..........................................................................................................................................................................
DR. JAMES D. MANNING - YOU MUST SEE THIS NOW
..........................................................................................................................................................................
Genesis Chapter 12 בְּרֵאשִׁית
..........................................................................................................................................................................
U.S. official resigns over Afghan war
Foreign Service officer and former Marine captain says he no longer knows why his nation is fighting
..........................................................................................................................................................................
First Daughters Not Vaccinated Against H1N1
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
MARC FABER - "TOTAL COLLAPSE"
..........................................................................................................................................................................
MARC FABER - ECONOMICS
..........................................................................................................................................................................
"EU" HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
October the Deadliest Month for US Soldiers in Afghanistan - What is Obama's real agenda?
Appeal filed in Obama eligibility argument
'Court cannot refuse to hear a case because it prefers not'
Republicans 'as dangerous to this country as the Democrat Party is'
Divulges Ann Dunham was 'very young and very single' at birth of U.S. president
8:38 pm Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
 Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Jr. |
Her comments further undermine the official story as told by Barack Obama – that Dunham was married to his father, Barack Obama Sr., at the time of birth.
The remarks were made by Michelle Obama during a July 2008 round table at the University of Missouri. Obama was responding to criticism of her husband's presidential campaign speeches about fatherhood and faith-based initiatives.
Michelle Obama explained her husband understands the struggles of low-income families.
"He understands them because he was raised by strong women. He is the product of two great women in his life. His mother and his grandmother," she said.
"Barack saw his mother, who was very young and very single when she had him, and he saw her work hard to complete her education and try to raise he and his sister," Michelle Obama said.
Her remarks about Dunham being "very single" when she gave birth to Barack Obama were also quoted last year on a blog posted at MSNBC.com. The remarks, however, contradicted previous claims President Obama made about the circumstances of his birth.
.........................................................................................................................................................................
*************************************************************************************************
..........................................................................................................................................................................
PAYBACK TIME FROM RUSSIA - THIS IS A STINGER MISSILE SUPPLIED BY AMERICA BEING USED BY AN AFGHAN REBEL TO SHOOT DOWN RUSSIAN AIRCRAFT ... THE RUSSIANS NEVER FORGET, SO GOES RUSSIA - SO GOES THE WORLD...
.......................................................................................
FROM JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
WorldNetDaily Exclusive
Deja vu! Russians
arm Cuba's military
Plans include sensitive electronic
eavesdropping 90 miles from U.S.
.......................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
Madoff Billionaire Found Dead in Palm Beach Swimming Pool
Jeffry Picower 'Cleared' $7 Billion in Ponzi Scheme; Faced Civil and Possible Criminal Charges
.......................................................................................................................................
Obama's charm offensive for radical rulers abandons Israel to Iranian threat
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis
May 23, 2009
The new US president's dramatic global policy steps have easily dwarfed the knotty Israeli-Palestinian peace issue handed down from one US president to the next over decades. Barack Obama's outstretched hand to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Iran's best friend in the Americas, on April 17, at the summit of American leaders in Port of Prince, made the talk surrounding Special Middle East Envoy George Mitchell's mission to Jerusalem and Ramallah this week sound eerily like voices from the past.
After talking to Mitchell, Israel's prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minister Ehud Barak tried the usual bromides: They protested that Jerusalem's ties with Washington and Jerusalem were as strong as ever and they would work together toward an agreed solution for the Palestinian problem.
But those words were lost in the black Iranian cloud hanging over the relations.
Barack Obama has set his sights and heart on friendship with the rulers of the Islamic Republic of Iran and their radical allies. The name and policies of the occupant of the prime minister's office in Jerusalem do not matter - any more than Tehran's determination to complete its nuclear weapons program in defiance of the world, or even its first A-bomb test in a year or two, for which intelligence sources report Tehran is already getting set.
Obama's Washington believes America can live with a nuclear-armed Iran – a decision probably taken first under the Bush presidency. But Israel cannot, and may have no option but to part ways with the Obama administration on this point. As a nuclear power, Iran will be able to bend Jerusalem to the will of its enemies, make it unconditionally give Syria the Golan plus extra pieces of territory, tamely accept a Hamas-dominated Palestinian West Bank louring over its heartland and let the Lebanese Hizballah terrorize Galilee in the north at will. All three would make hay under Iran's nuclear shield, while Tehran lords it over the region in the role of regional power conferred by Obama's grace and favor.
In no time, Israel would be stripped of most of its defenses.
Israel is not the only nervous country in the region. But Hosni Mubarak of Egypt is the only Middle East leader brave enough to stick his neck out, albeit with Saudi backing, and stand up to the Iranian peril, direct and through Hizballah.
He has also outspokenly criticized Washington's courtship of the revolutionary Islamic republic.
Cairo's Al Ahram Saturday, April 18, accused Iran, Syria, Qatar, Hizballah, Hamas, al Jazeera TV of a conspiracy to overthrow Egyptian government.
But the US president is not daunted by the radicalism or enmity of his new friends or the loss of old ones. At the Summit of All Americas, Obama greeted Hugo Chavez 24 hours after the Venezuelan ruler said: "The United States Empire is on its way down and will be finished in the near future, inshallah!"
Using the Muslim blessing to underline the wish for America's downfall was no bar to the smile and handshake; neither was Venezuela's recent severance of its ties with Israel for no provocation or its willingness to host a delegation of Hizballah (internationally branded a terrorist organization) in Caracas.
What is relevant to Obama is Hugo Chavez's role as co-architect of the joint Russian-Iranian campaign to displace American influence in the southern hemisphere. The US president has opted for winning America's enemies over with smiles and embraces rather than punishing them like George W. Bush.
Obama continues to woo Bashar Assad apace despite his blunt refusal to loosen his strategic ties with Tehran or stop supporting the Lebanese Shiite group [with arms] because Hizballah is dedicated to fighting Israel, - as he is quoted as saying in the pro-Hizballah Lebanese publication al Akhbar on April 17.
For the first time in years, the administration this week sent a high-ranking delegation to Syria's independence day celebrations at Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel, headed by Jeffrey Feltman, former ambassador and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs.
The thaw in relations has gone so far that some Washington wags are calling Assad's capital "Syria on the Potomac."
The American storm besetting the Middle East leaves Israel's most vital interests way behind. The condition Netanyahu put before Mitchell for progress in peacemaking - that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state, which was instantly rejected by Palestinian Authority leaders – aroused scant attention in Washington or anywhere else.
As Netanyahu will find when he meets Obama in Washington early next month, Israel is no longer a prime factor in US global policy, because America has fundamentally reshuffled its Middle East allegiances and alliances. Even Tzipi Livni at the helm in Jerusalem would not divert Obama from his détente with Ahmadinejad, Assad and Chavez.
To gain points with his new friends, Obama's White House is not above nudging Israel to please them. This week, his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told Jewish leaders whom he met in Washington that if Israel wants America's help for thwarting Iran's nuclear program, it must first start evacuating West Bank settlements.
This was of course cynical claptrap.
Even if every single settlement were to be removed and Israel lined up with Obama's quest for a Palestinian state alongside Israel, the US president would not drop Tehran or help Israel strike Iran's nuclear facilities. He has already ceded Tehran's uranium enrichment program (and therefore its drive for nuclear arms), and would forcefully oppose any Israeli military action. US defense secretary Robert Gates indicated as much this week when he went to almost absurd lengths to play down the Iranian nuclear threat and Israel's ability to handle it.
So what options are left to Israel at this juncture?
1. To bow under the Obama tempest until it blows over in keeping with the old proverb which says that trees bowing in the wind remain standing. This would entail going along with US acceptance of Iran as a nuclear power. The question is will Israel's trees still be standing when the storm has passed and, if so, in what strategic environment?
2. To follow the example set by Likud's first prime minister Menahem Begin in 1981. He stood up to Ronald Reagan's fierce objections and sent the Israeli Air force to smash the Iraqi nuclear reactor before it was operational. Saddam Hussein never rebuilt the facility. By following in Begin's footsteps before it is too late, Netanyahu would change the rules of the game regionally and globally.
(The London Times reported from Jerusalem Saturday that the Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government. Two civil defense drills have been scheduled to prepare the population for missiles that could fall on any part of the country without warning.)
3. Israel could go for a more modest target, one of Iran's faithful surrogates – Syria or Hizballah – to warn Washington that a larger operation is in store for their boss. If the Gaza offensive against Hamas last January was meant to send this message, it failed. Hamas is still the dominant Palestinian power and Barack Obama was not swayed from forging ahead with his policies of rapprochement with Iran and other radical world leaders.
*************************************************************************************************The entire 974 generations (Hagiga 14.) which are `Erev Rav which are the souls from the world of chaos, G-d transplants them every generation, and they are the bold-faced of the generation. Our Sages said that in the period of "messiah's footsteps" impudence will become great... and the `erev rav will return to be the shepherds of Israel" - Safra ditz'ni`utha, chapter 1, beginning with the words "They were not watching" (3).
"You should know that there are five kinds of `erev rav. The first kind are argumentative and libelous people; the second kind are those who pursue passion and fornication; the third kind are those who are deceitful, who pretend to be righteous but whose hearts are not whole. The fourth kind are those who pursue honor in order to make a name for themselves; the fifth kind are those who pursue money... and the argumentative kind are the equivalent of all of them: they are called `Amalekim, and the son of Dovid will not come until they have passed out of this world, for it is of them that we recite timche et zekher `Amalek - "You shall erase the memory of Amalek" - Adderet Eliyahu, commentary on Deut. 1:1 (325), his words being based on Zohar 1:25, 27; 3:125: and see the Gaon's commentary on Tikkunei Zohar 97, pp. 86,91.
**********************************************************************************
.................................................................................................
Mission Abandoned – by Alan W. Dowd
Posted By Alan W. Dowd On October 27, 2009 @ 12:06 am In FrontPage | 2 Comments
“I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm’s way,” President Barack Obama intoned [1] this week. “I won’t risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary.” Had those words been uttered seven or eight months ago, they would sound more sensible than they do today. But they seem increasingly less so the longer the president reviews his own review of the strategy in Afghanistan.
FROM "CNIN"
The Israeli & Iranian time bomb is TICKING
***********************************************************************************************
UK's Prince Harry is not Prince Charles' son. Prince Harry is the son of Princess Diana and James Hewitt.
***********************************************************************************************
From an IT guy: "I'm a Bank of America IT worker and can tell you there is a large event going down this weekend. They're implementing what they're calling The October Release."
***********************************************************************************************
Afghanistan is in trouble. It is filled with ineffective governing officials and powerless police officers, many of whom moonlight as criminals. Government services are in disarray. Reconstruction projects have proven unhelpful. Unemployment is widespread. Heroin production is booming.
Most concerning to many Afghans, the radical Taliban is staging a relentless comeback. NATO forces are simply too sparse to hold these terrorists in check.
Don’t expect things to improve anytime soon—thanks to a botched national election in August. Operations against the jihadists will have to take somewhat of a backseat to efforts at patching up the wounded government.
President Obama called the election “an important step forward in the Afghan people’s effort to take control of their future, even as violent extremists are trying to stand in their way.” It’s a nice thought—but anyone who still thinks democracy is the solution for Afghanistan should look closer.
Before the election, the Taliban threatened violence against voters; they launched rocket attacks and a suicide bombing that killed seven; they pulled one candidate from his car and shot him—the 13th confirmed political killing since spring. The intimidation worked: Voter turnout was estimated at 20 to 30 percent, and was especially poor in rural areas, which make up four fifths of the country. On election day, 73 more attacks were carried out, killing 20 to 30 people. Several voters had their inked fingers chopped off.
The Afghan Elections Complaints Commission (ECC) received over 2,600 allegations of fraud, including ballot box stuffing, bullying of voters and lack of access to polls, particularly for women. “Fictitious polling booths were set up,” reported Tim McGirk from Kabul, “and in some places, vote riggers were so brazen they did not even bother to remove the individual ballots from the booklets in which they were printed before marking them” (Time, September 10). “The problem is a basic lack of rule of law,” the co-director of the Afghan Analysts Network told Times Online. “In eight years we haven’t established a culture where you follow rules” (September 11). The ECC threw out ballots from 83 polling stations and called for a recount at over 2,500 others.
Additional complications arose from the fact that most of the country is tribal, with local elders who have immense power over the people they are responsible for. “We have tribal agreement,” a laborer in an east Afghani village explained. “When tribal elders request anything we cannot avoid it.” Another individual said that the elders had simply voted for the people. “They helped us and spared all the women the trouble of going and voting,” he said. At many polling stations, 95 percent of the votes went for one candidate.
Two thirds of the population—including 85 percent of the women—are too illiterate to have even read the names on the ballot.
At the time of this writing, Karzai had enough of a lead to avoid a runoff against Abdullah. But UN officials say they believe if the fraudulent votes are pitched, that wouldn’t be the case. Problem is, another vote would take months to stage—months of instability that would open the door for even greater political turbulence.
In fact, the electoral mess is playing right into the Taliban’s hands. “A stream of revelations about systematic cheating during last month’s vote has given the Taliban fresh ammunition in their propaganda campaign to portray President Hamid Karzai’s administration as hopelessly corrupt,” reported the Washington Post. “Infighting among U.S., UN and European diplomats over whether to accept the results with Karzai the winner or force a new round of voting has also fed the Taliban line that the government in Kabul is merely a puppet of foreign powers” (September 21).
And at the end of the process, the president will either be Karzai or Abdullah. Each man would have to reward the supportive regional warlord strongmen with whom they wheeled and dealed. That means giving them positions in the government or otherwise legitimizing their rule over regions of the country.
The bottom line is, democracy is an impossible fit in Afghanistan. The nation’s history of ethno-regional warlordism is simply too strong.
“Ironically,” wrote Stratfor on August 21, “attempts to impose a democratic political system in Afghanistan appear to be undermining the U.S. counterinsurgency strategy.”
In September, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, said it was “premature to make judgments” on whether President Obama’s efforts there are successful, “because we’re only at the initial stages of that policy.”
You’re welcome to keep waiting to make judgments. We’ll stick with what we’ve said from the beginning. America is under a curse. The pride in its power is broken. That is why, as Gerald Flurry has written, “we cannot win the war against terrorism.” •
************************************************************************************************
