The recent article that came out about William Ayers (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/guilty_as_hell_free_as_a_bird_1.html), who admitted his guilt in the SF bombing and who chortled that he was “guilty as h*ll and free as a bird,” prompted the Gunny to do a little review session of the various friends of Comrade Maobama.
Carl Davidson:
1. Member of the SDS and is an ultra-militant leftist.
2. Key member and founder of the Venceremos Brigade. They were trained by Cuban intelligence officers in the areas of propaganda, espionage, subversion, and terrorism. It is believed by many American POWs in Vietnam that one of these Venceremos Brigade members used to interrogate and torture them.
3. Has met with Fidel Castro.
4. A board member of the the Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS). This is a regrouping of old scummy SDSers.
5. He is rebuilding the NEW SDS.
6. Worked to elect Comrade Maobama in Progressives For Obama. This organization is chock-full of radical leftists from the SDS, MDS, NSDS, Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS).
Michael Klonsky:
1. Ran Comrade Maobama’s official campaign website.
2. The son of a member of the Communist Party, USA, Robert Klonsky. This scumbag was convicted of working to overthrow the United States in the 1950s.
3. National Secretary of the SDS.
4. Hardcore fan of Chairman Mao and was allowed to visit China.
5. Founder and chairman of the Communist Party Marxist-Leninist (CP/M-L).
6. Received funding from Mao and is one of China's premier agents in the United States.
7. Received funding from William Ayers and Comrade Maobama from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge/Woods Fund for his Small Schools Workshop.
8. Actively campaigned for Comrade Maobama.
Mark Rudd:
1. Primary instigator of the 1968 SDS occupation of the Columbia campus. They damaged the campus and numerous buildings.
2. Assisted in founding the Weather Underground.
3. Was complicit in all of the bombings that resulted in deaths and maimings.
4. Followed the path of his buddies and is a mathematics instructor at Central New Mexico Community college.
Tom Hayden:
1. A self-avowed communist.
2. Member of the SDS/Weather Underground including: Marilyn Katz, Jeff Jones, Howard Machtinger, Steve Tappis, Bill Fletcher, Bert Garskoff, and Donald Warden (aka Khalid al-Mansour).
3. Was married to Hanoi Jane Fonda, American traitor.4. Co-Founder of the SDS.
William Ayers:
1. Loyal supporter of the PLO.
2. Ghostwrote Comrade Maobama’s books.
3. Led the Weather Underground's bombing efforts.
4. Sought to create armed insurrection against the U.S. government.
5. Anti-white racist and seeks to inflame blacks in a recent book co-authored with his wife, terrorist Bernandine Dorhn.
Melody Barnes:
1. Was Executive VP for policy at the Center For American Progress (CAP) run by George Soros.
2. Has represented Maobama on PBS/Lapdog media outlets.
3. Longtime adviser to Senator Ted Drunkennedy.
Professor Linda Darling-Hammond:
1. Was the education adviser to Comrade Maobama.
2. Advocate of reparations for blacks.
3. Active member of the American Education Research Association (AERA). They are a major promoter of radical educational theory and policy. (Ayers is the VP).
4. Went with Ayers to Hugo Chavez's 2006 education summit.
Professor Gloria Ladson-Billings:
1. Past president of AERA.
2. Advocate of reparations for blacks.
3. Calls America a "white supremacist" nation (like they all do).
4. Along with Darling-Hammond, calls on the federal government to give free education to blacks. 5. Launched a petition drive to collect signatures to support Ayers and denounce his detractors. (Commie Tactic)
6. Friend of PLO terrorist Rashid Khalidi, Maoist H. Bruce Franklin, the co-founder of Revolutionary Union and the Venceremos Organization.
OTHER FRIENDS OF COMRADE MAOBAMA INCLUDE:
1. Noam Chomsky: Well known linguist, writer and activist. A member of both DSA and the CCDS.2. Angela Davis: A leader of CCDS, formerly prominent in the CPUSA.
3. Bill Fletcher Jr: Maoist. A leader of DSA and an official in the AFL-CIO.4. Bert Garskof: SDSer and a close friend of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.5. David Graeber: Former SDSer and now an avowed anarchist.6. Al Haber: Original founding member of SDS.7. Robin DG Kelley: Former member of the Communist Workers Party now in the CPUSA, allied with the Progressive Caucus in Congress.8. Ethelbert Miller: CEO of the Institute for Policy Studies, a radical leftist think-tank and allied to the Cubans.9. Howard Zinn: Leftist revisionist historian and a self-avowed socialist.
10. Manning Marable: MDS chairman. Founded the DSA. A leader of CCDS.11. Jeff Jones: Former SDSer and a major leader of the Weather Underground.
12. Bruce Rubenstein: The MDS treasurer and former Weatherman.Liberals have denied that unrepentant terrorist William Ayers is involved with the MDS but here is a video of the scumbag speaking to his fellow travelers at the November 2007 MDS conference in Sh*tcago. Ayers calls MDS "our work!" In addition, he outlines rigging and using the US elections to enlist useful idiots in college to the MDS cause. He discusses Rashid Khalid, a PLO terrorist and a close friend of Barack Obama.
March 21, 2009
Special Olympian to Dumbass.....Bring it
Special Olympian Kolan McConiughey to Obama: "Bring it."With a couple of 300 games to his credit, Kolan McConiughey does not appreciate the president's bowling jokes at the expense of Special Olympians.During his first appearance on the Jay Leno Show on Thursday President Hopenchange sans Teleprompter slammed Special Olympians.Jake Tapper reported:
The first appearance by a sitting president on “The Tonight Show” may well end up being the last.President Obama, in his taping with Jay Leno Thursday afternoon, attempted to yuk it up with the funnyman, and ended up insulting the disabled.Towards the end of his approximately 40-minute appearance, the president talked about how he’s gotten better at bowling and has been practicing in the White House bowling alley.He bowled a 129, the president said.“That’s very good, Mr. President,” Leno said sarcastically.It’s “like the Special Olympics or something,” the president said.In response Special Olympian Kolan McConiughey said that he can beat the president easily.The AP reported:
So President Barack Obama thinks he bowls like a competitor in the Special Olympics?He's obviously never met Kolan McConiughey, a mentally disabled man considered one of the nation's top Special Olympics bowlers, with five perfect games to his credit. He'd like to go to the White House and show the president a thing or two about how to roll strikes."He bowled a 129. I bowl a 300. I could beat that score easily," McConiughey said Friday.Look for White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to bash Kolan at the next press conferece.
The first appearance by a sitting president on “The Tonight Show” may well end up being the last.President Obama, in his taping with Jay Leno Thursday afternoon, attempted to yuk it up with the funnyman, and ended up insulting the disabled.Towards the end of his approximately 40-minute appearance, the president talked about how he’s gotten better at bowling and has been practicing in the White House bowling alley.He bowled a 129, the president said.“That’s very good, Mr. President,” Leno said sarcastically.It’s “like the Special Olympics or something,” the president said.In response Special Olympian Kolan McConiughey said that he can beat the president easily.The AP reported:
So President Barack Obama thinks he bowls like a competitor in the Special Olympics?He's obviously never met Kolan McConiughey, a mentally disabled man considered one of the nation's top Special Olympics bowlers, with five perfect games to his credit. He'd like to go to the White House and show the president a thing or two about how to roll strikes."He bowled a 129. I bowl a 300. I could beat that score easily," McConiughey said Friday.Look for White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to bash Kolan at the next press conferece.
Napolitano And "Made Caused DIsaters"
In an interview with Der Spiegel, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano revealed one of the not too subtle changes of the Obama era.
Janet Napolitano, 51, is President Obama's new Homeland Security Secretary. She spoke with SPIEGEL about immigration, the continued threat of terrorism and the changing tone in Washington.
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.SPIEGEL: This sounds quite different from what we heard from the Bush administration. How will the new anti-terror policy differ from the previous one?Napolitano: Our policies will be guided by authoritative information. We also have assets at our disposal now that we did not have prior to 9/11. For example, we are much better able to keep track of travellers coming into the US than we were before. The third thing is to work with our international partners and allies to make sure that we are getting information and sharing information in an appropriate and real-time fashion.This is an outrage. This is BS. Napolitano's "nuance" sucks. Dick Cheney was right to criticize the Obama administration's new policy.The politics of fear?Calling terrorist acts "terrorism" has nothing to do with the politics of fear. It has everything to do with REALITY. Sometimes, being fearful is being realistic. The threat from Islamic radicals is real. This "man-caused disasters" crap is ridiculous. The United States Homeland Security Secretary shouldn't sound like a politically correct, "everything is relative" Reuters hack.It's wrong to call the slaughter of 3000 people, the destruction of the World Trade Center, the damage to the Pentagon, and the crash of Flight 93 in Pennsylvania something as benign as a "man-caused disaster." It was terrorism. This is like spitting in the face of all those throughout the world who have suffered and died due to the savagery of Islamic terrorists. It's wrong to diminish the horror and the evil of those acts by softening the terms.Who carries out these "man-caused disasters"? Not terrorists. If we can't call their actions "terrorism," we certainly can't call the perpetrators "terrorists."I guess we're supposed to call them "man-caused disaster-doers." We can't be referring to Osama bin Laden as a terrorist, now can we?What a load!I will never stop calling the 9/11 attacks "terrorism." Never. And I will never stop calling bin Laden and his barbarian followers "terrorists."However, I agree to use the term "man-caused disaster." The 2008 presidential election was a "man-caused disaster."
Janet Napolitano, 51, is President Obama's new Homeland Security Secretary. She spoke with SPIEGEL about immigration, the continued threat of terrorism and the changing tone in Washington.
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.SPIEGEL: This sounds quite different from what we heard from the Bush administration. How will the new anti-terror policy differ from the previous one?Napolitano: Our policies will be guided by authoritative information. We also have assets at our disposal now that we did not have prior to 9/11. For example, we are much better able to keep track of travellers coming into the US than we were before. The third thing is to work with our international partners and allies to make sure that we are getting information and sharing information in an appropriate and real-time fashion.This is an outrage. This is BS. Napolitano's "nuance" sucks. Dick Cheney was right to criticize the Obama administration's new policy.The politics of fear?Calling terrorist acts "terrorism" has nothing to do with the politics of fear. It has everything to do with REALITY. Sometimes, being fearful is being realistic. The threat from Islamic radicals is real. This "man-caused disasters" crap is ridiculous. The United States Homeland Security Secretary shouldn't sound like a politically correct, "everything is relative" Reuters hack.It's wrong to call the slaughter of 3000 people, the destruction of the World Trade Center, the damage to the Pentagon, and the crash of Flight 93 in Pennsylvania something as benign as a "man-caused disaster." It was terrorism. This is like spitting in the face of all those throughout the world who have suffered and died due to the savagery of Islamic terrorists. It's wrong to diminish the horror and the evil of those acts by softening the terms.Who carries out these "man-caused disasters"? Not terrorists. If we can't call their actions "terrorism," we certainly can't call the perpetrators "terrorists."I guess we're supposed to call them "man-caused disaster-doers." We can't be referring to Osama bin Laden as a terrorist, now can we?What a load!I will never stop calling the 9/11 attacks "terrorism." Never. And I will never stop calling bin Laden and his barbarian followers "terrorists."However, I agree to use the term "man-caused disaster." The 2008 presidential election was a "man-caused disaster."
March 20, 2009
Obama's Special Olympics "Joke"..What An Idiot
I have a special needs child. He looks like you'd imagine a special needs child looks when he throws a ball. He looks like you'd imagine a special needs child looks when he catches a ball. He looks like you'd imagine a special needs child looks when he runs. He looks like you'd imagine a special needs child looks when he bowls. He rode the short bus for a while.
Sounds hilarious doesn't it? You know, running, throwing, bowling awkwardly because of muscle imbalances and fear of falling and fear of being hit by the ball. What's amazing is that his Little League teammates haven't laughed or poked fun. Not. Once. They have managed to show more class, patience, empathy and charity than the President of the United States, but that's turning out to be no big feat.
Last night, Barack Obama joked with Jay Leno that it's like "watching Special Olympics" to watch him bowl:
Hilarious.
The joke doesn't bother me so much, though. It's just more evidence that our President is a small man. This is the man who talked about Jessica Simpson's weight gain. This is the man who gave unworkable DVDs to our staunchest ally as a gift. This is the man who slyly flipped off John McCain and his current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Speaking of Hillary... This is the administration who gave a mis-translated red button to the Russians saying "reset". Do they not realize that by diminishing the past administration and making fun of it at every turn they undermine their own power and respect?
They have no respect for the offices or the power or authority they hold. None.
So, the President of the United States will go on late night talk-shows. It is beneath the office but since he has no respect for the office, it's impossible to tear it down. Bookworm says:
The President, of course, said he didn't mean to offend anyone, and I believe it. Nasty just rolls off him naturally, without any effort on his part. He's done this offensive trash talk before. Remember how you condescendingly told Hillary she was "nice enough?" Or how about his offering that "I'll put Mr. Burgess up against Sean Hannity. They'll tear him up." That's not presidential. That's school yard talk, and school yard talk from the kid who isn't nice. Popular, maybe. But nice? Definitely not.
Now, to the guts of the Politically Correct nonsense. Imagine a Republican had said something similar. Remember "Macaca"? Yeah, the career of a good man was buried because of a verbal slip such as Obama's last night. Those on the right are outraged, but is the Left? No, they figure you should "get a sense of humor", you know, because making fun of 'tards is funny.
UPDATED with more from The Anchoress (go to her site, she has loads of links to the Left's gaffes--she has a long memory and better search functions than me, I think):
Perhaps President Obama, who received a rather tidy Book Advance just before he was sworn in, (does anyone else remember how Newt Gingrich got castigated for 'using his office to sell a book'?) should donate some of the proceeds of his advance, say...I dunno, 90% - to the Special Olympics, to show he doesn't really think that it's okay to joke about "extra chromosome people" like Al Gore did (yes, I remember everything). Or, at least, that he should not insult disabled people by comparing them to himself, or to political junkies, in general.
As a political junkie, I can say that.
Sigh. One almost gets tired of saying it, but one must say it, still: Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would do with that, had Bush said it. Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done with the Irish PM Teleprompter gaffe (the press has helpfully embargoed the video, so Obama doesn't have to see it playing 24/7, as Bush would have - had Bush so gaffed). Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done if Bush had given the Prime Minister of Great Britain a lousy pack of 50 "Classic" DVD's that didn't work in the UK?
The Leftists in this country, once again reveal their hypocrisy. They want to control your language but when their beloved makes stupid gaffe after stupid gaffe and reveals his lack of character, it's funny, not pathetic.
The fact is, the Left in our country don't mind stooping to sexism (Sarah Palin), racism (Michelle Malkin, Michael Steele), religion (Gun-clingers, Joe Lieberman), classism (Joe the Plumber, any American not Democrat), etc. when it suits them. But they'll turn like vicious hyenas on anyone who say, does, or thinks something outside what they decide is politically correct.
Meanwhile, the Right believes in free speech. So those on the Right feel that if the President wants to make an ass of himself, he's welcome to do so. Is it offensive? Sure. It isn't much different than shock jock Howard Stern's sexist jokes or the unfunny and leftist darling Don Imus' saying "nappy headed hoes". Listen or don't, it's up to you.
So the Right tends to roll their eyes at the un-p.c. shenanigans of the Left. It's hypocritical, we tell ourselves, to believe in free speech and then admonishing someone on the left for exercising that right and revealing himself to be a jerk. That time is over. I call bullshit. The Left can start following their own rules or embrace free speech again. It's their choice, but they can't get away with this double-standard any more.
Back to Barack and bowling: Would I like the President of the United States to have some measure of decorum? Sure. That would be nice. It's not going to happen with Barack Obama. And his hate speech (come on, you know if a Republican said this it would be called hate speech) represents a very nasty character flaw and deep insecurity. But anyone paying attention before the election would have seen that too.
President Barack Obama diminishes himself, the office and the country. It's embarrassing. But you know, Americans choose presidents who, for better or worse, represent themselves. He fits right in to the base, crass culture. Far from being better or smarter, like we were told during the election, he's baser and cruder. It's interesting watching so many try to defend the indefensible.
Sounds hilarious doesn't it? You know, running, throwing, bowling awkwardly because of muscle imbalances and fear of falling and fear of being hit by the ball. What's amazing is that his Little League teammates haven't laughed or poked fun. Not. Once. They have managed to show more class, patience, empathy and charity than the President of the United States, but that's turning out to be no big feat.
Last night, Barack Obama joked with Jay Leno that it's like "watching Special Olympics" to watch him bowl:
Hilarious.
The joke doesn't bother me so much, though. It's just more evidence that our President is a small man. This is the man who talked about Jessica Simpson's weight gain. This is the man who gave unworkable DVDs to our staunchest ally as a gift. This is the man who slyly flipped off John McCain and his current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Speaking of Hillary... This is the administration who gave a mis-translated red button to the Russians saying "reset". Do they not realize that by diminishing the past administration and making fun of it at every turn they undermine their own power and respect?
They have no respect for the offices or the power or authority they hold. None.
So, the President of the United States will go on late night talk-shows. It is beneath the office but since he has no respect for the office, it's impossible to tear it down. Bookworm says:
The President, of course, said he didn't mean to offend anyone, and I believe it. Nasty just rolls off him naturally, without any effort on his part. He's done this offensive trash talk before. Remember how you condescendingly told Hillary she was "nice enough?" Or how about his offering that "I'll put Mr. Burgess up against Sean Hannity. They'll tear him up." That's not presidential. That's school yard talk, and school yard talk from the kid who isn't nice. Popular, maybe. But nice? Definitely not.
Now, to the guts of the Politically Correct nonsense. Imagine a Republican had said something similar. Remember "Macaca"? Yeah, the career of a good man was buried because of a verbal slip such as Obama's last night. Those on the right are outraged, but is the Left? No, they figure you should "get a sense of humor", you know, because making fun of 'tards is funny.
UPDATED with more from The Anchoress (go to her site, she has loads of links to the Left's gaffes--she has a long memory and better search functions than me, I think):
Perhaps President Obama, who received a rather tidy Book Advance just before he was sworn in, (does anyone else remember how Newt Gingrich got castigated for 'using his office to sell a book'?) should donate some of the proceeds of his advance, say...I dunno, 90% - to the Special Olympics, to show he doesn't really think that it's okay to joke about "extra chromosome people" like Al Gore did (yes, I remember everything). Or, at least, that he should not insult disabled people by comparing them to himself, or to political junkies, in general.
As a political junkie, I can say that.
Sigh. One almost gets tired of saying it, but one must say it, still: Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would do with that, had Bush said it. Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done with the Irish PM Teleprompter gaffe (the press has helpfully embargoed the video, so Obama doesn't have to see it playing 24/7, as Bush would have - had Bush so gaffed). Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done if Bush had given the Prime Minister of Great Britain a lousy pack of 50 "Classic" DVD's that didn't work in the UK?
The Leftists in this country, once again reveal their hypocrisy. They want to control your language but when their beloved makes stupid gaffe after stupid gaffe and reveals his lack of character, it's funny, not pathetic.
The fact is, the Left in our country don't mind stooping to sexism (Sarah Palin), racism (Michelle Malkin, Michael Steele), religion (Gun-clingers, Joe Lieberman), classism (Joe the Plumber, any American not Democrat), etc. when it suits them. But they'll turn like vicious hyenas on anyone who say, does, or thinks something outside what they decide is politically correct.
Meanwhile, the Right believes in free speech. So those on the Right feel that if the President wants to make an ass of himself, he's welcome to do so. Is it offensive? Sure. It isn't much different than shock jock Howard Stern's sexist jokes or the unfunny and leftist darling Don Imus' saying "nappy headed hoes". Listen or don't, it's up to you.
So the Right tends to roll their eyes at the un-p.c. shenanigans of the Left. It's hypocritical, we tell ourselves, to believe in free speech and then admonishing someone on the left for exercising that right and revealing himself to be a jerk. That time is over. I call bullshit. The Left can start following their own rules or embrace free speech again. It's their choice, but they can't get away with this double-standard any more.
Back to Barack and bowling: Would I like the President of the United States to have some measure of decorum? Sure. That would be nice. It's not going to happen with Barack Obama. And his hate speech (come on, you know if a Republican said this it would be called hate speech) represents a very nasty character flaw and deep insecurity. But anyone paying attention before the election would have seen that too.
President Barack Obama diminishes himself, the office and the country. It's embarrassing. But you know, Americans choose presidents who, for better or worse, represent themselves. He fits right in to the base, crass culture. Far from being better or smarter, like we were told during the election, he's baser and cruder. It's interesting watching so many try to defend the indefensible.
Obama's Inexperience Killing Pakistan
March 20, 2009 (Kolkata, India). While Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is still congratulating the Pakistani government for “resolving its crisis,” by which she means an internal political spat; the real crisis is only getting worse. The Taliban continues its march through Pakistan, imposing Sharia law and persecuting non-Muslims as it does, while President Barack Obama continues to happily search for the “moderate Taliban” among them. And that’s not all.
Yesterday, police here foiled an attempted terrorist bombing by a former member of the Pakistani Rangers paramilitary force. According to Kolkata police and the Indian Border Security Force (BSF), Shahbaz Ismail, flew from Karachi, Pakistan northwest of India to the Bangladesh capital of Dhaka, which borders the Indian state of West Bengal that has Kolkata as its capital. He slipped across the border near Murshidabad not far from this sprawling metropolitan area, the world’s 14th largest. The BSF got a tip about Ismail and alerted the Kolkata police. “We found out that [Ismail] would go to Fairlie Place to buy a rail ticket,” a police spokesman said.
When the would be terrorist got there, the police were ready, even before he had a chance to purchase a ticket to Indian-controlled Kashmir, known as Jammu, which was to be the site of his terrorist action. They had men stationed all around the area, some even posing as reservation agents; all with Ismail’s picture. According to one of the special agents on the scene, Ismail was in India “for a secret mission.” Interrogators are still working on Ismail for the details, but they know it was to take place in Kashmir. Ismail is part of the Al Badar terrorist group, affiliated with Al Qaeda. According to Indian intelligence, over 80 percent of the terrorists “used to work for the Pakistani army and paramilitary force.”
This is the “resolution” for which Obama and Clinton have been congratulating the Pakistanis.
India is in the midst of an election campaign at the moment, and there have been numerous terrorist attacks and attempts recently, almost all originating from or supported by Pakistan. That same day, terrorists attempted to blow up a full passenger train in India’s northeast only to detonate the device too early and so causing only minimal damage. And the day before, a terrorist exploded a bomb in a market in the same region, killing several shoppers. Only one day before that, it was revealed that all of India’s major candidates have been given increased security because of credible terrorist threats.
It might assuage some people that CIA Director Leon Pannetta is now in India, but most people here believe the Obama administration is oblivious to increasing terrorist actions in South Asia, much of that sentiment fueled by Obama’s comments about finding a negotiated settlement with the terrorists.
India and South Asia are the key to winning the war on terror, and it appears that the best Obama is hoping for is a negotiated compromise with the terrorists.
Yesterday, police here foiled an attempted terrorist bombing by a former member of the Pakistani Rangers paramilitary force. According to Kolkata police and the Indian Border Security Force (BSF), Shahbaz Ismail, flew from Karachi, Pakistan northwest of India to the Bangladesh capital of Dhaka, which borders the Indian state of West Bengal that has Kolkata as its capital. He slipped across the border near Murshidabad not far from this sprawling metropolitan area, the world’s 14th largest. The BSF got a tip about Ismail and alerted the Kolkata police. “We found out that [Ismail] would go to Fairlie Place to buy a rail ticket,” a police spokesman said.
When the would be terrorist got there, the police were ready, even before he had a chance to purchase a ticket to Indian-controlled Kashmir, known as Jammu, which was to be the site of his terrorist action. They had men stationed all around the area, some even posing as reservation agents; all with Ismail’s picture. According to one of the special agents on the scene, Ismail was in India “for a secret mission.” Interrogators are still working on Ismail for the details, but they know it was to take place in Kashmir. Ismail is part of the Al Badar terrorist group, affiliated with Al Qaeda. According to Indian intelligence, over 80 percent of the terrorists “used to work for the Pakistani army and paramilitary force.”
This is the “resolution” for which Obama and Clinton have been congratulating the Pakistanis.
India is in the midst of an election campaign at the moment, and there have been numerous terrorist attacks and attempts recently, almost all originating from or supported by Pakistan. That same day, terrorists attempted to blow up a full passenger train in India’s northeast only to detonate the device too early and so causing only minimal damage. And the day before, a terrorist exploded a bomb in a market in the same region, killing several shoppers. Only one day before that, it was revealed that all of India’s major candidates have been given increased security because of credible terrorist threats.
It might assuage some people that CIA Director Leon Pannetta is now in India, but most people here believe the Obama administration is oblivious to increasing terrorist actions in South Asia, much of that sentiment fueled by Obama’s comments about finding a negotiated settlement with the terrorists.
India and South Asia are the key to winning the war on terror, and it appears that the best Obama is hoping for is a negotiated compromise with the terrorists.
March 19, 2009
Dems Dodd Caught Up In Lies
Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut has been caught in a bold faced lie. One day after denying he was personally responsible for inserting a loophole in a budget bill which protected bonus payments to executives at companies like AIG, Dodd was forced to admit that he is, in fact, responsible.It worked like this: AIG gave more campaign money to Senator Dodd than any other Senator. When it came time to protect the bonuses of the folks at AIG, Dodd remembered the huge campaign contributions and paid his supporters back with a loophole.They can deny it all day long, but that's what happened. I think Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut is corrupt and the AIG bonus loophole proves it. Dodd has to go.
Homeland Sec Changes "Terrorism" To "Man Made Disaster"!!
Even as President Obama compares bankers to suicide bombers, his Homeland Security Secretary is suggesting the T-word, terrorism, is too inflammatory and representative of old-fashioned "politics of fear." She's announced a new term: "man-caused disaster." From an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel:
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?
NAPOLITANO: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
But what if the suicide bomber is a female? Isn't it sexist to use "man-caused disaster"?
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?
NAPOLITANO: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
But what if the suicide bomber is a female? Isn't it sexist to use "man-caused disaster"?
Feds Buying Treasury Bills
In an effort to promote liquidity and boost the economy, the Federal Reserve yesterday announced plans to grow the money supply by another 50 percent to 60 percent. This ignores the profound observation of Gen. George Patton: "You can't push a string."When the Fed expands the money supply, it doesn't pass out $100 bills on Broadway. It gives lines of credit to banks and other financial intermediaries to generate some money and also buys up Treasury bills in circulation to pump out more cash.But the money supply has already expanded by 271 percent in the past five months. Why does the Fed expect what hasn't worked to suddenly start working?Right now, there is about $800 billion plus currency in circulation sitting in wallets, purses and cash registers around the country. Another $800 billion is sitting in a vault at the Federal Reserve Board, for a total monetary supply of about $1.6 trillion.In a vault? Yes. When Congress voted the TARP program to bail out banks, the banks actually took only a small part of the money. The rest they used to offset losses on their balance sheets while letting the Fed hold onto the money.Why didn't the banks want the money? Because they're not about to make loans in this economy. They're more than happy to let the cash sit at the Fed earning them interest. (The Fed decided to start paying interest last November).So now the Fed will, in essence, be creating another trillion of money supply to sit in the vault alongside the $800 billion already there. The new money will remain idle for the same reason the old money has because banks won't make loans in this environment.And what of the money that is going out the door to buy Treasury bills? Those selling Treasuries won't run out and spend the money on flat-screen TVs. With higher taxes coming up next year and the economy in the tank, they won't spend it or lend it they'll probably just turn around and buy more T-bills.Think of a parking garage filled with cars. The cars' owners leave them in the garage, because it's a bad day with rain and snow and conditions aren't suitable for driving. Similarly, banks and consumers leave their money in the vault at the Fed or in their bank accounts or under the mattress.When conditions improve, though, all those metaphorical cars will suddenly be taken out for a drive. All at once. And a traffic jam of monumental proportion will ensue.When everybody starts spending the money they're now leaving in vaults and mattresses, way too much money will be chasing way too few goods and services. Double-digit inflation will return to America.Yesterday's Fed action won't help but it will put more money out there that the Fed will have to mop up once the economy, on its own, revives.
Why Legalize Immigrants? So They Join Unions
According to reports, President Obama said it’s important to have a quick path to citizenship for illegal immigrants so that they can join unions to “get protection” from evil employers.
Speaking at a town hall meeting in Southern California, Obama broached his newest cause celebre, “comprehensive” immigration reform, in Costa Mesa.
“If they stay in the shadows in the underground economy, they are oftentimes pitted against American workers since they can’t join a union. They can’t complain about minimum wages.”
Obama also claimed that we need to make sure illegal immigrants don’t flood across the border uncontrolled saying that we need to secure our border with Mexico. Yet, even as he told Californians that he is an advocate of a tighter boarder, reports have emerged that his administration is going to take money away from immigration workplace enforcement programs allowing immigrants to more easily take jobs illegally in the U.S.
So, as is typical with this president, what he says on the permanent campaign trail is in no way backed by his actual policies.
What we see here is the exact opposite of a controlled border. He wants to give blanket amnesty to enlarge union rolls and denude money from enforcement on top of that so that even more illegals will find reason to sneak across the border.
If Californians thought Obama was trying to head off the coming Mexifornia, they are sorely mistaken.
Speaking at a town hall meeting in Southern California, Obama broached his newest cause celebre, “comprehensive” immigration reform, in Costa Mesa.
“If they stay in the shadows in the underground economy, they are oftentimes pitted against American workers since they can’t join a union. They can’t complain about minimum wages.”
Obama also claimed that we need to make sure illegal immigrants don’t flood across the border uncontrolled saying that we need to secure our border with Mexico. Yet, even as he told Californians that he is an advocate of a tighter boarder, reports have emerged that his administration is going to take money away from immigration workplace enforcement programs allowing immigrants to more easily take jobs illegally in the U.S.
So, as is typical with this president, what he says on the permanent campaign trail is in no way backed by his actual policies.
What we see here is the exact opposite of a controlled border. He wants to give blanket amnesty to enlarge union rolls and denude money from enforcement on top of that so that even more illegals will find reason to sneak across the border.
If Californians thought Obama was trying to head off the coming Mexifornia, they are sorely mistaken.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
