Dem. Pat Caddell gets conservative love for shredding Lindsay Graham… “Calling Graham the “effective leader of the surrender caucus of the Republican Party,” Democratic strategist and Fox News analyst Pat Caddell drew cheers from a gathering of conservative activists Monday night in the city’s downtown Harbour Club.”
Dem. Pat Caddell gets conservative love for shredding Lindsay Graham
BizPacReview ^ | 09/11/2013 | Joe Saunders
Posted on Monday, September 16, 2013 5:04:18 AM by TexGrill
Appearing on Fox News Channel’s “Special Report,” Napolitano said he watched Thursday’s confirmation hearings for Victoria Nuland, the former State Department spokeswoman who has been tapped by President Barack Obama as assistant secretary of State.
Urgent: Should the NSA Spy on Americans? Vote Here Now”In my former forum, the questions would have been more pointed and she would have had to give precise, specific answers to the questions,” Napolitano said.Nuland’s name surfaced after the Benghazi attacks because she was the go-between for the State Department in talks between the CIA and White House over talking points that would be used with the press.
Gunny G: DEVVY’S EMAIL ALERTS: WILL ROMNEY DO IT? DC District Court of Appeals: only person who can challenge Obama’s legitimacy is Romney…
(Mailing list information, including how to remove yourself, is located at the end of this message.)
Links are generally posted at my web site http://devvy.net/cgi-bin/dada/mail.cgi/r/alerts/999837625718/
Posted on my web site with links; www.devvy.com
The items below will remain posted until June 10, 2013
My new email address is: email@example.com. If you want to send me email, please use that email address. Thanx.
I would call this wishful thinking. Montgomery Blair Sibley has been fighting the courts for over two years. Gutless cowards in black robes. For those unfamiliar with Montgomery, he is a highly skilled attorney who did everything legally possible to get Soetoro removed through the statute passed by Congress to remove someone who has usurped the office they pretend to hold. Such is the case with Barry Soetoro aka Obama. Which is why Soetoro cannot be impeached. Since he usurped the office, he never held or occupied the office of president, therefore, you cannot impeach someone who did not legally occupy the office.
SHOCKING: OBAMA INTENDS TO COLLAPSE US ECONOMY – Ann Barnhardt
FinanceAndLiberty FinanceAndLiberty·97 videos
Published on May 23, 2013
SUBSCRIBE (It’s FREE!) for more!: http://bit.ly/FinanceAndLiberty
The Spectator President Pat Buchanan “The Barack Obama revealed to us in recent days is something rare in our history: a spectator president, clueless about what is going on in his own household, who reacts to revelations like some stunned bystander.”
The Spectator President
Townhall.com ^ | May 21, 2013 | Pat Buchanan
Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2013 10:43:39 AM by Kaslin
No, this is not Watergate or Iran-Contra. Nor is it like the sex scandal that got Bill Clinton impeached.
The Barack Obama revealed to us in recent days is something rare in our history: a spectator president, clueless about what is going on in his own household, who reacts to revelations like some stunned bystander.
Totalitarian Subversion – Can we Awaken from the Nightmare?
Loyal to Liberty ^ | 5-18-2013 | Loyal to Liberty (Alan Keyes) – Commentary
Posted on Saturday, May 18, 2013 9:39:09 PM by smoothsailing
Totalitarian Subversion- Can we Awaken from the Nightmare?
by LOYALTOLIBERTY on MAY 18, 2013
Whatever Obama, Hilary Clinton, Susan Rice and other Obama faction officials were seeking to achieve with their lies about the terrorist murders of U.S. officials in Benghazi; whatever the full extent of the ideologically motivated political abuses at the IRS, one thing is clear. Except for mindless apparatchiks, thoughtlessly loyal to the Obama cult, (like Chris Matthews and Al Sharpton, for example) no sane person can now consider it crazy or irrational to distrust the words and actions of those presently controlling the U.S. government. These scandals show the self-serving ‘chutzpah’ of Obama’s snide dismissal of people who “warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems….They’ll warn that tyranny [is] always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.”
In one respect, Obama’s words ring true. Tyranny isn’t just around the corner. It is already upon us. Its forces are not yet confident enough to employ the ‘Gestapo’ tactics routinely associated with socialist dictatorship. But they have obviously been using their control of the Federal bureaucracy to repress and intimidate individuals and grassroots organizations, preoccupying their time and depleting their resources. Should we be encouraged by the fact that these abuses are now being openly discussed and decried? Only if the stir actually leads to actions that effectively curtail them, while establishing am oversight mechanism that assures continually formal and public scrutiny, to make sure that they cannot be repeated without an immediate outcry.
But what if no such action is taken? Inaction is likely, given the collaborative mindset of the GOP leaders in the U.S. House, and the Obama faction’s solid majority in the U.S. Senate. If it happens these abuses will recur in a more virulent form. And they will spread, like an infection treated with an inadequate course of antibiotics. People will realize that the abuses are still in train, and that their elected officials have done nothing to reduce each individual’s vulnerability. Increasingly tinged with fear, the angry public reaction against the abuses will wane. Spreading from one individual to another, as episodes of abuse proliferate, this individual fear will gradually intensify until it dominates the public mind. This is the way tyranny subverts peace of mind.
National Review Online… “The 10 P.M. Phone Call Clinton and Obama discussed Benghazi. What did they say? By Andrew C. McCarthy ” | Print
So if I were investigating Benghazi, Iâ€™d be homing in on that 10 p.m. phone call. Thatâ€™s the one between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton â€” the one thatâ€™s gotten close to zero attention.
Benghazi is not a scandal because of Ambassador Susan Rice, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, and â€œtalking points.â€ The scandal is about Rice and Nulandâ€™s principals, and about what the talking points were intended to accomplish.
Benghazi is about derelictions of duty by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton before and during the massacre of our ambassador and three other American officials, as well as Obama and Clintonâ€™s fraud on the public afterward.
Benghazi Whistleblower Attorney: Congress Must Subpoena Hillary Clinton to Testify Again… (not one of her best pics…)
Benghazi Whistleblower Attorney: Congress Must Subpoena Hillary Clinton to Testify Again
Fox ^ | 5/13/13 | staff
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2013 10:03:56 PM by Nachum
Laurie Roth – Benghazi is not Watergate for Obama but the bombing of Hiroshima… “Obama also put out in is official statement that no one was told to stand down. Help was not denied, yet according to the SEALS Doherty and Woods who were working with the CIA in Benghazi, they…”
The attack on Benghazi was merely a response to a You Tube video on Islam by a guy no one had ever heard of before. The people were reacting and protesting…you know, they had some sort of reason for attacking. US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said on at least 6 different shows on Sept. 16th that the attack was in response to the You Tube video. Hillary and Obama boldly agreed.
Obama also put out in is official statement that no one was told to stand down. Help was not denied, yet according to the SEALS Doherty and Woods who were working with the CIA in Benghazi, they heard the shooting and promptly called for help. They were told to ‘stand down.’ When the shooting continued they called for help again and were told to stand down again. They kept shooting and killing as many terrorists as they could while trying to get help.
By Judi McLeod Thursday, May 9, 2013
If the Benghazi investigations before the House Oversight and Reform Committee prove anything it’s that we all live in a world dominated by talking points as victims of a world dominated by government and media lies.
It was “talking points” that gave oxygen to the Big Lie that an unwatched anti-Islamic YouTube was responsible for the terrorist attack in Benghazi which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.
When former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yelled “What difference does it make”, she knew at heart that the Obama regime was already making sure Benghazi wouldn’t matter.
We bridled at her hissy fit, not seeing through the unshakeable confidence she brought to the congressional hearing that came from knowing the lies told to the American people would never be redressed in any meaningful way.
How can Benghazi be made to matter if the Fundamental Transformation of America can’t be made to matter?
Posted on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 11:31:44 AM by lbryce
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday that the misinformation that came out about the Benghazi attacks in their immediate aftermath no longer mattered, saying that the important thing was to find the persons responsible.
(Gunny G: What “The Folks” Are Saying About Hillary, Etc.–See reader Responses!) ~ State Department preparing for Libya bombshell?
Susan Rice‘s abrupt withdrawal from consideration for secretary of state, coupled with suggestions from the State Department that Secretary Hillary Clinton may not testify as scheduled next week, has stirred speculation that something big is brewing in the Libya terror attack investigation.
For the better part of the last three months, an independent board has been conducting a review for the State Department of the Sept. 11 terror attack in Benghazi. In anticipation of the report’s conclusion, two congressional committees scheduled hearings for next week in which Clinton was set to testify.
The Davis Petraeus saga is another urban legend; a myth about a great man felled by a single flaw or indiscretion. The truth is that Petraeus is a bit player in a larger, uglier drama, the political corruption the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) and that exclusive four star glut that sits atop the military. And the rot didn’t start with Petraeus. Recall Army Chief-of-Staff George Casey taking to the airways to rationalize the Fort Hood Islamist massacre in 2009. Somehow “diversity” and Muslim sensitivities were more important than twin dangers of domestic sedition or troop safety on American bases.
Casey was thrown at the Sunday chat shows, like the more recent Susan Rice mendacity tour, to spin a politically correct message. And then there was Admiral Mike Mullen leading the charge for sex with any sex a year later on the E-Ring at the Pentagon. Say what you will about booty call as a “civil right,” but gender choice is not a significant national security issue in the middle of a shooting war. The legality of relationships are social issues that should be addressed by an elected, yet too often cowardly,
Congress; not the appointed military brass. And while the JCS was riding point for preferences, nobody seemed to notice, or care about, failure in all those Muslim Wars. Indeed, a four-star public relations campaign reinvented the English language to avoid words like victory. The new word for retreat is “drawdown.”
After yesterday’s closed-door testimony of David Petraeuson the Hill, we now know for a fact that for two weeks the Obama Administration repeatedly and relentlessly lied to the American people about what they knew was the truth behind the September 11 anniversary attack on our consulate in Libya. Unfortunately, we also now know that they’re going to get away with it.
Americans are confused. I realize that’s probably the understatement of the year, but I am referring not to the apparent insensibility of those who continue to support President Barack Obama, but to the perplexed state of those who are attempting to make sense out of the election outcome itself, as well as events that have taken place since.
In short, it is mind-boggling that the man was re-elected considering the shape America is in, and his being the most dismal record of any President in American history.
The craven but successful ploy on the part of the administration to defer addressing the issue of Benghazigate until after the election is evident, unless one is a consumer of the establishment press (mainstream media). The American public is being encouraged to focus upon the romantic dalliances of fallen CIA Director General David Petraeus with a predatory publicity hound, and obscure emails between an ugly Middle Eastern-American socialite, the publicity hound, and another general. This, I suppose, would be in lieu of focusing upon the effluvia of lies being fire-hosed from the mouths of President Obama and his administration vis-à-vis the events of September 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya.
These deceptions have been so blatant and so outlandish that I can only describe them as surreal. At House and Senate intelligence committee hearings this week, intelligence officials ostensibly tried to explain their deportment on September 11 as regards the reported pleas for aid leading up to and through the attack on the consulate in Benghazi. Meanwhile – with help in distraction from the press – the administration continues to purvey contradicting accounts of whether or not aid was requested by slain Ambassador Christopher Stevens and CIA operatives, while at the same time attempting to clarify that very matter.
Obama’s faux chivalry in his defense of UN Ambassador Susan Rice
David Petraeus Could Nail Obama To The White House Wall On Benghazi… (“There is no doubt in my mind that the American people were fed a load of lies. There is also no doubt in my mind that it was done for two specific purposes.”)
The greatly anticipated testimony by former CIA Director David Petraeus is almost upon us. In less than half an hour, General Petraeus will be going behind closed doors to testify to before members of the House and Senate intelligence committees.
Specifically, he will be asked about what he knew about the attack in Benghazi and when he knew it. According to CNN, Petraeus will also testify that the CIA was not responsible for the talking points used by Susan Rice when she famously went on five different Sunday talk shows and spread the false rumor that a video was responsible for the attacks.
PetraeusFor security purposes, much of the content of Petraeus’ testimony will be classified. I am hopeful, however, that enough information will be released to allow us to gain some knowledge about what really happened, before, during, and after the attack in Benghazi. There is no doubt in my mind that the American people were fed a load of lies. There is also no doubt in my mind that it was done for two specific purposes.
Following President Obama’s Wednesday afternoon press conference, NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams continued his longtime obsession with the liberal fantasy film The American President and his eagerness to compare Obama to Michael Douglas’s fictional presidential character: “…the President today almost conjuring the wording of Aaron Sorkin from the movie American President, as will be pointed out all day, really decided to throw down.”
[Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
By Doug Hagmann Friday, October 26, 2012
Most people know that we’ve been lied to about the attacks in Benghazi, but few realize the extent of those lies or the hidden secrets they cover. After all, the lie is different at every level.
Thanks to a well placed source with extensive knowledge about the attack, the disturbing truth is slowly beginning to emerge and is lining up with information contained in my previous articles published here weeks ago (Here, Here and Here). The truth reveals the most serious situation in the world today as it involves the interests and destinies of us all.
A mosaic of lies
“I want a comprehensive timeline showing all the documents, all the cable traffic, all e-mails, all the conversations held leading up to September 11th, and what happened on September 11th, as to why they concluded this was caused by a pornographic video, and arose out of a demonstration when there was no demonstration, and in fact, the video had no impact. What information they got after that caused, which them to change their mind,” said Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) on Fox.
Prison Planet.com | During a recent appearance on Bill Maher’s Real Time, actor Ben Affleck defended the TSA’s policy of grabbing people’s genitals.
Paul Joseph Watson | Weeks after footage showed police beating demonstrators.
Prisonplanet.com | Alex talks with Congressman Walter Jones about the fall of america and the next president to be.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the reason the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, gave misinformation to the American people is because of the “fog of war.” According to the notes of Wendell Goler of Fox News, here’s what Clinton had to say:
On Rice ‘grew out of a protest’ assertions: “the fog of war. The confusion you get in any type of combat situation. Remember this was an attack that went on for hours…there had to be a lot of sorting out…everyone said here’s what we know subject to change.”
A confusing array of contradictions concerning the murders of four Americans, one of which was a U.S. ambassador, was made worse by Vice President Joe Biden’s remarks during the debate with Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan Thursday evening.
Today the confusion only worsened yet again when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters that her agency was not the source of misinformation concerning the attacks, charging instead that the White House was the source of the false mantra that the murders were spurred by an anti-Muslim film made in the United States. Clinton told reporters that when Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her rounds on every Sunday morning news show to claim the film motivated the attacks, the information had been fed to her by the White House and not the intelligence community in the State Department or the CIA.
The State Department has said that it never believed the September 11th attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was the result of a protest over an anti-Islam movie – directly contracting the rest of the Obama administration.
By trying to distance her department from the inept and deceptive handling of the Benghazi attack, which left U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American officials dead, Hillary Clinton could help herself politically for a 2016 presidential run.
The Ugly Face of the Obama Regime… (“They’re living in an upside down dreamworld enabled by the mainstream media and Hollywood.”)
…..During the long last mile, lies and propaganda will ooze all over the path.
Good question. After all, the State Department actually conducted the dog-and-pony show on behalf of the White House after the terrorist attack on our Benghazi consulate that left four Americans dead, including the first US Ambassador assassinated on assignment in 33 years. Hillary Clinton’s UN envoy Susan Rice went on five Sunday talk shows to propagate a cover story that Hillary Clinton’s own organization announced last night it never believed.
So where is the Secretary of State these days, anyway?
The Daily Caller reports that Peter King, the House Homeland Security Committee Chairman, is asking CIA director Gen. David Petraeus and White House national security adviser James Clapper to investigate whether a columnist for The Daily Beast received the same classified foreign policy briefings as President Obama.
The Daily Beast columnist in question is Leslie Gelb, a crony of Joe Biden (back in 2006-07, they jointly pushed a plan for “federalism” in Iraq that amounted, in essence, to partition of the country).
Via Powerline, I think this is her version of a compromise. Deep down, she’d prefer that he held off until November 2016.
House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King (R-N.Y.) tonight called on U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice to resign from her post in light of comments she made regarding the nature of the attack earlier this month on a U.S. consulate in Libya.
Rice, whose name has been floated as a potential replacement for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told NBC and ABC on Sept. 16 that evidence at the time suggested the attacks that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were “spontaneous.” Since then, President Barack Obama has indicated the attacks were, in fact, planned and are being considered “a terrorist attack.”
It remains unclear whether President Barack Obama’s lies about attacks on U.S. embassies will cost him re-election. One thing is certain, however: whatever ambitions Secretary of State Hillary Clinton once held to run for president in 2016 have been damaged beyond repair. Obama was literally asleep when the proverbial “3 a.m. call” came, but Clinton–who bears responsibility for embassy security–was asleep on the job for weeks.
Clinton’s response–”How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction?–bears the same naïveté for which she once mocked her Democratic rival in debates and campaign commercials. Both Obama and Clinton suffer the same self-delusion: that the world loves Democrats and hates Republicans, that it loves flower children and hates cowboys. Benghazi is a wake-up call they should not have needed–not after the first 9/11, not after Bill Clinton‘s “law enforcement” approach to terror failed.
I see the Obama campaign has redesigned the American flag, and very attractive it is too.
Replacing the 50 stars of a federal republic is the single “O” logo symbolizing the great gaping maw of spendaholic centralization. And where the stripes used to be are a handful of red daubs, eerily mimicking the bloody finger streaks left on the pillars of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi as its staff were dragged out by a mob of savages to be tortured and killed.
What better symbol could one have of American foreign policy? Who says the slick hollow vapid marketing of the Obama campaign doesn’t occasionally intersect with reality?
Now it’s starting to get real serious:
Though initially skeptical that top Iranian regime figures were behind a plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to Washington, U.S. government officials became convinced by the operation’s money trail and now consider it likely that Iran’s supreme leader was aware of the plan.
“This is the kind of operation — the assassination of a diplomat on foreign soil — that would have been vetted at the highest levels of the Iranian government,” said a senior U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about sensitive analyses. “We can’t prove that, but we do not think it was a rogue operation in any way.”
Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi says if Western leaders decide to attack his country, he’ll join with al-Qaida in a “holy war,” unleashing a flood of illegal immigrants into Europe and backing known terror fomenters, according to a report from Joseph Farah‘s G2 Bulletin.
Gadhafi originally had accused al-Qaida of creating the opposition to him inside his own country.But now he says his forces appear to be pushing the opposition onto the ropes inside Libya, and he doesn’t like the United Nations adopting a no-fly zone over Libya, or the fact Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, hinted in a speech that other military action may be forthcoming from the West .She did not specify what that would be.
The Obama administration has made it clear that it will not take unilateral action and insists on an international response if the decision is made to take military action against Libya.Previously, Gadhafi said his regime is opposed to Islamist extremists in the region, although he has a history of supporting terrorists, with Libyans constituting the single largest bloc of membership in al-Qaida outside the Saudis.Now Gadhafi has offered to help facilitate an al-Qaida sweep from the Middle East and North Africa that would then threaten Europe.
Story continues below
Fox News says the United States has deployed some Marines and two amphibious ships to help with the evacuations in Libya.The news comes one day after the U.S. moved naval and air forces closer to Libya and said all options were open, including patrols of the North African nation’s skies to protect its citizens from their ruler, Muammar Qaddafi.
The Obama administration is demanding that Gadhafi relinquish power immediately.Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned that Libya is at risk of collapsing into a “protracted civil war” amid increasingly violent clashes between the two sides.On Tuesday, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice cast doubt on Qaddafi’s sanity and ability to lead and said the international community will continue pressuring Qaddafi with embargos and sanctions until he steps down.
Excerpt Read more at myfoxphilly.com …
According to Rasmussen, a large majority of Americans agree with the common sense of George Washington.
During his farewell address, the first president of the United States said the nation should beware of foreign entanglements.On February 23, Rasmussen reported that 67% of Americans strongly believe the United States should stay out of Libya and the Middle East.
The globalists, their hand-picked government in the district of criminals, and the Pentagon are not listening. They have dispatched the USS Enterprise and other warships to Libya.
The Enterprise was conveniently close, having squandered millions of tax payer dollars confronting ragtag pirates off the coast of Somalia. The Pentagon will not confirm one way or the other if it has instructions to set-up a no-fly zone and begin bombing the North African nation.According to Colonel David Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman, the U.S. military is moving ships closer to Libya “in case they are needed.”The Pentagon is not about to go it alone in Libya. It will act in concert with NATO. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice – mentor of Secretary of State Madeline Albright who declared killing 500,000 Iraqi children was acceptable, CFR and Ford Foundation Brookings member – said “the international community is not going to tolerate the slaughter of innocents.”……………….
Browse · Search Pings · Mail Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
OBAMA PLANS TO “STRENGTHEN” UN
The Constitution Club ^ | 02-13-11 | Region Rat
Posted on Sunday, February 13, 2011 6:03:12 PM by TheConservativeCitizen
The Administration has begun a campaign to convince the American people that the United Nations should be “strengthened, not starved.” With Obama’s dream of remaking America in the image of Europe, is it any wonder? Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, delivered a speech last night, the first in a series aimed at selling the idea to the country:
“The U.N. provides a real return on our tax dollars by bringing 192 countries together to share the cost of providing stability, vital aid and hope in the world’s most broken places.” (You’re messin’ with us, right?) She continued: “Because of the UN, the world doesn’t look to America to solve every problem alone. We’re far better off working to strengthen the U.N. than trying to starve it — and then having to choose between filling the void ourselves, or leaving real threats untended.” Does this woman smoke crack?
The UN is arguably the most hypocritical and corrupt organization in the history of the planet, yet Obama wants to give it more money and more clout. He has promised to double foreign aid to $50 billion by next year, while also insisting he wants to make UN programs “more effective.” Good luck with that one. During the presidential campaign, Obama said the following:
“For the last twenty years, U.S. foreign aid funding has done little more than keep pace with inflation. Doubling our foreign assistance spending by 2012 will help meet the challenge…it will help push the rest of the developed world to invest in security and opportunity…we have the capacity to make sure this funding makes a real difference.” YES WE CAN’T.
(Excerpt) Read more at constitutionclub.org …
Free RepublicBrowse · Search Pings · Mail News/ActivismTopics · Post ArticleSkip to comments.Susan Rice kicks off U.N. series Obama backs Muslim overthrows, moves on to CommunistsPolitico ^ | 2/11/2011 | Mike Allen & Jake ShermanPosted on Friday, February 11, 2011 11:24:10 AM by wheresmyusa
The address is the first in a series of speeches — to continue this spring – making the case to the American people about why the U.N. matters to national security, and how it is being improved.House Republicans failed this week in trying to get $180 million in overpaid dues back from the United Nations. The effort was widely panned by New Yorkers in Congress as damaging to security.
The ambassador will be speaking to the World Affairs Council of Oregon, in Portland.”The U.N. provides a real return on our tax dollars by bringing 192 countries together to share the cost of providing stability, vital aid, and hope in the world’s most broken places,” Rice says in prepared remarks.
“Because of the U.N., the world doesn’t look to America to solve every problem alone. … We’re far better off working to strengthen the U.N. than trying to starve it—and then having to choose between filling the void ourselves, or leaving real threats untended.”
Obama‘s ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, called the Saudi win, “a very good outcome”Good news, everybody. Saudi Arabia now has a seat on the women’s board at the United Nations. That’s right, a regime where it’s illegal for women to drive or leave the house without being accompanied by a male guardian, where girls were pushed into a burning building because they were trying to flee without covering their ‘obscene’ female faces… will be a key player in the international effort to empower women.
I don’t know what contribution the Saudis can make to the project, since in Ridyah, empowering women usually means strapping them into an electric chair. But in the Muslim world, human rights is usually read to mean banning criticism of Islam under the guise of Islamophobia.In Europe, Islamists are calling the Burqa a human right. That’s probably what the Saudis will bring to the table, along with the condemnations of Israel that are De rigueur in every UN group and body.
Excerpt Read more at canadafreepress.com …
Ok just another reason to have Obama arrested as a traitor to the Unites States and removed from office. I did a search and did not find any threads on this action so here it is read for yourself and you decide. President of the US or King of the world.www.knowthelies.com…/4422
Submitted by SadInAmerica on Mon, 09/14/2009 – 9:39am.Some unprecedented news today, folks. NEVER in the history of the United Nations has a U.S. President taken the chairmanship of the powerful UN Security Council. Perhaps it is because of what could arguably be a Constitutional prohibition against doing so. To wit: Section 9 of the Constitution says…No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States:
And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.Nonetheless, the rotating chairmanship of the council goes to the U.S. this month.
The normal course of business would have U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice take the gavel. However, this time will be different. Constitution be damned, Barack Hussein Obama has decided to put HIMSELF in the drivers seat, and will preside over global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament talks slated to begin September 24th.
The Financial Times says…Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.