Monthly Archives: May 2011




Bibi Netanyahu and Barack Obama. The one an anchor of reason, stability and peace for his people. The other all sail and no anchor recklessly steering America and The Middle East toward disaster, destruction and war.
All last week Rush Limbaugh waxed enthusiastic over Bibi Netanyahu's "epic" speech before both houses of Congress on Israel, the Palestinians and the Jew hating Middle East. Telling Republicans that Netanyahu was a lesson in dealing with Obama Rush urged GOP candidates to emulate the man and "Say what you mean, say it confidently and fearlessly...."  when attacking Obama. In short, be straight, talk tough and boldly tell the truth about Obama's dismal presidency and record. Speak out resolutely about his lies, hypocrisies and insane and destructive policies. Strip Obama naked, gut him at every turn, and leave him twisting in the wind for the carrion birds.
But what went unnoticed was that Bibi's speech exposed how politically weak and vulnerable Obama is. What Bibi did was unprecedented. Never before has the guest of a US President, a foreign head of state and ally, lectured and slapped down his host in public. It's unheard of and appalling in the abstract. But look at what happened, or didn't happen in the concrete. Were the American people offended by Bibi's disrespect and insolence to their likable but floundering Commander-in-Chief? Were they outraged like Jeff Goldberg and other leftist pundits who vilifying Netanyahu compared him to Chavez and Ahmadenijad as if he were behaving like an enemy? NO! Did the public rally behind Obama in protest of Bibi's slapdown, like the support they gave JFK when he was humiliated by Khrushchev in Vienna? On the contrary, while Obama was in England making a fool of himself Netanyahu was in Congress, the people's House, being treated by both parties like a hero who'd just achieved a stunning victory. It was amazing. Netanyahu won over America with millions of us wishing that he was our leader instead of the poor hapless fool disgracing the White House.
Postscript I: Bibi's Bold Move For Peace
Obama's disingenuous State Department speech of May 19th showed how utterly confused, misguided and unrealistic he is on Mideast policy. And how desperately he needed to be lectured and taught by the wiser and saner Netanyahu.
Case in point was Obama saying that the Jewish communities on the West Bank were "occupations" of Palestinian lands, when Palestinians never owned or lived on them; when they were taken from Jordan as payment for aggression in the 67 War; when Jews have lived there for 4000 years, and hopefully for thousands more. Has the man who said in 2008 that he's smarter and wiser in foreign affairs than both Clinton and McCain bothered to study Israel's history going back to Biblical days? Apparently not. His mentor on Israel was the Jew hating Rev. Wright who believes that the world would be better off if Israel were to disappear and all its Jews subjugated to Moslems or destroyed*.  *Wright supports Hamas and its genocidal policies.

Moreover, and just as outlandish and naive, was Obama saying, and I quote that "Israel must act boldly to advance a lasting peace." "Act boldly?" How many times must Israel "act boldly" for peace before Obama realizes how futile it is? How many times before he gets it that peace for Palestinians means Israel's eradication?
In the 1990s Israel boldly went out on a limb giving peace a chance and gave Yassir Arafat and his people autonomy in Gaza and the West Bank. Then boldly for the sake of peace Arafat was offered by Ehud Barak 90% of the "occupied" West Bank, 100% of Israeli "occupied" Gaza, and control of the Moslem and Christian quarters of East Jerusalem. With the international community urging Arafat to accept the deal he backstabbed Barak, Clinton and everyone and started the second Intifada where hundreds died. Then Israel boldly dismantled its Jewish settlements in Gaza and unilaterally withdrew its forces only to face kidnappings and rocket attacks leading to war.  Then boldly Netanyahu endorsed a two state solution publicly recognizing the right of Palestinians to have a state, but without reciprocation.
With all these bold Israeli moves coming to nought whose turn is it to act boldly? "The international community is tired of an endless process that never produces an outcome," complains our moron in chief. And whose fault is that? Again I say, the one and only way to peace for Israeli Jews and Palestinians is the bold, intrepid, self-sacrificing path of ANWAR SADAT*.

 *Meaning the Palestinian permanently ending their jihad against Israel, and accepting its existence and legitimacy as a sovereign state. 
Postscript II: Netanyahu and the American Spirit
As most Americans sensed that there is more of the true American spirit in Netanyahu than in Barack Obama it stands to reason that his disrespectful bashing of Obama was not only tolerated it actually thrilled millions of patriots who see Obama as an un-American leftist more interested in "transforming America than in restoring what's good about it," as the wonderful Sarah Palin says.





The island of Oahu where Obama was vacationing was plunged into darkness and confusion by an 11 hour power outage (see). Four hours into the blackout the Gaza War began. 

On December 26, 2008 just hours before the start of Operation Cast Lead (the Gaza War) the island of Oahu experienced a massive power blackout while the Obama family was vacationing there. After the fighting and bloodshed began-necessary for Israel's self-defense and security from brutal Hamas aggression and rocket attacks-Obama made his first mistake on Mideast policy-a sign of his badly flawed judgment and blunders to come culminating in his well deserved slapdown by the wiser, stronger, more experienced  Bibi Netanyahu. Indeed, instead of joining George Bush and taking Israel's side in the conflict (the side of good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, the civilized man vs, the savage) Obama said nothing refusing to take sides. In retrospect this silence was indicative of Obama's misguided decision to push for a return to the failed, disastrous, immoral policies of the Bush 41/Clinton era and shamefully play the "honest, evenhanded broker" in the conflict. This is immoral in that it treats Israel and terrorist Hamas (and the Palestinian Authority nonviolently but no less intent on Israel's destruction) as moral equals thus legitimizing Hamas's aggressive, murderous genocidal policies (shared by most Palestinians) as differing little from Israel's right of self-defense*. If Obama's policies aren't downright immoral they're certainly morally confused and can lead to more war-which is nothing good.
*In Sharia Law an infidel nation defending itself from Moslem aggression is an act of war and aggression against Islam. This is Islam's "just war" doctrine. 
Now based on the "coincidence" of the Gaza War and Obama's Honolulu vacation during the blackout I made the following prediction:
"On December 26th, six days into the Obama familiy's Christmas vacation in [Oahu] Hawaii, Honolulu [and Oahu] suffered a massive power outage that put the Obamas in the dark for 11 hours. This wouldn’t be of any interest but for the fact that four and a half hours into the blackout Israeli defense forces started Operation Cast Lead Israel’s secretly planned military campaign against missile firing Hamas murderers in Gaza. As Obama was physically in the dark when Israel struck, the blackout was emblematic of  his blindness, ignorance and stupidity on Mideast issues [in general]; and [on] the racial, cultural and religious dynamics underlying [Arab intransigence and aggression] in the Palestinian/Arab-Israeli conflict [in particular].
Indeed, this blindness was evident when Obama kept silent during the Gaza War and refused to join George Bush (perhaps the most pro-Israeli US President in history) in condemning Hamas, thus signaling his coming policy of evenhanded neutrality-of playing the "honest" broker once in power in a conflict of good against evil where neutrality is a sin and emboldens aggression. As the honest broker game was played to death by Bill Clinton to his regret, with Yassir Arafat backstabbing him [and Ehud Barak] and starting a deadly war [the second intifada], returning to it is madness as it could only have the same terrible outcome or worse. The Honolulu [Oahu] blackout was an ominous sign prophetically anticipating the destructive impact of Obama's naive and misguided policies in the region. It was a warning that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the turbulent, volcanic Middle East will likely explode during his presidency plunging the region and his misguided administration into darkness and turmoil."
Since this prediction was made the Middle East has exploded in revolutionary protests and violence across the region; and Obama's attempt to restart the failed and destructive Palestinian-Israeli peace talks has predictably blown up in his face. And yet despite the ominous development of Abbas's Palestinian Authority joining with Iranian backed terrorist Hamas in an evil coalition of hatred, terror and genocidal war Obama persisted in the lunacy of urging Israel to restart peace talks when she has no peace partner, and Arab-Palestinian intransigence against Israel's existence is stronger than ever.



  Clinton and Obama bringing irreconcilable enemies together in a handshake from hell.


Another unmistakable sign warning Israel to resist Obama's ill-conceived plans to restart the Palestinian-Israeli peace process was the death of Israeli airforce pilot Asaf Ramon in the crashing of his F-16 jet in the Hebron Hills of the so-called "occupied" West Bank. The son of Israeli airforce pilot Ilya Ramon-who died in the skies over Palestine, Texas when the Columbia Space Shuttle exploded-Asaf was killed on September 13, 2009, the 16th anniversary of the Rabin-Arafat handskake which kicked off the disastrous Olso Peace Process  on September 13, 1993.
 Also see
Prior to Bibi Netanyahu's public slapdown of Obama last week were two years of private, frustrating, wasted conversations where the Israeli PM failed to enlighten Obama on the realities of the Arab/Palestinian-Israeli conflict. During this period against all rhyme and reason our delusional, dumbass president put the onus for restarting the failed peace process of the Clinton era on Israel, when the annihilating hatred of Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and most Palestinians had not abated. In short, Obama's stuck on stupid appeasement mentality and reelection hopes completely blinds him to the reality of Palestinian intransigence* and the evil medieval dynamic driving the 63 year old conflict.
 *He still thinks that "land for peace" will work.
Obama doesn't want to hear about Palestinian intransigence, implacable hatred and rocket attacks. Blinded by the vision of being the peacemaker regardless of reality and its cost to Israel's security Obama for two years tried forcing Netanyahu to the peace table without the enemy offering concessions. For two years without Abbas and Hamas uttering the magic words: WE RECOGNIZE THE JEWISH STATE'S RIGHT TO EXIST our malignantly narcissist and irresponsible president wanted Israel to engage with the enemy to make him look good for election day.
Last Thursday's "67 borders" speech was the last straw. Understanding that his relations with Obama has reached rock bottom and couldn't get worse, and there was no chance of completely alienating him from Israel and pushing him into the jihadist (Abbas/Hamas) camp, Netanyahu decided to lecture Obama before the world as a last resort to wisen him up and make an adult out of him on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Whether it worked is to be seen. But I'm not counting on it given Obama's ideological blindness and pigheadedness .
What Is The World Going To Do?
What got me about Obama's reply to Bibi's slapdown was his laughable fear mongering about the growing impatience of the world and that it can't wait for peace much longer. Well, assuming that Obama wasn't expressing his own impatience-he's been a man in a hurry getting nowhere fast-what is the world going to do? Pass a resolution at the UN declaring a Palestinian state? And then what? Declare war on nuclear armed Israel for not allowing a Pali state to exist? Not a chance! This would be another worthless, toothless anti-Israel resolution with Hamas, Abbas and the anti-Israel Left going ballistic over the UN's inaction and impotence.




Leon Panetta does 180 degree turn on the use of EITs in finding and killing bin Ladin to appease Obama and secure defense job?

Did enhanced interrogation techniques play a key role in the finding and killing of Osama Bin Ladin? We now have two Leon Panettas on the issue. There's the bold, honest, truthful Leon who, agreeing with those who were there (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Hayden, Yoo, Mukasey etc.) and approved of these indispensable, life saving methods, told Brian Williams (to the embarrassment of his boss*) that info gathered from "tortured" terrorists led to the identity of Bin Laden's mystery courier. Then there's the other Leon, the one who craves replacing Bob Gates at Defense; the Leon who most likely was taken to task by a pissed Barack Obama for his honesty and transparency. This Leon under pressure agreed to change his story and lie about the facts. But how does he do that? Does he go back to Williams to "set the record straight," or call for a news conference? No. Why embarrass yourself and look like an ass when you can use muddled headed foolish John McCain as your messenger to the media. It's so much easier when a Republican does the dissembling for you.
*Two days after his inaugural Obama signed an executive order banning the use of "torture" as an interrogation technique.


Panetta's useful fool.

Did you hear McCain on the Senate floor and later on CNN yesterday making an ass of himself in place of Panetta? Did he make any sense? Said McCain to Anderson Cooper that Cheney, Rumsfield, Hayden and Yoo "weren't lying" when they credited EITs with the finding and killing of Bin Ladin. They were simply "mistaken." Mistaken? Mistaken about what? About the very same intel that Panetta saw when he said that  EIting "torturing" terrorists led to bin Laden's end? The intel that suddenly changed in a week under pressure from Obama and Holder? Did you hear this man? "Torture is not a reliable source of good intel," he said. Why? "Because you get a mix of truth and falsehood." Oh, really! And what do you get with standard, non-coercive interrogation techniques senator? The naked, unvarnished, absolute, life saving truth?  You mean terrorists don't lie when you're hugging them? Better to get a mix of truth and falsehood than nothing. When the wheat is separated from the chaff  you have actionable intel.

Remember, this John McCain is the same opponent of EITs who said back in 2008 that when faced with a ticking bomb situation, or an imminent, massive terrorist attack like 9/11, "you do what you have to do" to prevent it. Meaning "torture" under certain conditions is permissible and morally justified to stop mass casualty attacks . But not when interrogating the mastermind of 9/11 who may have other deadly plots afoot which are ticking bombs? Handling a hardened  psychopathic  Moslem killer more humanely will soften him up and bring out his better angels? Make him fall in love with you and he'll cooperate and squeal like a pig. McCain is hopelessly muddled on this issue. There's no consistency or moral clarity in him. It's wrong to torture terrorists except when they're within days or hours of killing us by the thousands-except in the case of the mass murdering KSM and his accomplices. Like those on the soft-on-terror Left who cheered McCain's muddled speech yesterday, his approach to the issue is emotional, senseless and dangerous. If McCain were president and captured bin Laden alive not to "torture" him as a last resort to get him to talk would be an intolerable, unpatriotic, criminal dereliction of duty. As McCain is just as disingenuous and contradictory as Leon Panetta he's Panetta's perfect fool for torturing the truth with his backtracking lies.

Postscript: What If Bush Had A Third Term?

If George W. Bush had a third term as president and publicly stated that enhanced interrogation techniques played a crucial role in the finding and killing of Osama bin Ladin what would John McCain have said if Bush showed him proof that EITs worked? Would he have made a speech from the senate floor and give interviews on CNN praising the program and admitting that he was wrong? Not a chance. He would have said nothing; in fact, most on the Left would be accusing the wicked, war criminal Bush of lying through his teeth and wrecking American values and our standing in the world with McCain not lifting a finger in his defense. McCain may have been a POW war hero. But as a Senator he's no Profile In Courage.