Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Shamnesty for illegal immigrants is rearing its ugly head again. A new bill introduced by Rep Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) brings to mind two items immediately. Gutierrez is from Illinois and the Chicago political machine as is President Obama. And the word ‘caucus’ suggests, go figure, special interest. Wordnet defines ‘caucus’ as follows:

meet to select a candidate or promote a policy
a closed political meeting

Gutierrez describes his bill in the quote below.

My bill will promote fair immigration proceedings, humane treatment of immigration detainees, and policies that respect the tenet of community policing. No more raids in our community, no more separation of our families. Now, none of this works without a strong commitment to America’s labor force. None of it works without a strong commitment. So one of the tenets of our bill will be comprehensive immigration reform, has to mean—has to mean—to protecting all workers.

A press release from Gutierrez is presented below. If not simply liberals the co-sponsors of his bill belong to one caucus (special interest) or another or are Hispanic.(one special interest as regards shamnesty). What ever happened to being American and not allowing one’s self to pursue agendas contrary to the rule of law and founding principles? To honor one’s responsibility as a citizen of the United States includes adhering to the rule of law. That also includes requiring those here illegally to, at the very least, return to their country of origin and get in line for legal entry to this country. Any argument to the contrary does not meet the smell test. Allowing illegal immigrants to thwart the rule of law as their first action as a prospective immigrant defies reason as well as indicates a willingness to do as one pleases rather than demonstrate characteristics of good citizenship. To be blunt, Mr Gutierrez’ legislative proposal is a crock. As is the sentiment of those who support it.

Looks like the shamnesty monster has returned as everyone expected. Time to defend this nation again from those who would destroy it by ignoring its founding.

Other related posts on this blog

Send immigration views to Congress (click here)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

the press release…..
Comprehensive Immigration Reform to be Introduced December 15
December 11, 2009
Rebecca Dreilinger (202) 225-8203

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Washington D.C.) On Tuesday, December 15, Congressman Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) will introduce new legislation, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 (CIR ASAP), to the U.S. House of Representatives. Gutierrez will be joined by members of many different faiths and backgrounds, including the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Black Caucus, Asian Pacific American Caucus and Progressive Caucus.

Who:
Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (IL-4), Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Immigration Task Force

Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez (NY-12), Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus

Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (NY-11), Whip of the Congressional Black Caucus

Rep. Mike Honda (CA-15), Chair of Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus

Rep. Silvestre Reyes (TX-16), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (CA-6), Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus

Rep. Joe Baca (CA-43)

Rep. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)

Rep. Judy Chu (CA-32)

Rep. Joseph Crowley (NY-7)

Rep. Sam Farr (CA-17)

Rep. Charlie Gonzalez (TX-20)

Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)

Rep. Ruben Hinojosa (TX-15)

Rep. Grace Napolitano (CA-38)

Rep. Solomon P. Ortiz (TX-27)

Rep. Pedro R. Pierluisi (PR-At large)

Rep. Jared Polis (CO-2)

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL-9)

Rep. Jose E. Serrano (NY-16)

Rep. Anthony Weiner (NY-9)

Other Members of Congress

What:
Introduction of Comprehensive Immigration Reform Legislation

When:
12:30 pm, Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Where:
Room 2261, Rayburn House Office Building

“We have waited patiently for a workable solution to our immigration crisis to be taken up by this Congress and our President,” said Rep. Gutierrez. “The time for waiting is over. This bill will be presented before Congress recesses for the holidays so that there is no excuse for inaction in the New Year. It is the product of months of collaboration with civil rights advocates, labor organizations, and members of Congress. It is an answer to too many years of pain —mothers separated from their children, workers exploited and undermined security at the border— all caused at the hands of a broken immigration system. This bill says ‘enough,’ and presents a solution to our broken system that we as a nation of immigrants can be proud of.”

Press should confirm their attendance with Rebecca Dreilinger at 202-225-8203 or via email at Rebecca.Dreilinger@mail.house.gov.

###

Amazing how so many Illinois POLS have links to irregularities in real estate. Mr Gutierrez is no exception.

In October 2008, Gutiérrez became subject to federal scrutiny as a result of a $200,000 loan he received from a campaign contributor on whose behalf he personally lobbied the mayor of Chicago to back a real estate development.

related:

Culture of corruption: Cory Voorhis, Denver ICE & the Voorhis prosecution (Michelle Malkin)

A regular feature on MoreWhat.com is the Forum section that currently lists various stories referred to as Upbeat Conservative News. Frequently a list of those stories are posted on the blog. A few stories from the last couple of days merit some additional emphasis. This post begins with Navy SEALs accused by a terrorist of punching him and the subsequent court martial.

This story has not been carefully researched on this blog. So correct me if I’m wrong but reports read thus far suggest the decision to proceed with a court martial is based solely on the accusation from a terrorist. If any evidence to support the accusation has been presented, please advise in the comment section. Given other similar stories since the election of Barack Obama as President of the US a trend seems to be growing. Not only did the Messiah launch his administration with a World Apology Tour and appeasing sources of threat to our national security but he has made every effort to diminish the defense and security of our nation. The SEALs’ story rises as just another target of his agenda.

From the Upbeat Conservative News listing in the forum the following link is provided for this story. Upbeat Conservative News, 40 Congressmen: Dismiss SEALs Case It is also interesting to note that a simple Google search on this topic returns results from sources not generally regarded as the MSM. So the mainstream media apparently deems this story unworthy of their attention.

On a related topic it is suggested the Obama administration is holding back intel on the recent Ft Hood tragedy and its ‘alleged’ perp. Here’s a link to the story from Upbeat Conservative News. From the intent to close Gitmo and send terrorists to civilian prisons around the country to the Afghanistan ‘exit strategy’ and doing nothing about other foreign threats to the US, like Iran and North Korea, these two stories highlight the continuing reckless policies of Barack Obama.

Although not as serious but equally troubling are several other stories from the UCN listings in the forum. BTW, while the feature is named Upbeat Conservative News you may think some of the stories are not so upbeat. Understand that troubles caused by liberals are still upbeat since they improve the chances the public as well as elected representation will move to the right as a result of damage caused by the left. Back to the UCN stories.

Much of the climate change fracas is centered on left versus right, real science versus fake science and the like. But a story in UCN suggests the real push behind the AGW fiasco. It mirrors the agenda of Al Gore and making billions off this scam. How about an organized effort to essentially steal money and technology from the most successful countries in the world and GIVING it to others in the name of combating climate change? More redistribution of wealth for Obama and his socialist buddies.

Last but certainly not least is the comic relief of the Obama administration’s economics’ crew. Summers says the recession is over and Romer says its not. These are the people advising Obama on matters economic. Could this be one indication Obamanation has no clue? Oh, you say that’s not fair? C’mon! If for no other reason members of the ‘administration’ should be able to present information without looking like idiots. But the primary reason this is bad points to the idea that on fundamental financial data Obama’s top two money dudes are polar opposites. Ain’t it great?

So that’s it for Moan-day December 14, 2009. You’ve been briefed. Okay you’ve been boxer/briefed.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Free the SEALs (Michelle Malkin)

How long can they keep this up? No, not Iran’s so-called ’supreme leader’, the revolutionary guard or that little Hitler named Ahmadinejad but the opposition. At a time when the UN and more importantly, member nations, have done essentially nothing about Iran’s nuclear program(s) people who actually have the stones are taking their case to the streets at great risk. Many have suggest the US and other countries should rise in support of the protests. It it is true that Ahmadinejad and the ruling thugs of Iran stole the election earlier this year there are plenty of legitimate actions other nations could take on behalf of those seeking justice in Iran.

In the VOA piece below another account in this year’s Islamic saga describes the latest threat of Iran’s ruling crew toward protesters. After that an excerpt from an LAT’s report that is not included in the one from VOA. It is another example of concerns that the present community organizer-in-chief in the US may be placing his influence within this well-known news gathering organization.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Issues Stern Warning to Protesters

Iran’s supreme leader has accused the pro-reform opposition of trying to undermine the Islamic system and insulting the Islamic Republic’s founder.Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Sunday the opposition’s relentless protests were disrespectful. State television had broadcast footage of what it said were opposition supporters destroying photos of both Ayatollah Khamenei and the Islamic Republic’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, during massive anti-government protests on December 7.

Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard called Sunday for punishment of the demonstrators who tore up or burned photos of the late Ayatollah Khomeini. The guard is the country’s most powerful military force.

On Saturday, hard-line Iranian clerics rallied in cities across the country to denounce pro-reform students who staged the violent anti-government rallies.

In the holy city of Qom, cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami accused the opposition of trying to destroy Iran’s Islamic system of government.

Government supporters at the rallies chanted “death to opponents of the supreme leader.”

Defeated presidential candidate and opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi was quoted on Saturday as saying his supporters would not allow any insult against the supreme leader.

Supporters of Mousavi and other reformist leaders held mass protests earlier this year after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad secured a second term in a disputed June election. The post-election demonstrations were the largest in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The opposition accuses Mr. Ahmadinejad of stealing the vote.
from the LAT….

Opposition supporters, however, said the incident was staged by hardliners loyal to Ahmadinejad and aired on TV to discredit their cause.

Now that’s an interesting claim. But beyond this latest episode international action is sorely needed against Iran’s delaying tactics on the nuke problem. Another benefit Ahmadinejad acquires from being allowed to procrastinate on the issue. One could argue that makes the UN and member countries complicit in Iran’s threat to the planet.

BTW, peace on Earth good will toward all.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It is not uncommon for President Obama to be characterized as an appeaser. From this World Apology Tour to a fruitless response on Iranian nukes to his recent Afghanistan exit strategy and everywhere in between, Obama the commuity orgranizer and campaigner appeases. Some even suggest his speech given after picking up his Nobel was lauded by libs and conservatives alike. But there’s another take on that one. And it is right.

As Bill Clinton taught the Dems, if you have to “confront” a liberal audience about some obvious truth, be sure to choose a hapless or unappealing one. Clinton bravely took on rappers; Obama took on Scandinavian pacifists.

The piece goes on to explain the real story of Obama’s Nobel speech. Which, by the way, leads nicely into a discussion of an older Obama speech.

from….

Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win
Washington, DC | August 01, 2007

Thanks to the 9/11 Commission, we know that six years ago this week President Bush received a briefing with the headline: “Bin Ladin determined to strike in U.S.”

It came during what the Commission called the “summer of threat,” when the “system was blinking red” about an impending attack. But despite the briefing, many felt the danger was overseas, a threat to embassies and military installations. The extremism, the resentment, the terrorist training camps, and the killers were in the dark corners of the world, far away from the American homeland.

Then, one bright and beautiful Tuesday morning, they were here.

That a boy, Mr President, take another opportunity to bash President George W Bush. What was stated in the reference at the top of this post applies. ‘The speech was the usual collection of truths, half-truths, and deceptions.’ That of course referred to the Nobel speech and this one and all Obama speeches.

But then everything changed.

We did not finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We did not develop new capabilities to defeat a new enemy, or launch a comprehensive strategy to dry up the terrorists’ base of support. We did not reaffirm our basic values, or secure our homeland.

Instead, we got a color-coded politics of fear. Patriotism as the possession of one political party. The diplomacy of refusing to talk to other countries. A rigid 20th century ideology that insisted that the 21st century’s stateless terrorism could be defeated through the invasion and occupation of a state. A deliberate strategy to misrepresent 9/11 to sell a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Barack Hussein Obama speaks of these things as if it all started with George W Bush. Well, not exactly. There is plenty of blame to go around. But what is troublesome here is President Obama cherry picks the 9/11 Commission report to bash Bush. How about the other players?

from the 9/11 Commission….

Early Efforts against Bin Ladin

Until 1996, hardly anyone in the U.S. government understood that Usama Bin Ladin was an inspirer and organizer of the new terrorism. In 1993, the CIA noted that he had paid for the training of some Egyptian terrorists in Sudan. The State Department detected his money in aid to the Yemeni terrorists who set a bomb in an attempt to kill U.S. troops in Aden in 1992. State Department sources even saw suspicious links with Omar Abdel Rahman, the “Blind Sheikh” in the New York area, commenting that Bin Ladin seemed “committed to financing ‘Jihads’ against ‘anti Islamic’ regimes worldwide.” After the department designated Sudan a state sponsor of terrorism in 1993, it put Bin Ladin on its TIPOFF watchlist, a move that might have prevented his getting a visa had he tried to enter the United States. As late as 1997, however, even the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center continued to describe him as an “extremist financier.”1

1992, 1993, 1996, 1997 are specifically mentioned above. And who was President then. Wow, bin Laden was just a financier. Excuse me, ‘extremist financier’.

In 1996, the CIA set up a special unit of a dozen officers to analyze intelligence on and plan operations against Bin Ladin. David Cohen, the head of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, wanted to test the idea of having a “virtual station”-a station based at headquarters but collecting and operating against a subject much as stations in the field focus on a country. Taking his cue from National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, who expressed special interest in terrorist finance, Cohen formed his virtual station as a terrorist financial links unit. He had trouble getting any Directorate of Operations officer to run it; he finally recruited a former analyst who was then running the Islamic Extremist Branch of the Counterterrorist Center. This officer, who was especially knowledgeable about Afghanistan, had noticed a recent stream of reports about Bin Ladin and something called al Qaeda, and suggested to Cohen that the station focus on this one individual. Cohen agreed. Thus was born the Bin Ladin unit.2

In May 1996, Bin Ladin left Sudan for Afghanistan. A few months later, as the Bin Ladin unit was gearing up, Jamal Ahmed al Fadl walked into a U.S. embassy in Africa, established his bona fides as a former senior employee of Bin Ladin, and provided a major breakthrough of intelligence on the creation, character, direction, and intentions of al Qaeda. Corroborating evidence came from another walk-in source at a different U.S. embassy. More confirmation was supplied later that year by intelligence and other sources, including material gathered by FBI agents and Kenyan police from an al Qaeda cell in Nairobi.3

The CIA during the Clinton years puts some money into studying bin Laden the ‘financier’. It seems the big breakthrough was entirely a chance event.

By 1997, officers in the Bin Ladin unit recognized that Bin Ladin was more than just a financier. They learned that al Qaeda had a military committee that was planning operations against U.S. interests worldwide and was actively trying to obtain nuclear material. Analysts assigned to the station looked at the information it had gathered and “found connections everywhere,” including links to the attacks on U.S. troops in Aden and Somalia in 1992 and 1993 and to the Manila air plot in the Philippines in 1994-1995.4

It took them years to go from bin Laden the financier to bin Laden is much more than that. Yet Obama suggests George Bush is responsible for 9/11. Obama cited this report but not this part or any other than the one that suited his agenda.

By the fall of 1997, the Bin Ladin unit had roughed out a plan for these Afghan tribals to capture Bin Ladin and hand him over for trial either in the United States or in an Arab country. In early 1998, the cabinet-level Principals Committee apparently gave the concept its blessing.9

On their own separate track, getting information but not direction from the CIA, the FBI’s New York Field Office and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York were preparing to ask a grand jury to indict Bin Ladin. The Counterterrorist Center knew that this was happening.10 The eventual charge, conspiring to attack U.S. defense installations, was finally issued from the grand jury in June 1998-as a sealed indictment. The indictment was publicly disclosed in November of that year.

Gee, then they were thinking it might be good to get this guy.

Regarding a plan to capture bin Laden…..

Director Tenet discussed the high risk of the operation with Berger and his deputies, warning that people might be killed, including Bin Ladin. Success was to be defined as the exfiltration of Bin Ladin out of Afghanistan.28 A meeting of principals was scheduled for May 29 to decide whether the operation should go ahead.

The principals did not meet. On May 29, “Jeff” informed “Mike” that he had just met with Tenet, Pavitt, and the chief of the Directorate’s Near Eastern Division. The decision was made not to go ahead with the operation.

Most of us are aware of the fumbling during the Clinton years on the topic of terrorism and bin Laden. You can go back further than that for example when the US financed bin Laden when the Soviet Union was in Afghanistan. The point here should be obvious. Pay attention to President Obama’s agenda and tactics. And stop blaming Bush for everything.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

You could be a little troubled these days with all the talk about politicians and how they respond to matters and issues of the day. President Obama is certainly not immune to analysis or the opinions it generates. Since the mainstream media or those organizations generally considered to be the establishment media rarely open a critical eye toward the President the rest of us must fill the void. After all, the President has pledged his administration would be transparent and accountable. So let’s all help him fulfill that promise.

On the topic of shootings at Fort Hood by Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan the President said the following among other things. “But it is all the more heartbreaking and all the more despicable because of the place where it occurred and the patriots who were its victims.” It should come as no surprise that the community organizer-in-chief is often credited for being a great orator. And he has taken a lot of heat for his habitual use of teleprompters. But make no mistake, little if anything he says in public has escaped the scrutiny of the PR machine and focus groups or the rest in his inner circle. In evidence in the quote above is selecting the word ‘its’ when referring to the ‘victims’ of Hasan. There’s that strategy to appease the terrorists by calling these events ‘man-made’ disasters.

Sorry Mr President but all this is a little troubling. In his weekly Internet and radio address, Mr. Obama says those who responded to the rampage represent the best of America. “We saw soldiers and civilians alike rushing to aid fallen comrades; tearing off bullet-riddled clothes to treat the injured; using blouses as tourniquets; taking down the shooter even as they bore wounds themselves,” he said. Mr President, did you once acknowledge Kimberly Munley by name?

The president, hoping to calm potential ethnic tension, reminds the public about the diversity of those who defend the U.S. “They are Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and nonbelievers. They are descendants of immigrants and immigrants themselves. They reflect the diversity that makes this America. But what they share is a patriotism like no other,” he said.

Just by virtue of the fact the statement above was made in response to the Fort Hood shootings by Hasan demonstrates the flaw in that argument. This one must have gotten by the PR machine or the arrogance of the White House assumed you wouldn’t notice. Hasan wasn’t sharing that patriotism part, Mr President. At least at the end of the item below you refer to Hasan’s actions as a ‘crime’. Pat yourself on the back, Mr President.

My prayers go with those who were killed or injured as well as for their families. A special acknowledgment should be expressed for those who responded to the call that day. Although it has been reported Kimberly Munley does not want to be called a hero her actions were incredibly proficient and courageous. Hope she recovers from her injuries as if they never happened. Same sentiment for the others injured.

Let’s not dishonor those who died with more appeasement, Mr President.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Beltway snipers and the Fort Hood killer: Peas in a jihad-inspired pod (Michelle Malkin) 

Another example of how political motivation blurs the lines in the GOP on being a politician or standing for conservative values.

Republicans are unanimously opposed to the sweeping legislation.

Signaling the unease of some freshman Democrats in swing districts, Rep. John Adler of New Jersey said Friday he will vote against the bill. Mr. Adler, who won his first term in 2008 with 52% of the vote, said the House bill “does not do enough to contain costs.”

He added, “Congress should not pass a bill that costs more than $1 trillion” over 10 years.

Are Republicans unanimously opposed to HR3962 and the other healthcare reform plans proposed by the Democrats for purely political reasons or because this reform violates conservative principles? There is the distinct possibility current reforms violate sections of the US Constitution as well but that’s another story for another time. As is the question of why this unanimous GOP opposition is not demonstrated on other issues like illegal immigration?

The Democratic majority has been unable to produce party unity on healthcare reform as reports indicate the Saturday vote on HR3962 may be delayed. Vulnerable Democrats are worried about the 2010 elections. The GOP has similar concerns about their possible comeback in those same elections. And yet both parties seem unwilling to accept widespread rejection by the public and respond responsibly. The fight is purely political.

The Senate may not be able to arrange a vote until next year. That would take a toll on Obama’s first term. The liberal agenda now seems destined to ride completely on the outcome of healthcare reform legislation. If incomplete into next year their 2010 aspirations are vulnerable. But the GOP may suffer along with them as voters express their anger at the ballot box.

As this fiasco continues other issues suffer from neglect, incompetence or both. The President’s support is fading. Congressional approval ratings are still in the tank. There is no economic recovery. Unemployment has reached a new high above 10% and some say it is actually higher. And all politicians can do is play politics with an issue most regard as secondary at best.

Shelve the damn healthcare issue for now. Attend to national security, national defense, border control, immigration enforcement and domestic policy related to economic matters. In other words, limited government that reduces taxes, national debt, deficits and spending. If those items are ever effectively solved then revisit healthcare reform if anyone other than liberal politicians is interested.

Until then, get conservative or get out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

As President Obama campaigns on behalf of liberal candidates in current elections and has school children singing his praises thanks to questionable encouragement from their teachers one has to wonder how voters view his performance thus far. Indeed, Obama’s honeymoon with the American people lasted less than six months. So Mr Obama, how are all those government interventions working for you? You know, government motors, government healthcare, government pay czars and your nanny state agenda?

VPOTUS Joe Biden was tapped to shore up Barack Obama’s lack of foreign affairs experience during the 2008 Presidential campaign. Apparently most people dismissed any concerns about Obama’s lack of experience in other areas. A community organizer-in-chief was what the majority of American voters selected. The new President tapped his former rival for President as his Secretary of State. So how is Hillary Clinton doing in the minds of voters?

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 27 percent of voters think Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be doing a better job as president, while 49 percent say she would be performing about the same. That’s about 70 percent that say a hypothetical ‘President Hillary’ would be doing as well or better than President Barack Obama.

Obama’s honeymoon is over and according to the poll above about half the voters think Hillary or Barack would be doing about the same as president. Barack Obama has done nothing to inspire confidence resulting in the honeymoon being over and half the voters think Hillary would be doing about the same. So how’s Hillary doing as Secretary of State? Forget that most of the year she was promoting human rights as her central focus. What about the Middle East?

Secretary Clinton came to Marrakech for the sixth Forum for the Future, which joins civil society groups and the private sector with foreign ministers from the Group of Eight leading industrialized nations and the Middle East to talk about democracy and resolving conflict in the region.

What was the result of these discussions?

Palestinian leaders are voicing frustration after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised Israel for making what she said are unprecedented concessions in efforts to restart peace negotiations. Israeli leaders are keeping up their calls for the Palestinians to drop all preconditions.

Palestinian leaders on Sunday stuck to their demands that Israel stop all settlement activity before any resumption of peace talks that have been stalled since December.

Clinton praises Israel for doing their part and the Palestinians register a complaint.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Arab foreign ministers in Morocco to discuss Israel’s offer to limit the expansion of Jewish settlements. Clinton says Israel should reciprocate positive Palestinian moves to improve security.

Clinton reverses her earlier praise of Israel in response to Palestinian objections.

Well then, how’s it going on the issue of Iran and their pursuit of nuclear weapons?

Iranian officials say they want technical experts to review the U.N.-backed plan for sending Iran’s uranium abroad for enrichment.

All the rhetoric from various nations including the US over Iran’s nuclear program has produced zero results except that Iran is still stalling and being allowed to get away with it. And the answer from the US……

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says there will be no changes to an international offer to end the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program by having its low-grade uranium processed and enriched abroad.

That’s reassuring.(NOT) Given the impotent international response to date and Clinton’s caving on statements made about the Middle East peace process more of the same is anticipated.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Absolutely unbelievable! Apparently the audacity of the O is contagious. Or maybe this is a product of his recent World Apology Tour. The UN has raised a question on whether the US is killing people indiscriminately with the use of UAVs. Perhaps they should have first asked this question to al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah or any other terrorist group. For that is what terrorists do. Absolutely unbelievable! If anyone requires further explanation of this issue there is no point continuing a discussion. The world is truly losing its collective mind. This is beyond audacity. That the UN is the source is the only thing that is not a surprise.

What the hell do they think 9/11 was if not indiscriminate killing? In more than eight years has the UN accused al-Qaeda of violating international law for that? Nearly 3000 civilians killed in the attack on the WTC and the UN wants to know about drones? Wow! And this same organization is involved with determining whether or not Iran is developing nuclear weapons. How vulnerable do you feel right now?

It will take some time to nominate another story that even comes close to comparing to this one on the absurd meter.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial killings says the use of armed unmanned aircraft by the United States to hunt down terrorists could be a violation of international law. Philip Alston said Tuesday that Washington must explain how it is sure the United States is not killing people indiscriminately with these aircraft.

U.S. officials have never confirmed the use of Predator drones, but it is widely reported that the Central Intelligence Agency has used them to kill suspected terrorist leaders operating in Pakistan’s largely ungoverned tribal areas along its border with Afghanistan.

U.N. Special Rapporteur Philip Alston questioned the legality of their use under international law. “My concern is that these drones, these Predators, are being operated in a framework which may well violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The onus is really on the government of the United States to reveal more about the ways in which it makes sure that arbitrary executions, extrajudicial executions are not, in fact, being carried out through the use of these weapons,” he said.

U.S. officials never acknowledge these strikes, saying they do not discuss operational or intelligence matters.

The Special Rapporteur, who is an independent expert appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council, said the U.S. response has been “untenable” and that Washington needs to be more willing to discuss aspects of its drone program. “Otherwise you have the really problematic bottom line, which is that the Central Intelligence Agency is running a program that is killing significant numbers of people and there is absolutely no accountability in terms of the relevant international laws,” he said.

Alston said the United States should explain who is running the program and what precautions are being taken to ensure that these weapons are used within the framework of international law. He added that there must also be accountability and review mechanisms in place regarding their use.

If you are content with the Obama Administration’s handling of matters regarding nuclear weapons and Iran the following information should cause you to reconsider that position.

[But] the more telling detail, as a recent White House “guidance paper” acknowledges, is that the U.S. has been “carefully observing and analyzing this facility for several years.” That timeline is significant, because it was less than two years ago, in December 2007, that a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear programs asserted with “high confidence” that Tehran had “halted its nuclear weapons program” in the fall of 2003.

That NIE gave liberals and Iran a reason to cheer. Some internal critics in the Bush Administration may have sabotaged national security for political gain.

Fast forward to the present, and it turns out the NIE was misleading even on its own terms: Iran did have a covert facility, perhaps for enrichment, and the intelligence community knew or at least strongly suspected it. We are also learning that the NIE’s judgment puts the U.S. intelligence community at odds with its counterparts in Britain, Germany and Israel, which have evidence to show that Iran resumed its weaponization work after 2003.

Three US allies indicate Iran resumed the pursuit of nuclear weapons after 2003 yet the US report cited above held the opposite view. Red flags abound in this story if for no other reason then both positions cannot be correct. If the ‘allies’ assertion is correct then once again US intel is suspect. And if the Obama Administration is acting like the Qom facility is news to them more red flags are raised. Including support for the criticism that current US foreign policy is a strategy of appeasement. In which history and Neville Chamberlain serve as guidance in avoiding a 21st century failure.

Here are some recent reports demonstrating the complacency on the topic of Iranian nuclear weapons.

UN Nuclear Inspectors to Tour Iran’s Second Enrichment Plant Near Qom
Iran’s English-language Press TV reports that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors are beginning a three-day visit to Iran, Saturday, to examine the country’s Fordoo nuclear enrichment facility.

The timeline suggests a month long delay between Iran’s preemptive disclosure about the facility in Qom and an impotent UN inspection.

Iran to Respond to UN Uranium Proposal Next Week
Iran has delayed its response to a United Nations-backed uranium enrichment plan aimed at easing international concerns that Iran’s nuclear program is being used to develop weapons.

Above is one more example in an extremely long list of delaying tactics the rest of the world allows Iran to use.

US Says Patience With Iran on Nuclear Issue Not Unlimited
At a news briefing, State Department Spokesman Ian Kelly said the United States would obviously have liked to see an Iranian reply but is willing to give Tehran a few more days. “We’re looking for concrete steps. And we take it as a positive sign that they’ve agreed in principle to take a couple of significant steps - the opening of the Qom facility, and then working out a procedure for having their low-enriched uranium re-processed in another country. At the same time, our patience is not limitless. I think we can stretch things out a few days, and that’s really what we’re talking about. But we’re not going to wait forever,” he said.

Equalling the extremely long list of Iranian delay tactics are statements from the US suggesting ‘we are really serious this time’. There is an uncanny similarity between US rhetoric on Iranian nukes and the useless parental response to a child allowed to dictate the rules.

The US, UN, IAEA and the remainder of the ‘international community’ have not just recently adopted an Iranian appeasement strategy like the parent who spoiled the child with lack of discipline. A list of resources below aid in demonstrating this point.

IAEA, Multilateral Talks, Iran Nukes, What’s Changed?

IAEA, International Community Complicit in Iran’s Nuke Strategy

Iran, the UN, IAEA, Elbaradei and Do-Nothings

IAEA Paper Tiger vs Iranian Nukes

Democrats Raise White Flag in Advance on Iran Nukes

Bush Warns Iran If Controversial Nuclear Work Continues…

US Criticizes Iran’s ‘Partial Answers’ on Nuclear Program

UN: Iran Still Defying Demands to Stop Enriching Uranium

US Spars With IAEA Chief ElBaradei Over Iran

Iran Says 3,000 Centrifuges Are Operational

US Official Criticizes Iran, IAEA Deal on Nuclear Program

IRAN, IAEA Make Progress in Nuclear Talks

IAEA Says Iran to Allow Inspections of Heavy Water Reactor

The bulk of the items above are from 2007 with some from 2009. The titles alone suggest the recurring theme of Iran’s delays and the wait and see appeasement of everyone else. If there’s a betting line in Vegas on this story one would have to guess the odds on favorite is Iran. With time being about the only thing the Iranians need to complete their pursuit of nuclear weapons they have one each round of this game.

One way or another this game will end sometime. An appeasement strategy ushered in WWII. Can we afford to make the same mistake on the possibility of WWIII?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Could someone explain how this solves anything?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:
Pressure Mounts on Iran Uranium Enrichment Program (Right Truth) 

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has drafted an agreement to supply enriched uranium to Iran following three days of negotiations at its headquarters in Vienna. If all parties agree to it, the deal could mark a breakthrough after a years-long international standoff over Iran’s nuclear program.

The draft agreement was announced to reporters by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who has given all parties involved until Friday to approve it.

“I have circulated a draft agreement that reflects, in my judgment, a balanced approach on how to move forward,” he said. “The deadline for the parties to give, I hope, affirmative action is Friday, two days from now. And if we do get affirmative action, then I hope that we will have an agreement that we can send to the (IAEA) board of governors.”

ElBaradei said France was included in the draft agreement. Talks this week gathering Russia, the United States, France, Iran and the IAEA, stalled on Tuesday over Iran’s reluctance to have France participate in any deal on enriching its uranium. ElBaradei however described the discussions as constructive and forward-looking.

The IAEA chief did not elaborate on the draft deal, but news agencies report that it is essentially similar to an agreement reached in Geneva earlier this month. That deal would commit Iran to shipping about 75 percent of its lightly enriched stockpile of uranium to Russia for further enrichment.

The material would then be shipped to France to be converted into metal rods before being delivered back to Tehran. The rods would be used to power a research reactor in the Iranian capital making medical isotopes.

More broadly, if all parties agree to the deal, it would defuse international concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. Iran says the program is for peaceful purposes , but western nations fear Tehran is trying to build a nuclear bomb.

Nobel Peace Prize winning President Obama is said to be struggling over what to do in Afghanistan. Does the rookie believe ignoring intel, military and state warnings is the answer? What does this say about his campaign rhetoric to get elected and his desire to maintain favor from the far left antiwar liberal standard?

Officials: Obama advisers are downplaying Afghan dangers

By JONATHAN S. LANDAY, JOHN WALCOTT AND NANCY A. YOUSSEF
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — As the Obama administration reconsiders its Afghanistan policy, White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al-Qaida, U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy Newspapers.

His worry about public opinion ,aka far left support, and resistance to his own advisors is of such concern the report cited here mentions the problem twice in the first seven paragraphs.

However, the officials said, in their effort to muster domestic support for a more limited counterterrorism strategy that would concentrate on disrupting and dismantling al-Qaida, White House officials are neglecting warnings from their own experts about the dangers of a more modest approach.

Given the antiwar sentiment on the left that both candidate Obama and Clinton pandered to in 2008 their ability to do the right thing and at the same time protect their political futures are at odds with each other. With their own ‘experts’ and others suggesting the simmering conflicts are providing renewed strength for al-Qaeda now is not the time for indecision. Biden’s warning of a test for Obama may be just around the corner contrary to the original forecast.

Instead of national security and defense the liberal new direction is focused on an ill-conceived domestic policy Those issues can and should wait based on the pathetic proposals offered to date. The other matters are of immediate concern and need to be handled effectively. And yes, elections have consequences.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Ah, a reminder of another one of President Obama’s dangerous image over substance agenda items. Just like elections have consequences so do campaign promises. Especially those promises that were only designed to win an election. Gee, admit you were wrong and abandon a misguided campaign promise or further endanger your country for fear of ending your political career. For those genuinely engaged to serve their country this would not be a difficult decision. For those with other priorities it is a risk worth taking.

Mr President, do the right thing. Closing Gitmo is a bad idea.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has acknowledged that it will be difficult to meet the January 22, 2010 deadline to close the U.S. detention center for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

But Holder told reporters Tuesday that officials will try to meet that goal, saying the prison will eventually be closed.

Holder made his comment days after the House of Representatives voted to block detainees at Guantanamo from being transferred to U.S. soil. The measure last Thursday passed by a vote of 258 to 163, drawing support from both Democrats and Republicans.

President Barack Obama has said he wants to close Guantanamo by next January. He says closing the facility is crucial to restoring America’s image in the world and to creating a more effective anti-terror approach.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that closing the facility has proven more complicated than anticipated. Many members of the U.S. Congress also have voiced concerns about bringing terrorism suspects to the United States.

A task force has cleared 75 of the remaining 223 Guantanamo prisoners for release as part of an effort to close the facility. The review team has been examining each prisoner’s case to determine who will be held for trial and who can be sent home or resettled in other countries.

Recently the US Senate has suggested we are vulnerable to a biological terror attack. They have even brought forth measures to counter that threat. The problem is the concern has been around for years. We are fast approaching a decade since the attacks of 9/11. And the US Senate took this long to get around to considering a biological attack? The list of other potential terror threats is quite long. And there is an overriding reason to keep our collective eye on the ball.

More than one source suggests there are no connections between all the terror activities known to date. But some of us believe otherwise.

Of course there are.

Maybe it will prove to be the case that the three suspects at the heart of these interrupted plots - Najibullah Zazi, Hosam Maher Husein Smadi and Michael C. Finton (also known as Talib Islam) - had no connection in a tactical or operational sense.

Still, it is absurd, and extremely dangerous, to insist that they are not connected in at least one way: What apparently animated all three of these suspects (and perhaps a number of others believed to have been involved in the New York plot who are still at large) is the seditious, supremacist theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls Shariah.

Shariah requires its adherents to engage in jihad - the struggle to bring about the triumph of Islam worldwide through whatever means are available. Shariah explicitly calls for the use of violent techniques designed to instill terror in those who stand in the way of a global Muslim theocracy.

The simple fact that the terrorists themselves offer evidence of this being the case by their frequent broadcasts or publications of text, video and other material should be adequate confirmation of their intent. Not heeding these warnings as real is done at risk of one’s own peril.

From state sponsors of terror to Iranian and North Korean nukes to the long history of terrorism around the world one would have to have been sleeping for the last twenty years or longer to not recognize it. So all you Rip Van Winkle’s had better catch up. That includes the US Congress and those members of the liberal appeasement crowd now comprising the majority party.

Although a favorite target of liberals is former President George W. Bush liberals have their own presidential problems. Now Bill Clinton has reentered the political discussion and if memory serves was given some sort of BS envoy job by Obama. Not less BS than the job given to the former First Lady HRC. Both of the Clinton’s have meaningless posts in the Obama Administration but apparently feel the need to ‘back’ the Messiah anyhow. And there’s Jimmy Carter who did no favors for the current Admin.

Yet the libs continue their worn out GOP bashing amid all the clamor their impotent party and fringe supporters create. Fringe components like nutroots, MoveOn and the Soros gang bashed Cheney, Rumsfeld, Patraeus and US troops with their antiwar sentiment leading up to the 2008 election. Obama began with campaign rhetoric convincing supporters the US would immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan and punish everyone in the Bush Administration.

The fringe and not so fringe left want government everything from bailouts to stimulus to free healthcare as well as shamnesty for illegals, same sex marriage, abortion paid by tax dollars and more expense to the American public through AGW, cap and tax and a crushing debt exacerbated by President Obama and tax cheat Tim Geithner.

Congress is still muddled in Obamacare and cannot turn this sow’s ear into a silk purse. Okay, there’s not enough lipstick on the planet to accommodate this pig. Dems don’t appear to have the strength to finish Iraq or Afghanistan as required, fail to handle problems like Iran and North Korea properly and hand the Russians a gift by abandoning allies in Europe with an another appeasement missile defense plan.

As indicated by all the tax cheat nominations and withdrawals, plus the ACORN connection and shady resumes of most of the Messiah’s chosen few Michelle Malkin is not the least off the mark emphasizing the Culture of Corruption and placing it squarely on the liberal majority in Washington. The GOP had their fall from grace and lost the majority in the last two elections. It is now the Dems turn and they have wasted no time promoting a ‘throw the bums out’ option for voters in 2010.

Elections have consequences. Democrats wanted to be the majority and got their chance. Their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is once again being confirmed. It is way past time to point fingers and blame those who were previously the majority.

To the Democratic Party:

You wanted the job, you got it. Now govern properly and abandon your insane agenda or pay the price next year.

Complete the jobs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Abandon your present course on healthcare. Reduce spending and increase tax cuts. Stop the bailouts and porkulus madness. Forget cap and tax. Give up shamnesty and improve national security and defense. Follow the rule of law and the founding documents. Correct the other items mentioned above.

Once you get that completed come back here for the next task list.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Is that the best Iran’s so-called supreme leader can do? Blame his country’s problems on media reports. That same media has recently reported Iran has agreed to a new set of rules for cooperation with the IAEA. You can call the IAEA independent all you want to but it’s relationship and sanction by the United Nations is all too clear. The IAEA’s ‘atoms for peace’ slogan is more than any rational human being can bear. The history of the UN and the IAEA fit well into Iran’s plans to play games with the all too willing international community until Iran detonates their first nuke.

Iran’s Supreme Leader says Western News Media Attempting to “Poison” Iran
Iran’s supreme leader says Western media are to blame for his country’s recent political unrest. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is pointing his finger at Western news media for inciting political friction in Iran.

In May of this year not the ‘Western News Media’ but ‘Iran’s state media’ got all puffed up about Iran’s missile tests complete with cheering crowds of those characterized as supporters of Ahmadinejad.

Iran Claims to Have Test-Fired Mid-Range Missile
Iran’s state media says the country has successfully test launched a mid-range surface-to-surface missile that can reach Israel, southeastern Europe and U.S. bases in the Middle East. Iranian government TV showed what it said was the test-firing of the Sejil-2, which it says has a range of 2,000 kilometers. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad also commented on the test-firing of the two-stage missile during a campaign speech in the northern town of Semnan. The crowd of several thousand Ahmedinejad supporters cheered as the president described the launch.

During the same month Ahmadinejad held a news conference rejecting talks about Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Iran: No More Nuclear Talks With World Powers
Mr. Ahmadinejad told a news conference in Tehran Monday Iran will only agree to discussions with major powers about cooperating in managing global problems. He said Iran will not participate in talks about nuclear issues outside the framework of the U.N. nuclear agency.

This of course is combined with the year’s Iranian politics which generated this headline, ‘Ahmadinejad Win Sparks Protests in Tehran‘ in which an address by Ahmadinejad made the following claim, ‘In an address, Mr. Ahmadinejad declared the vote a great victory and called it a “completely free election.”

Add his statements which blame the US and Israel for all the world’s problems, his call for the destruction of Israel and recently renewed claim the holocaust never happened and it becomes clear any ‘poisoning of Iran’ is self-induced contrary to the stated opinion of Khamenei. Most of what comes out of Iran, minus the loyal opposition to the current regime, demonstrates a rogue state’s intention to develop a nuclear arsenal and put the world at risk. All the delays are nothing more than a smoke screen to buy time to complete their sinister strategy.

AP NewsBreak: Nuke agency says Iran can make bomb
VIENNA — Experts at the world’s top atomic watchdog are in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report seen by The Associated Press.

IAEA denies report it is sure Iran seeking atom bomb
The International Atomic Energy Agency reaffirmed IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei’s Sept. 9 comment that allegations the agency was sitting on evidence of Iranian bomb work were “politically motivated and baseless”.

Either way, the IAEA does not inspire confidence. You need a scorecard to keep up with all the reports on yes they do or no they don’t in terms of Iran’s status of joining the nuclear club. Argue the topic to your heart’s delight but one conclusion remains clear. The world does not need any more members to the nuke club. Pandora’s Box was opened long ago in the heat of a world war. There’s no putting the lid back on. Outside of ending the war with Japan in the last century none of the current known members of the nuke club have become reckless with the option. Who believes that restraint would be practices by any new members?

And no one has forgotten about North Korea or the Jihad crowd’s similar ambitions. World leaders are as impotent in this regard as with Iran.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com