Maybe Elizabeth Warren can get 1/32 of it (Yeah, I know- Cherokee, not Sioux) and Ward Churchill…well…nevermind:

South Dakota’s Black Hills, home to the granite faces carved into Mt. Rushmore, should be restored as Native American tribal lands, a United Nations official recently said.

James Anaya, a U.N. special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, completed a fact-finding mission on Friday that included meetings with a number of Native American tribal leaders as well as White House officials. His investigation led him to suggest that the United States take additional steps to repair the nation’s legacy of oppression against Native Americans.

Reuters:

[James Anaya] met with representatives of indigenous peoples in the District of Columbia, Arizona, Alaska, Oregon, Washington State, South Dakota, and Oklahoma. He also met with U.S. government officials.

“I have heard stories that make evident the profound hurt that indigenous peoples continue to feel because of the history of oppression they have faced,” Anaya said in a statement issued by the U.N. human rights office in Geneva.

That oppression, he said, has included the seizure of lands and resources, the removal of children from their families and communities, the loss of languages, violation of treaties, and brutality, all grounded in racial discrimination.

Anaya welcomed the U.S. decision to endorse the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2010 and other steps the government has taken, but said more was needed. His findings will be included in a final report submitted to the U.N. Human Rights Council. While not binding, the recommendations carry moral weight that can influence governments.

“It is clear that this history does not just blemish the past, but translates into present day disadvantage for indigenous peoples in the country,” Anaya said.

“There have still not been adequate measures of reconciliation to overcome the persistent legacies of the history of oppression, and that there is still much healing that needs to be done,” he said.

~~~

“Past uncontrolled and irresponsible extractive activities, including uranium mining in the Southwest, have resulted in the contamination of indigenous peoples’ water sources and other resources, and in numerous documented negative health effects among Native Americans,” he said.

He said indigenous peoples feel they have too little control over geographic regions considered sacred to them, like the San Francisco Peaks in Arizona and the Black Hills in South Dakota. Anaya suggested such lands should be returned to Native peoples.

“Securing the rights of indigenous peoples to their lands is of central importance to indigenous peoples’ socioeconomic development, self-determination, and cultural integrity,” Anaya said.

“Continued efforts to resolve, clarify, and strengthen the protection of indigenous lands, resources, and sacred sites should be made,” he added.

Mount Rushmore, a popular tourist attraction, is located in the Black Hills, which the Sioux tribe consider to be sacred and have territorial claims to based on an 1868 treaty. Shortly after that treaty was signed, gold was discovered in the region. U.S. Congress eventually passed a law taking over the land.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1980 that the seizure of the land was illegal and ordered the government to pay compensation. But the Sioux rejected the money and has continued to demand the return of the now public lands.

Are Native Americans still being oppressed? Are they a separate people from the rest of America? At what point in history do we let go and move on? A generation? 100 years? 200 years? A millennium? Never? To always hold grudges and claim victimhood for one’s situation today due to what happened to one’s ancestors, generations removed? And what of those Americans of “oppressed ancestry” who are currently experiencing great prosperity in today’s America? Who have benefited because of the course America took- good and bad, just and unjust- in its formulation?

In the case of Japanese-Americans receiving compensation for internment, that I can understand and am more sympathetic to, because those directly affected are still around.

With upwards of 70% unemployment on two Sioux reservations in South Dakota, Hot Air points out:

The report goes on for paragraph after paragraph about proposed plans based on the concept of systemic racism against indigenous people, but it does also manage to touch on one issue which is very real.

Anaya visited an Oglala Sioux reservation where the per capita income is around $7,000 a year, less than one-sixth of the national average, and life expectancy is about 50 years.

The two Sioux reservations in South Dakota – Rosebud and Pine Ridge – have some of the country’s poorest living conditions, including mass unemployment and the highest suicide rate in the western hemisphere with an epidemic of teenagers killing themselves.

“You can see they’re in a somewhat precarious situation in terms of their basic existence and the stability of their communities given that precarious land tenure situation. It’s not like they have large fisheries as a resource base to sustain them. In basic economic terms it’s a very difficult situation. You have upwards of 70% unemployment on the reservation and all kinds of social ills accompanying that. Very tough conditions,” he said.

Conditions on many of the reservations are indeed horrible. There are some exceptions, of course, among some in the Northwest with ocean access and others with casinos, but many of the tribal lands are simply desolate pools of poverty. If there is anything to the questions being raised by the UN, though, it is likely to be found less in some sort of nebulous cure for any sort of endemic racism than in the technicalities of a court of law.

The United States has indeed made many treaties with Native Americans spanning three centuries. Some were honored, (at least in part) but many were either ignored or crafted in patently unfair ways.

Everyone’s ancestors (let aside the possibility of immediate family members) at some point in time and in history has suffered injustices and oppression at the hands of some invading tribe or army, pillaging, raping, conquering. What is the practical solution to righting the wrongs of the past? The U.S. government is still around but the people involved on both sides of the equation are long gone. When do you cut your losses and say, “Time to move on” and quit blaming your circumstances on what happened centuries ago?

U.N. Budget and U.S. Portion

Did you know that American taxpayers, through “assessed” dues, account for 22% of the United Nation‘s (U.N.) regular operating budget, and 27% of a separate peacekeeping budget? For comparison, China pays just 3%. The U.N. “proposes” an operating budget in 2012-2013 of $5.5 billion, and that currently employs 10,307 people. In 2010, U.S. payments totaled $3.35 billion, of which $2.67 billion was dedicated to the 16 peacekeeping operations worldwide. Additionally, the U.S. provides voluntarily billions of dollars in contributions for various U.N. agencies. Here is just one example.

For What We Are Paying – The U.N. Works Web page

Below are the ten areas in which the U.N. works. Let’s see just what sources say about their efforts.    H/T to Andrew K. Dart for some article sources.

• Children – Here is information about how the U.N. ignores China’s “one child policy.” And here is just one example of how the U.N. spends money to spread its propaganda.
• Education – Here is an example of the work of United Nations Education Science Corporation Organization (UNESCO). And the United Nations Council is on a list of accrediting agencies are not recognized as college accreditors in the U.S. by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation or the U.S. Department of Education.
• Poverty – Here is an example of how the U.N. has provided food and shelter since 1950! And here is another example of how the U.N. combats poverty.
• Peace – The U.N. ironies just don’t stop. Here is an example of the U.N.’s “peace” activities.
• Health – U.N. “peacekeepers” from Bangladesh introduce cholera into Haiti.
• HIV/AIDS – Two new books are forcing the UN’s AIDS program to defend itself against claims that it put politics before health.
• Human Rights – The recent movement by the U.N. to recognize Palestine as a state proves human rights campaign to be a hoax. And here is information about the U.N.’s “human rights nightmare.”
• Climate Change – UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that humans are causing a climate crisis is a hoax.
• Emergencies – Here is an example of how the U.N. handles emergencies.
• Women – The U.N. has created something called U.N. Women. The combined budgets of the four existing women’s departments at the U.N. (which will be consolidated into U.N. Women) constitute about $220 million. Advocates for this new agency are demanding a budget of $1 billion.

Congressional Proposal

House Foreign Affairs Committee chairwoman Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) said it was important to make a stand for “the principles that we believe in.” She filed, and has 74 co-sponsors (all Republicans), the U.N. Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act (H.R. 2829), seeking to change the way the U.N. is funded, allowing the U.S. and other member states to fund only those activities and agencies deemed efficient and in the national interest. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she would recommend that President Obama veto the bill if it reaches his desk.

The committee’s senior Democrat, Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), said the “real agenda” behind the bill was to end U.S. participation in the U.N. and to “deal a fatal financial blow to the world body.”

Ros-Lehtinen cited repressive regimes’ membership on the Human Rights Council, a continuing anti-Israel bias, the elevation of states such as North Korea and Iran to leadership positions in various bodies, and various corruption scandals. “Every year, scores of member countries that contribute almost nothing to the U.N. vote together to pass the budget. Then they pass the costs on to big donors like the U.S.” BTW, Ros-Lehtinen is a Cuban exile, a staunch critic of repressive regimes, and is adamantly pro-life.

Before the committee met, the U.N. Foundation released a poll, saying that 64% of American citizens said they supported the U.S. “paying our dues to the U.N. on time and in full,” while 31% said they opposed this.

The Conclusion I Reach

If there has ever been a more arrogant, self-serving organization that wastes money and is fraudulent, is scandal-ridden, is consistently proven wrong, that has lost its focus, that is NO LONGER serving its original purpose, the hoax that is the U.N. has to be it.

BTW, I acknowledge that some of these sources are not current, but do you REALLY think the U.N. will clean up its act?

But that’s just my opinion.

Crossposted at RWNO, my personal web site.

Lost But Now He Is Found, Poor Drunk Uncle Omar Obama

Corruption and Lies seem to be a tradition in the Obama family.

Every family has a “Black Sheep,” someone who embarrasses the family by getting drunk and in trouble. It’s possible some of us have relatives who are illegal aliens on the public dole and have repeatedly defied deportation orders: thankfully, not many of us fit into that category. However, not many drunk relatives tell arresting officers to call the White House, presumably before they do something stupid.

“Omar” or Onyango Obama is the long lost brother Kenyan half-brother of President Obama’s father. The same Uncle Omar mentioned by Bill Ayers in the best selling autobiography “Dreams From My Father”, the life story of President Obama as portrayed by the unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers. Although he was mentioned in the book, our president is wishing his drunken uncle would behave himself or live in the shadows.

Drunk Uncle Omar Obama was driving drunk after leaving the Chicken Bone Saloon and barely missed hitting a squad car. When he was pulled over, he demanded that he be allowed to call the White House in a belligerent manner. The cops didn’t find the drunk name dropper all that impressive; a drunk illegal alien with a long rap sheet had run down and killed a 23 year old Milford, Mass. man, two weeks earlier.

Open-borders and Open Society advocates of George Soros philosophy consider drunken Obamas to be “harmless”. However, drunken Uncle Omar has defied two court orders to leave the country. He also owes thousands in back taxes and has a fraudulent Social Security Card and has evaded authorities for 50 years.

The court policy that allows the drunk criminals like Omar Obama to simply stay in the country is the “voluntary departure” system that allows illegal aliens to evade the police and deportation for years. Omar lost his first deportation hearing in 1989, he lost a second time with the Board of Immigration Appeals in 1992.

Uncle Omar joined the ranks of an estimated 400,000 to 700,000 illegal aliens who give the law a one finger salute and look upon disregarding America’s Immigration Laws as a right or entitlement.

Drunk Uncle Omar will now be represented by the same Ohio law firm that fought the deportation of President Obama’s indigent welfare collecting aunt, Aunt Zeituni Onyango. Zeituni landed in the US in 2000 on a temporary visa and sought asylum in 2004. She was denied asylum and refused to leave. She hid with relatives in public housing for years before winning a second bid to stay in the US, a country she seems to despise.

Both parties play games with the immigration issues to win votes from the ever growing illegal demographic. Yes, illegals seem to be able to vote, have driver licenses, and Social Security numbers. Especially those who are here illegally and are related to our president.

Aunt Zeituni Onyango, Ward Of The State, Perpetual Welfare Recipient, President's Aunt, Former Illegal Alien

President Bush told Immigration and Customs Enforcement to stop deportations until after the 2008 election, when Aunt Zeituni was caught and identified as an Illegal Alien in October of 2008. Thank you former President Bush.

The question remains, how many more of these Obama welfare recipients are we going to be asked to support for the rest of their natural lives in a state of permanent Welfare and Public Housing. Our former inept and clueless President, Jimmy Carter, only had one embarrassing relative, Brother Billy, the one who inspired Billy Beer and became a cultural icon and a standing joke. At least, Billy was humorous; Zeituni and Omar are far from humorous.

We might remember the case of Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer, a Palestinian bomb builder by trade; he immigrated to the US illegally (considered legal by Napolitano and Obama) in 1996 through Canada. He claimed political asylum from alleged persecution by Israelis, was released on a $5,000 bond posted by another illegal, then skipped his asylum hearing. His lawyer dropped his asylum claim and a federal judge issued a laughable “voluntary departure order”. Obviously, illegal aliens who enter the country illegally or not interested in leaving the country voluntarily. He later joined a New York City group that was formulating a bombing plot and was arrested after his roommate tipped off local police. And once again we have another example of the DHS being on the ball and defending our country.

“Always remember. Never forget.” Words, just words.

A citizen is rebuffed by a judge for trying to unravel the nefarious facts concerning the president’s dubious Social Security Number.

Unfortunately for the plaintiff, today is not her lucky day.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA____________________________________)ORLY TAITZ, ))Plaintiff, ))v. )) Civil Action No. 11-402 (RCL)MICHAEL ASTRUE, )COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL )SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, ))Defendant. )____________________________________)MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [21]. Upon considerationof defendant’s motion, plaintiff’s opposition [31], the reply thereto [32], the entire record herein,and the applicable law, the Court will grant summary judgment in defendant’s favor for thereasons set forth below.
I.

BACKGROUND
Ever persistent, plaintiff has once again come before this Court in an effort to uncover“the biggest cover up in the history of this nation.” Pl.’s Opp’n to Mot. for Summ. J. 20 [31]. Shebelieves that the President is using a “fraudulently obtained” social security number and that theSocial Security Administration—among other agencies—is involved in a scheme to “cover[] upsocial security fraud, IRS fraud, elections fraud and possibly treason” committed by thePresident.
Id.
at 5–6, 13. As her numerous filings with the Court demonstrate, plaintiff will stopat nothing to get to the bottom of this alleged conspiracy. Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is nother lucky day.

Barack Obama has already sued the state of Arizona.

Claiming “preeminent authority” to write the laws on immigration, the Justice Department filed suit to block Arizona from enacting its own.

“Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves.”

The challenge, although not unexpected, appeared certain to reignite a searing national debate on immigration and send the midterm election season into fraught new territory.

“The American people must wonder whether the Obama administration is really committed to securing the border when it sues a state that is simply trying to protect its people by enforcing immigration law,” Republican Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl, both of Arizona, said in a joint statement criticizing the lawsuit.

Mexico joined Obama in suing Arizona

Mexico on Tuesday asked a federal court in Arizona to declare the state’s new immigration law unconstitutional, arguing that the country’s own interests and its citizens’ rights are at stake.

Lawyers for Mexico on Tuesday submitted a legal brief in support of one of five lawsuits challenging the law. The law will take effect July 29 unless implementation is blocked by a court.

Not only did Obama sue Arizona, he turned Arizona over to the UN

There can be few sights more humiliating for the American people than that of a US president kowtowing to a foreign leader or to supranational institutions. Continental Europeans are used to this sort of thing after decades of dominance by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, and have grudgingly accepted over time the gradual and undemocratic erosion of their freedoms. But most Americans fiercely defend their national sovereignty, and find the idea of giving international organisations a say over their laws and lives completely unacceptable.

Now Obama’s policy of suing states in America has become a truly international movement.

16 Countries Side with Justice Department in Lawsuit Against Alabama

Sixteen countries, including Mexico, have filed briefs supporting the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Alabama’s recently passed immigration enforcement law. In June, the Alabama legislature passed a bill that many believe is tougher than Arizona’s SB1070 bill that also drew a lawsuit from federal prosecutors last year. According to the attorney who filed the briefs, the 16 countries “want one immigration law and not 50.”

In addition to the Justice Department, the Roman Catholic Church, ACLU, and National Immigration Law Center have all filed suits against the state.

“Mexico has an interest in protecting its citizens and ensuring that their ethnicity is not used as basis for state-sanctioned acts of bias and discrimination,” the brief filed by the 16 countries said.

Mexico doesn’t even border Georgia. What’s next? Will Mexico sue any state that insists on a driver’s license or other ID?

What other American President has joined other countries in suing his own states? WTF?

Please tell me again how Obama is not anti-American.

I don’t buy it.

New York/Shanghai

When the US lost its AAA Credit Rating, China slapped their lap dog in the face and told Obama,

the “good old days” of borrowing are over.

“The U.S. government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone,” China’s official Xinhua news agency said in a commentary.

China, america’s largest creditor feels Washington has only itself to blame for its plight and renewed calls for a new global reserve currency.

After a week that saw $2.5 trillion dollars evaporate in global markets, international investors are having deep concerns about an impending recession. The profligate policies of the US and the Euro Zone are adding to the building crisis and neither the us or The EU are willing to cut spending to stop the ever increasing pressures adding to the crisis.

The credit rating downgrade is thought to adversely affect a global dimension, the Euro crisis is only adding fuel to the fire with no relief valve in place.

The political positioning and posturing is seen as pathetic moves to secure political futures in the US rather than addressing the immediate problems. China sighted military and social welfare expenditures as the source of the US “debt addiction”.

“China, the largest creditor of the world’s sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China’s dollar assets,”

It urged the United States to cut military and social welfare expenditure. Further credit downgrades would very likely undermine the world economic recovery and trigger new rounds of financial turmoil.

“International supervision over the issue of U.S. dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country,” Xinhua said.

We should be prepared for international supervision of our debt. China owns us and they don’t want to lose their investments. Our president will be more than willing to hand over the reins of power, there are rockstars to entertain and barbecues to host. It is called priorities, Obama has an election to think about.

Let Him Hang

In 1994, a sixteen year old girl was brutally raped and murdered by having her head smashed in with a thirty to forty pound piece of asphalt, her killer is finally due to be executed tonight in Texas; President Obama is pleading for this monster’s life by asking the Supreme Court to grant a stay of execution, alleging the killer, another illegal alien, wasn’t granted consular access to the Mexican Embassy. In this new world of Obama Law, Terrorists are to be granted the rights of an American citizen and illegal aliens have more rights than an American citizen.

Humberto Leal is the 38 year old illegal alien that has Obama acting like an ACLU lawyer. Obama wants a stay so that congress can consider a law that will require court reviews of cases of condemned foreign nationals who did not receive advice from their consulates. President Obama maintains that the case will affect not only foreign nationals, but Americans arrested in foreign countries. Prosectors insist the president’s entreaties are an attempt to delay the execution and that the future legislation is bound to fail.

Leal left the nude sixteen year old’s body impaled with a stick and the head caved in; he arrived home bloody and told his brother he had killed a girl. The Mexican government maintains that if Leal had been given access to consular assistance, he would have never been convicted or received the death penalty, so powerful is their influence with the American government.

Leal moved to the U.S. as a toddler with his family from Monterey. His appeals contend that under an international treaty that Texas didn’t sign, that police didn’t advise him that he could have had access to consular assistance and that would have strengthened his defense.

The argument is not new, Texas is very proficient at executing foreign nationals or illegal aliens who commit heinous crimes in Texas.

Leal’s appeals have focused on legislation introduced in the Senate by D. Patrick Leahy, that would impose the rules of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations regarding the arrest of foreign nationals, ensuring court reviews for condemned foreign nationals to determine if consular assistance would have made a significant difference in their verdicts.

In the tradition of the Skippy Gates affair that ended in a beer summit, the Obama Administration took the unusual step of interfering in a state murder case by asking the high court to halt an execution.

Sandra Babcock, a Northwestern University law professor and one of Leal’s lawyers:

“The legislation would give Mr. Leal an opportunity to demonstrate that with consular assistance, he likely would not have been convicted, let alone sentenced to death.”

Even though the savage rape and murder happened two decades ago, the Mexican government contends that the execution should be delayed to give them time to review the case. They also implied a veiled threat by intimating that the execution could imperil Americans detained abroad.

Legislation similar to that required by Leal has failed twice in congressional sessions. The Texas Attorney General’s office cites those failures:

“legislative relief was not likely to be forthcoming.”

Stephen Hoffman, assistant attorney general:

“At this point, it is clear that Leal is attempting to avoid execution by overwhelming the state and the courts with as many meritless lawsuits and motions as humanly possible.”

Prosecutors said Sauceda was drunk and high on cocaine the night she was killed, and that Leal offered to take her home. Witnesses said Leal drove off with her around 5 a.m. Some partygoers found her brutalized nude body later that morning and called police.

There was evidence Sauceda had been bitten, strangled and raped. A large stick that had a screw protruding from it was left in her body.

A witness testified that Leal’s brother appeared at the party, agitated that Leal had arrived home bloody and saying he had killed a girl.

In his first statement to police, Leal said Sauceda bolted from his car and ran off. After he was told his brother had given detectives a statement, he changed his story, saying Sauceda attacked him and fell to the ground after he fought back. He said when he couldn’t wake her and saw bubbles in her nose, he got scared and went home.

Testifying during his trial’s punishment phase, Leal acknowledged being intoxicated and doing wrong but said he wasn’t responsible for what prosecutors alleged. A psychiatrist testified Leal suffered from alcohol dependence and pathological intoxication.

Sauceda’s mother, Rachel Terry, told San Antonio television station KSAT her family already had suffered too long.

“A technicality doesn’t give anyone a right to come to this country and rape, torture and murder anyone,” she said.

George Bush, in 2005, agreed with an International Court ruling that Leal and 50 other Mexican nationals were entitled to new U.S. hearings if their consular rights were violated. The Supreme Court later overruled Bush.

President Obama should find less despicable characters to promote placing the sovereignty of US courts under international control. Texas will hopefully be able to maintain its conservative principles despite an ever increasing illegal alien invasion from Mexico that will surely be influencing the political situation in the years to come. Placing the Texas and the other state court systems under the review of national court systems is a method of control that Obama has been advocating as a means to weaken America and to bring America under the influence and control of the UN and international courts so that sovereignty and power can be slowly diminished.

Let’s suppose there was someone who was so stupid, that he would borrow money from a neighborhood leg breaker and then give the money away to everyone in the neighborhood, including the leg breaker. Would you recommend that person be institutionalized? Welcome to Obama’s Theater Of The Absurd.

A surd in mathematics is that which cannot be expressed in quantifiable numbers or finite terms. The concept of the surd, becomes an irrational philosophy rather than merely ridiculous; yet, it is more of a pervasive attitude, rather than a definable system of thought. This is the basis upon which the Obama Theater Of the Absurd and The Obama Theory of Economics are constructed.

To better understand Obama’s apparent madness in dealing with the absurd, we must first study concepts that sane rational men rarely consider.

His economic theory denotes nihilism, an extreme radical philosophy or attitude that rejects all traditional and moral values by destroying all prevailing systems in a revolutionary force of action. Dadaism evolved from the nihilism and came to mean anti-rules or total freedom from the restraint of traditions and rational thought. Dadaism was eventually subsumed by surrealism, but its effects have been evident in art and literature up to this time. No one expected to ever see its presence in American politics, especially in the highest office.

The surrealist attempts to express the workings of the unconscious mind and synthesize them with the conscious mind. He wants to delve into an area that is liberated from logic and reason; thus in this state beyond realism, a new knowledge of enlightenment awaits to be discovered.

Obama is providing hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid to countries he is borrowing from, according a recent report by Congress’s research arm.

Obama, in his best effort to redistribute our wealth to the rest of the world, is trying to bankrupt the country as fast as possible. This is the Obamanation of surrealism that you may have thought was difficult to grasp, don’t worry any longer, you are living in that surreal world. The first line is the amount of money that each country is receiving from the US in the form of welfare.

China ($27.2 million), Brazil ($25 million), Russia ($71.5 million), India ($126.6 million), Mexico ($316.7 million) and Egypt ($255.7 million).

China is the largest holder of U.S. Treasury bonds with $1.1 trillion as of March, according to the Treasury Department. Brazil held $193.5 billion, Russia had $127.8 billion, India owned $39.8 billion, Mexico held $28.1 billion and Egypt had $15.3 billion.

The foreign aid to these countries is earmarked for a variety of causes, such as HIV/AIDs prevention, combating weapons of mass destruction, fighting tuberculosis, and counterterrorism efforts.

Now you may see the links from Nihilism, to Dadaism, to Surrealism.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., requested the report and blew the whistle.

“Borrowing money from countries who receive our aid is dangerous for both the donor and recipient, if countries can afford to buy our debt, perhaps they can afford to fund assistance programs on their own.

Even a spark of elementary intelligence can be appreciated.

“At the same time, when we borrow from countries we are supposedly helping to develop, we put off hard budget choices here at home. The status quo creates co-dependency and financial risk at home and abroad.”

Obama in a true test of Nihilism is insisting that we raise the debt ceiling after reaching our $14.3 trillion debt limit and increase taxes to avoid defaulting. Moody’s in a purely political gesture is saying we will have our credit rating downgraded, a move that will only bankrupt us sooner.

It may just be me or perhaps all of you are lost and bewildered in the surreal world of the Obamanation or the Theater of The Absurd, but this is beyond absurdity.

The State Department is refusing to comment and who can blame them. This is no longer acceptable, we are putting our great-grandchildren into insurmountable debt because we elected a Marxist fool who wants to redistribute America’s wealth around the world. This must stop immediately.

Wounded Aboard The USS Liberty After Being Attacked By Israel

It is painful to say, but so many of us don’t understand the difference between ‘Intelligence’ and ‘Mis-Information’. This article will illustrate several factors that escape our consciousness of thought; unfortunately, most of us are victims of mis-information. I served in counterterrorism and counterintelligence for 27 years. Most people think because they have served in the military or in the government they actually have a true grasp of what is actually happening; nothing could be further from the truth!

Sadly, most of us will go to the grave, without ever really knowing the truth. Every government of the world is involved in intelligence and mis-information. Here is a simplified version of who is responsible for what:

Intelligence

1. Private Contractors
2. Intelligence agencies
3. Military personnel
4. Private Individuals

Mis-Information

1. Mis-Informed Politicians
2. News Media
3. Military Personnel
4. Foreign Governments and Diplomats
5. General Public
6. Religious Institutions
7. Terrorist Groups
8. Law Enforcement Agencies
9. Government Agencies
10. International Agencies (United Nations, etc.)

Within the United States Government, the majority of people who actually have a grasp of what and why things are actually happening are appointed, contracted, and are government employees. Elected officials are often the least informed. If a Senator or a Commanding Officer makes a statement concerning official policy, the reality is they often don’t have a clue.

Presently, because of our president’s favoritism toward the Palestinians at the expense of Israeli security, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has been positioned in the forefront. I worked in intelligence and counterintelligence for both countries, with apologies to no one, but if you will analyze these next few paragraphs, you may begin to question what you think you know and get a glimpse of what really happened or is happening. You need an open mind and the ability to admit misconceptions.

We shall start at the beginning of Israel, 1947-48. I will provide background and commentary on the key players of that era: you will be free to draw your own conclusions after reading the article.

Britain and the United States needed a base of operations for naval, air, and ground forces in the Middle East for strategic and economic reasons. The United States State Department was instrumental in proposing and lobbying for the proposed Jewish State of Israel before the newly formed United Nations.

The United States and Great Britain were supplying armaments and supplies to the Arab states: while Britain tried to prevent the importation of armaments to Israel.

Britain and the United States wrote an agreement to help the new born Jewish State become established and another agreement that would divide it after failing to defend itself against numerically superior Arab militias. The United States would take the Northern area and Britain would have the Southern section. Thus the U.S. and Britain were not overly concerned with defensible borders or a large land mass for Israel, the area was sufficient for their strategic and economic plans; they didn’t expect Israel to last over a couple of weeks.

The Arab nations also felt Israel would fall within a week or less. The Arab leaders felt they would be able to tap into the economies for vast sums of money from the U.S. and G.B..

To some of you, this may be upsetting; since, you were probably taught differently, but I will point out some verifying factors.

The Georgetown University Center for studies of peace in the Middle East…..Who paid for it?

Who heads the educational system for all of our State department officials?

With every group that is sponsored by our government on studies of the Middle East who teaches and heads up those divisions?

How many translators does the United States military have enlisted who were trained to speak Arabic?

And why are we depending on Iraqis to serve as translators in Iraq?

Does our Military undergo any type of training as to the customs and mentality of the Arabic speaking people? Very little to none! I could write a book in explanation of why all of this is the way it is; however, this is not my objective.

The USS Liberty incident.

The public information available and the naiveté of the amateur historian is laughable and the willingness of the public to believe what they read or have been told defies logic.

Following the USS Liberty incident, Israeli intelligence asked the United States if they wanted the pilot radio logs and the intercepted radio transmissions that were intercepted and recorded to be made public to help clarify the issue.

The reaction by the U.S. was to sweep everything under the carpet.

It is reasonable to ask why.

Perhaps, there was intelligence being transmitted to the Egyptians. Israel was indeed in a desperate struggle for survival and had no alternative but to stop the source of that intelligence to the Egyptians.

Now, we must ask, when in the history of the U.S. was an attack on an American Military vessel swept under the rug?

Why would the U.S. government take such an action?

When in the history of the United States did diplomatic relations become stronger after an attack on a military vessel?

We have only two allies who have paid back their debts to the U.S., Israel and Taiwan; yet, they have been repeatedly stabbed in the back through the diplomatic process by Liberal administrations.

Israel, has two great enemies, the Zionist and the Liberal; they have been Israel’s greatest enemies from the beginning.

To survive this system of Intelligence and Mis-Intelligence, it is imperative to start over with new people who have vision and objectives. It is written ” the people who have no vision will perish!”

Shimon Perez and Obama are from the same philosophical family; they see history as an empty slate to be manipulated for political advantage. They want to remain in power, even if it tears the very core of their countries apart and destroys the foundations of those countries.

Our politicians have no vision and we will perish as a nation if we cannot produce a complete change of government and establish a government that serves the people and not a political agenda: ” the people that have no vision will perish”.

The history of the race, and each individual’s experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.

Mark Twain

Never try to estimate the heat in a raging fire until you have actually been caught in one and never under estimate the ability of you enemy as long as he is still alive!

Captain John W. Wells USN

Liberals and Communists can only be trusted when they have no office and even then, from no less than 3 feet away!

J.V. Hoffman

Epilogue: The attack on the USS Liberty has been obfuscated by our government, that is obvious. If some of you are dissatisfied with the facts in this post, feel free to dispute them with more precise facts, but as Chill has cautioned us, don’t rely on emotion, that is a fool’s technique. Verify your facts and present them in an organized and precise debate. I am merely the messenger, who can present this episode with fewer errors; other than that, this tragedy has bothered me for a long time and I just want the truth. Right now, this is the most plausible scenario I have heard, but I am open to reason and logic. Emotional attacks, heavy breathing, drooling, and name calling; the methods we see on Liberal blogs is demeaning and wont be tolerated.

Ready on the right, ready on the left, commence firing!

Some Of The Damage Sustained By The USS Liberty

Democratic Presidential Candidate Senator Barack Obama speaks in Mitchell, South Dakota. Rick Wilking -Reuters

A good read and lengthy piece in the New Yorker called, The Consequentialist.

We now have a concise description of the Obama Doctrine, defined by an unnamed senior official in the president’s own administration: “Leading from behind“:

That’s not a slogan designed for signs at the 2012 Democratic Convention, but it does accurately describe the balance that Obama now seems to be finding. It’s a different definition of leadership than America is known for, and it comes from two unspoken beliefs: that the relative power of the U.S. is declining, as rivals like China rise, and that the U.S. is reviled in many parts of the world. Pursuing our interests and spreading our ideals thus requires stealth and modesty as well as military strength. “It’s so at odds with the John Wayne expectation for what America is in the world,” the adviser said. “But it’s necessary for shepherding us through this phase.”

Kori Schake:

Ask any young Marine what “leading from behind” means. They probably won’t know; they’ve only ever seen leaders out front, sharing in the greatest risks because that is the responsibility of command. To the extent they will even understand what you’re asking, those Marines will probably say that a leader in the back of the formation is a coward, because they are making their Marines take risks the commander will not expose himself to.

Which is pretty close to what President Obama has done in regard to the demands for democracy in the middle east. He allows others to take risks for which he then claims credit

Runner up slogans would be, “Having it both ways”, “Straddling the fence”, and “Voting present”.

Nile Gardiner and Kori Schake write responses to Ryan Lizza’s New Yorker article which sums up the origins and shaping of Obama’s foreign policy.

He writes:

This spring, Obama officials often expressed impatience with questions about theory or about the elusive quest for an Obama doctrine. One senior Administration official reminded me what the former British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan said when asked what was likely to set the course of his government: “Events, dear boy, events.”

Obama has emphasized bureaucratic efficiency over ideology, and approached foreign policy as if it were case law, deciding his response to every threat or crisis on its own merits. “When you start applying blanket policies on the complexities of the current world situation, you’re going to get yourself into trouble,” he said in a recent interview with NBC News.

Obama’s reluctance to articulate a grand synthesis has alienated both realists and idealists. “On issues like whether to intervene in Libya there’s really not a compromise and consensus,” Slaughter said. “You can’t be a little bit realist and a little bit democratic when deciding whether or not to stop a massacre.”

Gardiner:

The Obama White House must be the first US presidency in living memory that actually prides itself on following rather than leading on the world stage.

~~~

On the Middle East as a whole, the Obama administration barely has a coherent big picture strategy, hardly an advertisement for what it calls its “smart power” approach. In reality the Obama doctrine represents little more than the humbling of a superpower, and the stunning abdication of US leadership in an increasingly dangerous world. As I noted previously, America badly needs another Reagan-style revolution, not only to rebuild its economic might, but also to restore its standing in the world.

Schake:

What makes the article so funny is the pompous self-regard of the administration officials and the complete lack of appreciation for how woefully inadequate their performance has been in meeting these challenges. They are “not cursed with self-awareness,” to quote Annie Savoy from the movie Bull Durham. Secretary of State Clinton compares herself as a collegiate Vietnam war protester to the young Egyptians who brought down the Mubarak government. Both Tom Donilon and Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes explain the importance of reducing involvement in the middle east because our strategic interests lie in Asia … as the administration engaged in combat operations in Libya. A presidential memo is cited as wisely anticipating the middle eastern revolutions, except that the memo calls for tailored country by country programs that the administration’s policies clearly did not have. The author even unwittingly adds to the humor, saying “Obama’s instinct was to try to have it both ways.”

America is lacking leadership in the world because America is lacking a leader capable and willing to lead.

July 27: President Barack Obama does a behind the back move with the ball after he welcomes the 2008 WNBA champion Detroit Shock on the South Lawn of The White House in Washington. Alex Brandon-AP

The notion that the Arab League’s endorsement of the “no fly” zone is somehow vindication for a desperately stupid foreign policy gives one pause for cause. Are our current crop of politicos and advisors unaware there is little love lost between Gaddafi and the Arab League? When you see Arab leaders, crying for western military might in Islamic countries, doesn’t anyone become the least bit suspicious?

I posit the theory that having the west do the Arab League’s dirty work by removing and/or killing Gaddafi, is a win win for them, and a lose lose for the west. And make no mind, killing Gaddafi is most certainly circulating in the background dialogue of the western governments involved. Note of this comes to light when UK’s Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir David Richards, denies Gaddafi as a target is legal.

He replied: “Absolutely not. It is not allowed under the UN resolution and it is not something I want to discuss any further.”

Since the general is the Prime Minister’s principal military adviser, you might have thought that was the end of it.

Not so. Downing Street “sources” are now telling journalists that the general is, simply, wrong. They add that David Cameron himself will give the final word on the matter in the House of Commons shortly. Headlines involving words like “slapped down” and “humiliation” cannot be far behind.

~~~

In the House of Commons, Mr Cameron was challenged on targeting individual Libyan leaders.
He said: “Targets must be fully consistent with the UN Security Council resolution. We therefore choose our targets to stop attacks on civilians and to implement the no-fly zone.”

The PM’s official spokesman later repeatedly refused to endorse the general’s position. He said: “All I can do is tell you what the government policy is and it is what the Foreign Secretary said this morning and what the prime minister said in the House.”

Just to make sure we got the message, a Government source later insisted that Gen Richards was “wrong” to claim that the dictator could not be targeted. The source said: “What he said is wrong. The resolution could allow it, under certain circumstances.”

Read more at this Telegraph article.

Benedict Brogan over at the Telegragh is also painfully aware of the mixed messages, as well as scratching his head over why the US Secy of Defense warnings are so easily dismissed. There is, indeed, a rift between a publicly stated “end goal”, and the implementation of that no fly mission, which includes bombing of Gaddafi compounds.

One stellar reason to suspect an quasi-legal assassination of a truly bad guy may be the risk of leaving Libya in a far worse state because of no clear “exit stategy”. Despite Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, and British Defense Secretary Liam Fox’s insistence that regime change is not the goal, a long term division of Libya , sitting on Africa’s biggest oil reserves, via a seemingly endless no fly strategy, would have negative global economic impact in oil speculation commodies.

Nor do any of the western or Euro military powers have much of an appetite for an elongated no fly zone – if for nothing else but economic risk and expense. A down and dirty assassination, while Gaddafi happens to be sitting in a legit “no-fly” target. conveniently speeds along the process.

This suits the Arab League just fine since Gaddafi has long been at cross purposes with the League. Not only has he often threatened withdrawal from that body, in 2005, he described the them as a “mockery”, saying “there is no respect for any resolution from the Arab League”. At the same time, the Saudi’s asked the Libyan diplomat to exit the country, and withdrew their own from Libya.

Adding to it is Gaddafi’s self perception as a king, bestowing upon himself the title “King of Kings” in August 2008.

On 29 August 2008, Gaddafi held a public ceremony in Benghazi in which he was self-handed the title “King of Kings of Africa” with over 200 African traditional rulers and kings as part of a grassroots effort to encourage African heads of state and government to join with Gaddafi toward a greater political cohesion. This was followed on 1 February 2009 by a coronation ceremony in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia simultaneous with the 53rd African Union Summit, at which he was elected head of the African Union for the year.

The title of “King of Kings” was reiterated by Gaddafi at the 2009 Arab League Summit, at which he claimed to be the King of Kings, “leader of the Arab leaders” and “imam of the Muslims” in his criticism of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia prior to storming out of the summit.

Ironically, at the Arab Summit one year before, Gaddafi spoke passionately about how the US was systematically removing Arab leaders, and warned his fellow members they all could be next… a statement met with laughter.

Considering today’s events, and the betrayal of Gaddafi by the Arab League, one can’t but help but notice the madman had a certain amount of prescience on the subject.

In 2007, Gaddafi was again at cross purposes with the Arab League when he suggested that Arab nations not interfere in the power struggle between Hamas and Fatah.

March 2010, the rift was made yet more noticable when multiple influential Arab League nations boycotted the summit hosted by Libya that year… including Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt, and the sultan of Oman.

Gaddafi and six other Libyan officials were accused of involvement in the disappearance of Sadr and two companions, leading to criticism by the Shiite leadership, compounding the Saudi Sunni’s disapproval of Gaddafi. Making friends among the League was not Gaddafi’s forte.

Even with the ailing relationship, why would the Arab League toss one of their own “under the bus”? The logical answer is because the replacement is a better option. Which brings us to those supposed Libyan democracy freedom lovers which a Security Council has no compunction to endorse… enough to build in flexible “by all means necessary” language to stop Gaddafi from not only violating air space, but demands that “..immediate establishment of a cease-fire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians” be obeyed.

So what we do know of the Libyan rebels? Not much. Pajamas Media’s John Rosenthal notes that Sarkozy recognized a “…National Council as the “legitimate representative of the Libyan people.” But only seven of these 31 “council” members are identified. Only a tad more information is provided in the referenced le Figaro article referenced, linked here with translation from French to English (For you French fluent FA’ers, here’s the original French version)

In the building, everybody knows that this unexpected recognition gives a major boost to the National Council, a body meant to be the lead on 17 February and the rebel army, which in fact is still struggling to find a reality. Only the presence of a president, chosen by consensus, now face and voice of the revolution, gives a little thick on the Council. Moustapha Abduljalil seems unanimous. This former judge and former justice minister of Qaddafi has built a reputation for opposing March 2, 2010 by publicly accusing the Guide in these jails to detain political prisoners under false pretenses. The output, extremely rare in the reign of Colonel Gaddafi, immediately earned its author a strong admiration, as his reputation for probity. For the rest, as conceded Mouftah Faraj, a French teacher, “we do not know much.”

With a H/T to suek, FA regular, a FOX news article reports of North Africa’s al Qaeda wing, espressing solidarity with the Libyan rebels.

BTW, a bit more on that Libyan “national council” leader, Moustapha Abduljalil , found in Wikipedia under the spelling of Mustafa Abdul Jalil. The unsubstantiated Wiki reports are already glowing about the former Justice Minister, saying:

He has been noted in news media for his stance against various human rights violations in that country.

No links to those media reports… ?. And in fact, Wiki notes he’s been mighty busy giving interviews after his resignation:

On 21 February 2011, during the 2011 Libyan protests, the privately-owned Quryna newspaper reported that he had resigned over “the excessive use of violence against government protesters.”[7]

On 22 February 2011, he stated in an interview with Swedish newspaper Expressen that Gadaffi had personally ordered the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.[8]

On 24 February 2011 he told Al Jazeera that the responsibility for the infection of 400 children with HIV lay totally with Gaddafi’s regime.[9]

On 24 February 2011 he presided over a meeting of opposition politicians, former military officers and tribal leaders the eastern city of Al Bayda.[10]

On 26 February 2011, it was reported that he would lead a Benghazi-based proposed interim government.[11]

Hummmm… the Lockerbie bombing was in 1988. The Libyan HIV experiement was 1998. Why has this man been remaining silent for over 23 years? Where’s he been? Why haven’t we heard of this long “pro democracy” voice coming out of Libya?

Count me skeptical about all this “humanitarian” glow…. I’d like to see something tangible from the past on this.

About the best we can get is from an interview the rebel leader gave to The Daily Beast, and appearing on their site on March 14th.

He hits all the right soaring rhetoric that the west, who’s military he wants to help his rebels assume power, would want to hear.

Should you prevail, what’s your vision of the new Libya?
We are striving for a new democratic, civil Libya, led by democratic and civil government that focuses on economic development, building civil society and civil institutions and a multi-party system. A Libya that respects all international agreements, is good to its neighbors, stands against terrorism, with respect for all religions and ethnicities.

How would you the transition to a democratic Libya?
We will be seeking a smooth peaceful transition, with a drafting of a new constitution that will lead the country to a free and fair legislative and parliamentarian elections as well as presidential election. No member of the transitional council will have the right to run for any of these elections. There will be peaceful conference of governance according to elections, under the observation of the international organizations.

Well, we all have to expect that they talk the talk. But what really popped out for me was when the DB asked about al Qaeda in Libya, to which Mustafa replied:

There is no al Qaeda in Libya. Gaddafi is using this as a scare tactic to create fear and distrust between us the international community, but the world learned a long time ago not to trust or believe Gaddafi.

Really? In a nation that is 97% Sunni Muslim, not one AQ supporter? Isn’t that sorta like Ahmadinejad, telling us that Iran has no homosexuals? And lest we forget, there were large numbers of Libyans, crossing the Syrian border to enter Iraq to fight the US coalition forces there. No AQ (or supporters), my arse.

So why would a pro western style democracy Muslim leader gain the support of the North African faction of al Qaeda?

Quite simply, he wouldn’t.

Moreover, if this man was so appalled at Gaddafi atrocities, why did he only now resign? Why has he not spoken out sooner and attempted to make change… even by defecting and using the ICC? Did he not have enough evidence to act as a witness for crimes against humanity?

Yup… count me majorly skeptical.

I suggest that it’s a very good possibility that this new “humanitarian” is all words, little substance and a good mouthpiece to present to a gullible west, desperate to see genuine reform in the ME. I would very much like to be proven wrong, but until then, I don’t believe a word of it all.

Personally, I’m not under the impression that the Arab League will throw over Gaddafi for pro western democracy forces. And I’m also extremely leery about what we do not know of this “council” of future transition leaders. Who are they, and what is their agenda?

What I do know is that the Arab League wins either way. If the west kills Libyan Muslims while enforcing the no fly zone, it’s a plus to their traditional rhetoric. Those accusations have already begun. They also can get rid of a leader with questionable loyalty, and still blame the meddling west for overstepping the bounds and assassinating Gaddafi. The icing on the cake is that the Arab League will have great influence with the upcoming transitional “council” since – as everyone loves to point out… including the UN – the Arab League was instrumental in getting the rebels the military aid from the international community for victory.

The question is, what have the western nations been duped into? How have they convinced western leaders to use military might to support a rebellion and civil war in a Muslim country, all without knowing the players in that rebellion?

I think I’m more on the side of Andrew Bostom at Human Events…. no non-Muslim forces are required here.

Mordechai Nisan, writing over a decade ago, observed that already by the mid-1990s the world’s then over 50 Islamic nations had amassed considerable economic and military power — both of which have further increased during the subsequent 10+ years:

The Muslim umma [global community] was by the mid-1990s numbering approximately one billion believers, possessing over 50 Muslim states, and in control of a little less than a third of United Nations membership; moreover, possessing more than 50 per cent of known crude oil resources and a combined military arsenal of conventional and non-conventional weaponry second only to the combined Western bloc of states. The international balance-of-power could not in the aftermath of the end of the Cold War ignore the Muslim civilization and its awesome pretensions to playing a dominant role in global affairs.

I maintain that the “Libyan freedom fighters” ongoing needs for military assistance be provided exclusively by Muslim nations from the now 57 member Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

Of the same opine is Andrew McCarthy over at NRO… one of the few to buck the “humanitarian” BS argument.

Yup… I second those motions.