I had recently shared my assessment that Iran and Syria and not “peace talks” with the PLO would be the main items on the agenda when President Obama visits Israel.
Now you might want to now see this article, “Barack Obama’s visit to Israel ‘will focus on Iran, not peace talks’” (emphasis added):
“…Israeli diplomats said talks with Benjamin Netanyahu would focus on Iran.
“‘The peace process may be the subject that is initially emphasized in public but there are other issues on the table that must be addressed before the summer,’ one diplomat said, alluding to Israel’s spring deadline for Iran to stop enriching uranium. ‘The deal they will have done may be on the subject of war, not of peace.’
“‘There are currently bigger and much more urgent issues to address than the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,’ one Israeli official said.”
What I’ve been reading is that Obama has wised up since his first term: he knows that there is not going to be a deal between Israel and the PLO, and understands that pushing on this too hard merely renders him foolish and will cause him to have to backtrack.
Please, don’t write to me telling me not to trust Obama. I don’t trust him, but this is not the issue here. What is important is analyzing what Obama thinks is in Obama’s best interests, for this is the critical factor in understanding how he’s likely to play the situation.
As a result of the latest assessments of the situation, the prospect of pressure on our prime minister by Obama with regard to freezing settlements and the like seems diminished.
What also seems clear is that Netanyahu and Obama need to speak face to face on the subject of Iran.
Since Iran has been obstinate in its behavior and has rejected American outreach, it seems (speculatively) not beyond the realm of possibility that Obama would now be reassessing his position with regard to this country as well.
However, I make mention of this, which for me remains unconfirmed. According to the JPost today, “unnamed officials” (whose own motivation and political orientation are unknown) told Army Radio that Obama is coming to warn Netanyahu not to take on Iran.
The urgency on Obama’s part, say these officials, “is because in his speech to the United Nations in September, Netanyahu had flagged the spring of 2013 as a significant time in the context of the Iranian nuclear threat.”
It is not for nothing that Netanyahu is talking about a unity government to take on the challenges ahead.
However, Obama would have to secure Netanyahu’s trust, something he does not have at present, in order to convince the prime minister to “let me handle matters with the Iranians according to my understanding, and if necessary I will take action, we have capabilities that you do not.”
Not a simple matter, as there is no issue on which Netanyahu stands firmer or has greater concern. What would Obama have to do to convince Netanyahu to step down here? That the US has capabilities — including more powerful bunker-busters — that Israel does not have is absolutely the case. We’d love to let the US handle this.
But according to Obama’s understanding? There’s the rub. The US would let matters in Iran progress a great deal further than Netanyahu believes is either safe or advisable. There is a genuine disagreement here.
So perhaps the question should be reversed: What would Netanyahu have to do to convince Obama to truly act on Iran in a timely fashion? We cannot rule out that quid pro quo possibility.
And while Obama may have wised up with regard to the possibility of securing an agreement between Israel and the PLO, there is nothing wise at all about the approach of Secretary of State Kerry. It is Kerry who is most likely to be, shall we say, “bothersome” on this issue. Thus does Aaron David Miller — who served as an adviser on the Middle East for multiple administrations — counsel, “Chill Out, John Kerry”:
“The last thing we need (or Kerry needs) is another abortive effort to get talks going. The inconvenient truth is that if you put Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas in a room tomorrow, their talks would fail galactically. The gaps on the two least contentious issues (borders and security) are large; the divide on the identity issues (Jerusalem and refugees) are yawning.”
The findings, which were released last week, of an investigation by Bulgaria into the terrorist murders of five Israelis, plus the Bulgarian bus driver, in the sea resort of Burgas last July, point the finger firmly at Hezbollah:
The investigation uncovered the fact that a Canadian and an Australian citizen — believed to be the bomb maker — were involved, and that both had been living in Lebanon, since 2006 and 2010, respectively.
Said Tsvetan Tsvetanov, Bulgaria’s interior minister, “We have well-grounded reasons to suggest that the two were members of the militant wing of Hezbollah.” He indicated that three of the people in the cell had fake driver’s licenses that had been forged in Lebanon. (Emphasis added)
That Hezbollah was implicated was, of course, precisely what Prime Minister Netanyahu said from the beginning. And also of course, the Lebanese immediately put this down as a report predicated on unreliable information.
The mind-blowing matter here has been the stance of the EU in the wake of these findings. Until now, the EU has not been interested in listing Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. It was widely believed that the Bulgarian investigation would turn the trick and convince the Europeans to change their position. Bulgaria is, after all, a member of the EU.
Hah! What we have seen instead is a model of perversity, cowardice, and lack of willingness to crack down on Hezbollah operations — financial schemes, infrastructure, etc. — within several European countries. As the NY Times (in the above cited article) explains,
“…countries including France and Germany have been wary of taking that step, which could force confrontations with large numbers of Hezbollah supporters living within their borders.” (Emphasis added)
Or, as was explained in a JPost article (emphasis added):
“..the EU-observer, an online newspaper devoted to EU politics, reported that the union’s top counter-terrorism official, Gilles de Kerchove, said responsibility for that blast will not necessarily qualify Hezbollah for the terror blacklist.
“‘There is no automatic listing just because you have been behind a terrorist attack,’ he said in a comment that forces a double-take.
“No, de Kerchove said, it is not only ‘the legal requirement that you have to take into consideration, it’s also a political assessment of the context and the timing.
“‘You might ask, given the situation in Lebanon, which is a highly fragile, highly fragmented country, is listing it going to help you achieve what you want?’ There will, indeed, be many inside the EU asking that exact question, foremost the French, who are fearful that if the EU places Hezbollah on the list, then Paris will lose its leverage inside Lebanon.
“Placing Hezbollah on the list, these same voices will argue, could lead it to pull out of the Lebanese government, something that could significantly destabilize that country at an extremely volatile time in the region.”
But let’s look more honestly at the EU concerns. There is fear of Hezbollah retaliation on their soil, or against their nationals. And fear of loss of investment by Arab nations.
As the Jpost article explains (emphasis added):
“The irony is that not all the EU feels this way. The Netherlands, for instance, has placed the group on its terror list, and Britain has blacklisted the organization’s military wing.
But it is precisely against that phenomenon – splitting the organization into a military wing and a political one – that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu warned Tuesday in responding to the attack by saying, ‘there is only one Hezbollah, it is one organization with one leadership.’
“The Bulgarians may have opened the door to this type of division by determining that at least two of those involved in the attack were ‘members of the militant wing of Hezbollah.’
“That could give the EU, which needs the consensus of all 27 member states, the wiggle room to ban part of the group, but not all of it.
“But that would, of course, only be a partial solution. Hezbollah, as The New York Times reported Tuesday, has thousands of operatives and supporters fanned out across Europe raising money.
“Declaring that the military wing is a terrorist organization will do little to hamper the activities of these fund-raisers, since they will always maintain that they are merely raising money for the ‘good’ part of the Lebanon-based organization.”
Were Hezbollah, without those artificial distinctions, to be declared a terrorist organization by the EU, it would be forbidden to transfer funds from the EU countries to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Such is the world with which we must deal. A world filled with people — fools that they are — who are prepared to let the bad guys thrive, somehow imagining that they will be safe.
Iran has now announced that it is downgrading diplomatic relations with Bulgaria and recalling its ambassador, because Bulgaria had the temerity to name Hezbollah. According to Tsvetanov, there were pressures put on him from within the country not to name Hezbollah. Fear of repercussions is pervasive.
What must be noted, however, is that the US has taken a strong stand against the EU position. John Kerry urged nations around the world but particularly in Europe, “to take immediate action to crack down on Hezbollah.”
I said I wouldn’t write about the rumors surrounding the formation of the coalition here. But I cannot resist mentioning this: Yair Lapid, who is totally without diplomatic experience, and wants a “two state solution,” to boot, has been vying for the plum of Foreign Minister.
But according to Israel Hayom, as of today, Netanyahu has rejected this bid, and will be bringing back Avigdor Lieberman, once he has moved past his current legal difficulties. According to Lieberman, this arrangement was set in place even before the elections and was made public. As I understand it, in the interim, Netanyahu will serve as Foreign Minister. Lieberman told the “Meet the Press” TV show yesterday that:
“It is not possible to reach a permanent peace agreement with the Palestinians…This [situation] is impossible. It is not possible to solve the conflict here. The conflict can be managed and it is important to manage the conflict…” We take what we can get here.
What portfolio will Lapid get? Finance Ministry is frequently mentioned. Not that he knows the first thing about finance, either.
Here is the major flaw in our coalition system. Parties are enticed to enter the coalition via positions that are offered to them, as much as by platform positions. This hardly guarantees that the most competent person will fill each major position. I’m not sure exactly what Lapid’s experience as a TV journalist qualifies him to do. But he has 19 mandates.
Today is Rosh Chodesh Adar, the beginning of the new month of Adar. This is a month when we are meant to be happy: “Mishe’nichnas Adar Marbin Be’simcha” — when Adar comes joy increases — we are told. Two weeks from today is Purim, the silliest, most joyous holiday of the year.
In the spirit of silly, I provide this link, which will provide a variety of Mishenichnas Adar song versions. Enjoy.
Silly and joyous can preserve sanity, I think.
By: Lloyd Marcus
Rush Limbaugh said something extremely profound at the end of his depressing monologue in which he declared that there is no resistance to Obama. Rush said sooner or later something will turn it around. It always does.
Well, the time is now and that something is us! We The People in the form of the Tea Party are still here. Though severely wounded, extremely discouraged, brutally battered, devastatingly betrayed and soundly rejected, we the resistance survived and are poised for battle. What’s that line from the pop song? “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.”
We cried, moped and many in a moment of frustration and hopelessness, temporarily gave up. We are human. Our pain is great. But when the dust cleared, and upon stabilizing our emotions, patriots defaulted back to what motivated them to join the resistance four years ago – love – love for the greatest nation on the planet and a burning desire not to allow it to be transformed into an abomination of the vision of our Founding Fathers. No Mr. President, not on our watch!
As a Christian, I believe that as long as we stay faithful to Godly principles and values (Conservatism) we can expect a miracle at any moment. The Bible tells how one day Joseph was hopeless in prison with no release in sight. The next day Joseph was summoned to the King which led to him becoming a ruler, the King’s right hand man. With God any and all things are possible.
Also, history confirms that no one knows enough to be fatalistic. From the ashes of the Goldwater campaign came the beginning of the legacy of Ronald Reagan.
After Bill Clinton beat George HW Bush in 1992, there was a sense that Clinton and the New Democrat Party were unstoppable, but it was the 1994 Midterms that saw the emergence of Newt Gingrich and the Republican Revolution that resulted in one of the largest shifts in political power in Congress in our nation’s history.
Someone wisely said, “Pray for help, but swim for home!” In other words, along with praying for our nation, the resistance/patriots are organizing, and preparing, everyone doing their part to restore America to the constitutional principles of individual liberty and freedom on which our country was founded.
We at Conservative Campaign Committee have launched our first national TV ad, The Imperial President, which exposes Obama’s unlawful tyranny. http://bit.ly/127147U
Tea Party.net has organized Day of Resistance rallies across America protesting Obama’s agenda, Feb 23rd. http://www.dayofresistance.com/rally/
God, Guns and the Constitution national town hall meetings are happening across America. http://godgunsconstitution.org/
Strategically ignored by the liberal media, a huge Pro-Life rally took place a few weeks ago.
Resistance to Obama is out there folks. Karl Rove coming out of the closet announcing that the GOP is at war with the Tea Party could be a gift from God – serving to fire up demoralized patriots. Mr. Rove, if you think the Tea Party was a force to be reckoned with in the past – you “ain’t” seen nothing yet.
So, yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus (Barack Obama). And yes Rush Limbaugh, there is resistance to Obama/Santa Claus – The Tea Party!
Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee
By: Nelson Abdullah
Conscience of a Conservative
Imagine if during World War II President Franklin Roosevelt appointed a member of the Nazi Party to be the head of the OSS? The OSS was the Office of Strategic Services, it was the United States intelligence agency formed during World War II. It was a predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The OSS was formed in order to coordinate espionage activities behind enemy lines for the branches of the United States Armed Forces. Would that have raised any eyebrows in the news media? Well, now suppose in the midst of our war against terror, the one-time Muslim, mentored by a Communist, Democrat Barack Hussein Obama nominated a Muslim to head the CIA? Nominated a Muslim to fight a war that was started by Muslims following the Muslim hijacking of four U.S. airliners who flew them on a religious suicide mission into the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. A war that has pitted us against radical Islamic groups such as al Qaida which was led by Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, both of which were created by The Muslim Brotherhood. A war that has cost us over 8,000 American lives which include almost 3,000 civilians killed on September 11, 2001 and the remainder in U.S. servicemen and women killed in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Well, suppose no longer because that is exactly what is happening today. Now read the details from the Australian web site Winds of Jihad and The Investigative Project on Terrorism.
“John Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia.”
by sheikyermami on February 9, 2013
Don’t say I told you so:
John Brennan, President Obama’s nominee for Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, converted to Islam while working in Saudi Arabia, states former FBI agent, John Guandolo. John Guandolo wrote the first Muslim Brotherhood training manual for the FBI. Watch the detailed story in this explosive interview.
Rasool Obama wants to make John Brennan director of the CIA.
Brennan calls Jerusalem “al Quds”, lawmakers call for his firing.
Brennan “marvelled at the majesty of the hajj and the holy two mosques” while he was the station chief of the CIA in Soddy Barbaria.
This is the turd who told us that the Muslim Brotherhood is “largely secular”, “jihad is a legitimate tenet of Islam”and the same Brennan called for a stop to “Iran bashing.”
He has helped strip language about “radical Islam” and similar terms from government vernacular, choosing instead to refer to “violent extremism.” When it comes to jihad, he stubbornly maintains the word does not belong in conversations about terror, no matter what the terrorists themselves say.
Creeping Sharia asked this very question back in a February 2010 post. In that video, Brennan stated “Those Who Are Anti-Islam are a National Security Threat.” It has since been deleted from the web.
Yesterday, a former U.S. Marine and FBI agent confirmed on the trentovision radio/tv show that indeed John Brennan did convert to Islam. Watch to the end.
“Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia.”
Brennan’s Feb. 13, 2010 address to a meeting at the Islamic Center at New York University, facilitated by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), provided an insight into his views on Islam, a faith which he said during the speech had “helped to shape my own world view.”
Like the president during his childhood years in Jakarta, I came to see Islam not how it is often misrepresented, but for what it is – how it is practiced every day, by well over a billion Muslims worldwide, a faith of peace and tolerance and great diversity.”
- CIA nominee Brennan urged AGAINST bin Laden attack before 9/11
- Counter-terror adviser Brennan bolts when asked about jihad (video)
- Counter-terrorism advisor Brennan: We are not at war with Islamic Jihadists
- Hamas-Linked ISNA “Facilitated” Brennan’s NYU Speech (video)
- Obama’s Nat’l Security Adviser Brennan does Q&A with former coordinator for Hamas-funding Islamic “charity”
- White House admits national intelligence chief Brennan clueless on UK terror arrests
- Counterterror chief’s company linked to “Innocence of Muslims” video
Brennan Lets Radical Islamists Dictate Policy
During his time as a White House advisor, Brennan displayed a disturbing tendency to engage with Islamist groups which often are hostile to American anti-terrorism policies at home and abroad. Those meetings confer legitimacy upon the groups as representatives of all Muslim Americans, despite research indicating that the community is far too diverse to have anyone represent its concerns.
A Feb. 13, 2010 speech Brennan gave at the New York University School of Law serves as an example.
Organized by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the talk became an outlet for Brennan’s argument that terrorists benefit from being identified by religious terms, including “jihadist.” In doing so, Brennan waded into theological revisionism by denying the Quranic foundation exists, even though jihadists routinely cite chapter and verse.
“As Muslims you have seen a small fringe of fanatics who cloak themselves in religion, try to distort your faith, though they are clearly ignorant of the most fundamental teachings of Islam. Instead of creating, they destroy – bombing mosques, schools and hospitals. They are not jihadists, for jihad is a holy struggle, an effort to purify for a legitimate purpose, and there is nothing, absolutely nothing holy or pure or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children,” Brennan said. “We’re trying to be very careful and precise in our use of language, because I think the language we use and the images we project really do have resonance. It’s the reason why I don’t use the term jihadist to refer to terrorists. It gives them the religious legitimacy they so desperately seek, but I ain’t gonna give it to them.”
Like his positions on Iran and Hizballah, Brennan’s views about using religious references like “jihad” have been uttered repeatedly and consistently. “President Obama [does not] see this challenge as a fight against jihadists. Describing terrorists in this way, using the legitimate term ‘jihad,’ which means to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal, risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve,” Brennan said in an Aug. 6, 2009 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
He returned to the narrative in a May 26, 2010 speech, also at CSIS.
“Nor do we describe our enemy as ‘jihadists’ or ‘Islamists’ because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenant of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community, and there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children,” Brennan said.
Brennan’s interpretation of jihad stands in stark contrast with how the term has been consistently understood, especially by the intellectual founders of the global Islamist movement.
Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, whose ideas have influenced all subsequent Islamic extremists including Hamas and Al-Qaida, rejected the definition of jihad that Brennan suggests is correct.
In a pamphlet titled “Jihad,” al-Banna wrote: “Many Muslims today mistakenly believe that fighting the enemy is jihad asghar (a lesser jihad) and that fighting one’s ego is jihad akbar (a greater jihad). The following narration [athar] is quoted as proof: ‘We have returned from the lesser jihad to embark on the greater jihad.’ They said: ‘What is the greater jihad?’ He said: ‘The jihad of the heart, or the jihad against one’s ego. This narration is used by some to lessen the importance of fighting, to discourage any preparation for combat, and to deter any offering of jihad in Allah’s way. This narration is not a saheeh (sound) tradition …”
Sayyid Qutb, al-Banna’s successor in defining Islamist thought, clearly endorsed the idea of violent jihad, suggesting that it should not be fought merely in a defensive manner.
“Anyone who understands this particular character of this religion will also understand the place of Jihaad bis saif (striving through fighting), which is to clear the way for striving through preaching in the application of the Islamic movement. He will understand that Islam is not a ‘defensive movement’ in the narrow sense which today is technically called a ‘defensive war.’ This narrow meaning is ascribed to it by those who are under the pressure of circumstances and are defeated by the wily attacks of the orientalists, who distort the concept of Islamic Jihaad,” Qutb wrote in his book Milestones. “It was a movement to wipe out tyranny and to introduce true freedom to mankind, using resources according to the actual human situation, and it had definite stages, for each of which it utilized new methods.”
Even Brennan’s NYU host advocated violent jihad. A December 1986 article appearing in ISNA’s official magazine Islamic Horizons notes that “jihad of the sword is the actual taking up of arms against the evil situation with the intention of changing it,” that “anyone killed in jihad is rewarded with Paradise,” and that “a believer who participates in jihad is superior to a believer who does not.”
Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, the senior Muslim Brotherhood imam who the Obama administration reportedly has used in its negotiations with the Taliban, connects jihad with fighting in his book Fiqh of Jihad. In it, he says that Muslims may engage in violent jihad in the event Muslim lands are threatened by or occupied by non-Muslims as he contends is the case with Israel.
These Brotherhood treatises are relevant because Brennan’s host, ISNA, was founded by Muslim Brotherhood members in the United States, some of whom remain active with the organization. And, although it denied any Brotherhood connection in 2007, exhibits in evidence in a Hamas-support trial show ISNA’s “intimate relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood.” In addition, the federal judge in the case found “ample evidence” connecting ISNA to Muslim Brotherhood operations known as the Holy Land Foundation, the Islamic Association for Palestine and Hamas.
ISNA has sought to publicly moderate its image, yet it has kept radicals such as Jamal Badawi on its board of directors and granted a 2008 community-service award to Jamal Barzinji, a founding father of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, as well as a former ISNA board member.
Badawi has defended violent jihad including suicide bombings and has suggested that Islam is superior to secular democracy. Barzinji was named in a federal affidavit as being closely associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas.
Barzinji’s name appears in a global phone book of Muslim Brotherhood members recovered by Italian and Swiss authorities in November 2001 from the home of Al-Taqwa Bank of Lugano founder Youssef Nada, one of the leaders of the international Muslim Brotherhood and an al-Qaida financier.
At the NYU event, Brennan was introduced by then-ISNA President Ingrid Mattson, who made Qutb’s writings required reading in a course she taught. Mattson has advocated against using terms like “Islamic terrorism” since the earliest days after 9/11. During his speech, Brennan praised Mattson as “an academic whose research continues the rich tradition of Islamic scholarship and as the President of the Islamic Society of North America, where you have been a voice for the tolerance and diversity that defines Islam.”
Brennan met privately around the time of the NYU speech with another advocate of ignoring the Islamic motivation driving many terrorists. Both Salam al-Marayati and his organization, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) have long records of defending suspected terrorists and terror supporters and of arguing the terrorist threat in America is exaggerated.
During a 2005 ISNA conference, al-Marayati blasted the idea that Muslims would be used as informants to thwart possible terrorist plots. “Counter-terrorism and counter-violence should be defined by us. We should define how an effective counter-terrorism policy should be pursued in this country,” he said. “So, number one, we reject any effort, notion, suggestion that Muslims should start spying on one another.”
The White House invited al-Marayati to attend the NYU speech despite his prior comments suggesting Israel was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, condemning the FBI’s use of informants in counter-terror investigations, and his argument that Hizballah engages in “legitimate resistance.”
After the meeting, MPAC claimed credit for the administration’s policy of sugar-coating terrorist motives. “Mr. Brennan made two important points in his address that signified the importance of MPAC’s government engagement over the last 15 years in Washington,” an MPAC statement said. Among them, “He rejected the label of ‘jihadist’ to describe terrorists, because it legitimates violent extremism with religious validation, a point MPAC made in its 2003 policy paper on counterterrorism.”
While Brennan and his associates like Mattson and al-Marayati may wish to disconnect terrorism from religion, this strategy has proven meaningless among those who plot attacks against Americans. Many describe acting out of a belief that America is at war with Islam. Asserting that religious motivation doesn’t exist does nothing to lessen the threat.
When Army Pvt. Naser Jason Abdo’s mother asked her son what would drive him to plot a bombing and shooting attack on a restaurant that serves personnel at Fort Hood, Tex., his answer was succinct.
“The reason is religion, Mom,” he said.
End note: In the wartime annals of American history, putting a Muslim in charge of the CIA is not the first time American soldiers have fought a battle with an enemy who had one of their own running the show. The Korean War was fought by American troops fighting under the flag of the United Nations. While communist North Korea was being aided by communist China and the Soviet Union, the United Nations office of Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs was coordinating all of our U.S. Military troop movements.
For decades, since the founding charter of the U.N. was written, only Communist leaders would be appointed to fill the UN’s highest military post, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs. Fourteen of the fifteen men who held this vital post up until 1995 (and probably into the new century) represented the USSR. The one exception was Dragoslav Protitich, a Communist from Yugoslavia. So when American soldiers fought Communism in Korea and Vietnam in partnership with the UN, the top UN military leaders were Communists. No wonder American soldier fought two futile and deadly wars.**
Since the founding of the U.N. in 1945, when delegates from 50 countries met in San Francisco to sign the UN Charter, U.S. State Department employee and Communist spy, Alger Hiss, co-authored that founding charter and served as the first acting UN Secretary-General.**
Hat Tip: BB
AL-ARABIYA NEWS: Hundreds of thousands of people marched on Sunday in Tehran and other cities chanting “Death to America” as Iran marked the 34th anniversary of the Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S.-backed shah.
In the capital, crowds waving Iranian flags and portraits of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini walked toward the landmark Azadi (Freedom) Square, in a government-sponsored rally which is now a cornerstone of the regime.
Marchers also chanted “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” as they headed for the square, some waving posters of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, where President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was expected to make an address…. Read More
Hat Tip: BB
The Daily Caller
Really? Someone should tell the Tea Party, because it would be news to them. You wish…
By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
I would wish everyone a happy Chinese New Year, but the prospects for it being a ‘happy’ year are rather bleak. Traditional astronomers warn that this coming year could bring economic upheaval and geopolitical strife. Ya think? In Chinese symbology, snakes are regarded as intelligent, but with a tendency to be somewhat unscrupulous. Sounds a lot like our President, doesn’t it? Although I would like to say this is exclusively about Barack Obama, there are plenty of political snakes to go around. We have a virtual den of snakes currently here in America to choose from and they slither on both sides of the aisle.
Let’s take a look at some of the biggest serpents in the American Garden of Eden:
- Barack Obama – Wow… where to start. From tyrannical executive orders to his lavish lifestyle, Barack Obama embodies the very essence of an arrogant dictator. Among his greatest atrocities: Benghazigate, Obamacare, Fort Hood, the wooing of the Muslim Brotherhood, Cloward and Piven spending on a massive scale, attacks on the Second Amendment, illegal immigration, regulation on an epic scale, crony capitalism, executive orders bypassing the Constitution, drone wars, Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, class warfare (racism 2.0), Czars, the call for a second Bill of Rights and the list goes on and on and on. I firmly believe that Obama is a snake, but he is a puppet to the Progressive/Marxist movement. The puppeteers are the Marxists who have money and influence, such as George Soros and his fellow Marxist reptiles.
- Karl Rove – Rove is almost as big an enemy to Constitutional Conservatives as Obama and the Progressives. In the last week or two, he has openly declared war on the Tea Party, while attempting to further RINO moderation (especially on illegal immigration) and Progressive principles in the Republican Party. He has been the ‘architect’ of the death of the Republican Party and making sure it goes the way of the Whigs.
- Chuck Schumer – By all accounts one the most arrogant of the self-styled nobility in our government. He is anti-Second Amendment and just generally anti-Constitution. Corruption for him is a breakfast food and he sneers at the common man while collecting power and wealth. He is a detestable human being (and I’m not entirely sure he’s human).
- Michael Bloomberg – Another arrogant elitist, Bloomberg is not only fascist, he’s downright batty. From banning salt, to banning large soft drinks to banning styrofoam – he’s the no-go nanny and is delirious with regulation authority. He is also anti-Second Amendment (having blatantly committed anti-2A crimes, e.g. gun stings across state lines) and he is tax happy.
- Diane Feinstein – Feinstein is the queen of hypocrisy. She has armed guards and is armed herself, but she is the leader currently against the Second Amendment. If she had her way there would be universal gun registration and confiscation. Another elitist who sees two sets of rules – one for the wealthy Progressive elite and one for the rest of us.
- Jesse Jackson – Another leftist, whacko extremist – Jackson hides behind the title of ‘reverend’ while violating every commandment in the Bible. He’s known for his sexual escapades, corruption, lies and racism. Lately, he has jumped on the anti-gun bandwagon like a good little Progressive soldier, spouting fascist proclamations while seeking more bribes and power. He’s the poster boy of the Progressive movement and the tip of the spear for racism 2.0.
- John Boehner – Mister ‘cry me a river’ is a RINO Progressive coiled on the right side of the aisle. While forwarding more and more Keynesian spending, he tearfully proclaims that he can’t stop the left. Well, it’s hard to stop the left while enabling them. Boehner covets money and power and has made his bed with the Progressives. If this is what leads the Republicans, they would be better off with an old shoe. At least the old shoe would not betray his party base at every opportunity.
- George Soros – Soros is an evil, wretched old spider. He has toppled currencies and countries, been responsible for the deaths of thousands and wields power as if he is king of the world. He is one of the chief power brokers behind the Progressive movement and plays global RISK like no other. He is a very dangerous man with an evil empire at his beck and call. If you want to see a prime example of an election fixer and an enemy to America, he’s your guy.
- John Brennan – Don’t let Brennan’s incompetent facade fool you. He is a vile viper who is about to be confirmed as the head of the CIA. An evil, malicious power broker – he hates Israel and America. The latest revelation… Brennan is a convert to Islam – so says a former FBI agent, John Guandolo, who wrote the first Muslim Brotherhood training manual for the FBI. He converted while in Saudi Arabia. In my book, that makes him a national security threat – compounded by his love for the Muslim Brotherhood. His conversion was the fruit of a foreign service agency who recruited him to join Islam.
- John Kerry – Swift Boat Kerry is now our Secretary of State. This is a wealthy, one-percent Progressive who hates America and all she stands for. He berated and dragged our military through the mud over Vietnam with many, many falsehoods that were proven lies repeatedly. And yet, here we are with a treasonous asshat as Secretary of State. And he was confirmed by a vast majority on both sides of the aisle.
- Hillary Clinton – Speaking of Medusa, the ‘dirty dancing’ former Secretary of State is now prepping herself to run for the presidency in 2016. Some polls says she is the favorite. Either the whole country has lost its mind (which is very possible), or the polls are lying. She is fresh off of Benghazigate where she lied over and over with nary a peep from any opposition. On her worldwide tour, she spent more time drunk than not and was arguably the worst Secretary of State we have ever had. But man, she gets high scores for dancing the nights away with other women while pounding down those drinks. Maybe she should have been Secretary of Corona. But don’t look too hard or too closely at the Gorgon, you might wind up stoned.
- Leon Panetta – Panetta is a two-faced political animal who is surpassingly cunning and I believe he is a Communist. Which could probably be said of most of the Progressive movement these days. He screams that sequestration will weaken our military on one hand, while doing all he can to gut our forces on the other. He has been the most expensive Secretary of Defense in US history; taking many, many lavish government paid trips. He denies culpability in Benghazi when it was his job to handle it. His lies on the subject are breathtaking. Between the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, the attempts to undermine Israel and weakening our military worldwide, Panetta has been a busy little Progressive.
- Chuck Hagel – Hagel is a Jew-hater extraordinaire. He has also received funds from Hamas related groups and others he won’t disclose. I would wager they are Communists and Iran related groups. Not only that, but he comes off as an incompetent boob. And yet, I can’t quite believe the headlines that he will withdraw from the nomination of Secretary of Defense. Why should he? Even with someone as evil as Hagel surely is, our esteemed leaders will almost certainly confirm this reprehensible power monger. He’s one of ‘them’ don’t ya know.
And there are soooo many more. We just let these monsters go on and on. We are willingly submitting to their rule over us. We have to get these thugs out of office and fast, 2014 may be our last off ramp… our last chance to get back enough seats in Congress to wrest back control of our government. We need to make these evil asshats shake in their jackboots. If we don’t take massive action, all that will be left to us is revolt and with few exceptions, that always ends badly.
The above list does not even begin to touch the plethora of snaky Progessive organizations funding and supporting these Marxist moves in our government. Take for example, Obama’s newly formed “Organized for Action.” I kid you not, it is a “non-profit, non-partisan” group. If you believe that, I have a bridge for you – a real steal. Involved with this false front for Obama are the likes of George Soros, Lockheed Martin, Citi Group and Duke Energy. You’ll also find Walmart in that mix – Sam Walton must be turning over in his grave. And “Organized for Action” is not the only group providing money and cover for the Progressives. You have “Priorities Action USA” and the “Common Purpose Project.” And if that is not enough to garner attention, well take a gander at “Business Forward.” This is an association of “more than 40 of the world’s largest and most respected companies” that makes “it easier for entrepreneurs, investors, small business owners and senior executives from across America to get involved in the policy-making process.” These movers and shakers get involved in the policy-making process by forking over a membership fee to Business Forward, which then organizes meetings between company officials and White House personnel. To me, this is all very reminiscent of how Hitler worked with companies in Germany before and during WWII.
Yes, it is the Year of the Political Snake. By the way, our political snakes are poisonous and are crushing our freedoms. Whose up for a red snake hunt?
I’ll leave you with the following from Daniel Greenfield of Sultan Knish (the man is brilliant and gifted):
SO GOD MADE A DEMOCRAT
God looked down on Washington D.C. and said “I need someone who will steal morning, noon and night. Who will steal from the rich to give to the poor and steal from the poor to give to the rich and fool them all and keep all the loot.”
So God made a Democrat.
God said, “I need college man to come to a farm and tell the farmer that he can’t feed his hogs with lettuce from his own farm or use the manure from his pigs to grow his lettuce. I need an inspector who will tell him how much he can sell his milk for and warn him that his son riding on the tractor constitutes child labor. I need someone to pay a farmer not to farm so that poor people can’t afford bread.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I want a union organizer who hires non-union picketers to keep workers from working, a politician who fights for the people by taking money from billionaires and a clergyman who worships whoever runs on the party line. I want a banker who fights for the poor and gives to the party and a party that pays the poor man eight times to vote for the banker’s man.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need someone to retire at 55 with generous benefits from a government job. I need lawmakers who will pass laws without reading them. I need teachers who refuse to teach kids unless they’re paid twice as much as any worker in their city. I need people to sit on commissions and make rules about lines of work that they’ve never been in.”
So God made a Democrat
“I need a Catholic who’s for abortion. A Jew who’s for Palestine. A Mormon who’s against the Church. A Baptist who’s for evolution. A Methodist who doesn’t believe in god. And a Muslim who believes in destroying America.”
So God made a Democrat.
He said, “I need someone who starts all the wars and protests against all the wars. Who is first in line to sign up to fight against his country but comes out as a pacifist when it’s time to defend it. I want war heroes who throw their medals over fences and then gather them up again when it’s time to run for office. I want men who are for everything before they’re against it”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need a working class man who who has never worked a day in his life, but always talks about caring for those who do. I need a man who talks all the time about helping women, blacks, lesbians, Eskimos and Martians get ahead and then drops them like a dirty rag when he has what he wants. A man who gets up at 11:30 in the afternoon to help the less fortunate by passing laws that will make them even less fortunate. A man who takes nine tenths of what’s meant for the poor and lets them have the leftovers.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need a man who believes in himself too much to take responsibility for anything he did. I need a man who is tolerantly intolerant, who is outraged all day by everything in the world except his own outrageous behavior. I need a man who is for freedom of speech except when he’s offended, for freedom of religion except when he disagrees with it and for the right to bear arms but only for those weapons that existed in 1791.”
So God made a Democrat.
God said, “I need a party of jackasses that will always break through the fence and spoil everything that the farmer grows. I need bad men to test good men and liars, cheats and thieves with clipboards to teach neighbors to stick together against them. I need a man with no more conscience than a rattlesnake leading a band of fools with less sense than sheep. And I need him to keep the farmers and ranchers, the workers and doers on their toes so they always remember that evil never rests and keeping it down can sometimes be the hardest work of all.”
Pray for us as we embark on this voyage into the snake-infested waters of this next political cycle — for here be dragons and serpents. Progressive hunters will be exposing the pale underbellies of these political ophidians.
Hat Tip: BB/Pierre Legrand
And for the 66% of Americans (including myself) who live within 100 miles of the US border, here is a new ruling that will make you feel snug and cuddly over national security:
In other words, you have no 4th Amendment rights. Hell, the Constitution is now deemed null and void in these areas. The tyrannical elite ruling over us are not shaking in their jackboots.