Do you ever wonder where the Barack Obama anti-Israel attitude comes from? Do you ever wonder why Hillary Clinton kept her distance from standing at the side of Israel? Do you ever wonder how John Kerry has been even more assertive in his aggression on Israel? Do you ever wonder why the New York Times maintains their journalists that write pro-Hamas and pr0-Palestinian news items? There are many in the Obama circle that maintain visual and highly vocal opposition to Israel but one you should come to know and meet in Philip Gordon. Gordon was a senior policy advisor to Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. He was later named as the Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs, responsible for 50 countries. NSC top advisor Tom Donilon completely endorses Philip Gordon. All involved completely ignore Hamas, the PLO and the fact that 20 years of peace negotiations have never advanced, so Israel is to blame according to Gordon. Why you ask? Top Obama Official Blasts Israel Over West Bank Military Occupation Amid Heightening Conflict by: RAPHAEL AHREN, The Times Of Israel Israel’s ongoing occupation of the West Bank is wrong and leads to regional instability and dehumanization of Palestinians, a top American government official said Tuesday in Tel Aviv, hinting that the current Israeli government is not committed to peace. In an unusually harsh major foreign policy address, Philip Gordon, a special assistant to US President Barack Obama and the White House coordinator for the Middle East, appealed to Israeli and Palestinian leaders to make the compromises needed to reach a permanent peace agreement. Jerusalem “should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate” such a treaty with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has proven to be a reliable partner, Gordon said. “Israel confronts an undeniable reality: It cannot maintain military control of another people indefinitely. Doing so is not only wrong but a recipe for resentment and recurring instability,” Gordon said. “It will embolden extremists on both sides, tear at Israel’s democratic fabric and feed mutual dehumanization.” Delivering the keynote address at the Haaretz newspaper’s Israel Conference on Peace, Gordon reiterated Obama’s position that a final-status agreement should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps. The administration is aware that Israel is facing threats on several fronts and Obama remains committed to Israel’s security, he said, speaking on the day that Israel launched Operation Protective Edge to counter rocket fire from the Hamas-run Gaza Strip. Indeed, mere hours before Gordon addressed the conference, hundreds of participants were forced to quickly evacuate the event hall and enter a safe room after an alert signaled a missile approaching Tel Aviv. After about 10 minutes, participants returned to the hall and the conference resumed. “The United States will always have Israel’s back. That’s why we fight for it every day at the United Nations,” Gordon said. But as Israel’s greatest friend and strongest defender, Washington should be allowed to ask some fundamental questions, he added. Specifically, Gordon went on: “How will Israel remain democratic and Jewish if it attempts to govern the millions of Palestinian Arabs who live in the West Bank? How will it have peace if it’s unwilling to delineate a border, end the occupation and allow for Palestinian sovereignty, security and dignity? How will we prevent other states from supporting Palestinian efforts in international bodies, if Israel is not seen as committed to peace?” The administration was disappointed that the last round of US-brokered peace negotiations failed and that currently “we find ourselves in an uneasy pause,” Gordon said. “At the same time we have no interest in a blame game. The unfortunate reality is that neither side prepared their publics or proved ready to make the difficult decisions required for an agreement. And trust has been eroded on both sides. Until it is restored, neither side will likely be ready to takes risk for peace, even if they live with the dire consequences that resolve from its absence.” The “past few weeks” show that the inability to resolve the Israeli-Palestinians conflict “inevitable means more tension, more resentment, more injustice, more insecurity, more tragedy and more grief,” he said. “And the sight of grieving families, Israeli and Palestinian alike, reminds us that the cost of this conflict remains unbearably high.” In his 25-minute speech – which marked the first time a senior White House official had directly addressed the Israeli people since Obama’s March 2013 speech in Jerusalem — Gordon rejected any alternatives to the two-state solution. He called on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resume peace talks with the PA, suggesting that Abbas is the best Palestinian leader Jerusalem could hope for. “Israel should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate such a peace with Abbas, who has shown time and again that he’s committed to non-violence and co-existence and cooperation with Israel.” At one point in his speech, Gordon appeared to directly contradict an assessment Netanyahu made last week regarding Israel’s security needs vis-à-vis its eastern border. Referring to deliberations retired US General John Allen held with IDF officers regarding ways to secure Israel’s border with Jordan, Gordon said that Allen’s plans include “a full range of contingencies, including rising threats that we see around the Middle East.” Allen was likely referring to the territorial gains made in recent weeks by the radical terror group Islamic State (formerly known as ISIL or ISIS). “The approaches that are being discussed would create one of the most secure borders in the world along both sides of the Jordan River,” Gordon said. “By developing a layered defense that includes significantly strengthening the fences on both sides of the border, ensuring the right level of boots on the ground, deploying state of the art technology, the comprehensive program of rigorous testing, we can make the border safe against any type of conventional or unconventional threat – from individual terrorists or a conventional armored forces.” On June 29, Netanyahu declared that one of Israel’s central security challenges was to “stabilize the area west of the Jordan River security line.” In this part of the West Bank, the prime minister said, “no force can guarantee Israel’s security other than the IDF and our security services… Who knows what the future holds? The ISIS wave could very quickly be directed against Jordan,” he said at a conference in Tel Aviv. Israel would thus have to maintain long-term security control of the territory along the Jordan River in any future accord with the Palestinians, the prime minister said. “The evacuation of Israel’s forces would most likely lead to the collapse the PA and the rise of radical Islamic forces, just as it did in Gaza. It would also severely endanger the State of Israel.” In his speech at the David Intercontinental Hotel in Tel Aviv, Gordon also referred to the hail of rockets that rained down on Israel throughout the day from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. “The US strongly condemns these attacks. No country should have to live under the constant threat of indiscriminate violence against innocent civilians,” said Gordon, whose administration was heavily criticized by the Israeli government for quickly agreeing to work with the new Hamas-backed Palestinian unity government when it was established last month. The administration supported Israel’s right to defend itself against these attacks, he added. “At the same time, we appreciate Prime Minister Netanyahu’s calls for acting responsibly and we in turn call on all sides to do all they can to restore calm and to protect civilians.”
Category Archives: History
IRS Chats and Emails, a Parallel Universe
Who knew that the IRS was the only agency that runs an internal chat communication system? Seems, Lois Lerner and her inner circle made full use of it after getting full confirmation that those chat exchanges were not recorded or archived, giving full freedom to discuss with co-workers to continue to ambush of non-profit conservative groups.
The IRS became a parallel universal agency to halt and eventually prosecute organizations against freedom of speech and the ability to re-dress grievances as directed by many including some members in the Senate and in the House. This was a attack mission directly after the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United and mentioned by Barack Obama in his State of the Union address. The timeline is there, although it is a long one with many moving parts.
An update on the email component:
From Reuters,
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge is ordering the IRS to explain under oath how it lost a trove of emails to and from a central figure in the agency’s tea party controversy.
U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave the tax agency a month to submit the explanation in writing. Sullivan issued the order Thursday as part of a freedom of information lawsuit by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group.
The IRS says it lost the emails in 2011 when Lois Lerner’s computer crashed. At the time, Lerner headed the IRS division that processes applications for tax-exempt status. She has since retired.
Lerner has since become a central figure in several congressional investigations over the handling of tea party applications. IRS Commissioner John Koskinen has already testified on the issue before Congress.
So on the Fourth of July weekend, Commissioner John Koskinen delivered a major cache of communication documents and inside a particular email was found by assigned Oversight staffers, directing a hearing on Wednesday.
From: http://oversight.house.gov/release/new-e-mails-show-lerner-intentionally-sought-hide-information-congress/?utm_content=buffer60d88&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
‘I was cautioning folks about email and how we have several occasions where Congress has asked for emails … we need to be cautious about what we say in emails’
he House Oversight and Government Reform Committee today released new e-mails at a hearing with IRS Commissioner John Koskinen showing former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official Lois Lerner leading an IRS effort to hide information from Congressional inquiries.
From the April 9, 2013, email exchange among Lerner, an IRS technology employee (Maria Hooke), and the agency’s Director for Exempt Organizations Exam Unit Manager Nanette Downing who led audits:
I had a question today about OCS [Microsoft Office Communications Server]. I was cautioning folks about email and how we have several occasions where Congress has asked for emails and there has been an electronic search for responsive emails – so we need to be cautious about what we say in emails. Someone asked if OCS conversations were also searchable – I don’t know, but told them I would get back to them. Do you know?
Lerner’s April 2013 e-mail exchanges came just twelve days after the IRS Inspector General shared a draft copy of its targeting audit with the IRS that Lerner would leak at a bar association speech only weeks before the scandal became public.
In e-mails withheld from the Committee until only last week, Lerner was apparently concerned that IRS conversations taking place within the agency’s instant messenger program could end up in the hands of Congress along with requested e-mails. An IRS technology employees responded that “OCS messages are not set to automatically save” but cautioned that “parties involved in an OCS conversation can copy and save the contents of the conversation to an email or file.” Lerner responded, “Perfect.”
When Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, raised the e-mail to Commissioner Koskinen’s attention, Koskinen said he had never seen the e-mail and was unfamiliar with the OCS communication system.
You can read the new Lerner e-mails here.
Lerner is at the center of the scandal prompted by revelations more than a year ago that IRS officials improperly targeted and harassed hundreds of Tea Party and conservative nonprofits seeking tax-exempt status during the 2010 and 2012 campaigns.
Lerner has twice refused to answer questions put to her by the committee, which is chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. She claimed her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
Going Digital to Aid Obama’s Intel
Ah, I learned about it in media reports. This is Barack Obama’s canned response to any crisis nationally or globally. Likely the best suggestion is for Barack Obama to purge his National Security Council, to purge his CIA leadership, to purge his FBI director.
While at least the New York Times is Obama’s personal written mouthpiece, it appears that journalists globally should include a courtesy copy of their news reports items should include the White House. As an example, this news report tells us that Belmoktar is planning more attacks from Libya. This news report tells us who some of the members of ISIS is in Iraq. Most importantly, this news report tells us a General is explaining the real concern of the alien incursion at our southern border.
America could save billions of dollars if the White House would just continue reading items from journalists. But in the end, does that really influence his actions or policy? Well even according to the New York Times, the answer is no. Not even begging the White House to act for a year or more caused Barack Obama to be assertive and or proactive with regard to the building conflicts in Syria and Iraq.
So, what does Barack Obama do all day long anyway? Well that in reality continues to be a secret, there are two versions, one for insiders and one for the media.
Of most concern since his daily schedule is mostly obscure, bombing the fact he says is the most transparent administration in history, does he even attend and review in any form his Presidential Daily Briefings? The short answer is less than have the time. This could say then he is in fact behind on half the issues domestically and globally, enter the plausible deniability.
The Government Accountability Institute conducted an analysis of how much time President Barack Obama has spent attending his Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), as recorded on the White House official calendar and Politico’s comprehensive calendar. The study covered the President’s first 1,225 days in office, running from January 23, 2009 through May 31, 2012. Of those, President Obama attended a total of 536 Presidential Daily Briefs.
The chart in the link above shows that in May of 2012, Barack Obama only received a PDB 7 times. Ah 7?
Okay, well all is well in the world today now that his PDB’s have gone digital, meaning he can fire up his tablet and that solves his knowledge base problem, or does it? Well it seems that the office of ODNI is the primary source of PDB’s and that points to James Clapper. But, recently Clapper has been more than honest in his assessments and document releases pertaining to the NSA, so now that duty has fallen to Clapper’s deputy. Problem solves yet? Nah.
“Cardillo spends a lot of time in the White House so he knows his principal client pretty well. As a deputy on the National Security Council he meets one to three times a day in the Situation Room. And then there are those regulars forays to the Oval Office for the “oval briefings.”
He told a small gathering of reporters Thursday afternoon that we wouldn’t be “surprised by the topics” of the PDB. “Today it’s Ukraine; it’s Iran; it’s Korea it’s South Sudan; it’s cyber; it’s terrorism etc.”
It seems Barack Obama went digital two or more years ago and he still gets his information from the media or does he? Well no actually it appears that many others get these briefings as Obama seems to fill his time with appointments that remain a secret.
Well for those reading this perhaps you can tweet to the White House what they need to know as that is the powerful tool being used by our enemies. And maybe since our U.S. Ambassador was asked to leave the country he represents, we may see him attending afternoon tea at the White House, but you wont find that on Barack Obama’s daily schedule just as Hillary’s afternoon tea was omitted as well.
Going digital has not worked either….moving on, all is well in the world so fund-raisers for the DNC takes priority.
Putin Sees a Post America World
Barack Obama in just a few short years has passed the baton to Vladimir Putin such that Putin can now dictate global conditions, economic standards and alter international law as he chooses. The United Nations, the Hague, the International Monetary Fund, Interpol and the World Bank will all fall in line with Putin at the helm, while the equilibrium of the globe will be at the hands of China, Iran and Russia.
Any influence that the United States once had, an policy that the United States once had, any loyalties the United States once had vanished without so much as a debate or whimper.
Putin: Ukraine is a Battlefield for the New World Order
This week in Moscow President Vladimir Putin made a major foreign policy statement, while speaking to a worldwide gathering of Russian ambassadors and permanent diplomatic representatives. According to Putin, the West did not give Moscow a choice, but to move to annex Crimea last March to defend Russians and Russian-speakers “that consider themselves part of the wider Russian world” (“Ruskiy Mir”). Putin insisted that NATO planned to swiftly move its forces into Sevastopol and radically change the balance of power in the region, depriving Russia of everything it had been fighting for since the times of Tsar Peter the Great.
According to Putin, the present crisis in Ukraine is a manifestation of the core Western policy of “deterring Russia” that continued despite the end of the Cold war. Putin announced Moscow would continue to defend the rights of Russian “compatriots” living abroad “using political, economic and self-defense humanitarian operations.” He declared that the time of U.S. world domination has ended and Russia will be reintegrating the Eurasian landmass [former USSR], while promoting better relations with Europe, “which is our natural partner.” The Russian foreign ministry was ordered to work on preparing “a joint space of economic and humanitarian cooperation from Lisbon to Vladivostok,” based on absolute noninterference in internal political matters and excluding the U.S. Putin accused Washington of blackmailing Paris to stop the delivery of the French-built Mistral helicopter-carrying assault ships to the Russian Navy (kremlin.ru, July 1). The first Mistral is planned for delivery this year and it could be stationed in Sevastopol (Rossyskaya Gazeta, June 25).
Putin’s speech was controversial: while accusing the West of ignoring international law and interfering in others’ affairs by promoting so called “democracy,” Putin strongly asserted Russia’s right to intervene in other nations internal affairs “to defend Russian compatriots abroad.” The Kremlin rejects the West ideologically, politically and militarily, but Putin’s speech did not spell out fully the practical part of the Russian foreign policy agenda (gazeta.ru, July1).
After Putin’s foreign policy statement, the deputy secretary of Russia’s National Security Council, Eugenie Lukyanov, Putin’s appointee from St. Petersburg, told RIA Novosti that “the time of U.S. world hegemony is over,” but Washington is not ready to accept this fact. According to Lukyanov, new international rules must be written together by major world powers that would take into account the interests of all key players. Possibly, a global conference to rewrite international law must be called, because today “there are no agreed rules and the world may become an increasingly unruly place” plagued with constant conflicts. Lukyanov accused Washington of directly promoting conflict and bloodshed in Ukraine and using the conflict to rally European nations against Russia. Russia, according to Lukyanov, could reply by cutting supplies of titanium to Boeing that could seriously hamper the production of passenger aircraft in America. Lukyanov ridiculed President Barack Obama’s administration: “They spent $5 billion to prepare and organize the Maidan protests in Kyiv, but the end result was that Crimea became part of Russia and Putin’s approval ratings are more than 80 percent. It turns out Obama’s advisers are our prime helpers.” Lukyanov accused Poland of harboring training centers of Ukrainian radical nationalists on its territory and expressed hope that attempts to use the Ukrainian crisis to consolidate the West and NATO shall fail eventually (RIA Novosti, July 2).
The Kremlin apparently believes the time is ripe for a decisive drive to undermine U.S. influence and power worldwide and hit at the transatlantic link to undermine NATO, while the White House is occupied by the Obama administration, seen by Moscow as ineffective and indecisive. The Ukrainian crisis may promote the emergence of a new world order that would sideline Western democratic nations and recognize Russia’s own sphere of undisputed influence in the post-Soviet Eurasian landmass. On the practical side, Putin promised the ambassadors gathered in Moscow, who have been tasked to make this happen, a fourfold pay hike for diplomatic staff (kremlin.ru, July 1).
This week the Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko announced the termination of a 10-day unilateral ceasefire in fighting with pro-Russian separatists in Donbas. Poroshenko accused the separatists of constantly violating the ceasefire, of killing Ukrainian solders, of failing to liberate hostages and implement Poroshenko’s previously announced peace plan. Poroshenko promised “to liberate our land,” but implied the ceasefire could be resumed, if separatist fighters accept his conditions and that his peace plan was still on the table (Segodnya, July 1). Putin criticized Poroshenko for resuming the so-called anti-terrorist operation in Donbas, but also left open the possibility of a negotiated compromise (kremlin.ru, July 1). The Kremlin is at present concentrating its efforts on pressing for a prolonged ceasefire and “substantial negotiations” between the rebels and Kyiv—an arrangement that would give Putin leverage to keep Kyiv and the unruly Russian nationalist rebels under control, while containing Western influence in Ukraine and possibly inserting wedges into the transatlantic connection between the U.S. and EU. Moscow has been apparently influencing the rebels to scale down their demands and offering some tactical concessions to Poroshenko, while trying to sideline the U.S. and engage European powers as intermediaries (EDM, June 26).
Resumed fighting in Donbas this week seems to be marginal in nature—the Ukrainian forces are improving their positions and trying to secure the border with Russia, while not attempting to decisively defeat the rebels or take over any major rebel-held cities. A meeting in Berlin between the German, French, Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers on July 2 resulted in a joint press conference and a declaration calling for terms of a ceasefire to be finalized by July 5. Moscow has promised to allow Ukrainian border guards and OSCE observers into its posts on the Ukrainian border to verify that men and arms are not being smuggled into Ukraine. Hostages must be released and OSCE observers deployed to monitor any future ceasefire (Rossyskaya Gazeta, July 3). A pattern is emerging of possible intermittent fighting followed by ceasefire and negotiations. This pattern would seem to largely exclude the U.S. from the picture and be in line with Moscow’s announced overall foreign policy objectives.
The Constitution, all Used Up
Ukrainian Journalist: “Let’s Borrow From The US Constitution; They’re Not Using It Anymore”
Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man blog
In the fall of 1239 AD, Batu Khan and his Golden Horde were making great progress in their rapid advance into Europe.
The Mongol Empire was in the midst of global conquest, and Batu’s army had been devastating cities across the Russian plain.
He stopped briefly after taking Chernihiv (in northern Ukraine) and sent his cousin Mongke with a vanguard force to probe Kiev, the capital of Kievan Rus.
At the time, Kievan Rus was one of the greatest powers in Europe, forming a loose federation of Slavic principalities that stretched from the Black Sea to the White Sea.
Kiev had been founded nearly eight centuries before, and by 1239 it was a grand capital with some 50,000 inhabitants. Mongke was quite taken with it. And, not wanting to destroy it, he sent an emissary to discuss terms for their surrender.
Apparently Kiev’s Prince Mikhail had just watched the movie 300… because he put the Mongol emissary to death.
Now, if I could paraphrase the Princess Bride, history gives us a couple of very clear rules– (1) Never get involved in a land war in Asia; and (2) Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line.
But only slightly less well-known is this: (3) Never slight a guy named Batu Khan, especially when his army is called the ‘Golden Horde’.
Batu responded to Mikhail’s poor manners by laying waste to the city. Martin Dimnik’s work “The Dynasty of Chernigov” describes the carnage in gruesome detail, saying that people “drowned in a pool of blood.”
To their credit, though, the Kievans fought bravely. They lacked the Mongolian weaponry and tactics, but they fought with sticks and knives… hand to hand, house to house, man to man.
Resistance is in their DNA. So it’s no surprise that, several centuries later, people were out in the streets fighting against their own government. Sticks and knives, once again, againt tanks and automatic weapons.
This time they won. Sort of.
Every 10-15 years this place has a major revolution. And each time it’s precipitated by one basic principle: money.
All people really want is to be in a place where they can improve their lives… where their children can have a brighter future than they did.
The system in Ukraine did not provide those conditions. It was designed for a tiny political and banking elite to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else.
This revolution was borne from economic frustration, plain and simple.
Yet each time this happened in the past, all they really did was change the players… not the game. They just ended up with a different set of criminals in charge.
This time around there seems to be serious effort to at least change the rules.
Many are talking about major revisions to the Constitution (leading one local journalist to ask– “Why don’t we use the American Constitution? It was written by really smart guys, it has worked for over 200 years, and they’re not using it anymore…”)
He’s right. Much of the West, in fact, has descended into the same extractive system as Ukraine.
There’s a tiny elite showering itself with free money and political favors at the expense of everyone else.
Dow 17,000 means that a handful of people at the top are making boatloads of money thanks to quantitative easing, some upper-middle class are doing fairly well, and the average guy pays higher prices for food, fuel, education, medical care, etc.
It’s not just the US. France, for example, is simply not a place where you can work hard and expect to improve your life anymore. In Greece and Spain, half of the nations’ young men are broke and unemployed.
And along they way, they have all set aside civil liberties and turned into vast police states.
Ukraine may be in the midst of turmoil right now, but they at least hit the big giant reset button and are looking to build something new.
The West, meanwhile, continues down its path of more debt, more money printing, more regulations, and less freedom. How long can this really go on without consequence?
_____________________________________________
“You have a power to stop deportation for all undocumented immigrants in this country!” the young South Korean man yelled at President Obama during a speech on immigration reform last November in San Francisco. Waving away security guards, Mr. Obama turned and addressed Mr. Hong, himself undocumented. “Actually, I don’t,” the president said. “And that’s why we’re here.”
“We’ve got this Constitution, we’ve got this whole thing about separation of powers,” Obama continued. “So there is no shortcut to politics, and there’s no shortcut to democracy.” Read more here.
So, Barack, which is it now dude? So sue me? How about as you wind down RICO based presidency, your last days will be part of history that says, due to your abuse of power and authority, you became a president that was sued by the House of Representatives, the PEOPLE’s house.