Dems Reject Health Care Amendment To Prevent Federal Funding Of Abortion

HATCH AMENDMENT TO PROHIBIT FUNDING FOR ABORTION NARROWLY DEFEATED

 

WASHINGTON – A Senate committee today narrowly defeated Sen. Orrin Hatch’s amendment to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee’s health care reform bill to prohibit federal dollars from being used to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or to protect the life of the mother.

Hatch (R-Utah) was dismayed by the HELP Committee’s 12-11 vote against his amendment to the proposed Affordable Health Choices Act.

“The right to life is a fundamental value cherished by most Americans, regardless of their political affiliation,” said Hatch, a member of the HELP Committee. “Yet unless abortion is specifically excluded from this bill, the secretary of Health and Human Services could mandate coverage of abortion, arguing it is an ‘essential health care benefit’ and is ‘necessary for meeting minimum qualifying coverage.’ ”

Last week, the HELP Committee adopted language to require “essential community providers,” which includes abortion providers, to be included in health insurance networks. While Hatch was assured that amendment, which defines Planned Parenthood clinics as “essential community providers,” would not require insurance plans to cover abortion, he wanted language in the bill to ensure that did not happen.

“That is why today’s vote is so puzzling,” Hatch said. “If last week’s amendment does not sanction taxpayer-funded abortions, as its proponents have said, then why strike down an amendment to ensure that it doesn’t? That is hardly reassuring to Americans who believe in the sanctity of human life.”

http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Print&PressRelease_id=75f521c9-1b78-be3e-e037-41a1d18d66c3&suppresslayouts=true

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/content/mobile/705316666/Hatch-loses-fight-on-abortion-funding.html

http://connect2utah.com/content/fulltext/?cid=53011

Read what the Pro-Abortion site NARAL’s www.prochoice california.org had to say about the vote and compare NARAL’s comments to the President’s:  http://www.prochoicecalifornia.org/news/headlines/200907132.shtml

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PRESIDENT’S PLEDGE? 

Can’t we trust the Presdient at his word?

Contact your elected representatives: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

Health Care Reform: Dems Defeat Amendment to Guarantee American’s Right To Keep Existing Insurance Policy

Senator Orin Hatch, Utah, made the following comments prior to submitting the following list of proposed amendments to the Health Care reform Act:

Hatch believes we should “do exactly what American families are demanding – step back, take a deep breath and start over on a truly bipartisan bill,” he filed numerous amendments in hopes to protect middle class families from tax increases, ensure continued access to quality care for seniors, promote prudent and proven tort reform, and stop out of control government spending. 

Hatch’s amendments include:

– An amendment to exempt any middle-class American family from tax increases of any kind in this bill.

An amendment to stop the implementation of the bill if more than 1,000,000 Americans lose their current health care coverage because of the bill.

– An amendment to prohibit federal health care funds from being spent on abortions.

– An amendment to restore and protect the Medicare Advantage Program, which is enjoyed by almost 10 million seniors

– An amendment to reign in trial lawyer awards in health care lawsuits.

– An amendment to preserve health flexible savings accounts — accounts which millions of Americans use to pay for health care services.

– An amendment to strike the new taxes being imposed on medical devices such as hospital beds and hearing aids, which will simply be passed on to American families.

– An amendment to protect tax payer dollars and prohibit funding in the bill from going to groups such as ACORN.

http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=e2257082-1b78-be3e-e09b-32f8a27c14ce

Hatch was one of the original members of the “Gang Of Seven”, working towards a bi-partisan health care reform, however, Hatch left the group in July, saying “Democratic leadership did not give Democrats enough flexibility to seek true compromise.”

Hatch complained Tuesday that the bill “contains almost $350 billion in new taxes on American families and businesses. This at a time when we are facing some of the toughest economic conditions our nation has ever seen.”

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705331872/Hatch-wants-reset-in-health-care-reform.html?linkTrack=rss-30

ON A PARTY LINE VOTE, DEMOCRATS REJECTED THESE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS.

That is correct, Democrats rejected an amendment that would guarantee that Amewricans could keep the policy they currently have and that “if” the proposed health care reform would result in more than 1 Million Americans being forced to give up their current Health Care plan, implementation of the reforms would be blocked. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S REPEATED PLEDGE THAT NO ONE WOULD BE FORCED TO GIVE UP THEIR CURRENT POLICY ….. Why then did the Democrats vote down this Amendment?

Answer: Even at this early stage three of the President’s “promises” are being ignored and broken. 1) Medicare is being cut. 2). Seniors are being forced out of Medicare Advantage – 20 Million Seniors will lose that coverage – a coverage many seniors living in rural areas are dependent on and 3). The plan is not deficit nutral – that is why the Democrats also voted to proceed to a final vote before the bi-partisan Congressional Budget Office can score the “true cost” of the final bill once it is drafted.

Why rush? Why not take the time and read the bill and get a final “projected” price tag before you force this mess upon the taxpayers. The Democrats also voted to  proceed to a final vote before the final bill is printed and placed on-line.

Just like with the other hugh spending bills – the Dmeocarts want to pass legislation in the dark of night, with as little transparency as possible.

Is this so they can later claim, “I don’t know what was in the bill, I didn’t have time to read it”. On a party line vote the Democrats voted down amendments to require that the CBO cost analysis and final draft of the bill be placed on line for 72 hours, prior to the final vote. A mere 72 hours. Just 3 days. What is the rush?

President Obama made a campaign pledge that in his Administration all legislation would be available on line for review by the American people, for 5 DAYS, before a final vote. 5 days not 3.

Isn’t this Presdient’s word worth anything?

“5 days”, transparency, “you can keep your policy”, “no abortion funding”, “deficit neutral”, “no medicare cuts” ………. wow, zero for 6!

Contact your elected officials today: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

Another Blast From The Past – Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor Calls On US Military To Shoot Down Israeli Jets

Just when I thought I’d  heard all there was to hear from the Carter Administration, the Administration that lost Iran to the militants and made America’s Military might a laughing stock on the world stage ….. now comes Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor with the unbelievable suggestion that the US should shoot down Israeli jets if Israel should attempt a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s Nuclear Weapons program.

Clearly, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama can’t tell our friends from our foes – or do they have a separate set of secret friends they don’t want us to know about?

How can American Jews continue to support this party when so many of its leaders are so anti- Israel?

From the Weekly Standard:

Brezinski Calls for Obama to Shoot Down Israeli Jets; “A Liberty in Reverse”

In a little noticed interview with the Daily Beast (presumably little noticed because serious people don’t read the Daily Beast), Zbigniew Brzezinski suggests that Barack Obama do more than just refuse to support an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear sites — the American president must give the order to shoot down Israeli aircraft as they cross Iraqi airspace:

 DB: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike might be in America’s worst interest?

Brzezinski: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

DB: What if they fly over anyway?

Brzezinski: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse.

 Contrary to Brezinski’s half-hearted disclaimer that no one wishes for such an outcome, there are plenty on the left who would delight in a pitched battle between the United States and Israel. Democrats in Congress routinely support resolutions affirming Israel’s right to take whatever steps it deems necessary to assure its own national defense. And Obama has at least paid lip service to the concept. But hostility to Israel among the rank and file is very real on the left — and among “realists.”

So conjure the image — the Obama administration sending U.S. aircraft up to protect Iran’s airspace and it’s nuclear installations from an attack by a democracy that is one of America’s closest allies. Unfortunately, this may not be so hard to imagine in Israel, where the number of people who believe Obama is pro-Israel is at just 4 percent — and falling. And given Obama’s (literally) submissive posture to the Saudis, his indulgence of the Iranians, and his simultaneously hard-line approach to Israel, it seems even some of Obama’s supporters can savor the possibility of a “reverse Liberty.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/09/brezinski_calls_for_obama_to_s.asp

AP Reports, “Rising unemployment accelerates foreclosure crisis”, Economy continues downward spiral. Credit Default Rates Up.

WASHINGTON – Relentlessly rising unemployment is triggering more home foreclosures, threatening the Obama administration’s efforts to end the housing crisis and diminishing hopes the economy will rebound with vigor.

In past recessions, the housing industry helped get the economy back on track. Home builders ramped up production, expecting buyers to take advantage of lower prices and jump into the market. But not this time.

These days, homeowners who got fixed-rate prime mortgages because they had good credit can’t make their payments because they’re out of work. That means even more foreclosures and further declines in home values.

The initial surge in foreclosures in 2007 and 2008 was tied to subprime mortgages issued during the housing boom to people with shaky credit. That crisis has ebbed, but it has been replaced by more traditional foreclosures tied to the recession.

Unemployment stood at 9.5 percent in June and is expected to rise past 10 percent and well into next year. The last time the U.S. economy was mired in a recession with such high unemployment was 1981 and 1982.

But the home foreclosure rate then was less than one-fourth what it is today. Housing wasn’t a drag on the economy, and when the recession ended, the boom was explosive. (The economic recovery of the 1980’s was fueled by Reagan’s tax cuts and a shrinking of Government – a formula we won’t see from this Administration).

No one is expecting a repeat. The real estate market is still saturated with unsold homes and homes that sell below market value because they are in or close to foreclosure.

“It just doesn’t have the makings of a recovery like we saw in the early 1980s,” says Wells Fargo Securities senior economist Mark Vitner, who predicts mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures won’t return to normal levels for three more years.

Almost 4 percent of homeowners with a mortgage are in foreclosure, and 8 percent on top of that are at least a month behind on payments — the highest levels since the Great Depression.

In the last 12 months, 15% of mortgages have had forclosure completed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090716/ap_on_re_us/us_foreclosure_crisis_unemployment

Obama’s Trillion Dollar Mortgage Modification Program, which he promised would help 9,000,000 (9 Million), has in fact provided temporary relief to less than 75,000 (Seventy Five Thousand). Many of the 75,000 have, after receiving a modification, now slipped into foreclsoure anyway. 

Credit card defaults keep climbing

Default rates in May continue to rise as borrowers struggle with the weak job market.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Banks continue to write off credit card debt as consumers hurt by record high unemployment default at an increasing rate.

Regulatory forms filed this week by some of the nation’s largest banks showed default rates on credit cards rose in May. The default rate is a measure of loans that the bank does not expect to be repaid.

“Data from May showed continued signs of stress for card issuers, reflective of worsening unemployment trends and deteriorating macro [economic] conditions,” analysts at Bernstein Research said in a report Tuesday.

Bank of America the nation’s largest bank, said its default rate jumped to 12.5% in May from 10.5% the month before. Other major banks, including Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Capital One also reported increases in May default rates.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/16/news/companies/credit_card_losses/index.htm?section=money_latest

Obama Administration Fudging The Unemployment Count 07/15/09 – 522,000 or 667,000 – Why is the Government Underreporting by 20%?

WASHINGTON – The number of newly laid-off Americans signing up for unemployment benefits last week, and those using this safety net over a longer period, both plunged. But the government figures released Thursday were clouded by difficulties adjusting for temporary shutdowns at auto plants. READ “The reported numbers plunged” the real numbers, the count of the actual unemployed did not – Please read on.

The Labor Department said new applications for unemployment insurance dropped by a seasonally adjusted 47,000 to 522,000, the lowest level since early January. Economists polled by Thomson Reuters expected claims to rise to around 575,000The Labor Department is adjusting the number and reporting some number “other than the true number” of individuals claiming benefits. Please read on ….

A department analyst said the drop in new claims didn’t point to improvements in economic conditions. The second straight weekly decline reflected problems adjusting layoffs for temporary shutdowns at General Motors and Chrysler plants to retool for new models.

The unadjusted figures for last week actually showed that new claims rose by 86,389 last week, which would push the total to 667,534. The actual number is 110,000 more than anticipated by economists and 145,000 more than the number being reported by the Government. After upwqard revisions, this week would represent the 30 straight week where “actual new unemployment claims” toppped 600,000.

So why do the headlines state “unemployment drops” ……… pure political theatre …. the Obama Administration will employ any trick to stall reporting a National Unemployment Rate of 10%. (the true numbers posted over the last 3 weeks would indicate that the National unemployment  rate is currently at 10.2%).

Weekly claims remain far above the roughly 325,000 that analysts say is consistent with a healthy economy. New claims last fell below 300,000 in early 2007. The lowest level this year was 488,000 for the week ended Jan. 3. The January 3 number was revised upward twice – as the number, 488,000, was proven to be another “underreport”.

Those adjustment difficulties also were behind a big drop reported for people continuing to draw unemployment benefits, the analyst said.

The truth … the number of unemployed actually increased by 620,000 …..

Telling lies about the real unemployment numbers – to make oneself look good politically ….. just more of the same  old style politics …..

Read the original story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090716/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

Obama’s Policy With Iran Fails – History Repeats Itself – Iranians Detain British Embassy Staff –

By KARIN LAUB, Associated Press Writer Karin Laub, Associated Press Writer 41 mins ago

EDITOR’S NOTE: Iranian authorities have barred journalists for international news organizations from reporting on the streets and ordered them to stay in their offices. This report is based on the accounts of witnesses reached in Iran and official statements carried on Iranian media.

Iranian authorities have detained several local employees of the British Embassy in Iran, a move that Britain’s foreign secretary Sunday called “harassment and intimidation.”

Iranian media reported Sunday that eight local embassy staff were detained for an alleged role in post-election protests, but gave no further details. British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said the employees were detained Saturday, but did not say how many were taken into custody.

The detentions signaled a further hardening of Iran’s stance toward the West which has become increasingly vocal in its condemnation of a crackdown on opposition supporters.

Opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi has alleged massive fraud in the June 12 presidential election and says he is the rightful winner, not President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Miliband, who is on the Greek island of Corfu for a foreign ministers’ meeting, said Britain has lodged a protest with the Iranian authorities over the detentions. He described the step as “harassment and intimidation of a kind that is quite unacceptable.”

“The idea that the British Embassy is somehow behind the demonstrations and protests that have been taking place in Tehran. … is wholly without foundation,” he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090628/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election

In November 1979 radical student revolutionaries, supported by the radical Islamic Cleric Ruhollah Khomeini, seized the American Embassy and held American Diplomats hostage for the next 444 days. The Embassy was seized during the presidency of Jimmy Carter and the hostages were not released until just minutes after President Ronald Reagan was sworn in on January 20, 1981.  

The act of seizing an Embassy or doing harm to Embassy personal violates both International Law and the teachings of the Quran as relayed by the Prophet Muhhamad, peace be upon him, the founder of the Islamic religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad#Other_religious_traditions  (see: Al-Harith bin ‘Umar Al-Azdi) 

Once again, the political leaders in Iran demonstrate, by their actions, their belief that they are “above” the teachings of the Quran and exempt from its directives.

Former Iranian President Bani Sadr (Abolhassan Banisadr – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolhassan_Banisadr ) the first Elected President of Iran following the “Islamic Revolution” has identified current Iranian President Mammoud Ahmadinejad as one of the leaders of the Group who seized the American Embassy and while Ahmadinejad may have had doubts about seizing the embassy, he did nothing to stop the action and did, in fact, fully support the continued detention of the Embassy Staff after the Ayatollah Khomeini “endorsed” the seizure. Five of the American hostages have identified Ahmadinejad as one of their captors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_the_1979_Hostage_Crisis

Obama has mishandled the “New Iranian Crisis” as badly as Carter mishandled the first Iranian Crisis 30 years ago. A failure to understand history is leading to it being repeated or extended …. the current crisis is clearly tied to the original of some 30 years ago.

Talk rather than action. Slogans over substance. Obama and Carter. History repeating itself.

30 years ago a small and violent group of demonstrators seized power in Iran. Now 30 years later, the Iranian people are attempting to reclaim their freedom while the repressive Iranian Government violates both International Law and the basic tenants of Islam.

Islam is a just religion. Islam does not permit the supression of it’s people for the sake of securing power for the few. Tyrants are tyrants because their actions are unjust and self serving.

Obama’ narcissism leads to the dangerous delusion that the tyrants in charge in Iran will be swayed from their course of violent supression of the Iranian people or be dissuaded from their reckless course of nuclear weapons production by the pure “force” of Obama’s rhetoric.

The “Free World” needs more from its leader than his narcissism.

On November 20 1979 a group of “Islamic militants” seized the Grand Mosque, the holiest site in Islam, located in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.  The seizure was timed to take place during the haji or annual pilgrimage. November 20 marked the 1st day of the Islamic New Year and the seizure took place as 50,000 worshipers were preparing for morning prayer. At the time the Saudi bin-Laden Group (yes that bin- Laden family) was involved with renovating the Mosque. 500 armed “militants” or terrorists took control of the mosque and executed both security staff and worshippers. By the time the mosque was retaken from these terrorists, hundreds of worshippers had been killed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_Seizure

The Iranian Government falsely claimed that the U.S. Government was behind the attack on the Grand Mosque, triggering anti American attacks around the world. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/21/newsid_4187000/4187184.stm   

The Grand Mosque was seized less than 2 weeks after the US Embassy was seized. The Grand Mosque was seized as international pressure was mounting against the “revolutionary” activities in Iran.  The seizure of the Grand Mosque was not a protest against the United States, it was a coldly calculated action aimed at gaining false support for Khomeini and his “Revolutionary Guards” in Iran.

What type of leaders conduct themselves in this manner? Seizing one of the worlds holiest sites during a religous holiday! Slaughtering innocent worshippers! What does this tell us about the belief system of  those who planned the seizure?

In 1933, Hitler’s Nazi Party set fire to the Riechstag, the German equivalent of the Capital Building in Washington D.C. The Nazi’s then blamed the act on their political enemies and declared martial law, eliminating many of the freedoms previously enjoyed by the German people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree                                                                                                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqw1R2oA9KA&NR=1  

The “revolutionaries” who continue to run Iran this day, used a lie concerning their desecration of the Grand Mosque to consolidate their power in Iran. To this day the Iranian’s have been denied a “free election” and have never regained the personal freedoms taken from them under the guise of “revolution”.  

The Iranian leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, made the following comment in 2005, “They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets,”. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm

In October 2005  Ahmadinejad said this,                                                                                                                                                                                                  

“The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world,” during a conference in Tehran on Wednesday, entitled The World without Zionism. “The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land,” he said. “As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,” said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran’s revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini. Addressing about 4000 students gathered in an Interior Ministry conference hall, Ahmadinejad also called for Palestinian unity, resistance and a point “where the annihilation of the Zionist regime will come“. “The Islamic umma (community) will not allow its historic enemy to live in its heartland,” he said in the fiery speech that centred on a “historic war between the oppressor and the world of Islam”.  http://canadiancoalition.com/aljazeera01/IranCallsForDestructionIsrael.html 

The “oppressor” is not Israel but the United States. 

Where was this historic speech reported? Aljazeera.net, not by some Pro-Israel or Pro-West news organization – check the site above for yourself.

These are not isolated statements byAhmadinejad:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9zcElqetqk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#Statement_during_2005_Muslim_Summit

The ruling elite in Iran are not the true face of Islam, they are the most recent reincarnation of  World War II’s Nazi Party. 

“Once I am really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Jews. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows – at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example – as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Jew in Munich has been exterminated. Other cities will follow suit, precisely in this fashion, until all Germany has been completely cleansed of Jews.” (1)  Adolph Hitler, 1922. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/hitler-1922.html

http://cghs.dade.k12.fl.us/holocaust/fsolution.htm

No wonder the Iranian people want “change”.

All of these events, speeches, proclamations and threats took place prior to Obama’s inauguration. So why then, did Obama chose to embrace Ahmadinejad at Israel’s expense? http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87271 . In Israel there is a growing consensus that Obama’s policies are hostile to Israel and that like his predecessor, Jimmy Carter, Obama favors Hamas over Israel.

Hamas is the Palestinian based Terrorist organization, funded by Iran and Syria,  that is intent on the total destruction of Israel and its replacement by a Fundamentalist Islamic State. A state modeled after the current Government in Iran.  

So much for the Quranic teachings that, “The teachings of the Qur’an favour mutual respect and coexistence with other religions. According to the Qur’an, the Prophet Mohamed told the non-believers “Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion (CIX: 6).” In another verse, the Qur’an declares, “Let there be no compulsion in religion (II: 256).” http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2001/536/in7.htm

 Ahmadinejad’s current “rants” are just another example of man perverting religion for self enrichment and self promotion. The same thing Hitler did in WWII.

Can Hamas be trusted?  Hamas is an off shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

On March 26,1979 Egyptian President Anwar Sadat signed a negotiated Peace Treaty with Israel. http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_egypt_israel_peace.php  The Treaty is the only one to be negotiated between Israel and it’s Arab neighbors. On October 6, 1981, Sadat was assassinated. Sadat’s killers were linked to Hamas through the Muslim Brotherhood. The killers stated that Sadat was killed for entering into the Peace Treaty with Israel. http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_sadat_assassination.php , http://middleeast.about.com/od/egypt/a/me081006a.htm

And after the Jews and “Zionists” are gone who is next on Ahmadinejad’s list?

After Sadat’s assasination Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who was later convicted of conspiring to blow up the World Trade Towers in New York City and Ayman al-Zawahiri, one of Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenants, were arrested in Egypt and jailed for their part in the assassination.  http://middleeast.about.com/od/egypt/a/me081006a.htm .

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1920’s by Hassan Al-Bana at the same time Hitler’s Nazi Party was coming into being. The two, Hitler’s Nazi party and the Muslim Brotherhood were allies during World War II. Remember, there was no State of Israel at this time, just a shared anti-semitism between the groups, a hatred of Western style Democracy and a desire to rule the world. The leader of the Brotherhood’s Palestine operations was the “Grand Mufti of Jerusalem”, Muhhamed Amin el- Husseini. The Mufti spent much of WWII in Berlin furthering the Nazi cause. The Mufti helped form an Arabic Division of the SS, a Division responsible for war crimes throughout the Balkan states and Yugoslavia.  http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php . The Mufti was convicted of war crimes at the Nuremberg Trials at the end of World WarII, but escaped punishment as he had been granted asylum in Egypt by future Egyptian President Gamal Abd’el Nasser. Nasser was a member of  a group of young military officers who overthrew the Egpytian Monarchy in 1952. On November 17, 1954 Nasser became Egypt’s 2nd President. Nasser remained as Egypt’s Pesident until his death in 1970, when he was succeeded by Anwar Sadat. Sadat had been a close confidant of Nasser’s and had been a member of “Free Officers Group” which had led the overthrow of Egypt’s Monarchy in 1952.  How ironic that Sadat, Nasser’s confidant and second in command, the man to bring peace to Egypt after 30 years of unsuccessful war against Israel, would die at the hands of the Grand Mufti’s supporters, when the Grand Mufti would have been executed for “crimes against humanity”, like so many other Nazi’s, had it not been for Nasser’s asylum.     

In 1940’s, the Mufti requested that the Axis powers acknowledge the Arab right, “to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy”. Rhetoric eerily similar to that spouted by Ahmadinejad today.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d51poygEXYU

The “conflict” started long before Obama was “chooming” on the street corners of Hawaii. It started in the 1920’s and continued in the run up to World War II. In some circles it continues unabated today. The Jewish question is not the only “question” the militants want to eliminate. Like Hitler, the desire to eliminate is founded in unbridled, irrational and pathological hatred.

How bizarre that today, Jimmy Carter embraces Hamas, the very group responsible for killing Egypt’s President Anwar Sadat. That Hamas killed Sadat for making peace with Israel, a peace that Carter desparately tries to associate himself with and claim credit for.

Prior to World War II, as Hitler was consolidating his power, and making his first conquests in Europe, many politicians adopted a policy of what is now called “appeasement”. The last act of “appeasement” was the surrendering of the “Sudetenland”, a large part of Czechoslovakia, to Hitler’s Germany in 1938. This act of appeasement occurred on September 29, 1938. http://www.johndclare.net/EII3.htm

Upon returning from Munich on September 30, 1938, where he had given away the “Sudetenland”, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain proclaimed, “”My good friends this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honor. I believe it is peace in our time.” http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1938PEACE.html ,                                                                                                                                  http://german-history.suite101.com/article.cfm/appeasement_and_adolf_hitler_in_1938

Less than 1 year later, on September 1, 1939, Hitler invaded Poland and launched World War II. 

In September of 1939 there were Americans who agreed with the policy of appeasement and actually supported Hitler. These Americans represented a very small minority of  the country. Many of America’s rich and famous supported appeasement, including Joseph P. Kennedy, the American Embassador to England at the start of World War II and father of future President John F. Kennedy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_P._Kennedy

President Kennedy on the other hand, authored a  thesis his senior year at Harvard (1940 – a year after the war in europe had started, but prior to America’s entry into the war) titled, “Why England Slept”, (originally titled “Appeasement in Munich“) – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/While_England_Slept) in which future President Kennedy critized the British Government’s attempts to prevent World War II. The thesis was later published as a book and is available on Amazon.  http://www.amazon.com/Why-England-Slept-John-Kennedy/dp/0313228744 . The United States did not enter World War II until  December 7, 1941 and the attack on Pearl Harbor. Between Spetember 1, 1939 and December 7, 1941 the “appeasers” in America hoped to avoid conflict with the tyrants by “giving them their way”.

Winston Churchill, Britian’s Prime Minister during World War II, published his book, “While England Slept” in 1938, one year before  WWII started.

Hitler published his infamous work “Mein Kampf”, or “My Battle” in 1925. http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/kampf.htm 

Churhill’s predictions in “While England Slept” proved prophetic. What made Churchill prophetic? He took Hitler at his word, both the words he pubished in 1925 and those he spoke afterward.

Just how much of history need we repeat in 2009 and 2010? At what cost later?

Unfortunately, the current leader of the Free-World may in fact be a “megalomaniac” and his narcissistic personality disorder may embolden America’s foes. Empty political slogans and flowery speeches won’t dissuade a tyrant. Neville Chamberlain learned as much. Despite Chamberlain’s proclamation of “peace in our time”, the tyrant had to be stopped by force.

Unfortunately for the Iranian people, he has not, to date, been stopped through the ballot box. Free and fair elections in Iran are about as likely as free and fair elections in Hitler’s Germany.

Footnotes

1. Josef Hell, “Aufzeichnung,” 1922, ZS 640, p. 5, Institute fuer Zeitgeschichte. The retired Major Josef Hell was a journalist in the twenties and in the beginning of the thirties, during which time he also collaborated with Dr. Fritz Gerlich, the editor of the weekly newspaper Der Gerade Weg, as cited in Fleming, Gerald. Hitler and the Final Solution. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. p. 17

Is Obama’s TIMID Response to North Korea Worse Than No Response At All? Is Obama’s Foreign Policy Flaccid?

US Will Not Use Force To Inspect North Korean Ship

By KWANG-TAE KIM, Associated Press Writer Kwang-tae Kim, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 40 mins ago

SEOUL, South Korea – The United States will not use force to inspect a North Korean ship suspected of carrying banned goods, an American official was quoted as saying Friday.

An American destroyer has been shadowing the North Korean freighter sailing off China’s coast, possibly on its way to Myanmar.

Defense Undersecretary Michele Flournoy met with South Korean officials in Seoul on Friday as the U.S. sought international support for aggressively enforcing a U.N. sanctions resolution aimed at punishing Pyongyang for its second nuclear test last month. The North Korean-flagged ship, Kang Nam 1, is the first to be tracked under the U.N. resolution.

North Korea has in response escalated threats of war, with a slew of harsh rhetoric including warnings that it would unleash a “fire shower of nuclear retaliation” and “wipe out the (U.S.) aggressors” in the event of a conflict.

On Thursday, the communist regime organized a massive anti-American rally in Pyongyang where some 100,000 participants vowed to “crush” the U.S. One senior speaker told the crowd that the North will respond to any sanctions or U.S. provocations with “an annihilating blow.”

That was seen as a pointed threat in response to the American destroyer.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_koreas_nuclear

timid – 3 dictionary results:  1. lacking in self-assurance, courage, or bravery; easily alarmed; timorous; shy, 2. characterized by or indicating fear: a timid approach to a problem. 3. fearful, fainthearted. See cowardly.
Or is flaccid a better term for Obama’s foreign policy?
flaccid – 6 dictionary results: adjective,  1. soft and limp; not firm; flabby: flaccid biceps. 2. lacking force; weak: flaccid prose. 3. Lacking firmness, resilience, or muscle tone. See Synonyms at limp. 4. Lacking vigor or energy: flaccid management. 5. Yielding to pressure for want of firmness and stiffness; soft and weak; limber; lax; drooping; flabby; as, a flaccid muscle; flaccid flesh. 6. not firm or stiff; also : lacking normal or youthful firmness.   
%d bloggers like this: