True Friends of Israel

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

The Emergency Committee for Israel has come out with a new ad that hits President Obama for (what else?) his stand on Israel.

ECI Thanks Israel's True Friends



Hat Tip Israel Matzav

The 3 NOs vs. The 5 Conditions

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

Heads of state from eight Arab countries attended a summit conference in Khartoum, Sudan held from August 29 to September 1, 1967. The meeting formulated the Arab consensus that formed the basis of the policies of most Arab states participating in the conflict with Israel until the Yom Kippur War of 1973. The resolution adopted September 1, 1967 called for the continued struggle against Israel, the creation of a fund to assist the economics of Egypt and Jordan, the lifting of an Arab oil boycott against the West and a new agreement to end the war in Yemen.

The text of the agreement reads as follows:

1. The conference has affirmed the unity of Arab ranks, the unity of joint action and the need for coordination and for the elimination of all differences. The Kings, Presidents and representatives of the other Arab Heads of State at the conference have affirmed their countries' stand by an implementation of the Arab Solidarity Charter which was signed at the third Arab summit conference in Casablanca.
2. The conference has agreed on the need to consolidate all efforts to eliminate the effects of the aggression on the basis that the occupied lands are Arab lands and that the burden of regaining these lands falls on all the Arab States.
3. The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.
4. \The conference of Arab Ministers of Finance, Economy and Oil recommended that suspension of oil pumping be used as a weapon in the battle. However, after thoroughly studying the matter, the summit conference has come to the conclusion that the oil pumping can itself be used as a positive weapon, since oil is an Arab resource which can be used to strengthen the economy of the Arab States directly affected by the aggression, so that these States will be able to stand firm in the battle. The conference has, therefore, decided to resume the pumping of oil, since oil is a positive Arab resource that can be used in the service of Arab goals. It can contribute to the efforts to enable those Arab States which were exposed to the aggression and thereby lost economic resources to stand firm and eliminate the effects of the aggression. The oil-producing States have, in fact, participated in the efforts to enable the States affected by the aggression to stand firm in the face of any economic pressure.
5. The participants in the conference have approved the plan proposed by Kuwait to set up an Arab Economic and Social Development Fund on the basis of the recommendation of the Baghdad conference of Arab Ministers of Finance, Economy and Oil.
6. The participants have agreed on the need to adopt the necessary measures to strengthen military preparation to face all eventualities.
7. The conference has decided to expedite the elimination of foreign bases in the Arab States.

Source Wikipedia

It is best remembered for the 3 NOs:

NO peace with Israel!
NO recognition of Israel!
NO negotiations with Israel!

At Khartoum, Nasser was promised badly needed economic assistancein exchange for his pledge to stop destabilizing the region and end his propaganda attacks against the Persian Gulf monarchies. This meant that Egypt, along with the other Arab states, would focus on consolidating power at home and on pressing economic problems rather than on revolutionary schemes to unify the Arabs. After 1967 Arab regimes increasingly viewed Israel and the Palestinian Arab problem not as the key to revolutionary change of the Arab state system, but in terms of how they affected their domestic political stability.

Contrast those NOs with the conditions that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has set down to bring peace to the region.

In a speech before the Knesset’s plenum in its special Herzl Day session, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu laid down five conditions for a peace treaty with the Palestinian Authority Arabs. These are:

1. The Palestinians must recognize Israel as the Jewish nation’s state.
2. The treaty must be an end to the conflict.
3. The Arab refugee problem must be solved outside of Israel’s borders.
4. A Palestinian state will have to be demilitarized and a peace treaty must safeguard Israel’s security.
5. The settlement blocs will remain within the state of Israel and Jerusalem will remain its united capital.

Full Story

This has been his position from the beginning of his Administration with the last statement a slap in the face to the EU and President Obama.  There is no way, no condition, no amount of bribery or coercion that could force Israel into giving up any grain of sand of Jerusalem.  It would take an army to force the Jews out of it.



There should be just one more condition:The immediate return of Gilad Shalit, safe, in good health, and unharmed!

Kellyanne Conway Pollster: Kellyanne Conway Polls on Health Care (Video)

Kellyanne Conway is a pollster who has declared Obama "is not a Prom King." She speaks of Obama's heath care plans and his reign as president. See video below.

Ms. Conway has appeared on various FOXNews panels for years, as well as the mainstream media. She is the president and CEO of The Polling Company, Inc., which is solely female-owned and headquartered in Washington, D.C.

The following interview of Conway, by Fred Thompson, is a very interesting look at Barack Obama's policies, and how he is polling.




Kellyanne Conway Pollster (Video)

U.S. Attorney Larry Brown and CNCS Displeasure with Walpin

By Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

One of the issues concerning Gerald Walpin's firing that is not being discussed much, is the displeasure of acting U.S. Attorney General Lawrence Brown with Walpin. Another not being discussed at all, is why the CNCS board turned hostile toward an investigation CNCS had tasked Walpin with, via Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Lawrence G. Brown

Acting Attorney General Lawrence G. Brown sent a letter to the "Integrity and Ethics" Counsel of Inspectors General, asking that Walpin be scrutinized for an ethics breach in the investigation of Kevin Johnson, Sacrament0 Mayor, and of course, former NBA "star."

At this point, the investigation had been completed. Here are Brown's concerns about Walpin:

1) Walpin was not authorized to recommend Suspension and Debarment for Kevin Johnson and Dana Gonzalez - overstepping his authority.

2) Walpin's report and his conclusions seemed overstated and not reflective of the investigation

3) Walpin released information to the press that the case was being referred to the U.S. Attorney's office for a decision on whether to prosecute criminally or civilly, before notifying Brown's office. Brown asserts that he learned about it through the Sacramento Bee and not through proper channels.

4) Walpin withheld information from the U.S. Attorney's office.

5) Walpin did not achieve a "settlement agreement" quickly enough to allow Johnson to be released from the Suspension upon becoming Sacramento's Mayor. The Sacramento Bee was calling for a quick resolution because it was believed that the City of Sacramento could not receive federal funds if their Mayor was under suspension.

Brown wrote the letter to the Ethics Committee on April 29, 2009. You can read Brown's letter here.

Gerald Walpin responded with an 18 page letter [undated from what I can see]. You can read Walpin's letter here. Because he answers every accusation by Brown in detail, I cannot easily put it down in a bulleted list. I've outlined what I see as the pertinent points dispelling Brown's claims.

This is important because after Walpin was fired, reports were everywhere that he mishandled the investigation of Kevin Johnson? But did he? We have an acting U.S. Attorney General making the charge. How does Walpin fight back against that? Maybe his 18-page response "to the complaint" shows another side, and in fact, it does - if the media would just report it.

Here are snippets of Walpin's counter:

About overstepping his authority: Walpin said it is his job to forward an investigation to the U.S. Attorney when he believes it may merit criminal or civil prosecution. He explained to Brown that the difference between "grant fraud" and the "contract fraud" that U.S. Attorney's offices are more familiar with, is an important difference. Walpin said I:

...quoted one of "Mr. Brown's ultimate supervisors, the Deputy Attorney General in emphasizing the importance of prosecuting "grant fraud," and support of "an energized and empowered IG community working in tandem with...Federal prosecutors" to achieve that end.

Walpin pointed out his procedure for submitting the case to the U.S. Attorney General was the same procedure his predecessors used:

I am informed that it has been the custom in my office, before I commenced as IG, to send a referral with such a covering letter. Aside from personally communicating the seriousness of the OIG’s decision to make the referral, it serves as an Executive Summary of the referral, which here was 33 pages long. Most United States Attorney’s offices to which I have forwarded referrals with such an “executive summary” cover letter, always containing my explanation of why I believed the conduct warranted prosecutorial action, have expressed appreciation for such explanations and summaries. Indeed, when I, together with Supervisory Special Agent (“SSA”) Morales and Special Agent Wingers, met with Mr. Brown and several of his fellow Assistant U.S. Attorneys, on August 25, 2008, they complimented us on our referral and the personal interest we took in it by traveling to California to meet with them.

Walpin responded that Mr. Brown's view that an IG has no further role is wrong:

The Senate Report, explaining the purpose of the Inspector General Act of 1978, specifies that the IG has the duty to “[a]ssume a leadership role in any and all activities which he deems useful to promote economy and efficiency in the administration of programs and operations or prevent and detect . . .waste in such programs and operations.” S. Rep. No. 95-1071, at 27 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2676, 2702 (emphasis added).

Mr. Brown’s misunderstanding of the proper role of the IG is further shown in his
assertion that the IG is the “investigative arm of the CNCS Agency.” The IG is statutorily made independent of the CNCS Agency, with responsibility to oversee and criticize what CNCS is doing if the IG believes that the agency is thereby wasting Federal funds -- including the waste of the right to recovery Federal funds from a grantee that misused Federal funds granted to it.

Of Brown's assertion that the IG "is not intended to act as an advocate for suspension or debarment," Walpin responds:

...the procedure exists to protect all Federal funds by denying new funds to an individual or entity who/which has shown by uncovered facts not to be trustworthy or responsible in the prior use of Federal funds....For the Suspension and Debarment procedure to work to protect Federal funds, the investigative agency, upon determining that the facts it uncovered warrant suspension, must make a recommendation of suspension to the agency's Suspension and Debarment official. That is exactly what OIG did here.

Walpin's response on When and How Mr. Brown Learned of the Suspension Recommendation: Brown not only knew "long before" he says he knew, but "he and his office assisted OIG in its suspension recommendation by submitting a letter, requested by the Suspension and Debarment Official as needed before that official would issue the Suspension order.

Mr. Brown’s assertion of lack of advance knowledge and surprise at the suspension
procedure is clearly without factual basis.

There's far more on Brown's alleged surprise notification in the letter on pages 4-6.

Walpin's response on The Propriety of the OIG Press Release: The Sacramento Bee, on September 24, 2008 and it's morning edition on September 25th, reported "its own discovery of the names of suspended parties" from a list that the General Services Administration (GSA) maintains. He says the OIG issued no press release on that date, as Brown accused.

After The Bee's initial article was published, Walpin says the OIG issued a press release on September 25, 2008. In that press release, Walpin says he "largely repeated the grounds for suspension set out in the Notice of Suspension, issued by the Corporation's Suspension and Debarment Official and publicly posted on the GSA website.

It's important to note that before the idea of firing Gerald Walpin became the thing to do, the corporation, CNCS, issued the Notice of Suspension of Kevin Johnson. Perhaps CSNC didn't know that their soon-to-be-President Obama would not be happy with their actions.

Walpin responds to The OIG Investigators' Alleged Withholding of Information From the U.S. Attorney's Office: Brown said that Walpin held back a letter from an elementary school principal (Herinder Pegany) where the principal claimed that "St. HOPE AmeriCorps members had performed after-school tutoring at his school." Walton said the letter actually said that the principal "knew that members were assigned to his school to conduct tutoring," but "he did not know how many members were assigned to his school...because he did not directly supervise the members." The point, said Walton, was not whether or not AmeriCorps members had been assigned to the school, but if in fact, they had "performed such tutoring." That fact was not established through the Principal's testimony because he said he had "no personal knowledge" of such tutoring.

Simply put, OIG does not provide to U.S. Attorney’s office all documents prepared as memoranda of work done during an investigation (and OIG’s Special Agents so informed Mr. Brown when they met with him), but rather all documents which provide usable evidence, whether probative of guilt or innocence. Particularly given the lack of personal knowledge provided by Mr. Pegany, I fully understand, as I previously told Mr. Brown, the good faith judgment call made by these two experienced Agents not to include that memorandum in the referral to the United States Attorney’s office. That decision certainly does not warrant the charge against them of any intent to conceal.

Brown asserted that Walpin "misled" his office through a heading in OIG's referral letter, titled "AmeriCorps Members Performed No Tutoring." Walpin says below that heading was the explanation that substantiated interviews with staff.

Brown's assertion that in the August 25th meeting he and his staff "expressed [their] concern that the Walpin's report conclusions "seemed overstated...."

What Mr. Brown and his colleagues said was that they would be studying all of the files that OIG had provided to see if criminal intent and knowledge could be established for a criminal prosecution; they never expressed any concern concerning the existence of a viable civil case.

Regarding the charge that Walpin failed to conduct an audit:

OIG then responded that an audit was neither feasible nor needed, and is not used in many investigations. OIG explained that the allegations in this case involved misuse of AmeriCorps members, and not to missing or misused funds, making an audit not warranted.

However, on September 11th, Assistant U.S. Attorney Newman asked OIG to prepare a report on St. HOPE's financial records to determine the extent of St. HOPE's liability to return any or all of the grant funds that it had received." At this time, a subpoena was served on October 1, 2008 on St. HOPE. As late as January 22, 2009 only partial information had been provided. Repeated letters to St. HOPE and St. HOPE's attorney on non-compliance were issued.

Yet, the U.S. Attorney's office took no action to enforce the subpoena.

On February 4, 2009, additional documents were provided, and AUSA Newman advised that OIG auditors "should base their report on the documents" available, "even though a big void in the required documents remained." Missing were:

“Source documentation for costs charged to the grant; complete general ledger (only a partial ledger was produced); reconciliation of costs charged on the Financial Status report to the general ledger, including match funds; explanation of the methodology for allocating costs between match and federal share; [and] identification of the accounting system used.” In other words, there were gaping
holes in the documentation. But to demonstrate OIG’s cooperation with the USA’s office, OIG's audit staff prepared its report.

The conclusion:

The report’s conclusion was straight forward:

None of the costs charged to the grant are allowable, primarily because the
AmeriCorps members’ service activities were not consistent with the grant
requirements.

Contrary to . . . grant requirements and prohibitions, we found that St. HOPE AmeriCorps members performed little, if any, of the service agreed to and stipulated under the grant. Instead, they were used for non-authorized and prohibited activities, including services that displaced St. HOPE employees, a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 12637 Non duplication and Non displacement. We also found instances where AmeriCorps living allowances and benefits were unlawfully used to supplement the salaries of St. HOPE employees. Another grant requirement is that all allowable cost must be adequately documented. . . . . We found an almost total lack of documentation to support St. HOPE’s performance of the grant, despite our repeated requests to St. HOPE for grant-related documents.

After the U.S. Attorney General's office asked for an audit, and after a subpoena was largely ignored by Kevin Johnson, the Attorney General's office refused to enforce the subpoena. Note also that Executive Director of Kevin Johnson's St. HOPE Academy, Rick Maya, resigned due to misconduct by Kevin Johnson. Maya claims that another board member deleted Kevin Johnson's emails during the federal investigation that Walpin was conducting. This article details 9 reasons for Maya's resignation. It's astounding. I hope you'll read it.

At the time of Walpin's firing he had also completed an investigation into City University of New York (CUNY), AmeriCorps largest program. Walpin said neither the CUNY report or the Kevin Johnson-St. HOPE Academy investigation were "well-received by top CNCS management."

So what changed at CNCS, because after all, the investigation came at the request of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger:

A Sacramento-based nonprofit run by former NBA star and Sacramento mayoral candidate Kevin Johnson is facing scrutiny after a teenager complained of inappropriate touching by Johnson.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office asked the federal government to investigate because the nonprofit, St. HOPE, has received money in the past from the federal AmeriCorps program.

One thing changed? Barack Obama was elected President and we know he has big plans for AmeriCorp. How can you achieve the huge expansion he has in mind, with millions, probably billions in federal funds funneled to them, with a-Gerald-Walpin reporting some nasty theft of taxpayer dollars?

A new report:
Schwarzenegger Involvement: Kevin Johnson Investigation by Gerald Walpin


Related and Background:

Michelle Malkin has news of The First Lady's coming speech at CNCS

Gerald Walpin Firing Update: AmeriCorp $75 Million Musused: Michelle Obama Hires?

Kevin Johnson - St. Hope Scandal: Rick Maya Resigns, Gerald Walpin Investigates

White House Charges Walpin Confused, Disoriented, Disruptive

Who is Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson - Walpin-Johnson Investigation

Flight 93 Blogburst: False AP report: Obama did NOT say that Iran must respect voters' choice

by Findalis

Obama's comments were mushy, yes, but at least he said the most important thing, according to AP:

He said it's up to Iran to determine its own leaders but that the country must respect voters' choice.

Why then have reputable people continued to pass harsh judgment? And why would AP paraphrase what would have been Obama’s key statement?

Turns out Obama said no such thing. What he actually said is that the VOICES of the Iranian people should be heard and respected, not their votes:

And particularly to the youth of Iran, I want them to know that we in the United States do not want to make any decisions for the Iranians, but we do believe that the Iranian people and their voices should be heard and respected.

This is consistent with the rest of Obama's remarks. He never said a word about respecting votes. Obama did mention "the democratic process," but far from saying anything about this process having to meet any standards of integrity, he instead implied strongly that he will accept whatever result the "process" followed by the Mullahs produces:

We will continue to pursue a tough, direct dialogue between our two countries, and we’ll see where it takes us. But even as we do so, I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we’ve seen on the television over the last few days.

The only operative concerns that he mentions are for: "free speech, the ability of people to peacefully dissent." When he talks about the "democratic process" going forward, all he urges is that the process be peaceful and that dissent be allowed. He says nothing about the process being honest:

...there appears to be a sense on the part of people who were so hopeful and so engaged and so committed to democracy who now feel betrayed. And I think it’s important that, moving forward, whatever investigations take place are done in a way that is not resulting in bloodshed and is not resulting in people being stifled in expressing their views.

It is no accident that Obama ended with the statement that AP paraphrased so egregiously (equating his call for bloodless suppression with a demand for legitimate elections). This was his theme throughout. He views the honesty of Iran's democratic process as something to be judged by the mullahs, who he clearly accepts to be the sovereign power, regardless of the merits of competing claims.

AP covers its tracks, just like they did with the Flight 93 memorial

AP's fraudulent report about Obama demanding respect for voters' choice was the primary print report on Obama's comments. Now that it has already misled millions of people, AP has covered its tracks by filing an update that overwrites the errant statement. This is what AP does when it gets caught putting out misinformation. To avoid issuing a correction, they flush the misleading story down the memory hole by using the same url for a completely different story. (Google only finds AP's original article still posted at Fox News.)

AP did the same thing last year after it was taken to task for failing to check the most basic facts in a story about the controversy over possible Islamic symbolism in the Flight 93 memorial. Ramesh Santanam reported a number of conflicting factual assertions, like the 44 blocks:

Opponents also claim there is a plan to have 44 glass blocks, for the 40 victims and four hijackers, in the design.

"That's an absolute, unequivocal fabrication that is being portrayed as fact," said Edward Felt's brother, Gordon Felt, president of Families of Flight 93. "It's misleading and helps drive the conspiracy theory."

When it was pointed out that Santanam could have found the four extra blocks just by opening up the design drawings and counting, AP quickly filed a completely different story (about fundraising for the memorial), under the same url.

It's not that there is anything inherently wrong with AP using subject feeds that automatically update with their latest offering. It is that AP is systematically using this system to dodge corrections. This is actually their official policy:

For corrections on live, online stories, we overwrite the previous version. We send separate corrective stories online as warranted.

Except AP virtually never issue corrective stories, for the simple reason that AP has no established correction procedure. They just do the overwrite thing and say "too bad."

Well this time the overwrite thing is not good enough.

Demand a corrective story about AP's false paraphrase of Obama's words

Associated Press obviously understands the importance of Obama saying that Iran must respect voters' choice or they wouldn't have bothered to pretend that he said it when he didn't. They don't just fail to mention Obama's glaring omission on this crucial point, but actually tell the public via false paraphrase that he did say what he glaringly omitted. This cannot stand. Faced with our new president's key statement on a historic crisis, AP reports a photo negative of what Obama actually said.

There may be no established procedure for AP corrections, but anyone can still send a pre-written email to AP CEO Tom Curley, Chairman Burl Osborne, Editor Kathleen Carroll, the reporters who worked on the story (the egregious Jennifer Loven, along with Anne Gearan and Robert Burns), plus a smattering of other AP editors and bureaucrats. Who knows. There may even be a limit to how disingenuous some of these people are willing to be.


To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.

Dear President Obama

By Findalis

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

Lou Pritchet is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.

Mr. Pritchett confirmed that he was indeed the author of the much-circulated "open letter." “I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the ‘experts’ has had over 500,000 hits.

Doing The Right Thing.

by Findalis

I do hope that President Obama is learning a bit about true diplomacy. His decision to first attend the Durban II conference in Geneva was the wrong one. It sent the message to the world that the United states does not support its friends and allies.

For whatever reason, his decision to now boycott the Durban II conference is being seen as one of leadership and courage, taken that he has been trying to make amends with the Muslim world. In this case, he may have lost some clout with the Muslim world, but as gain a lot of respect with Europeans.

Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said Thursday that Italy will not attend the Durban II conference scheduled for April in Geneva because of “aggressive and anti-Semitic statements” in resolutions being prepared for the summit on racism. Israel, Canada and the United States already have said they will not attend.

Foreign Minister Frattini also announced a postponement of a trip to Iran due to anti-Israeli and anti-American remarks by Iranian leaders.

Like the U.S., Frattini said that the decision to boycott Durban II could be reconsidered if the draft resolutions against Israel are changed. Several pre-conference motions have singled out Israel for alleged racism and have accepted Palestinian Authority recommendations supporting its claim that Arab descendants of former Israeli Arabs have the right to immigrate and live in Israel.

The committee preparing resolutions for Durban II also rejected a suggestion for condemnation of anyone denying the Holocaust.

Israel has called on all European Union countries to follow Canada and the U.S. and boycott the conference, a follow-up to the first conference held in Durban, South Africa in 2001. The U.S. walked out of the parley because of harsh anti-Israel resolutions that compared Zionism with racism.

Holland has also put the Durban II planners on notice that it also will join the boycott if the resolutions are not modified.

Italy has now stated that they will not attend. They are in very good company. Three nations are boycotting the Durban II conference. Italy is joining the ranks of Canada, Israel and the United States. Holland will be joining their ranks soon.

Now will France, Germany and Great Britain join in the boycott? Will they have the moral courage to do the right thing? Or will they give in to the pressure from their Muslim communities, and join in the anti-Semitic rhetoric that this conference has become? I hope that they will join the groundswell and boycott the Durban II conference.

What a Difference!

By Findalis

Notice the difference in the way George W. Bush and Barack Hussein Obama have been received by the US Marine Corps.

Hat tip to The Real Revo

Different Presidents, A Different Corps



View at YouTube

What a difference!

Semper Fi!

The Lesson At The Dome

By Findalis


He ascended to the Dome of the Capital, dressed in the holy suit and tie.
Upon arrival the assembled chapter of the Congress, the Holy Justices of the land, the members of the anointed Cabinet and guests from near and far, the Anointed One, Wearer of the Mantle of Power, spoke:

I speak not to the assemblage here, but to the nation as a whole,
I know of your pain, I have heard your cries of anguish,
The child whose college dreams are shattered,
The business that is going under,
The job that is gone.
I will fix that all.

This Recession is not My fault, it was the doing of others,
It was others that destroyed our Health Care, Schools and Jobs.
But I have heard your cries, and I will repair the damage.
We will have less, work more, and struggle harder,
But we will prevail.

I have foreseen all this.
The law that I just created was a start, there will be many more like it.
There will be jobs, I promise you that.
There will be more money in your hand,
This 1st of April, on that.

I will bring to all the blessings of Health with no cost to you,
I will bring to all the blessings of college, that wonderful place, to your children, with no cost to you,
I will bring to you the blessings of Wealth, with no cost to you,

Through Me we will cure all the problems that we face.
I know where the answers lie,
Not in the former wizards of the past,
but in the new wizards of technology that will be green and good.
New wizards that will banish the foreign oil demon back to the gates of Hell,
New wizards who when given the right amount of funds, will solve all of our energy needs and clean the environment too.

But we cannot wait, we must forge ahead,
We must spread the wealth around to all young and old.
I will even balance the budget, by 2015, so it is told.

I will sit with our enemies and listen to them,
Will make the radicals of Islam kneel before all,
I will bring peace to the Israelis, Palestinians too,
Have sent My envoy Mitchell to bring them the truth too.

I have signed the order,
We torture no more,
And the prison of Gitmo will be gone for ever more.
We will deal with the prisoners like the criminals they are,
In Our courts and with juries, and I know they will walk.

For through Me, All things are possible.
For through Me, All things will be made whole.
For through Me, Our economy will recover.
For I am the Hope and the Change.
I will bring us all to the Land of Plenty.

All through the speech, Pelosi the Loud, kept rising in joy like a yo-yo. She guided the assembled in their cheers.

After the speech the media hacks, gushed glowing terms over each word the Anointed One spoke.
They called it brilliant, enlightened and bold.
They clamored over each other, trying to be the first to praise Him.
That is until a small voice said:

Wait just a minute!
He tells you that He will do all these things.
Balancing the budget, Health Care, Education, Jobs and Wealth.
And without tax increases, just spend more He said.
And if that doesn't work, we will just spend more again.

You cannot keep spending like there is no tomorrow.
Sooner or later the money will run out.
You have to raise taxes, to cover your expenses.

This Emperor we have, is telling us lies.
We cannot do all this, yet He will try.
He will spend so much money, that there will be none left,
For the daily running of this nations defense.

The hacks looked around to see who had spoke, in tones that weren't glowing of their Anointed One.
They saw to their horror a brave man in the corner.
It was none other than the Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal the Prophet.

Jindal the prophet, spoke to them of responsibility,
Of how this nation needs to start producing its own goods again.
Of how this nation needs to spend less and save more.
Of how this nation didn't negotiate with our foes.

The hacks just smiled and shooed The Prophet away.
Then they returned to the glow of the Anointed One.

But many in the nation heard the words of Jindal the Prophet.
They looked to each other and nodded in agreement.
Just wait Anointed One, in just 4 years.
This prophet will be singing our praises.

For the Anointed One's star is starting to descend.
From ratings of 80% now to just 59%.
He may not last at this high rate. Especially if the economy tanks.

Hope may come to the land,
Not without hardship.
Change will come, just let it be soon.

Durban II draft document getting worse.

by Findalis


I told you so President Obama. The second Durban Conference on bigotry and racism will be worse than the first.

Not only is Israel the only nation singled out for attack, but the idea of Free Speech will be destroyed too when they meet in April and force the world to accept as International Law that any criticism of Islam is a crime.

The draft document for the United Nations anti-racism conference, dubbed Durban II, is problematic both for Israel and western democracies in general, Ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva Roni Leshno Yaar told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

Besides issues relating to Israel, the draft has problematic paragraphs regarding free speech, defamation of religion and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, he said.

"At this stage it is not possible to say what in the text would improve, if at all. In fact I expect the text to get only worse on all issues which are important for western democracy," Leshno Yaar said in a telephone interview from Geneva.

He spoke as representatives from 190 nations have been meeting in Geneva to debate the language for a document in which Israel is alluded to as a "racist" and "apartheid" power.

The final draft will be presented at an April meeting in Geneva, which is the follow-up to the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which took place in Durban, South Africa.

Israel and the United States walked out of the 2001 conference to protest its disintegration into an anti-Semitic and anti-Israel hate-fest. Israel and Canada have already announced they do not intend to participate in this April's conference in Geneva.

On Friday, the State Department stated that it had gone to the preparatory meetings in Geneva "to work with countries that want to achieve a successful review conference" and added that the United States had "strong reservations about the direction of the conference, as the draft document singles out Israel for criticism, places unacceptable restrictions on freedom of expression under the guise of defaming religion, and calls for payment of reparations for slavery."

While in Geneva, US representatives met with 30 national delegations to outline their concerns.

The Americans were present but did not appear to have made improvement in the document, which he said "is getting worse every day."

Irwin Cotler, a Canadian MP and former justice minister, told the Post that the conference had been initially designed to speak about global issues relating to racism without singling out any country or group.

Israel was the only country that was alluded to in this way, he said.

Read the full story here.

Sorry followers of the Great Pedophile. But it will come down to which system of government is better. The backward 7th Century ramblings of a lunatic who hated everyone or the enlightened men of Philadelphia who foresaw this and placed the Freedom of Speech as 1st in the American Constitution.

What will the President do? Support those who follow a 7th Century madman, those who reject everything this nation stands for? Or finally listen to reason and reject not only the Durban II Conference, but anything that comes from it?

President Obama swore to uphold and defend the Constitution on Jan. 20th. Will he now do that? Or to please the Muslim world will he ignore our laws and impose the UN's on us?