Democrats Awash in Corruption Scandals

Human Events

by Donald Lambro

03/31/2010

Seven months before the November midterm elections, the Democrats are awash in ethics and corruption scandals in Congress and among the nation’s biggest governorships.

The major networks’ nightly news shows have largely ignored or played down the mounting allegations, charges and investigations targeting Democrats, but they are becoming a major issue in key campaigns that could help the Republicans make large gains in the House, Senate and state capitals.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pledged the Democrats would “drain the swamp” of corruption” in Washington when she and her party took control of the chamber, but much of the available evidence shows that, if anything, the Democrats’ ethical record is noticeably worse. In many cases involving Democrats, investigations into wrongdoing have been swept under the rug or slowed to a snail’s pace and penalties have been just a slap on the wrist.

“Instead of draining the swamp of corruption in Washington as Pelosi promised, Democrats are now swimming neck-deep in it,” said Brian Walsh, chief spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

“Whether it’s powerful committee chairs flouting tax laws, rampant earmark abuse, or a Senate nominee in Illinois who was a former banker to the mob, this isn’t change any American can believe in. Republicans will be running on returning accountability and checks and balances to Washington this November, and we are intent on earning back the trust of the American people while the Democrats continue to flout it,” Walsh told HUMAN EVENTS.

The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, known as the House ethics committee, has more than half a dozen investigations pending into Democratic wrongdoing on everything from tax evasion to trading pork-barrel projects for campaign contributions.

At the same time, the independent, outside Office of Congressional Ethics, created in 2008 and headed by former Justice Department attorney Leo J. Wise, who won convictions against Enron executives, reports that 36 House members were under investigation, the most in more than a decade.

But Democratic majority leaders aren’t happy with OCE’s aggressive investigations of its members and have rejected most of its findings. Among 12 cases OCE referred to the House Ethics Committee in December, all but one were cleared of any wrongdoing, and three were pending.

The biggest scandal at the ethics committee came late last month when two lawmakers were cleared of allegations they had traded earmarks for campaign donations.
Wise’s report in this case was the product of dozens of interviews and some 200,000 pages of documentation of the little-seen insider trading between lobbyists and congressmen over earmarks.

Wise’s stepped-up actions have angered House lawmakers and there has been talk in Democratic circles of limiting OCE’s authority.

But if anyone wants evidence of how hollow is Pelosi’s promise to drain the swamp, one need look no further than the scandals that have been long-swirling around Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel of New York.

Rangel was forced to step down from the chairmanship of the powerful, tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee in early March after being admonished—the lightest “penalty” possible—for accepting corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean.

But even then he was allowed to say his action was only “a leave of absence” as chairman, though few Democrats think he will be allowed to return to his post. He faces far more serious charges in an investigation that has dragged on for more than a year.

The ethics committee is still digging into allegations he used his House office to raise money for a building named in his honor at a New York college; failed to pay taxes on a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic; had to amend his congressional financial disclosure reports to show more than $500,000 in wealth that he had not reported, and that he improperly used his rent-controlled apartments for his campaigns.

Then the Democrats were hit by another scandal when New York Democratic Rep. Eric Massa suddenly resigned his House seat in the wake of allegations that the freshman congressman had sexually harassed a male staffer and had groped other male staffers in multiple incidents that triggered warnings to Democratic leaders last year. A Pelosi spokesman said concern over Massa’s inappropriate behavior was relayed to Pelosi’s office in October and was referred to the ethics committee.

The House Ethics Committee decided to drop its inquiry because of Massa’s resignation. But Republicans want an investigation into how—or even whether—House Democratic leaders responded to the earlier complaints, asking “what did they know and when did they know it?” The House voted 402-1 on a Republican resolution to send the issue to the ethics committee, though it does not appear that that panel will undertake any serious inquiry.

Pelosi, who aggressively went after Republican transgressions when the GOP was in control of the House, has been supremely indifferent to the Massa sex scandal, dismissing it as a minor matter. “It’s another subject people would like to make into a distraction,” she said in an interview on MSNBC.

Many other House Democrats were also facing ethics investigations, including Representatives Jesse Jackson Jr. of Illinois, Alan Mollohan of West Virginia and Laura Richardson and Maxine Waters of California. But these, as well as other inquiries into House members, have been lingering for months, if not years, without any resolution.

Two of the Democrats’ most far-reaching scandals in this election cycle have been among their governors.

In Illinois, a state notorious for its political corruption, Gov. Rod Blagojevich was impeached and removed from office last year for trying to sell the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama to the highest bidder.
Blagojevich, who now faces charges that include fraud and solicitation of bribery, goes on trial June 3.

In New York, Gov. David Paterson, accused of interfering in a domestic-violence investigation, abruptly ended his gubernatorial campaign last month –the state’s second recent Democratic governor (Eliot Spitzer was first) to be snared by scandal.

Democratic scandals have also rocked several Senate races that have given Republicans a shot at major upsets in some of the country’s bluest states.

Until the Blagojevich scandal struck, Obama’s Senate seat, seemed safely in Democratic hands. But then, troubling questions were raised by Blagojevich’s appointment of Roland Burris to temporarily fill Obama’s remaining term, and the Democratic nomination was eventually captured by state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias who has a notoriously checkered banking background that includes financial transactions with underworld figures who have heavily contributed to his campaign.

One of Giannoulias’ top donors is Nick Giannis who was arrested and charged with writing $1.9 million in bad checks from Broadway Bank, the Giannoulias family business. Giannis gave about $114,000 to Giannoulias’ campaigns for state treasurer and the Senate.

Questionable financial deals have also brought down Connecticut Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd, who decided in January not to seek reelection.

The powerful Senate Banking Committee chairman, with oversight over the U.S. financial industry, benefited from two sweetheart (4.5% and 4.25%) home mortgage loans in 2003 from former Countryside chief executive Angelo Mozilo.

The mortgage deals reportedly saved Dodd $75,000 over the life of the loans, according to an analysis by Portfolio magazine. “The savings came from rock-bottom interest rates and a free ‘float-down’--the right to borrow at a lower rate if interest rates fall before you’ve closed on the loan,” The Wall Street Journal reported.

Dodd was not the only Democrat to benefit from Countrywide Financial’s VIP mortgage program. Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee, was one of several other government officials who received favorable loans after making a personal phone call to Mozilo.

The scandal caused Dodd’s approval polls to plummet in the midst of the housing meltdown and foreclosure crisis, forcing him to give up his bid for re-election to a sixth term, and giving Republicans a shot at the open Senate seat.

These and other Democrat scandals have sharply reduced whatever trust the voters had in their party to clean up corruption in Washington, especially in blue states like Illinois, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Delaware and Massachusetts.

A recent Rasmussen poll found that voters still trust Democrats more than Republicans on ethics and corruption by 35% to 28%. Notably, though, 27% now said they were not sure who to trust.

But we may well be hearing a lot more about the Democratic corruption in the future–this time about offering bribes to affect the outcome of federal elections.

Democratic Rep. Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania has charged that someone at White House he refuses to identify offered him a federal job if he agreed to drop out of the Democratic primary battle against Sen. Arlen Specter. That has spurred demands from Republicans for the appointment of a special prosecutor after months of evasion by the Obama Administration.

If an offer was made, it was not the first time Obama’s White House tried to buy off a Democrat with a political bribe to drop out of a party primary.

The Denver Post reported last year that former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff was apparently offered a federal job by top Obama “fixer” Jim Messina if the Colorado Democrat would abandon his Democratic primary bid against appointed Sen. Michael Bennet.

“When President Obama promised to change the way Washington worked, Americans weren’t picturing allegations of bribery and shady White House cover-ups. President Obama and his administration should come clean immediately,” said Amber Marchand, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

---

Mr. Lambro is a nationally syndicated columnist and former chief political correspondent for the Washington Times.

Prescription For Disaster Now Covered Under Obamacare

HUMAN EVENTS - LEADING CONSERVATIVE MEDIA SINCE 1944

by Ann Coulter

03/31/2010

On the "Today" show this Tuesday, President Obama claimed the massive government takeover of health care the Democrats passed without a single Republican vote was a "middle of the road" bill that incorporated many Republican ideas.

One Republican idea allegedly incorporated into the Democrats' health care monstrosity is "medical malpractice reform." Needless to say, the Democrats' idea of malpractice reform is less than nothing. Until trial lawyers are screaming bloody murder, there has been no medical malpractice reform.

The Democrats' "malpractice" section merely encourages the states to set up commissions to "study" tort reform, in the sense that frustrated mothers "encourage" their kids not to slouch. By "study," the Democrats mean "ignore."
So we get more taxpayer-funded government workers under the Democrats' "medical malpractice reform," but not one tittle of actual reform.

Democrats manifestly do not care about helping Americans get quality health care. If they did, they could not continue to support trial lawyers like John Edwards making $50 million by bringing junk lawsuits against doctors who are saving people's lives. (At least Edwards has not done anything else to publicly disgrace himself since then.)

At a minimum, any health care bill that purports to improve Americans' health, rather than trial lawyers' bank accounts, must include a loser-pays rule and a restriction on damages to actual losses -- as opposed to punitive damages, which mostly serve to enrich the John Edwardses of the world, and their mistresses.

The Democrats also lyingly claim their health care reform includes the Republican ideas of competition across state lines.

I know they're lying because -- well, first because I read the bill -- but also because Democrats are genetically incapable of understanding the free market. You might say it's a pre-existing condition with them.

True, you can buy insurance across state lines under the new health insurance law -- but only after the Democrats have created a national commission telling all insurance companies what they are required to cover.

That's not as bad as the current patchwork of state mandates -- it's worse!

At least before the passage of ObamaCare you could move to states such as Idaho or Kentucky, where all insurance plans aren't required to cover fertility treatment, restless leg syndrome and social anxiety disorder.

Under federal mandates, there will be no escape.

That's right, a single, one-size-fits-all, jammed-down-your-throat national plan is what the Democrats mean when they say their plan includes "competition across state lines."

How much do you want to bet that the national commission in Washington will mandate coverage for every form of shopping addiction treatment, body image therapy and sex-change operations with mandatory mental health counseling, but not injuries from hunting accidents or smoking-related illnesses?

The Democrats compare their new health care bill to entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid. But those are welfare, not health care. They may go to deserving welfare recipients, but they are a government-enforced gift from the young to the old (Medicare), and from the middle class to the poor (Medicaid).

There's no reason why most Americans shouldn't be able to buy our own medical insurance the same way we buy our own cell phones, hair care and cars.

And just incidentally, Medicare and Medicaid are projected to go bankrupt slightly before the United States of America is projected to go bankrupt. So turning all of health care into a larger Medicare program may need a little more thinking through.

These programs will have to be reconfigured at some point, but how society takes care of the old and the poor should be put in a separate box from how the non-elderly and non-poor should obtain health care.

Democrats want to turn the entire citizenry into welfare recipients.

A few weeks ago, The New York Times ran an editorial noting the amazing fact that, by the middle of this year, there will be an estimated 6.8 billion people on Earth -- and 5 billion will have cell phones! (Even more astounding, at least one of them is seated directly behind me every time I go to the movies.)

How did that happen without a Democrat president and Congress using bribes, parliamentary tricks and arcane non-voting maneuvers to pass a massive, hugely expensive National Cell Phone Reform Act?

How did that happen without Barney Frank and Henry Waxman personally designing the 3-foot-long, 26-pound, ugly green $4,000 cell phone we all have to use?

How did that happen without Obama signing the National Cell Phone Reform bill, as a poor 10-year-old black kid who couldn't afford to text-message his friends looked on?

The reason nearly everyone in the universe has a cell phone is that President Reagan did to telephones the exact opposite of what the Democrats have just done with health care.

Before Reagan came into office, we had one phone company, ridiculously expensive rates and one phone model. Reagan split up AT&T, deregulated phone service and gave America a competitive market in phones. The rest is history.

If you can grasp how inexpensive cell phones in a rainbow of colors and wonders like the iPhone could never have been created under a National Cell Phone Reform Act, you can understand what a disaster ObamaCare is going to be for health care in America.

---

Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors," "Slander," ""How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)," "Godless," "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans" and most recently, Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and their Assault on America.

COMMENTS ON HUMAN EVENTS

Report Abusive PostThe programs to 'help' have morphed into the ''entitlements'' that we have today. These entitlements have become a refuge for the true dregs of our society. These dregs are too Lazy, Stupid, or Dishonest to provide for themselves, much less the lazy, stupid, dishonest brats they keep procreating and dumping on us to support.

The liberals refuse to distinguish between the truly unfortunate and these dregs.
''Oh, they are all just poor victims of social injustice!! Wonderful, wonderful! So many lovely victims to rescue!!''

So, of course we are in financial trouble. NOW, I can look at www.refdesk.com for the latest figure. In the upper left area of that sight is a link (debt clock) to the national debt numbers, etc. That is how I keep track of the, now, over

$108 TRILLION in unfunded ENTITLEMENTS!

The fixed assets of the entire United Kingdom totals to at $10.5 trillion. The fixed assets of the entire United States totals to $72 trillion. Do you damn LIBERAL THIEVES understand this? And you just started another entitlement!!!

When it all starts to collapse, the aged and the truly unfortunate and the people who are just down on their luck will be tossed into the street along with all the dregs.

YOU DEGENERATE LIBERAL THIEVES HAVE DONE THIS!!!

Mar 31, 2010 @ 05:13 PM

Dan B., Tiffin, OH
______________________________

I think it is so funny how the liberals blame the insurance companies for high health insurance costs, but never mention the trial lawyers and the liberal government regulations on the insurance industry.

However, if they really wanted to do something, I am sure that there are enough of them to form their own insurance company or mutual company or something to provide health insurance at a ‘‘fair’’ price. Wow, without the obscene profits, they could compete in the open market at a very low price. Obviously, besides serving themselves, they could take all sorts of current customers away from the bad, evil, big insurance companies.

This would be real historical undeniable proof positive of what they claim!! Wow, they could really go down in history for solving this big problem through capitalism and good old American ingenuity. Just imagine the gratitude of the American people and the admiration of the rest of the world!!!

That is, of course, if the liberals are capable of taking real action. Maybe they are only good at whining, sniveling, and wanting their Mommy (government) to fix everything for them.

Mar 31, 2010 @ 05:19 PM
Dan B., Tiffin, OH

______________________________

The more we depend on the government, the more control they have on us. How has this escaped the rational thinking of the bleeding heart liberals of this country? It's like they want a all inclusive Utopia and if you disagree with them then you want to deny healthcare to select groups of people which as one liberal nutjob told me "is just sick". They don't get that this was never really about healthcare for everyone but about funneling healthcare dollars through Washington.
Mar 31, 2010 @ 05:29 PM
lezlie, Indianapoli
_______________________________

Ann as always makes great "points" on the tip of her rapier. The most important point is that she very correctly points out that the Democrats want to make us all welfare recipients.

There was an excellent article in National Review describing how the Atlee government (you know him, he defeated Churchill in 1945, despite Churchill being a very successful war-time PM) using the National Health Service set off a series of dominoes that has enslaved the brits. There are families in Britain, some of at least TWO generations, where neither the man nor the woman (I'm leery of using "husband or wife" since that seems no longer necessary) have EVER held a job.

This is where nationalized healthcare takes you, it is the "Road to Serfdom" on steriods, (sorry Fredrik).
Mar 31, 2010 @ 05:30 PM
Carl Watson, Demorest Ga
_______________________________________

"How did that happen without a Democrat president and Congress using bribes, parliamentary tricks and arcane non-voting maneuvers to pass a massive, hugely expensive National Cell Phone Reform Act?"

How about the National Television Reform Act? Or, the National Personal Computer Reform Act? And, why didn't we need the National Appliance reform act?

Every reform bill has caused great damage to this country.

Jay
Call me when they pass the National No More Idiots In Public Office Reform Act.
Mar 31, 2010 @ 05:45 PM
Jay, Olathe, KS
_____________________________

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.” - Albert Camus
Mar 31, 2010 @ 05:45 PM
Mike, Reno, N
_____________________________

note: To read more comments, please go to the site litsted above; click on the title of this article and you will be redirected to Ann's article. Bee Sting

Middle East Cage Match: Bibi or Barry?

Pajamas Media

Who would you bet on? Chicago politician or Israeli special ops guy?

March 31, 2010 - by James Lewis

Was Winston Churchill “in real trouble” when he took over from Neville Chamberlain in 1940 after war had broken out? Not at all — the English supported Churchill because they could see no alternative to war. Churchill projected strength, and that is what they needed most of all. It was Chamberlain who had to resign as prime minister and apologize in public for his failed appeasement policy. Chamberlain was in trouble, not Churchill.

This week the pundits seem to have decided all together that Benyamin Netanyahu is in real trouble today, supposedly because Barack Obama has “humiliated him” and put him in a double bind. It ain’t so, and the attempt by leftoids to portray Netanyahu as “humiliated” is nonsense.

Yes, Obama, in his usual subtle fashion, attempted to humiliate Netanyahu. But Obama is also an expert liar and faker, who believes that “the appearance of power” is power. It’s all by the book, Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

This whole media narrative is nonsense, for any number of reasons. Here are just some.

1. Humiliation?

Someone can spit in my face to try to humiliate me. Whether I am therefore humbled and shamed — actually humiliated — as a result of that is up to me. Netanyahu comes from a people who thugs and gangsters have attempted to humiliate since the first millennium BCE. Egyptian slavery is humiliation, but it became part of the defining narrative of the Jews. In the Hebrew Bible every single imperial power in the neighborhood invades the land of Israel and the land of Judah. They still keep their identity — and they are not really as peaceful as they’re sometimes cracked up to be. The dynamic of humiliation by an enemy followed by fierce resistance is pretty much coded in their biblical genes.

The same thing goes on in the Christian Bible. The Romans were brutal conquerors, after all, and Jesus was a rebel against Imperial Rome and its local puppets. So there’s nothing new about resistance to thuggery in the history of Israel.

2. Netanyahu isn’t Obama

Most men and women in Israel have faced the possibility of violent death – not just their own, but that of their children and parents. Israel was founded by such people. They train and train to meet that danger without flinching, if there is no alternative. Jonathan Netanyahu, Bibi’s brother, was killed at Entebbe leading a rescue raid of El Al air passengers who were being held hostage by thugocrat Idi Amin. Bibi’s father fought with the Irgun. His kids have done their service in the IDF.

Netanyahu is a hundred times the man Obama could ever be. Obama is a manipulator, an ideologue, and a liar. He sat for twenty years at the feet of a real racial hate monger, Jeremiah Wright. There is simply no doubt about these facts. Even the Democrats can’t deny it anymore.

Would you bet on a Chicago pol against an Israeli special ops guy? I wouldn’t.

3. More support

Since Obama administered his “public humiliation,” more Israelis and friends of Israel have come out in support of Israel and its prime minister than ever before. This isn’t personal. Netanyahu is the highest elected official of a sovereign people. Imagine Gorbachev trying to publicly humiliate Ronald Reagan in this way. How would Americans have felt? Even the Democrats would have had to fake a little public protest to cover their rears.

Only 9% of Israelis now believe that Barry is actually pro-Israel. The mask is off. In addition, the Israeli left is now being deeply embarrassed. This is important because it is a very delusional left, just like ours. The parliamentary opposition can’t afford to look like they are kneeling down to Barack Obama, or they will lose whatever popular support they still have.

Obama and Rahm Emanuel have been trying to play Israel’s left wing ever since Obama was nominated. They started long before he got elected. Obama has constantly tried to kiss up to the truly bloodthirsty regimes of Syria and Iran, and his big Cairo speech was hosted by Al Azhar University, which also happens to be the mainstay of endless Sunni hate propaganda against Israel and Jews.

The more Israelis perceive Obama to be an enemy, the stronger the support for Netanyahu will become — provided that he doesn’t back down. If Bibi does back down, they’ll just have to find somebody else to be Winston Churchill. This is a time for Churchills, not Chamberlains.

4. The worst Barry can do

According to Noah Greenberg, Obama can threaten some real moves – not Alinsky head fakes.

Barry can stop military aid to Israel.

Not a chance. The Democrats are in enough trouble already. That would just add fuel to the flames of anger against Obama’s nedi-fraud. Israel’s military aid money from the United States goes right back to American military manufacturers, who are trying to ride out the Obama recession, as well as the military budget cuts they think are bound to come. Republicans would love to see Obama try this.

Egypt and Israel receive equal amounts of military aid, and the Egyptians don’t want that treaty arrangement changed either. With Iran getting nukes, the Arab world is going to need Egyptian clout to aid the Saudis and the Gulf states against Iranian aggression — especially if Obama bugs out of the Gulf. Even the French have a carrier in the Gulf now.

Barry can mobilize European and UN opinion against Israel.

He’s been trying to do that, behind the scenes, ever since he got elected in the phoniest election since Jimmy Carter’s teeth carried him into power. The UN hates Israel just like it hates America, so that’s no loss. But the Arab states are quietly hoping that “the two Satans” — Israel and America — will knock out Iranian nukes for them. Sure, the Arabs would love to see Israel driven into the sea, but not at the cost of their own lives. Sunnis understand exactly what Khomeini was about when this regime came into power, even if Jimmy Carter hasn’t figured it out yet. Iran represents political Shiism, which has always laid claim to the true lineage of Mohammed. The Iranians want to conquer Mecca and Medina, and for the Arabs that would be worse than losing Jerusalem.

There’s more. The Europeans do have a huge stream of anti-Israel agitation in their government-supported media. Still, the Germans cannot afford to be perceived as falling back to National Socialism. The French are led by Nicolas Sarkozy, who is half-Jewish and Polish to boot — not a formula for an appeaser. If anybody is going to walk away from Israel, the Europeans want it to be Barry.

In addition — in spite of all the hatred in the European media against Israel, the continent is full of people who have not forgotten their history. Even the Russians haven’t. What is more likely is that the Russians will try to draw Israel into their own orbit, by selling them arms. Putin just put down a hellish Islamofascist rebellion in Chechnya with naked force. He doesn’t want another Islamist regime with nukes within missile range of Russia.

Barry can recognize the Palestinians as a state.

This is a wonderful idea that the Pals have been trying to dodge forever, because real statehood would give them real responsibility — for the welfare of their own people and for the suppression of attacks against Israel. Israel is at peace with Jordan, Egypt, and even Lebanon, neighbors who have the responsibility of statehood. Israel is not at peace with Fatah, Hamas, and Hezbollah, because they can dodge those responsibilities. How many sovereign states in the world have received massive welfare payments for sixty years for four generations of “refugees” who make their living from international terrorism?

Obama is on the run.

Obama’s key move is always to fake brute force and power. Then, when he is challenged, he backs down. That’s why Putin isn’t afraid of Barry. It’s also why the Chinese, who actually took him to the woodshed in public over the weakening U.S. dollar, don’t fear him. Even the GOP isn’t afraid of Barry anymore.

In fact, nobody is afraid of Barry except the people who rely on American resolve and strength. They should realize clearly that ultimately they only have themselves to rely on. If the Israelis are reawakening to that elementary fact, then Barry’s “humiliating” moves may actually do some good.

Barack Obama is now on the down side of his power curve. The Democrats are running scared. A lot of them are going to lose in the fall. In off-years the party in power always loses congressional seats, and the American people are ready to get amazingly angry at this grossly irresponsible administration. These people are just too wacky, too obviously incompetent, and too anti-middle class America to get away with their phony bluff forever.

The emperor is stark raving naked in front of the whole public. Just watch what happens when people really get that.

When he feels threatened, Barry always strikes out — verbally. It’s his personality, a mix of grandiosity and slippery evasion. He also tends to overreach over and over again. After all, most Americans don’t hate insurance companies, or Wall Street, or the car companies. That’s all leftie fantasy land. It’s pure Obamanoia.

The trick with Barry is to let him be himself. He’s his own worst enemy. Netanyahu has already won this game of perception with a Jiu Jitsu move. Watch the silent supporters of real democracies in the world, like Israel, turn against Barry on this one. How do you suppose Taiwan looks at this today? South Korea? France? The Iranian democracy protesters? All the other democracies that count on us?

The Europeans and UN-uchs like to play off all the Muslim regimes against Israel in public, just like they love to scapegoat the United States in their media. It gets them off the hook — they hope. But when push comes to shove they know who their survival depends on.

They know it’s not Obama.

[Correction: the first paragraph was revised to correct an error. In 1938 1939, Churchill became First Lord of the Admiralty; he became Prime Minister in 1940 after having been asked by King George VI to form a unified War Cabinet. Thanks to alert PJM readers who notified us of the error.]

James Lewis is a scientist by trade, and carps as a hobby about the passing parade of human fraud and folly.

Note: This article is one of the best comparisons of a left i.e. "liberal" i.e. Obama and one who is a strong defense for his State/country i.e. PM Netanyahu. This afternoon, we had such a liberal pay our blog a visit. This liberal is attempting to defend Obama - ha ha ha! Only a liberal would attempt to defend one who has been revealed to the world as an untrustworthy, lying, betrayer of all that is good, and so, I appreciate the comparison of Bibi to Obama's dity tricks. It helps me understand more fully why I choose to be a Conservative and the absolute necessity of fighting for our allies, even when our President does not see the forest for the trees.

Lastly, as one who spends hours finding great commentaries, such as this article, I do not have time to debate liberal ideology. Nor, do they make any sense, as their very own weak defense is no defense when it comes to Obama's shaky character; lack of morals; inability to be loyal to our founding fathers STRONG Constitution for America, with its checks and balances; and so, in the future, when a liberal arrives at our doorstep, I will suggest they take their opinions to a "liberal" blog - where they can spout off to their heart's content what is "good"(?) about Barry; as this is not the place to promote liberal propaganda. This tiny little blog is for truth - not the lies of Obama. "Real Americans Defend Israel - Because it is Right" - therefore, we do not have time to bemoan the lack of honesty that liberals try to promote, sadly, because they are too lazy to search for the truth outside the confines of Obama's thought-process! His thoughts are not my thoughts, nor are they the thoughts of any American conservative. BeeSting

Dr. David Gutmann: An American-Zionist Hero

Pajamas Media

Chesler Chronicles

He Ran the British Blockade in 1947-1948. Where Are His Counterparts Today?

As Israel faces an existential crisis of Perfect Storm proportions, I think it is crucial that we turn to heroes, to those who faced the realities of Jewish persecution in the past and who rose to the occasion heroically. Obama has shown his hand. Soon, the United Nation will “speak.” Perhaps they will condemn Israel wrongfully based on the faulty Goldstone Report. Perhaps they will go further and, as my friend and colleague David Meir-Levi has suggested, they might ultimately even order UN Peacekeeping troops into the area against Israel — to aid and abet Iran’s proxies (Hezbollah and Hamas), as well as the murderous Palestinian Authority on the West Bank. This is not inconceivable.

Who could ever have imagined that the American President would make such a point of shaming the Prime Minister of Israel? First, he orders the ever-dutiful Hillary Clinton to berate Netanyahu. Then, when Netanyahu visits, no dinner, no photo together. Today, in all the media, Obama poses proudly with Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan—a known drug dealer and a typically corrupt Afghan. The European worldview, the ruthlessness, and the cruelty of the American President become clear, daily.

And so, I thought that this interview, which I did for the JewishPress, might provide some solace to the soul. It might also inspire us.

I met with Dr. Gutmann at the U Café, in my Manhattan neighborhood. The U Café is a kosher Israeli café with the most delicious dishes and ambience. David’s daughter, the journalist Stephanie Gutmann, accompanied him. Stephanie has published an excellent book titled “The Other War. Israelis, Palestinians, and the Struggle for Media Supremacy.”

Please read what he has to say about history repeating itself and about the too-short memory of many Jews. Where are David Gutmann’s American counterparts today?

ISRAEL’S REBIRTH ‘A BORING STORY’ TO U.S. JEWS.
AN INTERVIEW WITH AMERICAN ZIONIST HERO DR. DAVID GUTMANN
JewishPress.com
Posted Mar 29 2010

In 1947-1948 I lived in Boro Park where, against parental and rabbinic advice, I joined a Zionist group. By 1950 I was packing machine-gun parts for Israel in a home not far from the Young Israel. But what I did as a child does not compare to what my friend and colleague David Gutmann did for love of Zion at that very time on the dangerous open seas.

Dr. Gutmann was a 21-year-old Jewish-American volunteer sailor for Aliyah Bet, the name given to “illegal” Jewish immigration into British-controlled Palestine (1934-1948). Hundreds of boats tried to run the British blockade. One was stranded on the Danube and its passengers later sent back to Vienna and executed, another boat was bombed by the Soviets.

Once Hitler was defeated, British disdain for Jews quickly became visible. Some Jews made it, many (more than 1,600) drowned, and most were captured and imprisoned on Cyprus. The British actually sent some boats right back to Europe, to Germany, as was the case with the SS Exodus. This public relations fiasco backfired; my friend Ruth Gruber’s on-board photo of the SS Exodus made the cover of Life magazine.

The Jewish Press recently met with Dr. Gutmann. Although he is no longer young, he is a large and sturdy man, a solid presence. He is also very witty. His generation of heroes is mainly gone but he is still here.

The Jewish Press: How did you become a sailor?

Dr. Gutmann: I served in the U.S. Merchant Marine during World War II.

JP: The ship manifests list you as serving on two ships, the Paducah-Geulah and the Ben Hecht. Were they the same kind of boat? Who served with you?

DG: I served first on the Hecht, after that on the Geulah. I was an engine room oiler on the Hecht, a second engineer on the Geulah. The Hecht was purchased and run by the Irgun. She was a German-built twin-diesel luxury yacht originally named Abril (April). She sailed for the U.S. Navy on anti-sub patrol during World War II.

After the Brits left Palestine, the Hecht/Abril became part of the Israeli navy and was used to launch frogmen against Egyptian naval craft off Gaza. Last I heard, she was running tourists between Naples and Capri.

The Hecht/Abril’s crew was a mix of Jews and non-Jews, kids and veteran seamen, crazies and idealists . We ended up in Acco (Acre).

The Geulah was purchased and run by the Haganah. A twin-screw steamship built around 1905, she served during World War II as, I believe, a gunnery-training vessel on the Great Lakes. She was scrapped in Naples in ‘49. The Geulah’s crew was more decorous than the Hecht’s complement. A mix of veteran sailors (Jews and non-Jews), and Zionistic college kids.

We also had a few exiled Spanish loyalist sailors and our second mate was Don Miguel Boeza, who had been high admiral of the loyalist navy. Our captain was Rudy Patzert, an old commie married to a Jew. He wrote a book about the voyage – Running the Palestine Blockade. Our Haganah commander was Moka Limon, a legendary hero of Aliyah Bet who later became admiral of Israel’s navy. He was the guy who pulled off the legendary “boats of Bordeaux” operation. We all ended up in the Cyprus prison camps.

JP: Would you consider writing a memoir?

DG: Depends on the kind of memoir. I wouldn’t want to deal with the whole operation – too much I don’t know. Perhaps something more personal and anecdotal. I’ve got a few good stories.

JP: Are Jews still eager to hear your stories?

DG: Despite the fact that I’m willing to speak without honoraria, even during 2008 – Israel’s 60th anniversary year – the response from heads of congregations was at best tepid. And since then, perhaps one in three rabbis show interest. Some who showed initial interest never followed up. Nowadays, they might suggest 10-minute gigs at men’s club breakfast meetings.

JP: Why the disinterest?

DG: Rahm Emanuel reportedly said, “I’ve had it with Israel.” I think a lot of Jews now feel that way. They’re tired of worrying about Israel, unendingly, from crisis to crisis . The Palestinians are the heroes of our victim-adoring age; accordingly, many liberal Jews have come to believe the Palestinian “Nakba” revision, the lies that turned a miracle into another Jewish blood libel.

But whatever their politics, modern Jews have little sense of history. I speak about the ‘48 war, and the lies about it that are now believed by too many Jews. For most U.S. Jews, the ‘48 war is an old and perhaps boring story. They saw “Exodus”; they don’t want to see it again. They don’t realize that history is the present, and that [post-Zionist] revisionist history is central to the attack on contemporary Israel. It is one of the manifold attempts to bring it down, first morally and then physically.

JP: Did you stay in touch with others from Aliyah Bet?

DG: Yes. I was one of the founders of the now defunct American Veterans of Israel organization. I held office and attended their reunions in Israel and the States. But that was then. Most of us are dead now, and I haven’t had a
drink with an old shipmate in years.

Bob Levitan, our captain, participated indirectly in the breakout from Acco. With his Leica, he took ID-type photos of all the Irgun and Lehi prisoners, and these were later used in the phony ID cards issued to them prior to their escape.

JP: What similarities, if any, do you see between American Jewish attitudes in the 1930s and 1940s and today?

DG: In the 1930s and ’40s, American Jews sanctified FDR. Now they are equally loyal to Obama. Despite their growing awareness of the Holocaust, during World War II American Jews for the most part stayed silent – very few mass protests and very little covert action. “FDR will save the Jews.”

My fear is that too many contemporary Jews are preparing to repeat this pattern. They will not embarrass the great and good Obama with their selfish concerns for what they view as a victimizing country – Israel – that no longer deserves their loyalty. Too many will follow Obama’s lead and stay silent while Israel is weakened or even destroyed.

Note: To any liberal in the United States that wishes to debate Obama's birth certificate and argue that Obama is a "legitimate" President of the United States, I suggest you re-read the opening paragraphs of this commentary by Phyllis Chesler. At not time in the history of the United States have we ever had a President less deserving of remaining a "leader" of the "free" world; as he continues to hire criminals and communists to his staff; Czars with criminal records and people who would be denied a "State" job, never mind a Federal position! What is embarrassing to all patriots in America is that 1. Many voted for this Imposter in Chief; and 2. Our Congress refuses to bring Obama's damaging and unConstitutional program to the forefront, as treason. It is the job of the President to protect and serve our nation; not to undermine and snuggle up with enemies; aiding terrorist organizations; and ignorning the potential dangers by doing so, while betraying our allies - he has betrayed America in the process!! No one hired Obama to run banks; confiscate car dealerships; force insurance down the throats of ALL Americans; place criminals in key positions in the White House; play hide and seek behind closed doors and bribe officials to get his agenda passed by Congress; .... and no one voted/hired Obama to apologize to the world for being an American. BeeSting

Belgian Parliamentary body votes to ban the burqa - F24 100331

Belgian committee votes for full Islamic veil ban

BBC News

A Belgian parliamentary committee has voted to ban face-covering Islamic veils from being worn in public.

The home affairs committee voted unanimously to endorse the move, which must be approved by parliament for it to become law.

Such a vote could be held within weeks, correspondents say, meaning that Belgium could become the first European country to implement a ban.

France is also considering restricting face-covering veils.

There are several types of headscarves and veils for Muslim women - those that cover the face being the niqab and the burka.

'Dangerous precedent'

The BBC's Dominic Hughes reports from Brussels that there are about 500,000 Muslims in Belgium, and the Belgian Muslim Council says only a couple of dozen wear full-face veils.


FROM BBC WORLD SERVICE

More from BBC World Service

Several districts of Belgium have already banned the burka in public places under old local laws originally designed to stop people masking their faces completely at carnival time.

The wording of the draft law approved by the parliamentary committee says the ban would apply to areas accessible to the public - which would include people walking in the street or using public transport - and would be enforced by fines or even prison.

Denis Ducarme, from the Belgian centre-right Reformist Movement that proposed the bill, said he was "proud that Belgium would be the first country in Europe which dares to legislate on this sensitive matter".

A colleague, Corinne De Parmentier, said: "We have to free women of this burden."

But the proposal has alarmed some who see it as an attack on civil liberties.

Isabelle Praile, the vice-president of the Muslim Executive of Belgium, said any law could set a dangerous precedent.

"Today it's the full-face veil, tomorrow the veil, the day after it will be Sikh turbans and then perhaps it will be mini-skirts," she was quoted as saying by AFP news agency.

WND Exclusive SEND THE CONSTITUTION Put Obama, Pelosi, Reid on notice 'What better way to tell them why they're losing their jobs'

Posted: March 25, 2010
12:00 am Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily


WASHINGTON – The whole world witnessed the unconstitutional shenanigans of House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi last Sunday, says WND Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah.

"Complicit with Barack Obama and Senate majority leader Harry Reid, she squeaked through the House the most sweeping, illegal, anti-American legislation in the history of the republic – the so-called 'health-care reform' bill," he said. "Now it's time to let Obama, Pelosi and Reid know why their actions are illegitimate and will not be tolerated, accepted, nor obeyed by the people."

Farah's solution is to send them copies of the clearly written, easily understood, 223-year-old law of the land – the Constitution.

Farah has made it easy and inexpensive to do just that – ensure delivery of a handsome, complete, bound copy of the Constitution along with an individually addressed letter to each with your name on it.

Pelosi gets one. Obama gets one. Reid gets one. And Fed Ex delivers all three for just $9.95 – guaranteed.

It's the "Send the Constitution" program, and already more than 7,500 copies of the Constitution have been delivered in just a few weeks.

Farah said the program was inspired by his reckoning that the common denominator in the federal government's overreaching and destruction of the economy and individual liberties is that all of its actions are violations of the Constitution.

What do health care, stimulus bills, bailouts and other abuses have in common?" he asked. "It's very simple. We've got a rogue government that no longer recognizes its strictly limited powers under the Constitution. It's time for a demonstration and an education."

How do you send them the message?

Send them copies of the Constitution.

That's what WND's "Send the Constitution" program is all about. For just $9.99, you can send attractive, bound copies of the Constitution to Obama, Pelosi and Reid to their offices by FedEx guaranteed delivery along with individual letters bearing your name and address that explain why they are being sent.

In addition, WND is making available these handsome bound editions of the Constitution for purchase by you for $1 each, so you can send them to your own representative in the House and two senators.

Send our leaders copies of the Constitution today!

"You can argue policy issues all day with Washington, but the fundamental problem facing Americans right now is that our federal officials continue to believe they have unlimited power to do whatever they believe is right," said Farah. "That's why this program is so effective. It deals with the root problem – the unprecedented power grab taking place in Washington."

Farah says there is no more poignant reminder that "most" of what takes place in Washington today is illegal. He says it's a necessary reminder that they are not supermen who can do anything they like.

"This is their Kryptonite," he explains. "Even if they don't read any of these booklets flooding their offices, they are getting the message that we are on to them – that they are far exceeding their constitutional limitations."

"This is their Kryptonite," he explains. "Even if they don't read any of these booklets flooding their offices, they are getting the message that we are on to them – that they are far exceeding their constitutional limitations."

You can also buy an unlimited quantity of the Constitution booklets to send to your friends, relatives and especially to your own member of the House of Representatives and your two U.S. senators for just $1 each.

Farah says it's time for some tough love, as expressed in those notes.

"But the love in thousands of parcels already delivered to Washington is in the Constitution itself, which bears a love of liberty by expressing, enforcing and ensuring restrictions on federal intrusions," says Farah. "That includes most of what the Washington power structure is angling to enact. That's why the notes not only advise the esteemed recipients to adhere to the clear limits on federal authority, but also invite them to share copies with their constitutionally challenged colleagues."

In a twist of irony, a top Obama adviser recently endorsed the idea of creating simple "booklets" to explain to the public its policies, such as taking over health care and the auto and banking industries.

"They're the folks who would benefit most from a 'simple booklet,'" said Farah, "and this copy of the Constitution is it."

The copy of the Constitution bears an impressive cover and design. It's beautifully put together, easy to leaf through and will fit snugly in a pocket. You'll want to order a few extra copies for yourself – to educate friends and family members and co-workers. But even in their busy schedules bent on "remaking America," Obama, Pelosi and Reid will find it easy to consult. Reading it won't bog them down, like 2,000-page pieces of legislation they are fond of crafting and signing.

"There's much more at stake than a piece of bad legislation here and there," said Farah, citing his plan to "reconstitutionalize" Washington. "After all, Obama and Pelosi and Reid are doing much more than passing and enacting bad legislation. They are actually overthrowing our constitutional republic. If we don't act, if we don't sound off, if we don't rebel, the damage to America's political institutions could be irreversible."

More than a campaign, Send the Constitution is political demonstration, or, in phraseology Obama, Pelosi and Reid will soon familiarize themselves with, an example of petitioning "the government with a redress of grievances." (See Amendment, First.)

WND's earlier Send Congress a Pink Slip Campaign plopped 9 million pink slips on congressional desks, warning them to start job hunting if they persisted in bankrupting generations of Americans, pursuing legislation based on fraudulent "science," attempting to command control of health care and quashing free speech.

As refreshing as that righteous response proved, this phase II gets back to the basics that America and her leaders can no longer afford to ignore.

"Never before," said Farah, "was seeing this document in Washington more necessary. It's time to flood the Capitol with these powerful words."

If you are a member of the media and would like to interview Joseph Farah about this campaign, e-mail WND.

You also can buy individual copies of the Constitution to send to your members of Congress, only $1 per copy.

Michael Savage - Gaddafi hijacks the podium at the UN

Muammar Gaddafi has made his first ever speech to the UN General Assembly, calling for the Security Council to be renamed "the Terror Council"

12:35 Mr Gaddafi has just wrapped up his unscripted 94-minute rant, having thrown the General Assembly session into confusion. He got absolutely no applause.

Delegates just sat stunned. ... 12:21 Mr Gaddafi has thrown the UN session into disarray. He has now been speaking for 100-odd minutes and seems just to be warming up. He was supposed to speak only 15 minutes.

Some UN journalists are now betting he will run on for a Fidel Castro-like seven hours. Of course, the General Assembly president has not got the heart to stop him. Perhaps because the General Assembly president is Ali...

Note: Dr. Savage's summary of Gaddafi is tremendous! Enjoy! Bee Sting

Michael Savage - The Meaning Of Passover

Michael Savage being Comedic in the Political Arena (3-30-10)

Dr. Savage speaks about the Iranian scientist .... now in the U.S.

Guess Who Is Really Going To Decide The Final Iraq Election Results

NEWS REAL BLOG

2010 March 30

by John L. Work

Over at Diana West’s website some not too surprising, but none-the-less deeply disturbing news reports have surfaced which demonstrate that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Supreme Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and exiled anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr (photo above) are all more than casually involved in deciding the final outcome of Iraq’s recent election results. Emissaries from the highest levels of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s government have already met in Tehran with all of the afore-named, hoping to secure the blessings of the Shiite Muslim coalition that governs Iran, and return al-Maliki to his current office. Any eyebrows up yet?

Not being a man to come to a conclusion without at least a preponderance of evidence to support one, it is not possible to disbelieve that Iran is calling some big shots in Iraq’s political future. If you are wondering how this can possibly be happening, or if I have somehow mistaken the facts of the situation, here are direct links to news accounts (again with thanks to Diana West) and you can examine them closely to discern for yourself what is going on in Iraq. Notice that not one of the reports originated within the United States.

Irish Times The Independent Guardian.CO.UK Story Asia Times Story

The Irish Times’ account includes this:

“IRAQI PRIME minister Nuri al-Maliki, whose State of Law bloc won 89 seats in the March 7th parliamentary election, is making every effort to overturn the result.

Yesterday the panel disqualifying ex-Baathists said six winners would lose their seats. It is assumed that some will be from the Iraqiya bloc of Iyad Allawi which came first with 91 seats in the 325 member assembly, destroying his lead over Mr Maliki…”

A few days ago I blogged about this possibility here at NRB.

“…Mr Maliki’s proposed deal seems to have been concluded at meetings in Tehran between Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, head of the PUK, and Shia vice-president Adel Abdel Mahdi of the INA who held discussions with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. At the same time, leading personalities belonging to Mr Maliki’s bloc travelled to the Iranian holy city of Qom to negotiate with radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who had expressed his opposition to a second term for Mr Maliki…”

Equally as disturbing as the afore-noted facts may be – I have neither seen a line of coverage in any American news publication, nor have I heard a word spoken of Iran’s deep involvement in the Iraq election results during American news broadcasts – yet.

It seems to me that with all of the political drama surrounding Iran’s race for a nuclear weapon, the threats to wipe out Israel, not to mention the unthinkable cruelties that have been inflicted upon political prisoners by the Iranian government, this apparent de facto control of Iraq’s election results should be sufficiently troubling to at least get a mention somewhere in America’s news outlets.

WHAT DID THE “PALESTINIANS” DO WITH THE 12 BILLION?

4International

Posted in Uncategorized on March 31, 2010 by socialisttruthfacts

March 31, 2010

Israel National News asks this question and it must be answered by the Fascist Left

(IsraelNN.com) A Palestinian Authority woman who addressed the United Nation’s Seminar on Assistance to the Palestinian People on March 25 noted that years of foreign aid appears to have done little good for the PA economy. Dr. Ghania Malhis, chairwoman of the board of trustees at the Economic Policy Research Institute in Ramallah, noted that billions of dollars spent over the past decade have not even restored the PA economy to its 1999 performance.

Malhis estimated that foreign countries had donated a total of $12 billion to the PA since 1995. That figure did not include billions of dollars in aid provided by international aid groups such as UNRWA and other NGO’s, she noted. Aid to the PA is increasing steadily: the PA received an average of one billion dollars a year between 2001 and 2005, $1.5 billion in 2007, $1.8 billion in 2009, and an estimated $2 billion is expected in 2010.

The amount of aid provided is particularly high when compared to the number of PA Arabs – the highest estimated PA population is 3.9 million, and more conservative estimates put the number of PA Arabs at 2.6 million – and the PA’s GDP is an estimated $4.5 billion annually.

And yet, Malhis said, it has been difficult to note any positive impact of these enormous sums on the PA economy. The GDP is 13 percent lower than it was in 1999, and GDP per capita is down by 30 percent, she said. .

Two main contributing factors are the large PA public payroll, which accounts for almost 60 percent of the PA’s spending, and the money poured into the armed forces, which is more than the combined amounts spent on health and education, Malhis said. Malhis elaborated:

1. The production capacity in the occupied territories was higher in the early nineties prior to the peace process,

2. The ratio of exports to imports became a feeble 19 percent

3. The ability of Domestic Production to cover domestic national consumption deteriorated resulting in an increase in dependency on Israeli imports and a heavy reliance on Arab and international aid to finance the cost of these imports.

4. We have also witnessed deterioration in PA ability to provide basic services such as health, education, social development and security unless heavily subsidized by Arab and international donations and aid to support its expenditures.

5. In 2009, international support was required to address a budget deficit of 61.4 percent, equivalent to 39 percent of the Palestinian GDP.”

She concluded: “One cannot but feel that these resources have been wasted. When the outcome of more than a 12 billion dollar investment results in such disastrous numbers, then it is obvious that immense mistakes were made on a strategic level”. She named the following causes:

The Palestinians, and in specific the Palestinian Authority, hold a sizeable responsibility, having failed to invest the funds mobilized by Arab and International donors on development and instead using them to cover their current running expenditures.

The Palestinian Authority failed to provide developmental sustainable solutions to unemployment, choosing governmental recruitment over encouraging and nurturing a vibrant productive economy and infrastructure to create jobs.

International donors also strayed from their initial goal of building a stable PA economy at the start of the peace process, and began reacting to a series of crises rather than investing foreconomic growth, she explained

Kawther Salaam, who reported the summary on the Palestine Think Tank site, wrote:”It was also exposed in the English and Arab media that (Al Al), brother of an assistant to Mahmoud Abbas, “bought” land from a dead person near the Jordan River in an Israeli military area. The land does not exist, but a total of $2,700,000 was paid by the PA from an account at the Bank of Jordan as a price of the land; [and] $750.000 of this sum was reportedly paid as ‘fees’ to the Bank of Jordan itself, what hints at the involvement of this Bank in the embezzlement of funds donated by the international community towards support for the Palestinian people.”

Mahlis did not detail corruption, saying only: “The Palestinian Authority has also failed to timely address allegations of misuse of funds, power and mismanagement as well as a lack of accountability and transparency.”

Past exposures showed that senior PA officials, including former PA chairman Yasser Arafat and current official Azzam el-Ahmed, have taken hundreds of millions of dollars in PA funds for their own use or that of their associates

However, true to form, Malhis put much of the blame on “aggressive Israeli policies,” stating that Israel had undermined the PA economy through counter-terror methods such as temporary closures and home demolitions and cited the end to the “occupation” as the cure all.

Previous statistics have shown that the Arab economy enjoyed an unprecedented boom from 1967, when the areas were restored to Israel after being occupied by Jordan since 1948, until the first and second Intifadas broke out in the early 1990s and in 2000.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/136772

CIA: Iran Moving Closer to Nuclear Weapon

Fox News

March 30, 2010 - 3:56 PM |
by: Justin Fishel

A recently published report by the Central Intelligence Agency says Iran is still working on building a nuclear weapon despite some technical setbacks and international resistance -- and the Pentagon say it's still concerned about Iran's ambitions. The mandated report to congress reads, "Iran continues to develop a range of capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to do so."

"Iran continued to expand its nuclear infrastructure and continued uranium enrichment and activities related to its heavy water research reactor, despite multiple United Nations Security Council Resolutions since late 2006 calling for the suspensin of those activities," the report says.

The CIA's new characterization of Iran's nuclear program stands in contradiction to the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which determined the country halted its nuclear production efforts in 2003.

The CIA report is unable to determine if Tehran has come to a decision about whether or not to build a bomb. (Oh, let me guess ... they threaten almost daily to wipe Israel off the map, but we do not know if they intend to build a bomb?! BeeSting)

Pentagon Spokesman Geoff Morrell says the U.S. remains concerned about Iran's ambitions. "They have not done enough to convince any of us that, indeed, their aims are purely peaceful," Morrell told Pentagon reporters Tuesday. "That is why this government, after extending an outstretched hand to Iran now for the better part of a year, has now pivoted. And though we haven't shut the door to engagement, we are clearly pursuing the pressure track."

A February report by the IAEA, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, decries a series of failures by Iranian officials to comply with requests that would guarantee its nuclear projects are not for the purpose of building a weapon. "Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities or its work on heavy water related," the report reads. "Contrary to the request of the Board of Governors and the requirements of the Security Council, Iran has neither implemented the Additional Protocol nor cooperated with the Agency in connection with the remaining issues of concern, which need to be clarified to exclude the possibility of military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme."

Perhaps just as disturbing as Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions are their chemical and biological warfare capabilities. "We judge that Iran is capable of weaponizing chemical warfare agents in a variety of delivery systems," the CIA report says. In addition, "Iran probably has the capability to produce some biological warfare agents for offensive purposes, if it made the decision to do so."

Iran is still far from having the ability to fire intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), but it does have a stockpile of shorter and medium range misses that if outfitted with a warhead could pose a grave threat to countries in the region, including Israel. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said repeatedly he would like to see Israel wiped from the map.

But according to the CIA report Iran has stated its intentions to put a satellite into orbit and it has dedicated $250 million towards that goal. Rocket technology needed to put a satellite into orbit is very similar to the technology needed for an ICBM. The CIA concludes that Iran has attempted to put a number of satellites into space, but it can't confirm if any of those efforts were successful, despite February 2009 press reports claiming Iran managed to launch the Omid satellite.

G8 skips Iran sanctions to boost secret US opening to Revolutionary Guards

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report March 30, 2010, 3:26 PM (GMT+02:00)

Canadian FM chairs G8 parley

debkafile's Wasshington and Iran source disclose that the G8 ministers meeting in Gatineau, Quebec, agreed to leave the door open to dialogue with Iran after they were discreetly informed that the Obama administration had launched a secret bid to engage Iran's radical Revolutionary Guards in nuclear talks.

The initiative aimed at bypassing Iran's hardline political leaders and ayatollahs.
It was first revealed by DEBKA-Net-Weekly 436 on March 12.

At their meeting in Canada on March 29, the G8 ministers drafted a statement "to remain open to dialogue and also reaffirm the need for the international community to take appropriate and strong steps to demonstrate… resolve to uphold the international nuclear non-proliferation regime."

But they pointedly sidestepped mention of sanctions or any other practical action for curbing Iran's dash for a nuclear bomb, after learning that the US president was no longer behind active steps that would antagonize Tehran. Instead, Washington had sent out messengers to meet high-ranking Guards representatives in Tehran and a number of European capitals in pursuit of a new diplomatic initiative for engaging the IRGC in dialogue, after failing to get anywhere with Tehran's regime leaders.

Those messengers went out on their mission three weeks before US Vice President Joe Biden's visit to Israel blew up into a major crisis over Israeli construction in East Jerusalem.

The US messengers offered IRGC emissaries the following arguments and inducements:

1. Washington was not seeking regime change in Tehran and had proved as much by not backing Iran's opposition in eight months of their protests against a probably rigged presidential election.

2. The US appreciated the IRGC was undergoing two fundamental transformations - one, shifting its radical-militant orientation over to greater emphasis on its vast business and financial interests, and, two, the disappearance of public affirmations of support for president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from the vocabulary of its leaders.

3. Washington believes that the IRGC had hoped the president would adopt a new pragmatic line on Iran's nuclear program and relations with the United States and were disappointed by his growing intransigence. It was therefore in both their interests to sideline the hardline Ahmadinejad in national decision-making.

4. UN sanctions against Iran - or unilateral US penalties - would harm the Guards' broad business interests and inhibit their growth pattern, whereas the absence of sanctions would let them expand uninterrupted.

5. As for the core issue, Iran's nuclear weapons program, here, too, the Obama administration was ready to be flexible, said the messengers, and accept Iran's acquisition of a nuclear bomb capability, so long as it does not cross the threshold and tip over into building bombs or stocking a nuclear arsenal.

This US concession would render academic the controversy over whether Iran was indeed pursuing a nuke - and the length of time it needed for its attainment.

The White House's rationale for talking to the Revolutionary Guards rested on the fact that its high command controls every facet of Iran's military nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Washington hopes the two sides can come to terms in advance on where to draw the line on their development. However, according to debkafile's Iranian sources, the Obama administration is still waiting for the Guards chiefs to reply to its proposal.

But already, there is diplomatic fallout in the Gulf region. When US defense secretary Robert Gates visited Riyadh on March 10, he was told Saudi rulers no longer trusted the Obama administration to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat in the light of its backdoor contacts with the IRGC. Gates departed the kingdom after an angry exchange.

Israel's Crisis and Opportunity

AMERICAN THINKER
By Steven M. Goldberg


Rahm Emanuel famously proclaimed, "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." Ironically, although the President's Chief of Staff has proven to be a false friend of Israel, the leadership of the Jewish State would do well to heed his advice.

That Israel is in peril is obvious. Israel's enemies sense the opportunity to destroy it through a perfect storm, a confluence of events that seem to leave Israel reeling and vulnerable. First and foremost is the unmistakable betrayal by the President of the United States, who has loudly broadcast his eagerness to sacrifice the security of the Jewish State to appease the Muslim world. Israel is under enormous duress to surrender vital territory to allow for the creation of a Palestinian state within its borders. That such a development would be catastrophic for Israel is apparent to anyone who knows history. As former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin stated, "The Palestinian state can only emerge on the ruins of Israel."

In addition, Iran is hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons, and it is clear that the international community will do nothing to stop it. President Obama appears to be pressuring Israel to refrain from military action to stop the Iranian threat. Hezb'allah and Hamas have restocked their arsenals of rockets and missiles, which now threaten to reach the center of Israel, including Tel Aviv. The European Union is championing the Fayed Plan, pursuant to which the Palestinian Authority would unilaterally announce the establishment of the Palestinian state, which would shortly thereafter be recognized by the United Nations Security Council. In view of President Obama's indifference and even antipathy to Israel, the United States cannot be counted on to exercise its veto.

Ominous as all this seems, Israel has the opportunity to seize the moment and secure its future. The actions required are not for the faint of heart.

With regard to Iran, Israel can let the United States know in no uncertain terms that it will take military action against Iran, with or without American assistance. If the Obama administration balks, and perhaps even threatens to withhold military hardware to Israel that might be necessary for a successful conventional strike, Israel can advise the United States, discreetly yet firmly, that it has non-conventional options, i.e., tactical nuclear weapons.

Such an admonition is not unprecedented. It has been reported that in 1973, during the first desperate hours of the Yom Kippur War, Prime Minister Golda Meir warned the Nixon Administration that Israel would have no choice but to resort to the nuclear option if conventional military resupplies were not forthcoming. Shortly after this communication by the Israeli Prime Minister, the Americans provided the assistance the Israelis needed to turn the tide in the war.

The situation is equally dire now. The possibility that Israel will resort to tactical nuclear weapons against Iran should be sufficient to convince the Obama administration to support Israel's attack with conventional weapons. If not, however, Israel must be prepared to carry out its threat. Failure against Iran is not an option.

With regard to the Palestinians, Israel need not sit idly by as the Palestinians carry out their threat to have the United Nations impose the creation of a Palestinian state, which would run afoul of the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap, which require a negotiated agreement by the parties, not an imposed solution.

A cardinal legal principle is that the violation of a contract by one party entitles the other party to rescind the contract. The Palestinians have repeatedly flouted both the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap. Israel can and should declare that those agreements have been abrogated. In their place, Israel can announce its annexation of Judea and Samaria. The Arabs residing in Palestinian cities will receive full civil and religious rights, but not political rights, which would be consistent with the Balfour Declaration of 1917 as well as the Mandate for Palestine that was adopted by the League of Nations in 1922 and ratified by the United States in 1924.

As for a Palestinian state, Israel would declare that issue to be dead as a doornail. Any such entity, if it is to be created, will be carved out of neighboring Arab lands, not out of the tiny piece of land afforded the Jewish State.

The international condemnation that will follow will be great, but history teaches it will be short-lived. The world will be a different place after an attack on Iran, and much of the international community will be silently grateful to Israel for ridding the Middle East of the Iranian menace. Anti-Semitism will never be eradicated, and thus Israel will always have enemies, but those enemies can be kept at bay if, and only if, they are convinced that Israel has demonstrated the will to do whatever is necessary to prevail.

Converting Israel's crisis into an opportunity will require extraordinary leadership. Israel's leaders will need strategic vision, decisiveness, steady nerves, unflinching determination, and absolute confidence in the justice of the cause. American Jewry will also have a critical role to play. We will need to dig deep, find our inner strength, coalesce and defend the Jewish nation. There is, however, no choice. It is a matter of life or death.

Steven M. Goldberg is a trial lawyer in Los Angeles who is involved in a number of Jewish organizations, including the Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors.

Note: I consider this the best news article of the day! Bee Sting