OBAMA'S FOOT DRAGGING ALLOWED BAN ON OIL DRILLING

BREAKING: Coast Guard Head Was Informed of Maine Oil Boom Availability on 5/21 (May 21st, 2010).

Yesterday, He Claimed He Didn’t Know

June 12, 2010- by Gregory Sullivan

ON PALLETS, READY TO GO FOR OVER A MONTH BUT STILL WAREHOUSED!

Auburn, Maine, company Packgen has miles of oil spill containment boom on hand and has the capacity to produce upwards of 100,000 additional feet of boom a day. That inventory and that capacity has been available to help the Gulf Coast states for nearly a month. The news of this company was reported here at PJM four days ago, on June 8.

The curious case of the lack of interest in Packgen’s boom gets curiouser and curiouser. Yesterday, ABC News had an interview with Admiral Thad Allen, the national incident commander in charge of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. After a handful of questions about the flow of oil into the Gulf from the wellhead, the topic turned to mitigation of the spill. Here’s the exchange:

Jake Tapper, ABC: I talked to a guy who runs a company in Maine that offers boom, and he has — he says — the ability to make 90,000 feet of boom a day. High quality. BP came there ONLY  TWO weeks ago, looked at it, they are doing another audit today. He is very frustrated, he says he has a lot of high quality boom to go and it is taking a long time for BP to get its act together. Don’t you need this boom right now?

Allen: Oh we need all the boom wherever we can get it. If you give me the information off camera I’ll be glad to follow up.

There was no need for the admiral to ask for the information from Jake Tapper. It’s contained in a letter that has been on the admiral’s desk since May 21st. The letter was also sent to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and to NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco. Copies were sent to Governors Bob Riley, Charles Crist, Haley Barbour, and Bobby Jindal. The letter was signed by two U.S. senators.

It’s not hard to come by. Here’s a copy:

I interviewed Packgen owner John Lapoint at his facility in Auburn on Friday afternoon. BP today, once again, had representatives in the building to inspect his production line and his product, and to verify his assessment of his capacity to deliver more. BP is still not ready to commit to purchasing the oil boom, though.

Packgen’s boom not only passes every independent ASTM assessment, it’s apparently superior to the material currently being used in the Gulf. According to John Lapoint, it’s priced only slightly higher than oil boom that BP apparently normally purchases from places like China. And according to Packgen, boom manufactured in Auburn, Maine, on Monday can be onsite at the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday. Boom from China normally has a lead time in months.

Packgen still has the 13 miles of ASTM certified floating oil containment boom, packed and palletized and ready to ship at a moment’s notice to the Gulf Coast.


That supply has been on hand for over a month, and in the intervening twenty-two days — between the time of the notification that Admiral Allen, Secretary Salazar, and Jane Lubchenco received, and today — Packgen says they could have manufactured and delivered approximately two million feet of additional boom, all of which could be helping to protect the coastline of the United States from the devastating effects of the BP oil spill.

The federal government has enormous power and responsibility when the United States is in danger from any large oil spill. According to the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan, the president is tasked with the mitigation of the spill:

If a discharge, or a substantial threat of a discharge, of oil or a hazardous substance from a vessel, offshore facility, or onshore facility is of such a size or character as to be a substantial threat to the public health or welfare of the United States (including but not limited to fish, shellfish, wildlife, other natural resources, and the public and private beaches and shorelines of the United States), the President shall direct all Federal, State, and private actions to remove the discharge or to mitigate or prevent the threat of the discharge.

In carrying out this paragraph, the President may, without regard to any other provision of law governing contracting procedures or employment of personnel by the Federal Government –

(i) remove or arrange for the removal of the discharge, or mitigate or prevent the substantial threat of the discharge; and

(ii) remove and, if necessary, destroy a vessel discharging, or threatening to discharge, by whatever means are available.

The wording does not equivocate. And the second part clearly states that the president can ignore any non-emergency government procurement hurdles to direct the mitigation of the spill.

If the federal government directs entities other than BP to mitigate the spill, does the American taxpayer get stuck with the bill? No:

Mitigation of damage. — In addition to establishing a penalty for the discharge of oil or a hazardous substance, the Administrator or the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating may act to mitigate the damage to the public health or welfare caused by such discharge. The cost of such mitigation shall be deemed a cost incurred under subsection (c) of this section for the removal of such substance by the United States Government.

Recovery of removal costs. — Any costs of removal incurred in connection with a discharge excluded by subsection (a)(2)(C) of this section shall be recoverable from the owner or operator of the source of the discharge in an action brought under section 1319 (b) of this title.

The public deserves to know why the federal government continues to allow BP to determine who will supply desperately needed material for the mitigation of their massive spill, determine how much and what type of material will be needed, and even determine if and when it will be purchased or used at all, all while the Gulf Coast’s wildlife and industries slowly die in a haze of oil.

And while American workers who are ready, willing, and able to do the job stand idle. The ball’s in your court, admiral. Er — on your desk.

ALSO demonstrated live  on TV

There are over a half dozen old and new technologies (old being hay, yes farmland hay and a newer version in a wood based artificial "hay" fiber made to exact micron specifications) which absorb oil like sponges from seawater, leaving clean water behind. Their offers of providing this in quantity to help out were turned down without explanation.

Would it have made the clean up look too easy and prevent Obama the excuse To BAN OIL DRILLING? At our expense to favor his corrupt buddies Soros, Saudi Arabia and Islamic Iran?

As might have been the case had the USA  accepted Dutch help and allowed their oil skimming ships to jump into action within 72-hours? We STILL refuse this under the EASILY waived Jones Act of the 1920's?

ALSO a handful of new science technologies separate, filter and retain oil from seawater with the greatest of ease - AS publicly DEMONSTRATED on TV.

Again rejected without comment by BP and Obama.

WAKE UP AMERICA! OUR ENEMY HAS INFILTRATED OUR WHITE HOUSE. OBA-HUSSEIN IS FAR MORE DANGEROUS TO US THAN OUR EXTERNAL ENEMIES, WHICH HE IS ENCOURAGING TO ATTACK US BY REMOVING OUR PROTECTIONS AND HOBBLING OUR MILITARY.

OBAMA WORKING HARD TO SOFTEN SANCTION BLOW TO IRAN

WAS AHMADI-NEJAD RIGHT (READ THE ARTICLE  FARTHER DOWN THE PAGE) WHEN HE recently SAID IF IT'S MONEY OBAMA WANTS, IT'S THERE!

Or does this manifest more proof that the Egyptian Foreign Minister was reporting accurately?

Reporting from Washington — The Obama administration, which labored for months to impose tough new United Nations sanctions against Iran, now is pushing in the opposite direction against Congress as it crafts U.S. sanctions that the White House fears may go too far. (GUESS THE CHECK CLEARED!)

Too far for the murderous regime to remain unharmed by the people rising up against them when sanctions bite?

Reports from inside Iran indicate the people would take the brunt of harsh sanctions if it disables and helps remove the bloodthirsty  Mullah regime Obama favors. They are Moslems (even bad ones) like himself.

He is not protecting the populace but his Mullah buddies.

Administration officials have begun negotiations with congressional leaders, who are working on versions of House and Senate bills that would punish companies that sell refined petroleum products to Iran or help the country's oil industry.

Unlike the U.N. measures, congressional action would pertain only to U.S. policies and agencies and would not be binding on other countries. Other countries and groups of nations also are considering adopting measures to augment the U.N. action.

After the unspeakable damage Obama has done to the USA - even if absolute ineptness of how the oil spill was handled  in the face of the multiple technologies available to deal with the oil, it is impossible to believe the mishandling was not on purpose. To favor Soros investments in Brazil and a continuation of Saudi Arabia not losing our obligatory purchases.

Every time someone mentions drilling within the USA, the knee jerk response is that it will take ten years to develop the field in question. If we had started some 25-years ago when the drill now came up, we could have been oil independent a decade or more ago.

Being a thug at a street level, lawyering for street thug organizations and voting "present" while bills were proposed by others but put in your name does NOT give this usurper ANY executive experience to run a country store let alone a country like the USA.

If he really cares for America he should resign forthwith. Or be removed for deriliction of duty and shirking responsibility he swore to accept and ignoring the Constitution he took an oath to uphold.

OBAMA ANNOUNCES HE IS A MOSLEM AND SUPPORTS ISLAMIC AGENDAS

Egyptian minister: Obama told me he is a Muslim

Obama told me he is still a Muslim, who supports the Muslim agenda.

Very few media have picked up what Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit said on Nile-TV in regards to Obama confirming he is a Muslim.

This was a statement by Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit on Nile-TV. It was made on the «Round table show».

This is the statement recorded:

Adul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, where the US President told him that he was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the step son of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.

Adul Gheit claimed Obama told the Arabs to show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic issues, like the Health care reform, he would show the Muslim World how to deal with Israel

Few American and International media seem to be covering this news event in Egypt.

Wonder why?

Are they embarrassed that the American voters have been fooled to vote a Muslim into the seat of the Commander in Chief of United States of America? (Our Trojan Horse enemy we dragged in).

Or has the Obama Administration been able to convince the press, that this media story from Egypt is false?

Under any circumstances, the Obama Hussein Administration has shown us that it favors the Islamic World with every breath and action it takes.

The word «Islamic Terrorism» is now deleted from the vocabulary in the US.

Islam shall from now on only be presented to the American public as a religion of peace.

ISLAMIC IRAN RAPE OF PRISONERS (sub-titles)

WHY ARE WOMEN GROUPS OF THE WESTERN WORLD, SPECIALLY AMERICA, SO SILENT ON THE RAPE AND ABUSE OF WOMEN INSIDE ISLAMIC IRAN?

Here is the relatively gentle but everelastingly traumatic  story of one of these compared to the recent spate of rape for torture reasons in Evin and Kahrizak prisons.

OBA-HUSSEIN'S MULLAH FRIENDS (ENGLISH SUBTITLES)

Islamic Iranian President Ahmadi-Nejad openly  complained that recently Oba-Hussein is  less supportive than before and stated that if it was meant to get some additional money from Iran, then no problem, the money is always there for him as usual!

Watch this horrifying video of an Iranian prison interrogation and ask yourself HOW IN HELL can Obama continue his paid support of this regime? Taking blood money puts the blood of these freedom fighters on Oba-HUssein's hands just as certainly as if he had been there and spilled the blood and conducted the TORTURE himself.

Supreme Ruler Ali Khamenei's middle son, Mojtaba regularly attends and participates in  "interrogation" sessions in the worst prisons and rapes prisoners for personal  pleasure and libido. Something expected from these brutal Mullahs and their agents. But for the US President to condone and support those who do this is despicable and puts to the lie his mealy mouthed, hypocritical condemnation of  alleged "harsh" American Abu Ghraib, GITMO and CIA techniques!

SHAME ON YOU, you dhimmi!

THE CHICAGO MOB NOW IN WASHINGTON D.C.

http://alanpetersgraphics.blogspot.com/2010/06/chicago-mob-now-in-washington-dc.html

INSIDUOUS INFILTRATION OF RADICAL MOSLEMS

http://alanpetersnewsbriefs.blogspot.com/2010/06/insiduous-infiltration-of-radical.html

CONSTITUTION UNDER ATTACK

OBAMA SHREDS THE CONSTITUTION EVEN WORSE THAN THESE TWO ENTITIES

Warning that appears on Wilder Publications' reprints of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and other historical texts.

A small publishing company is under fire after putting warning labels on copies of the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence and other historical documents.

Wilder Publications warns readers of its reprints of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, Common Sense, the Articles of Confederation, and the Federalist Papers, among others, that “This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today.”

The disclaimer goes on to tell parents that they "might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work."

Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, says the company may be trying to ensure that oversensitive people don't pull its works off bookstore or library shelves.

"Any idea that’s 100 years old will probably offend someone or other," Olson told FoxNews.com. "…But if there’s anything that you ought to be able to take at a first gulp for yourself and then ask your parents if you're wondering about this or that strange thing, it should be the founding documents of American history."

The warning seems to be offending more people than the documents themselves.

Amazon.com’s customer reviews of Wilder’s copy of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation show an overwhelming number of people speaking out against the disclaimer, describing it as “insulting,” “sickening” and “frankly, horrifying.”

Another review for Wilder’s edition of the Federalist Papers calls for an all-out boycott of the publisher, sarcastically pointing out the "dangerous ideas" it’s trying to protect children from: "limited government, checks and balances, constrained judicial review, dual sovereignty of states and federal government, and deliberative democracy."

And though warning labels are usually posted to protect a company from potential lawsuits, constitutional attorney Noel Francisco says this disclaimer has no legal benefits.

"Would it ever be a legal concern that selling the Constitution would expose you to some kind of liability? No. Never,” Francisco told FoxNews.com. "The Constitution is the founding document of the country, an operative legal document."

As for the idea that this warning label might help keep these works from being yanked off bookshelves, Francisco says it is more likely to have the opposite effect: people not carrying the book because it has the disclaimer.

"By putting on the warning, you’re making controversial something that’s not controversial: our Constitution, our Declaration of Independence," he said.

Amazon customers appear to agree. Almost all of the reviews discussing the disclaimer end with the same thought: don't buy from this publisher.

Efforts to reach the publisher were unsuccessful. (Who has successfully sabotaged spread of the Constititution with this trick).

ALSO!!

At one time the question for America's judges was how to read the
Constitution; but under today's liberal, postmodern, man-centered
worldview, the question too often is whether to read the Constitution.
Brannon Howse insightfully documents the tragic consequences that
judicial tyranny, legal positivism, and the humanist worldview are
having upon our faith, family, and freedoms."



- The Honorable Edwin Meese III, Former Attorney General, Reagan Administration



The course of action by our judiciary is no innocent drift in legal interpretation. The judges' unconstitutional moves have been calculated by a few to thrust their will upon Americans while the U.S. Congress has been asleep at the switch, seemingly unaware that the legislators' very reason for existence is being chipped away.

Benjamin Cardozo, appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1932, proudly proclaimed a belief in his right to usurp powers of the U.S. Congress and to violate the check-and-balance separations of the U.S. Constitution: "I take judge-made law as one of the existing realities of life."

Cardozo not only held the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Congress in contempt; he saw little purpose for people of faith - which includes most Americans-who want to apply a moral law as foundation for the legal process: "If there is any law which is back of the sovereignty of the state, and superior thereto, it is not law in such a sense as to concern the judge or lawyer, however much it concerns the statesman or the moralist."

Justice Cardozo was not the first to sound this theme. In 1907, Charles Evans Hughes, who would later become chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, declared, "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is."

Lino Graglia, professor of constitutional law at the University of Texas School of Law, explains the crisis caused when members of the judicial branch make policy:

Judicial usurpation of legislative power has become so common and so complete that the Supreme Court has become our most powerful and important instrument of government in terms of determining the nature and quality of American life.

The result is that the central truth of constitutional law today is that it has nothing to do with the Constitution except that the words "due process" or "equal protection" are almost always used by the judges in stating their conclusions. Not to put too fine a point on it, constitutional law has become a fraud, a cover for a system of government by the majority vote of a nine-person committee of lawyers, unelected and holding office for life. The desirability of this form of government should be the central question in any realistic discussion of judicial review today.

How can judges fulfill their sworn oath to defend and protect the U.S. Constitution while helping themselves to large portions of unconstitutional power and authority?

How can they uphold the U.S. Constitution when they often don't even consider the Constitution when rendering decisions?

Or how can federal judges claim to fulfill their sworn duty when the majority of federal judges have endeavored to replace the U.S. Constitution with a different judicial standard?

The separation of power among the three branches of our government-executive, judicial, and legislative-was designed to safeguard our nation from the very thing we now face: a runaway branch of the government. But make no mistake. The check system is still in place. It just isn't being used by Congress. Instead, our elected representatives go on allowing judges to enforce their new standard for law.

NOTE: And abused by Obama and his weirdo czars!
And exactly what is this new standard?

Secular humanism and its penchant for moral relativism, along with misapplied Darwinism, has now become the postmodern foundation on which America's courts and law schools are built. Constitutional and legal scholar John Eidsmoe observes: "Twentieth-century jurisprudence is based on a Darwinian worldview. Life evolves, men evolve, society evolves, and therefore laws and the constitution's meaning evolves and changes with time."

This new legal formulation is known as "legal positivism." In his book, Christianity and the Constitution, John Eidsmoe reviews the writings of the Critical Legal Studies movement, a group of radical lawyers, law professors, and law students. He summarizes legal positivism with the following points:

• There are no objective, God-given standards of law, or if there are, they are irrelevant to the modern legal system.

• Since God is not the author of law, the author of law must be man; in other words, law is law simply because the highest human authority, the state, has said it is law and is able to back it up by force.  (As propounded by Obama  in his Executive "equal" power claim)

• Since man and society evolve, therefore law must evolve as well.

• Judges, through their decisions, guide the evolution of law (Note again: judges "make law").

• To study law, get at the original sources of law, the decisions of judges; hence most law schools today use the "case law" method of teaching law.

Another, simpler definition of legal positivism is: moral relativism applied to law. Moral relativism is the belief there is no such thing as moral absolutes-no standard of right or wrong for all people in all places at all times. At times, moral relativism is also called, simply, pragmatism. Moral relativism is closely tied to situational ethics, the belief that individuals are free to decide for themselves what is best for them to secure the most desirable outcome in any given situation.

Tracing the development of the positivistic approach to law, David Barton notes, "This philosophy of 'positivism' was introduced in the 1870s when Harvard Law School Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell (1826–1906) applied Darwin's premise of evolution to jurisprudence."

Langdell's thought was advanced further by Dean Roscoe Pound and Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Holmes argued there is no fixed moral foundation for law: "The felt necessities of the time, the prevalent moral and political theories . . . have a good deal more to do than the syllogism [legal reasoning process] in determining the rules by which men should be governed."8

Did you catch that? The "felt necessities of the time" and "prevalent moral and political theories" should be the basis of the rules by which men are governed.

Using the "felt necessities" and "prevalent theories" model, judges can allow just about anything to be legal, depending on whose feelings, morals, and political theories are chosen for reference. Guided by this dangerous thinking, we have seen countless abortions performed in America. Even the grisly partial-birth abortion procedure has passed legal muster-a practice the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynahan called "near infanticide."

Along with millions of babies, matters of decency have also been aborted.

Current U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, while serving as an attorney for the ACLU in 1977, wrote a paper, entitled "Sex Bias in the U.S. Code," for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

In it, she argued that the legal age for sexual activity should be lowered to twelve years old.

If enough judges agree the age change "is a necessity" based on the perverted "moral and political theories" of Alfred Kinsey, for instance, Americans would have to accept that it would be legal for an adult to have sex with a child of age twelve. Lest you think that too crazy to happen, bear in mind that famed sex researcher Alfred Kinsey actually promoted the idea of adults having sex with children, and there are other forces pushing in similar directions.

A University of Minnesota publisher produced a book that discusses the "benefits" of children having sex with adults, and the North American Man/Boy Love Association has promoted this idea for years. These are the kinds of philosophical foundations that are now in play with relativistic judges.

AND THEY ARE BLOCKING ANY DISCOVERY INTO THE ELIGIBILITY OF OBAMA TO BE IN THE OVAL OFFICE - NOT EVEN LETTING MATTERS TO BE EVALUATED AND JUDGED ON THEIR MERITS - REGARDLESS OF WHAT IS FOUND TO BE THE RESULT BASED ON REAL FACTS. AND RESOLVE THIS MATTER ONCE AND FOR ALL!

They worry more about disturbing  the Black community than applying the law. And against which side of Obama is accused racism to apply? His WHITE or his BLACK/Arab half?

WHAT IS SHARIA?

http://terrornewsbriefs.blogspot.com/2010/06/what-is-sharia.html

NEEDS REPEATING

A LETTER FROM A PROCTOR & GAMBLE EXECUTIVE TO
THE PRESIDENT*

THE LAST SENTENCE IS THE MOST CHILLING

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an
acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest
rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize
him as the foremost leader in change management..

Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Proctor and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.

AN OPEN LETTER TO
PRESIDENT OBAMA

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
Limbaugh's, Hannitys, O'Reillys 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
*
*
This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it.
Big surprise. Since it hit the internet, however, it has had over
500,000 hits. Keep it going. All that is necessary for evil to succeed
is that good men do nothing.. It's happening right now.*

NEDA FILM - Mostly Farsi Language

http://farsiposts.blogspot.com/2010/06/neda-film.html 

PREVIEW OF HBO DOCUMENTARY  AIRING ON JUNE 14TH

AN "EDICT"SUGGESTS SENIOR MULLAHS MOVE TO NAJAF IN IRAQ - TO SAVE ISLAM

A few months ago. for their own safety,  a slew of middle level clerics/mullahs, aghast at the Green Iranian demonstrations against the regime "emigrated" out of the holy Iranian city of Qom and fled to the holy city of Najaf in Iraq, home to the most senior Shia Moslem in the world, Grand Ayatollah Sistani.

Other than sending a personal assistant to Qom to relay his  "discomfort' at the way Supreme Ruler in Iran, Ali Khamenei has handled the uprising in  a violent, brutal  fashion, Sistani has kept out of the fray and avoided issuing a fatwa (religious edict) against the torture, rapes and murders of protesters.

Enter Soroush. As a young man, he found himself in a position of strategist and tactician for Ayatollah Khomeini in the early days of the revolution and eventually  became an established advisor on policy. (Soroush is not his real name and he adopted this nickname meaning (roughly) "religious messenger of miracles" to suit "job" and avoid being identified in an official fashion.

Seeing the strength of the anti-regime demonstrations and fearing possible Israeli/Western military attacks leading to Shia Islam being "eradicated" in Iran if all the senior clergy were killed he has issued an edict for all of them to seek shelter in Najaf so they can restart a rebirth of Shia Islam.

Meanwhile, the Islamic regime in Iran, at odds how to stop the movements against them, including from various splinters of opposing clerics, has resorted to executions to drive fear into the hearts of the opposition. They executed FOURTEEN "dissidents" today. And declared that they have another two dozen in line to be hanged shortly.

Interestingly,  fear and suppression have failed to cow the dissent which has to also deal with leaders like Moussavi, Karroubi, Hatami and Rafsanjani putting out statements supporting the Islamic regime but attacking the Khamenei administration, if effect weakening and diluting the focus of demonstrations, who want a regime change but find their leaders falling short in this respect.

The kernel of this commentary is how seriously the Mullahs are taking the probability of a highly lethal and widespread attack in the near future or at least taking the clerics away from the discomfort of an effective sanction on trade with Iran and banning travel of these people to destinations outside Iran.

What is heartbreaking is the direct and indirect support of Obama, in Jihad Moslem fashion,  for this bloodthirsty and brutal regime, which deflates opposition protesters psychologically to where instead of being encouraged by support from America surging ahead, instead they see their Mullah enemy receiving the support the dissenters want.

Without a doubt, Obama's every action supports Islamic desires and benefits under the false pretense if unclenching our American fist just as everything Jimmy Carter did  benefited the Soviets to a point where the comment came about that "Carter was the best Soviet president America ever elected.

 With his low life, inept, inexperienced street level thuggery mindsets and almost fanatical and ideological insistence to destroy as much of our nation before his ability to do so evaporates in the November elections where he loses control of both the Senate and Congress he has comfortably taken away the title of America's worst president ever from Jimmuh the idiot Carter.

It was hard to imagine anyone being worse than Carter until Obambi hit the town with his criminal enterprise and weird czars and total deaf ear to what the American people want.

Resulting in, so far a rule by tyranny! Right now America is no longer a free republic, except in name but in the coils of the Obama serpentine  tyranny, where his people pass huge bills they have not read and without input accepted or examined from Republicans or Independents. And most  other bills by voice votes where passage is a subjective evaluation  by one of their own and avoids any record of who voted for what.

And the one party criminal enterprise does not even allow all of their own to contribute. Instead the leadership writes up bills behind closed doors.

Unless America wakes up and votes the Democrats and turncoat Republicans out of office and thus puts brakes on budgets/funds on Oba-Hussein's nefarious plans, we can say goodbye to our country forever and try to live in a bankrupt, lunatic, tyrannical environment created by someone who has never had to run anything, not even a coffee shop or  tiny business and has no clue of life outside his street level, Chicago style thuggery he used in his neighborhood organizing strong arm mindsets.

WAKE UP AMERICA AND VOTE THESE SCOUNDRELS (to be polite)  OUT OF OFFICE AND SAVE OUR NATION!

IT'S THE CONSPIRACY, STUPID!

As Obama's support plummets in freefall, by contrast the likelihood of his secrets and fraud emerging into public view rises proportionally. With a career ending series of events on the horizon.

And quite a number of others will go down with him.

Why else would the military refuse to allow legal discovery to Lt. Colonel Laitkin, almost ensuring a mistrial at his Court Martial while still blocking the truth/fraud emerging.

The Obama administration may well be ENCOURAGING Iran to provoke a confrontation in any armed naval escort of a Gaza blockade breaker to goad Israel into a response attack on Iranian ships, which would trigger severe Hamas and Hezbollah attacks on Israel with missiles in retaliation.

THEN all hell will break loose for the street level thug Oba-Hussein, unable to see beyond his desire to destroy us, as an estimated 50,000 + Jihadi suiciders/homiciders ALREADY inside the USA and thousands more aimed at US targets worldwide in a frenzy of soft targetting attacks in many other nations leap into action.

Loss of oil supply from Iran and possibly the Persian Gulf as a whole will also raise the value of Brazilian oil, in which Obama has a clear vested interest on behalf of Soros.

IMHO Obama will delight in the destruction he unleashes on America and American interests, which is far too focused to be pure ignorance.

Just as the lackadaisical, casual Gulf oil spill handling and thus an excuse for a drilling ban SERVES TO BOOST THE VALUE of Brazilian offshore investment held by his master Soros. And protects Saudi oil sales to the USA, while increasingly, the sales are siphoned off to an oil hungry China, thus further starving us.

And makes Brazilian oil even more viable and valuable. Here, we must consider the recent Iran-Brazil nuclear co-operation in the all round win for hard to deny, Moslem Obama, Soros, Brazil, Iran and to a degree for their radical Venezuelan ally.

Plus the deep sea BP oil reservoir is apparently the second biggest reserve in the world and shutting it down and any other access to it a huge plus for Soros and Brazil.

The fact that the BP CEO (or President) sold well over a $1 million of his stock ONE WEEK BEFORE the explosion does lead to less than a tin foil conspiracy possibility that this was a planned event between BP (which invested millions in Oba-Hussein and reaped huge profits from lack of supervision of their operations). And would support the motives outlined above.

Or a  diver could be tasked to cause the explosion for the same nefarious motivations

With any administration, even weird Carter or unscrupulous Clinton, other than the Oba-Hussein Thugocracy, I would shun such a comment as tinfoil hat level. Here, as I watch our nation being destroyed - IMHO on purpose - this appears too plausible to avoid sharing.

PHOTOS - GAZA THE OPEN AIR PRISON CAMP - PICTURES SPEAK LOUDER THAN HAMAS WORDS

THE ISRAELIS ARE STARVING US IN GAZA....

Have no clothes......

Not even for their children....

PHOTOS COURTESY HAMAS!!

OBA-HUSSEIN - MEET OUR REAL AMERICA NOT YOUR RADICALLY TWISTED ONE

June 04, 2010 — Herman Cain lead a Q&A session at the Douglas County Tea Party when a young woman asked him about the attack by the Left on our Judeo-Christian heritage in America...He addressed her question, then went to the last question of the night, and the crowd was not expecting what happened next... Verse 2! And the reaction of the people.

video: TURKISH FLOTILLA ALREADY PLANNED IN 2009

Organizer of "Freedom Flotilla," Bülent Yıldırım, in a Hamas Rally in Gaza: All the Muslims of the World Will March to Gaza (Archival) From the Internet - February 2009.

Turkey is fast leaving their long standing Attaturk secular stance and tumbling into the Jihadist camp under the current administrations (theirs and the Moslem promoting Oba-Hussein one in the USA).

 Even the Turkish "Khomeini" equivalent,  Fethullah Gullen, who resides (in now rescinded/over-turned Turkish exile) in the USA has come out against the flotillas, though he promotes Turkey becoming an Islamic State instead of a secular one.

He can throw at least two million Gullen dedicated Jihadi Turkish Islamist followers of his into the streets within Turkey at the snap of his fingers.

CLICK ON TITLE  to view MEMRI's archive video with English sub-titles for the Turkish language speech/exhortations and Arabic repetitions to the Gaza crowd.

PARIS

The Turkish Islamic charity behind a flotilla of aid ships that was raided by Israeli forces on its way to Gaza had ties to terrorism networks, including a 1999 Al Qaeda plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport, France's former top anti-terrorism judge said Wednesday.

The Istanbul-based Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, known by its Turkish acronym IHH, had "clear, long-standing ties to terrorism and Jihad," former investigating judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

Bruguiere, who led the French judiciary's counterterrorism unit for nearly two decades before retiring in 2007, didn't indicate whether IHH now has terror ties, but said it did when he investigated it in the late 1990s.


"They were basically helping Al Qaeda when (Usama) bin Laden started to want to target U.S. soil," he said.

Some members of an international terrorism cell known as the Fateh Kamel network then worked at the IHH, he said. Kamel, an Algerian-Canadian dual national, had ties to the nascent Al Qaeda, Bruguiere said.

Among Kamel's followers was Ahmed Ressam, an Algerian who was arrested in the U.S. state of Washington in December 1999 on his way to bomb Los Angeles International Airport as part of an Al Qaeda plot.

"IHH had a role in the organization that led to the plot," Bruguiere said, reiterating sworn testimony he made in a U.S. Federal Court during Ressam's trial. Ressam is serving a 22-year prison sentence.

Bruguiere issued an international warrant for Kamel, Ressam's former mentor, who was extradited from Jordan to France in 1999 and sentenced to eight years in prison on terror-related charges.

IHH vehemently denies ties to radical groups. The group is not among some 45 groups listed as terrorists by the U.S. State Department's Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism (surprise, surprise!). Nine people on board the IHH flotilla were killed by Israeli forces on Monday.

"We are a legal organization," IHH board member Omer Faruk Korkmaz said late Wednesday in response to Bruguiere's statements. "We have nothing to do with any illegal organization," he said.

"We don't know Ahmed Ressam or Fateh Kamel," Korkmaz said. "We don't approve of the actions of any terrorist organization in the world." (How about HAMAS, which is on the State Department list?)

French investigators found in the 1990s that "several members of Fateh Kamel's network worked at the IHH as a cover," Bruguiere said. "It was too systematic and too widespread for the NGO (non-governmental organization) not to know" their real goal, he said.

The former judge, renowned for tracking down convicted terrorist Carlos the Jackal, said he didn't believe the IHH could have been infiltrated by terrorists without its knowledge.

"It's hard to prove, but all elements of the investigation showed that part of the NGO served to hide jihad-type activities," Bruguiere said. "I'm convinced this was a clear strategy, known by IHH."

The judge said he was personally involved in a raid with French and Turkish police at IHH headquarters in Istanbul in 1998, where they found weapons, false documents and other "incriminating" material.

"It was clearly proven that some of the NGO's work was not charity, it was to provide a facade for moving funds, weapons and mujahedeen to and from Bosnia and Afghanistan" — areas focused on by Islamic militants then.

In Istanbul, Korkmaz, of IHH, confirmed the late '90s police raid but denied that any weapons were found and said there was no evidence found of links to militancy.

Bruguiere would not specify how many members of Kamel's terror cell worked at IHH or give their names, but he said one of the suspects, a man from Bosnia, appeared in another terror-related case as recently as 2005 — though there was no indication at the time that the man still had ties to IHH.

Elements within the charity supported jihadi operations in the 1990s, Bruguiere said, before adding: "I don't know whether they continued to do so" more recently.

"But it seemed clear at the time that it was thanks to a measure of political backing within the Turkish government that it (IHH) could continue to operate," despite the strong suspicions against it, Bruguiere said.

Bruguiere retired from the judiciary in 2007 when he took part in an election to become a lawmaker in the conservative party of French President Nicolas Sarkozy. He lost his bid.

Bruguiere, 67, is now the coordinator for the European Union in a terrorism finance tracking program jointly run with the United States.

In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters on Wednesday that "we know that IHH representatives have met with senior Hamas officials in Turkey, Syria, and Gaza over the past three years. That is obviously of great concern to us."

But, he said the U.S. could not "validate" that IHH has connections to Al Qaeda (the ONLY TERROR organization clearly Moslem Obama attacks as they are strongly against his financiers and royal family mentors - to whom he bows in submission down to his waist - inside Saudi Arabia).

THE REAL "TURKISH PEACE ACTIVISTS" IN FLOTILLA

This video, (from on board security cameras) and some filmed and left behind  by journalists - who were furious they were used by Israel to disprove the claimed peaceful intentions of the so-called activists in the flotilla are proof that this flotilla was not a shipment of  aid to Gaza but a provocation to goad Israel into action to defend itself.

Coming later this week - photos of an open market in the so-called "miserable outdoor mass prison"  as Gaza is described by anti-Israel propaganda, which cries of food shortages, lack of clothing and toys for children!

Judge for yourselves.

PAUPER PAY PAUPER TO PAY PAUPER -- WITH WHAT MONEY?

COMING TO OBAMA'S AMERICA!

SPECIALLY WITH THIS "LEADERSHIP" OF FAILURE

Obambi realizes he has no clue how to run anything (never did, nor had a reason to) and that he is a clown. So he is out to enjoy himself for the duration. AND carry out his mission to destroy America once and for ever.

And his hiring experience was street level thugs or over the top radicals, who pleased his own similar mindsets or were his enforcement tools in neighborhoods where he wanted to "persuade/organize" effectively. Just look at his czars!

For Soros' financial benefit, for his own Communist radical mindsets and Moslem upbringing and no longer deniable Islamic beliefs and "taghieh" (lying to promote and protect Islam).

CHECKOUT HIS SCHEDULE DURING THE 45-DAYS OF CRISIS OF WHICH HE CLAIMED HE WAS IN CHARGE

COURAGE!

OBAMACARE CHICKENS SLOWLY COMING HOME TO ROOST

One of the slimiest of Congressmen responsible for the worst of Obamacare and many other anti-"We the People" actions inside Congress and false hearings against opponents has suddenly seen the extent of his perfidy rise to the top!

Fiscal Fraud of Obamacare Snowballing Already
by Terence P. Jeffrey
Remember the health care issue? Well, the fiscal consequences of the socialized medicine scheme enacted by President Barack Obama and Congress just two months ago are already beginning to snowball.

Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, was one of the key architects and advocates of Obamacare. He was back on the House floor on Friday delivering an urgent plea to fellow Democrats that inadvertently -- or, perhaps, unavoidably -- revealed the fraudulent nature of our new national health care regime.

It was supposed to save the taxpayers money, remember?

"This legislation will lower costs for families and for businesses and for the federal government, reducing our deficit by over $1 trillion in the next two decades," Obama said when he signed the bill.

On Friday, Waxman declared that the sky is about to fall on the Medicare system. He went to the House floor to "urge" his colleagues to vote for a bill that includes $102 billion in new federal spending and would add $54 billion to the national debt over the next 10 years -- $25 billion of it in the few months remaining in this fiscal year.

Why did Waxman believe this new borrowing-and-spending was necessary?

"It's absolutely critical to do this if we are going to keep doctors in Medicare and keep the promise to Medicare beneficiaries that they will have access to physicians' services," said Waxman. "This provision will provide a moderate increase in physicians' fees, 2.2 percent for the rest of the year. If we don't act, doctors' fees will be cut by 21 percent from where they are today. This would be unconscionable."

It would not merely be unconscionable. If the 21-percent cut in Medicare fees for doctors -- that, in fact, legally took effect on June 1 -- is allowed to stand, many doctors in this country will simply stop seeing Medicare patients. They will not be able to afford it. The cost to them of serving their patients will exceed what they are paid. Their profit margin will be swept away.

To make precisely this point, 12 national surgeons' associations -- including the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery -- sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a letter last Wednesday warning her what would happen if Medicare doctors' fees are slashed as they are scheduled to be under current law.

"These continued payment cuts, rising practice costs and a lack of certainty going forward, make it difficult, if not impossible, for already financially challenged surgical practices to continue to treat Medicare patients," the surgeons' associations told Pelosi.

The letter pointed the speaker toward the results of a survey of more than 13,000 physicians done in February by the Surgical Coalition, a group of more than 20 medical associations. The survey asked these doctors what they would do if Medicare fees were slashed by the scheduled 21.2 percent.

Twenty-nine percent said they would opt out of the Medicare system entirely. Almost 69 percent said they would limit the number of appointments they would take from Medicare patients, 45.8 percent said they would start referring complex Medicare patients to other physicians, 45.3 percent said they would stop providing certain services, 43.8 percent said they would defer purchasing new medical equipment and 42.7 percent said they would cut their staff.

Almost 4 percent of the doctors said they would close or sell their practices.

Why did Congress plan to slash the doctors' Medicare fees in the first place? It didn't. In the past, the majority in Congress has routinely enacted budget bills that fraudulently assumed that on some future date the federal government would dramatically slash the Medicare fees paid to doctors, knowing that before that date arrived the majority would pass "emergency" legislation postponing the cuts to some still-future date. The majority in Congress does this so the long-term deficits caused by their spending bills appear to be smaller than they actually are.

As originally proposed, Obamacare would have ended this practice, permanently setting Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors at the true anticipated level. But the Congressional Budget Office determined that doing so would have added $208 billion to the cost of Obamacare over 10 years, forcing the CBO to declare that Obamacare added to the deficit rather than reduced it. That would have cost Obamacare votes on the House floor and quite possibly defeated the legislation.

So the congressional leadership stripped the "doc fix" out of Obamacare and left it to another day.

Waxman went down to the floor last Friday to declare that day had come. Unfortunately, for him, the Senate had already left town for its Memorial Day vacation. So, the current fix will have to wait until it returns.

Even then, the fix only accounts for $22.9 billion of the $102 billion cost of the bill the House did pass on Friday. Most of the rest of the money is for extending unemployment benefits and special targeted tax breaks.

The $22.9 billion fix for the doctors' fees -- if passed by the Senate -- would only last through September 2011. Then Congress will presumably do it all again -- or let the Medicare system collapse.

In the meantime, Obamacare is supposed to cut half a trillion in spending from elsewhere in Medicare, while Obama's budget -- not counting the $54 billion in new debt included in this bill -- is expected to add $9.8 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years.