistakably there and not only on the Fourth of July.
A great part of America now understands that this president's sense of identification lies elsewhere, and is in profound ways unlike theirs. He is hard put to sound convincingly like the leader of the nation, because he is, at heart and by instinct, the voice mainly of his ideological class. He is the alien in the White House, a matter having nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the demented fringe.
One of his first reforms was to rid the White House of the bust of Winston Churchill—a gift from Tony Blair—by packing it back off to 10 Downing Street. A cloudlet of mystery has surrounded the subject ever since, but the central fact stands clear. The new administration had apparently found no place in our national house of many rooms for the British leader who lives on so vividly in the American mind. Churchill, face of our shared wartime struggle, dauntless rallier of his nation who continues, so remarkably, to speak to ours. For a president to whom such associations are alien, ridding the White House of Churchill would, of course, have raised no second thoughts.
Far greater strangeness has since flowed steadily from Washington. The president's appointees, transmitters of policy, go forth with singular passion week after week, delivering the latest inversion of reality. Their work is not easy, focused as it is on a current prime preoccupation of this White House—that is, finding ways to avoid any public mention of the indisputable Islamist identity of the enemy at war with us. No small trick that, but their efforts go forward in public spectacles matchless in their absurdity—unnerving in what they confirm about our current guardians of law and national security.
Consider the hapless Eric Holder, America's attorney general, confronting the question put to him by Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas) of the House Judicary Committee on May 13.
Did Mr. Holder think that in the last three terrorist attempts on this soil, one of them successful (Maj. Nidal Hasan's murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, preceded by his shout of "Allahu Akbar!"), that radical Islam might have played any role at all? Mr. Holder seemed puzzled by the question. "People have different reasons" he finally answered—a response he repeated three times. He didn't want "to say anything negative about any religion."
And who can forget the exhortations on jihad by John Brennan, Mr. Obama's chief adviser on counterterrorism? Mr. Brennan has in the past charged that Americans lack sensitivity to the Muslim world, and that we have particularly failed to credit its peace-loving disposition. In a May 26 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Brennan held forth fervently, if not quite comprehensibly, on who our enemy was not: "Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is just a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear."
He went on to announce, sternly, that we do not refer to our enemies as Islamists or jihadists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam. How then might we be permitted to describe our enemies? One hint comes from another of Mr. Brennan's pronouncements in that speech: That "violent extremists are victims of political, economic and social forces."
Yes, that would work. Consider the news bulletins we could have read: "Police have arrested Faisal Shahzad, victim of political, economic and social forces living in Connecticut, for efforts to set off a car bomb explosion in Times Square." Plotters in Afghanistan and Yemen, preparing for their next attempt at mass murder in America, could only have listened in wonderment. They must have marvelled in particular on learning that this was the chief counterterrorism adviser to the president of the United States.
Long after Mr. Obama leaves office, it will be this parade of explicators, laboring mightily to sell each new piece of official reality revisionism—Janet Napolitano and her immortal "man-caused disasters'' among them—that will stand most memorably as the face of this administration.
It is a White House that has focused consistently on the sensitivities of the world community—as it is euphemistically known—a body of which the president of the United States frequently appears to view himself as a representative at large.
It is what has caused this president and his counterterrorist brain trust to deem it acceptable to insult Americans with nonsensical evasions concerning the enemy we face. It is this focus that caused Mr. Holder to insist on holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in lower Manhattan, despite the rage this decision induced in New Yorkers, and later to insist if not there, then elsewhere in New York. This was all to be a dazzling exhibition for that world community—proof of Mr. Obama's moral reclamation program and that America had been delivered from the darkness of the Bush years.
It was why this administration tapped officials like Michael Posner, assistant secretary of state for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Among his better known contributions to political discourse was a 2005 address in which he compared the treatment of Muslim-Americans in the United States after 9/11 with the plight of the Japanese-Americans interned in camps after Pearl Harbor. During a human-rights conference held in China this May, Mr. Posner cited the new Arizona immigration law by way of assuring the Chinese, those exemplary guardians of freedom, that the United States too had its problems with discrimination.
So there we were: America and China, in the same boat on human rights, two buddies struggling for reform. For this view of reality, which brought withering criticism in Congress and calls for his resignation, Mr. Posner has been roundly embraced in the State Department as a superbly effective representative.
It is no surprise that Mr. Posner—like numerous of his kind—has found a natural home in this administration. His is a sensibility and political disposition with which Mr. Obama is at home. The beliefs and attitudes that this president has internalized are to be found everywhere—in the salons of the left the world over—and, above all, in the academic establishment, stuffed with tenured radicals and their political progeny. The places where it is held as revealed truth that the United States is now, and has been throughout its history, the chief engine of injustice and oppression in the world.
They are attitudes to be found everywhere, but never before in a president of the United States. Mr. Obama may not hold all, or the more extreme, of these views. But there can be no doubt by now of the influences that have shaped him. They account for his grand apology tour through the capitals of Europe and to the Muslim world, during which he decried America's moral failures—her arrogance, insensitivity. They were the words of a man to whom reasons for American guilt came naturally. Americans were shocked by this behavior in their newly elected president. But he was telling them something from those lecterns in foreign lands—something about his distant relation to the country he was about to lead.
The truth about that distance is now sinking in, which is all to the good. A country governed by leaders too principled to speak the name of its mortal enemy needs every infusion of reality it can get.
Ms. Rabinowitz is a member of the Journal's editorial board.
A4 Driver
The Alien in the White House
The distance between the president and the people is beginning to be revealed.
By DOROTHY RABINOWITZ
The deepening notes of disenchantment with Barack Obama now issuing from commentators across the political spectrum were predictable. So, too, were the charges from some of the president's earliest enthusiasts about his failure to reflect a powerful sense of urgency about the oil spill.There should have been nothing puzzling about his response to anyone who has paid even modest critical attention to Mr. Obama's pronouncements. For it was clear from the first that this president—single-minded, ever-visible, confident in his program for a reformed America saved from darkness by his arrival—was wanting in certain qualities citizens have until now taken for granted in their presidents. Namely, a tone and presence that said: This is the Americans' leader, a man of them, for them, the nation's voice and champion. Mr. Obama wasn't lacking in concern about the oil spill. What he lacked was that voice—and for good reason.
Those qualities to be expected in a president were never about rhetoric; Mr. Obama had proved himself a dab hand at that on the campaign trail. They were a matter of identification with the nation and to all that binds its people together in pride and allegiance. These are feelings held deep in American hearts, unvoiced mostly, but unmistakably there and not only on the Fourth of July.
A great part of America now understands that this president's sense of identification lies elsewhere, and is in profound ways unlike theirs. He is hard put to sound convincingly like the leader of the nation, because he is, at heart and by instinct, the voice mainly of his ideological class. He is the alien in the White House, a matter having nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the demented fringe.
One of his first reforms was to rid the White House of the bust of Winston Churchill—a gift from Tony Blair—by packing it back off to 10 Downing Street. A cloudlet of mystery has surrounded the subject ever since, but the central fact stands clear. The new administration had apparently found no place in our national house of many rooms for the British leader who lives on so vividly in the American mind. Churchill, face of our shared wartime struggle, dauntless rallier of his nation who continues, so remarkably, to speak to ours. For a president to whom such associations are alien, ridding the White House of Churchill would, of course, have raised no second thoughts.
Far greater strangeness has since flowed steadily from Washington. The president's appointees, transmitters of policy, go forth with singular passion week after week, delivering the latest inversion of reality. Their work is not easy, focused as it is on a current prime preoccupation of this White House—that is, finding ways to avoid any public mention of the indisputable Islamist identity of the enemy at war with us. No small trick that, but their efforts go forward in public spectacles matchless in their absurdity—unnerving in what they confirm about our current guardians of law and national security.
Consider the hapless Eric Holder, America's attorney general, confronting the question put to him by Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas) of the House Judicary Committee on May 13.
Did Mr. Holder think that in the last three terrorist attempts on this soil, one of them successful (Maj. Nidal Hasan's murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, preceded by his shout of "Allahu Akbar!"), that radical Islam might have played any role at all? Mr. Holder seemed puzzled by the question. "People have different reasons" he finally answered—a response he repeated three times. He didn't want "to say anything negative about any religion."
And who can forget the exhortations on jihad by John Brennan, Mr. Obama's chief adviser on counterterrorism? Mr. Brennan has in the past charged that Americans lack sensitivity to the Muslim world, and that we have particularly failed to credit its peace-loving disposition. In a May 26 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Brennan held forth fervently, if not quite comprehensibly, on who our enemy was not: "Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is just a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear."
He went on to announce, sternly, that we do not refer to our enemies as Islamists or jihadists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam. How then might we be permitted to describe our enemies? One hint comes from another of Mr. Brennan's pronouncements in that speech: That "violent extremists are victims of political, economic and social forces."
Yes, that would work. Consider the news bulletins we could have read: "Police have arrested Faisal Shahzad, victim of political, economic and social forces living in Connecticut, for efforts to set off a car bomb explosion in Times Square." Plotters in Afghanistan and Yemen, preparing for their next attempt at mass murder in America, could only have listened in wonderment. They must have marvelled in particular on learning that this was the chief counterterrorism adviser to the president of the United States.
It is a White House that has focused consistently on the sensitivities of the world community—as it is euphemistically known—a body of which the president of the United States frequently appears to view himself as a representative at large.
It is what has caused this president and his counterterrorist brain trust to deem it acceptable to insult Americans with nonsensical evasions concerning the enemy we face. It is this focus that caused Mr. Holder to insist on holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in lower Manhattan, despite the rage this decision induced in New Yorkers, and later to insist if not there, then elsewhere in New York. This was all to be a dazzling exhibition for that world community—proof of Mr. Obama's moral reclamation program and that America had been delivered from the darkness of the Bush years.
It was why this administration tapped officials like Michael Posner, assistant secretary of state for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Among his better known contributions to political discourse was a 2005 address in which he compared the treatment of Muslim-Americans in the United States after 9/11 with the plight of the Japanese-Americans interned in camps after Pearl Harbor. During a human-rights conference held in China this May, Mr. Posner cited the new Arizona immigration law by way of assuring the Chinese, those exemplary guardians of freedom, that the United States too had its problems with discrimination.
So there we were: America and China, in the same boat on human rights, two buddies struggling for reform. For this view of reality, which brought withering criticism in Congress and calls for his resignation, Mr. Posner has been roundly embraced in the State Department as a superbly effective representative.
It is no surprise that Mr. Posner—like numerous of his kind—has found a natural home in this administration. His is a sensibility and political disposition with which Mr. Obama is at home. The beliefs and attitudes that this president has internalized are to be found everywhere—in the salons of the left the world over—and, above all, in the academic establishment, stuffed with tenured radicals and their political progeny. The places where it is held as revealed truth that the United States is now, and has been throughout its history, the chief engine of injustice and oppression in the world.
They are attitudes to be found everywhere, but never before in a president of the United States. Mr. Obama may not hold all, or the more extreme, of these views. But there can be no doubt by now of the influences that have shaped him. They account for his grand apology tour through the capitals of Europe and to the Muslim world, during which he decried America's moral failures—her arrogance, insensitivity. They were the words of a man to whom reasons for American guilt came naturally. Americans were shocked by this behavior in their newly elected president. But he was telling them something from those lecterns in foreign lands—something about his distant relation to the country he was about to lead.
The truth about that distance is now sinking in, which is all to the good. A country governed by leaders too principled to speak the name of its mortal enemy needs every infusion of reality it can get.
Ms. Rabinowitz is a member of the Journal's editorial board.
Here Is Some Simple Arithmetic - A Trillion $
I heard several months ago that the amount for TARP, Lehman Bros, etc (all of the items prior to the early 2009 $787B Stimulus plan) was $1.28T which, if in $100 denominations, would weigh 7000 tons or the same weight as all of the steel used to build the Eiffel Tower. Absolutely incredible and difficult for the Average Joe to comprehend. Sorry, not just the Average Joe, but the average college-educated, lawyerly Congress Person who obviously does not have an inkling about what a $1T is.
And this from the May 10, 2010 Agora Financial Daily Reckoning:
"The Congressional Budget Office's latest numbers reveal that America's national indebtedness will increase by $9.7 trillion over the next 10 years. Further, the CBO projects the national debt will be 90% of GDP by the end of this decade. This projection seems very optimistic, as America's national debt has already reached 86% of GDP."
The CBO has a specious record when projecting anything. Remember, this $9.7T is only the indebtedness and it's only the increase for 10 years.
So let me go through some simple arithmetic according to numbers furnished by Google:
$1,000,000 ($1M) in $100 bills weighs 22 pounds and is 1.24 Meters in height when stacked. (Google numbers)
$1,000,000,000 ($1B) in $100 bills weighs 22,000 ponds and is 1240 Meters in height when stacked.
$1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) - which just happens to be 1 million $1M - weighs 22,000,000 pounds and is 1,240,000 Meters in height when stacked.
22,000,000 pounds = 11,000 tons which is the displacement of an Independence Class WWII aircraft carrier. 1,240,000 Meters = 770 miles. Lay the stack down on its side and it reaches from the Oregon/California border to the California/Mexico border.
Guess what? That's only $1T!
Here's what you get for $9.7T:
106,700 tons and 7469 miles. The weight of the 13 story, 1379 stateroom, 2758 passenger, 1100 crew, 893 foot long Carnival Cruise Lines ship Carnival Victory is 101,509 tons. To reach 106,700 tons you would have to load an additional 5191 Volkswagen Bugs. Lay the stack down and it goes from Denver to Hong Kong.
Do you think these people representing us have a clue? I certainly don't. One of these days I'll write about what I learned of the mental state of staffers for Congressional members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees from 25 years ago.
A4 Driver
And this from the May 10, 2010 Agora Financial Daily Reckoning:
"The Congressional Budget Office's latest numbers reveal that America's national indebtedness will increase by $9.7 trillion over the next 10 years. Further, the CBO projects the national debt will be 90% of GDP by the end of this decade. This projection seems very optimistic, as America's national debt has already reached 86% of GDP."
The CBO has a specious record when projecting anything. Remember, this $9.7T is only the indebtedness and it's only the increase for 10 years.
So let me go through some simple arithmetic according to numbers furnished by Google:
$1,000,000 ($1M) in $100 bills weighs 22 pounds and is 1.24 Meters in height when stacked. (Google numbers)
$1,000,000,000 ($1B) in $100 bills weighs 22,000 ponds and is 1240 Meters in height when stacked.
$1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) - which just happens to be 1 million $1M - weighs 22,000,000 pounds and is 1,240,000 Meters in height when stacked.
22,000,000 pounds = 11,000 tons which is the displacement of an Independence Class WWII aircraft carrier. 1,240,000 Meters = 770 miles. Lay the stack down on its side and it reaches from the Oregon/California border to the California/Mexico border.
Guess what? That's only $1T!
Here's what you get for $9.7T:
106,700 tons and 7469 miles. The weight of the 13 story, 1379 stateroom, 2758 passenger, 1100 crew, 893 foot long Carnival Cruise Lines ship Carnival Victory is 101,509 tons. To reach 106,700 tons you would have to load an additional 5191 Volkswagen Bugs. Lay the stack down and it goes from Denver to Hong Kong.
Do you think these people representing us have a clue? I certainly don't. One of these days I'll write about what I learned of the mental state of staffers for Congressional members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees from 25 years ago.
A4 Driver
Did the Jewish Voting Bloc Shoot Itself in the Foot?
This is interesting. From a strictly US strategic military view of things, Israel is an absolute necessity in the Muddle East. There may be some other arguments in relation to how the state of Israel came about and the occupation of Palestine but from Israel's perspective they cannot allow a port to be established to allow Iran/Syria to import more weapons in both quantity and destructive power. The Jewish population in the US is predominantly Liberal and voted for Zero by a large percentage. So now he and Hillary are treating Israel as a second class country and are dis-respecting its ability to use its government and courts to hold a "credible, transparent" investigation of the recent flotilla incident. It will be interesting to see how the Jewish voting bloc in the US reacts.
First the article and then an embedded video clip of Netanyahu discussing the flotilla incident. These voters better re-evaluate how/who they vote in the future.
A4 Driver
First the article and then an embedded video clip of Netanyahu discussing the flotilla incident. These voters better re-evaluate how/who they vote in the future.
A4 Driver
Obama's chutzpah to Israel must stop
By Anne Bayefsky
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | In a first from a US president, Barack Obama has now lectured Israel how it must conduct an investigation into actions taken by the IDF to defend the Jewish state. In response to a question from CNN's Larry King on June 3 about the blockade-busting endeavor by Turkish-backed extremists, Obama said: "We are calling for an effective investigation of everything that happened. I think the Israelis are going to agree to that — an investigation of international standards — because they recognize that this can't be good for Israel's long-term security."
The statement marks a new low in the president's moves on impairing US-Israel relations.
Israel is a fully-free democratic society with an unparalleled, independent and accessible judicial system fully governed by the rule of law. The idea that it needs to be told by the president how to conduct an investigation into military operations taken in self-defense is an extraordinary insult. How dare the president suggest that its standards are not good enough?
The Israeli Supreme Court makes generous use — far more than the US Supreme Court — of decisions of national courts of other states, regional human rights courts, as well as international human rights treaties. The independent judiciary, to the frequent consternation of many political actors, is far more involved in oversight of the government and the military than is the judiciary in the US, where the political questions doctrine and other barriers frequently preclude judicial oversight.
Furthermore, as Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has made clear, defending the maritime blockade of Hamas-run Gaza and preventing the creation of an Iranian Mediterranean port are good for Israel's long-term security. They are also good for American security, given that Israel is seeking to defeat the same rejectionist Islamic forces that threaten America and democracy more generally.
The president's attempt at gross interference in Israeli sovereignty started with his rush to judgment last Monday, when he permitted a unanimous UN Security Council presidential statement calling for "a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards."
Predictably, within 24 hours that call was duly translated by the UN Human Rights Council into a call for an international investigation of what it had already condemned as "the outrageous attack by the Israeli forces."
The HRC is now engaged, in other words, in an effort to mimic the libelous Goldstone Report.
Though the US finally voted against the HRC resolution (after first suggesting it was open to a decision reproducing the Security Council statement), by that point the damage done by the president leaping on the Security Council bandwagon had been done. Moreover, since the Obama administration decided to join the HRC and to pay for it, American taxpayers will cover 22 percent of the $530,000 estimated costs of the HRC-sponsored investigation.
The president's assault on the credibility of the Israeli democratic system is coming from all sides of his administration. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated on June 1 that international participants might be necessary to bolster the legitimacy of an Israeli probe. Israelis won't do. In her words, the US wants "a prompt, impartial, credible, and transparent investigation... We are open to different ways of assuring a credible investigation, including international participation…"
Assistant Secretary of State Philip J. Crowley made the insult even more grotesque — the goal wasn't a credible probe in objective terms, it was credible in the eyes of the UN mob. On June 2 he said that Israel must produce "an investigation that is broadly viewed as credible by the international community."
Just a week ago, the Obama administration made another move to undermine Israel's stature by way of international intervention. It undertook in writing at the conclusion of the Nuclear Nonproliferation conference to co-sponsor a 2012 international meeting having the goal of removing Israel's nuclear deterrence capacity without concomitant security guarantees having been realized. This increasingly brazen intimidation is not going to evaporate if Israel decides to subject itself to any kind of international oversight of its military forces, political decision-makers or judicial authorities.
Nor, of course, would anything satisfy UN players short of a UN team which was handpicked to assure a predetermined outcome finding Israel guilty on all counts. Israel should, therefore, strongly reject President Obama's latest endeavor to erode its sovereignty and well-being.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and editor of www.EYEontheUN.org.
| | |
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | In a first from a US president, Barack Obama has now lectured Israel how it must conduct an investigation into actions taken by the IDF to defend the Jewish state. In response to a question from CNN's Larry King on June 3 about the blockade-busting endeavor by Turkish-backed extremists, Obama said: "We are calling for an effective investigation of everything that happened. I think the Israelis are going to agree to that — an investigation of international standards — because they recognize that this can't be good for Israel's long-term security."
The statement marks a new low in the president's moves on impairing US-Israel relations.
Israel is a fully-free democratic society with an unparalleled, independent and accessible judicial system fully governed by the rule of law. The idea that it needs to be told by the president how to conduct an investigation into military operations taken in self-defense is an extraordinary insult. How dare the president suggest that its standards are not good enough?
The Israeli Supreme Court makes generous use — far more than the US Supreme Court — of decisions of national courts of other states, regional human rights courts, as well as international human rights treaties. The independent judiciary, to the frequent consternation of many political actors, is far more involved in oversight of the government and the military than is the judiciary in the US, where the political questions doctrine and other barriers frequently preclude judicial oversight.
Furthermore, as Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has made clear, defending the maritime blockade of Hamas-run Gaza and preventing the creation of an Iranian Mediterranean port are good for Israel's long-term security. They are also good for American security, given that Israel is seeking to defeat the same rejectionist Islamic forces that threaten America and democracy more generally.
The president's attempt at gross interference in Israeli sovereignty started with his rush to judgment last Monday, when he permitted a unanimous UN Security Council presidential statement calling for "a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards."
Predictably, within 24 hours that call was duly translated by the UN Human Rights Council into a call for an international investigation of what it had already condemned as "the outrageous attack by the Israeli forces."
The HRC is now engaged, in other words, in an effort to mimic the libelous Goldstone Report.
Though the US finally voted against the HRC resolution (after first suggesting it was open to a decision reproducing the Security Council statement), by that point the damage done by the president leaping on the Security Council bandwagon had been done. Moreover, since the Obama administration decided to join the HRC and to pay for it, American taxpayers will cover 22 percent of the $530,000 estimated costs of the HRC-sponsored investigation.
The president's assault on the credibility of the Israeli democratic system is coming from all sides of his administration. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated on June 1 that international participants might be necessary to bolster the legitimacy of an Israeli probe. Israelis won't do. In her words, the US wants "a prompt, impartial, credible, and transparent investigation... We are open to different ways of assuring a credible investigation, including international participation…"
Assistant Secretary of State Philip J. Crowley made the insult even more grotesque — the goal wasn't a credible probe in objective terms, it was credible in the eyes of the UN mob. On June 2 he said that Israel must produce "an investigation that is broadly viewed as credible by the international community."
Just a week ago, the Obama administration made another move to undermine Israel's stature by way of international intervention. It undertook in writing at the conclusion of the Nuclear Nonproliferation conference to co-sponsor a 2012 international meeting having the goal of removing Israel's nuclear deterrence capacity without concomitant security guarantees having been realized. This increasingly brazen intimidation is not going to evaporate if Israel decides to subject itself to any kind of international oversight of its military forces, political decision-makers or judicial authorities.
Nor, of course, would anything satisfy UN players short of a UN team which was handpicked to assure a predetermined outcome finding Israel guilty on all counts. Israel should, therefore, strongly reject President Obama's latest endeavor to erode its sovereignty and well-being.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and editor of www.EYEontheUN.org.
What Doesn't Congress, Holder or Zero Get?
I just took an MSNBC (the most liberal TV news organization) poll regarding the Arizona immigration bill. I was expecting the results to biased towards the Left and to be some wimpy, wah-wah, hand-wringing results. Boy, was I wrong! Perhaps there is a message there for the Zero Administration, what do you think?
Check out what the American people say!
A4 Driver
http://world-news.newsvine.com/_question/2010/05/12/4274124-do-you-support-arizonas-tough-new-law-on-illegal-immigration
Results
Check out what the American people say!
A4 Driver
http://world-news.newsvine.com/_question/2010/05/12/4274124-do-you-support-arizonas-tough-new-law-on-illegal-immigration
Results
Total of 953,950 votes
95.9%
Yes
914,867 votes
4.1%
No
39,083 votes
Monday, June 7, 2010
Arrogance and Elitism at Its Worst
I had heard the term "Tea-Baggers" used by Zero in a condescending manner a few weeks after the Tea Party rallies were held. I didn't pay much attention to it until I read this article. The definition of Tea-Bagging is a act performed by homosexual men---this President, in his elitist and arrogant manner chides Tea Party members as Tea Baggers. Now you know why I refer to him as "Zero". He knew exactly what he was saying and he has no class in classifying his opponents of his out of control spending and socialism of America as homosexuals performing a sex act. This is elitism and arrogance at its worst. The Left always uses mocking or derogatory names to describe those who oppose their plans instead of engaging in thoughtful and comprehensive debate. I had little respect for him and now I am definitely at the "Zero" level.
First it was an item sent to the website, Patriot Post, from a military source. That source provided a briefing paper for an upcoming exercise at Ft. Knox, Ky., that sought to prepare for a possible protest at the Ft. Knox, United States Gold Depository by “Local Militia Groups/Anti-Government Protesters/TEA Party.”
The paper, entitled “Exercise” and dated April 23, stated:
The second incident occurred in Quincy, Ill., on April 28. With President Barack Obama arriving to speak nearby on the subject of Wall Street greed, the Quincy Tea Party was out in force. The gray haired grannies and grandpas were all ramped up and armed—with signs and a bullhorn or two—to protest the president’s visit. While they stood peacefully on the sidewalk, a police riot squad—decked out in helmets with face masks and other heavy protective gear—marched in lockstep in the street in front of them, ordering them back on the sidewalk. It was an obvious—and utterly ridiculous—attempt at intimidation from the regime.
The third was a quote by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the days after a car bomb was found and defused in Times Square. Rather than point the finger toward the obvious choice—Muslim extremist followers of radical Islam—Bloomberg told CBS’s Katie Couric: “If I had to guess—25 cents—this would be exactly that, somebody home-grown, maybe a mentally deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something. It could be anything.” [Emphasis added]
This is how the regime quashes dissent. It started as soon as the Tea Party began to grow a little more than a year ago, with those who head up the regime calling Americans names like Nazi, un-American, radical and dangerous. Leftist groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center (better described as the Southern Preposterous Lie Center) used their typical tactics of linking Tea partiers with Skinheads, the Ku Klux Klan and the militia movement.
The sycophantic Obama-fawning media followed suit by associating a disgusting homosexual practice called tea-bagging with people who were exercising their uniquely American right of free speech and peaceful assembly. (If you need to find out what tea-bagging is, Google it.)
These terms and messages spread through the blogosphere and are now in common usage by liberals and progressives.
Using such derogatory terms about their fellow citizens provides leftists, progressives and fascists an air of superiority. It allows them to dehumanize those they disagree with, which then gives them the justification to oppose them. But in doing so they only belittle themselves. They show themselves as devoid of morals, ideas and class—without the ability to engage in rational discussion.
Much like when the President—with his smug elitist arrogance—told an audience: “So I’ve been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes. You would think they would be saying thank you.”
Not hardly, Mr. President. Not hardly. And you are not so dumb that you don’t know why they’re protesting. And we know why you, your fawning media acolytes and the elitist corporatist elected class in Washington (from both the Left and Right and hereafter known as the collective “They”) treat Tea partiers with such arrogant disdain.
They do it because They fear the Tea Party protestors are a threat to their power. They understand that their policies are opposed by the majority of Americans who have finally… finally awakened to their abuses.
And Tea partiers, They fear you because they understand their big money donations from their corporate sponsors, the illegal votes that community organizations like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) drum up, and the thuggish activities of the unions will not be enough to overcome your moral drive and determination.
A recent poll by Gallup found that 28 percent of those surveyed identified with the Tea Party movement. That means you number in the dozens of millions—despite the attacks on your movement. Understand that is a large number, no matter what They say. Although Tea partiers skew right politically, its members broke out demographically much like the rest of the U.S.
That means that Tea partiers are husbands and wives, grandfathers and grandmothers. That means Tea partiers are homemakers and business owners. That means Tea partiers are blue collar workers and white collar workers. That means Tea partiers are employed and unemployed. That means Tea partiers are veterans of World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf Wars, and military operations in between. And it means Tea partiers are self-reliant.
And that’s what They fear. Tea partiers aren’t ready to bow down to the altar of big government like so many of the elitists want and expect… and have sought to foster for these many years.
But if the regime has managed to convince—without any evidence or any instances of violence—even some in the military that it is “realistic” to pose Tea partiers as dangerous and that opposition to a government takeover of the economy and the businesses that made America prosperous is evidence of a crime worthy of imprisonment in local detention centers, then it’s not just the Tea partiers who need to worry.
(Editor’s note: To prove their existence screen shots of the intel papers posted on Patriot Post have been saved, but Personal Liberty Digest will respect command staff’s request that they not be posted.)
Fear And Loathing Of The Tea Party
With all that’s going on in America and in the world it’s a shame that yet another article defending the Tea Party movement needs to be written. But three incidents over the last couple of weeks prove that the corrupt, unfounded and ridiculous notion that people who oppose the actions of an increasingly fascist regime and a corporatist Congress are fomenting terror continues to gain traction.First it was an item sent to the website, Patriot Post, from a military source. That source provided a briefing paper for an upcoming exercise at Ft. Knox, Ky., that sought to prepare for a possible protest at the Ft. Knox, United States Gold Depository by “Local Militia Groups/Anti-Government Protesters/TEA Party.”
The paper, entitled “Exercise” and dated April 23, stated:
“TEA Party organizers have stated that they will protest at the Gold Vault at a future date. Mint Police are on a heightened alert status to deal with a large crowd on the grounds. Anti-Government-Health Care Protesters have stated that they would join the TEA Party as a sign of solidarity.A follow-up intel update paper, dated April 26, warned of viable threats “against the US Bullion Depository and Ft. Knox.” It stated:
“Threats against the US Bullion Depository and Fort Knox have been made. Type of event is unknown, except that it will be ‘significant.’ The ‘significant’ event is a concern to local and Federal Law Enforcement Organizations, as these groups are armed, have combat training and some are former Military Snipers. Some may have explosives training/experience.”
“Many members were extremely agitated at what they referred to as Government Intervention and over taxation in Their (sic) lives. Alcohol use ‘fanned the flames’. (sic) Many Military grade firearms were openly carried. An ad hoc “shoot the Govt. Agent” event was held with prizes (alcohol) given for the best shot placement. Components for bomb making are reported to have been on the site. Some members have criminal records relating to explosive and weapons violations.After Patriot Post’s Mark Alexander wrote about the exercise and posted the two intel updates on his site he was contacted by senior command staff at Ft. Knox. Alexander then wrote:
“Also (sic)
In defiance to (sic) Regulations, the TEA Party Activists along with Anti-Health Care Demonstrators have stated that they will protest at the US Bullion Depository, ‘Stating that it is their right to demonstrate against the Government for redress of wrongs.’
“Local detention centers are being made ready for mass arrests.”
“There was a security exercise at Ft. Knox this week, but an officer in the security loop altered the scenario ‘in order to make it look more realistic.’ Those alterations were described in my essay, exactly as they appeared. The command staff informed me that the alterations were not approved at the command level and that the individual who circulated the scenario through official channels will ‘receive appropriate counsel.’ I was assured that Command staff would not have authorized such a scenario.”Alexander also wrote that he removed the two intel reports* from his site at the request of Command staff.
The second incident occurred in Quincy, Ill., on April 28. With President Barack Obama arriving to speak nearby on the subject of Wall Street greed, the Quincy Tea Party was out in force. The gray haired grannies and grandpas were all ramped up and armed—with signs and a bullhorn or two—to protest the president’s visit. While they stood peacefully on the sidewalk, a police riot squad—decked out in helmets with face masks and other heavy protective gear—marched in lockstep in the street in front of them, ordering them back on the sidewalk. It was an obvious—and utterly ridiculous—attempt at intimidation from the regime.
The third was a quote by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the days after a car bomb was found and defused in Times Square. Rather than point the finger toward the obvious choice—Muslim extremist followers of radical Islam—Bloomberg told CBS’s Katie Couric: “If I had to guess—25 cents—this would be exactly that, somebody home-grown, maybe a mentally deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something. It could be anything.” [Emphasis added]
This is how the regime quashes dissent. It started as soon as the Tea Party began to grow a little more than a year ago, with those who head up the regime calling Americans names like Nazi, un-American, radical and dangerous. Leftist groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center (better described as the Southern Preposterous Lie Center) used their typical tactics of linking Tea partiers with Skinheads, the Ku Klux Klan and the militia movement.
The sycophantic Obama-fawning media followed suit by associating a disgusting homosexual practice called tea-bagging with people who were exercising their uniquely American right of free speech and peaceful assembly. (If you need to find out what tea-bagging is, Google it.)
These terms and messages spread through the blogosphere and are now in common usage by liberals and progressives.
Using such derogatory terms about their fellow citizens provides leftists, progressives and fascists an air of superiority. It allows them to dehumanize those they disagree with, which then gives them the justification to oppose them. But in doing so they only belittle themselves. They show themselves as devoid of morals, ideas and class—without the ability to engage in rational discussion.
Much like when the President—with his smug elitist arrogance—told an audience: “So I’ve been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes. You would think they would be saying thank you.”
Not hardly, Mr. President. Not hardly. And you are not so dumb that you don’t know why they’re protesting. And we know why you, your fawning media acolytes and the elitist corporatist elected class in Washington (from both the Left and Right and hereafter known as the collective “They”) treat Tea partiers with such arrogant disdain.
They do it because They fear the Tea Party protestors are a threat to their power. They understand that their policies are opposed by the majority of Americans who have finally… finally awakened to their abuses.
And Tea partiers, They fear you because they understand their big money donations from their corporate sponsors, the illegal votes that community organizations like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) drum up, and the thuggish activities of the unions will not be enough to overcome your moral drive and determination.
A recent poll by Gallup found that 28 percent of those surveyed identified with the Tea Party movement. That means you number in the dozens of millions—despite the attacks on your movement. Understand that is a large number, no matter what They say. Although Tea partiers skew right politically, its members broke out demographically much like the rest of the U.S.
That means that Tea partiers are husbands and wives, grandfathers and grandmothers. That means Tea partiers are homemakers and business owners. That means Tea partiers are blue collar workers and white collar workers. That means Tea partiers are employed and unemployed. That means Tea partiers are veterans of World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf Wars, and military operations in between. And it means Tea partiers are self-reliant.
And that’s what They fear. Tea partiers aren’t ready to bow down to the altar of big government like so many of the elitists want and expect… and have sought to foster for these many years.
But if the regime has managed to convince—without any evidence or any instances of violence—even some in the military that it is “realistic” to pose Tea partiers as dangerous and that opposition to a government takeover of the economy and the businesses that made America prosperous is evidence of a crime worthy of imprisonment in local detention centers, then it’s not just the Tea partiers who need to worry.
(Editor’s note: To prove their existence screen shots of the intel papers posted on Patriot Post have been saved, but Personal Liberty Digest will respect command staff’s request that they not be posted.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)