US Muslim Organizations To Boycott Cooperation With The FBI

A group of major Muslim groups has announced that they will no longer cooperate with our FBI, claiming 'bias' and 'targeting' :

In a statement, the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT) cited in particular an incident in California, in which it says that “the FBI sent a convicted criminal to pose as an agent provocateur” in several mosques. A federal agent allegedly told one of the mosque-goers that the FBI would make his life a "living hell" if he did not agree to become an informant.

“Muslims are law-abiding and productive citizens who uphold the democratic principles of freedom, equality and justice,” AMT contended.

Another leading Muslim coalition, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), recently issued a statement headlined "FBI Losing Partnership with American Muslim Community."

MPAC warned that “federal law enforcement cannot establish trust with American Muslim communities through meetings and townhall forums, while at the same time sending paid informants who instigate violent rhetoric in mosques.This mere act stigmatizes American mosques and casts a shadow of doubt and distrust between American Muslims and their neighbors.”

Yet another Muslim umbrella group, the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, suspended “outreach” to the FBI in February.

AMT’s recent statement protested the 2007 designation of Muslim groups such as CAIR, the Islamic society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), as "unindicted co-conspirators" in the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas, Texas.

I suppose the fact that those groups fully deserved the label of unindicted co-conspirators has absolutely nothing to do with it as far as these people are concerned.

And the bit about 'instigating violent rhetoric in mosques' is especially rich..as though it would never happen unless the FBI fanned the flames..

“We call on the FBI to reassess its positions on profiling and the use of informants as agent provocateurs within the Muslim communities,” the Muslim groups declared, adding the caveat that “this possible suspension, of course, would in no way affect our unshakable duty to report crimes or threats of violence to our nation.”

I guess their lawyers insisted on that last bit. Not reporting a crime would lay them open to the charge of being an accessory, although actually proving they had foreknowledge would be difficult. But not cooperating with law enforcement is a crime as well in most jurisdictions, and I find it interesting that groups like this feel emboldened enough to openly state this.

What we have here is a bunch of diverse groups which might differ on tactics and focus but have a common goal of creating an Islamist political foothold under sharia law here in America, and ultimately control of our country and its institutions.

After 9/11, the common narrative we were given was that Islam was a religion of peace who had been "perverted by radicals"...and in any event, we were told that we didn't want to go to war with 1.3 billion people, did we?

This last line was frequently used by Muslims belonging to Saudi-funded groups like the ones above themselves, and I personally heard it come out of the mouth of Muslim Public Affairs Council Executive Director Salam Al-Marayati when he was pressed on a local talk radio show.

That line of reasoning was always ridiculous, because going to war against our enemy in this case the segment of Islam that wanted to conquer or destroy America meant a war against those enemies who chose to define themselves as our enemies through their actions. The majority of Muslims in America, at least by their own admission, claim to have distanced themselves from Islamist terrorism, attacks on Americans and the forced implementation of sharia over our Constitution.

The same goes for the rest of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims. The red lines and the enemies aligned against us in this war were always theirs to define.

All of the other squabbles between the various jihadi groups - Shia versus Sunni, al-Qaeda versus main stream Wahabi or Deobandi, al-Qaeda as opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood - were and are meaningless in this context no matter how much they fight amongst themselves, because Islamist domination and the implementation of Sharia is a goal they all have in common, and there is a long history of various disparate Muslim factions putting aside their differences temporarily and uniting to wage jihad on the infidel.

Jihad in America is promulgated at mosques and madrassahs across the country, as researchers like ex-intel officer Dave Gaubatz, award winning journalist and authors Steven Emerson, Zahdi Jasser, Daveed Garthenstein-Ross, Robert Spencer and others have amply documented. A number of terrorist attack attempts and jihad money laundering have come directly through these institutions or by Muslims that were radicalized through them.

If groups like MPAC, the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, CAIR and others are suspending their 'cooperation' with the FBI and don't want these mosques and other institutions put under surveillance and investigated, there's obviously a connection between them and the radicalization of America's Muslims that they would rather not see come to light. And that position, I think, self-defines them as our enemies.

All you have to do is connect the dots...

"The Toxic Assets We Elected...."

George Will hits one out of the ballpark..

With the braying of 328 yahoos -- members of the House of Representatives who voted for retroactive and punitive use of the tax code to confiscate the legal earnings of a small, unpopular group -- still reverberating, the Obama administration yesterday invited private-sector investors to become business partners with the capricious and increasingly anti-constitutional government. This latest plan to unfreeze the financial system came almost half a year after Congress shoveled $700 billion into the Troubled Assets Relief Program, $325 billion of which has been spent without purchasing any toxic assets.

TARP funds have, however, semi-purchased, among many other things, two automobile companies (and, last week, some of their parts suppliers), which must amaze Sweden. That unlikely tutor of America regarding capitalist common sense has said, through a Cabinet minister, that the ailing Saab automobile company is on its own: "The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories."

Another embarrassing auditor of American misgovernment is China, whose premier has rightly noted the unsustainable trajectory of America's high-consumption, low-savings economy. He has also decorously but clearly expressed sensible fears that his country's $1 trillion-plus of dollar-denominated assets might be devalued by America choosing, as banana republics have done, to use inflation for partial repudiation of improvidently incurred debts.

From Mexico, America is receiving needed instruction about fundamental rights and the rule of law. A leading Democrat trying to abolish the right of workers to secret ballots in unionization elections is California's Rep. George Miller who, with 15 other Democrats, in 2001 admonished Mexico: "The secret ballot is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose." Last year, Mexico's highest court unanimously affirmed for Mexicans the right that Democrats want to strip from Americans.

Congress, with the approval of a president who has waxed censorious about his predecessor's imperious unilateralism in dealing with other nations, has shredded the North American Free Trade Agreement. Congress used the omnibus spending bill to abolish a program that was created as part of a protracted U.S. stall regarding compliance with its obligation to allow Mexican long-haul trucks on U.S. roads. The program, testing the safety of Mexican trucking, became an embarrassment because it found Mexican trucking at least as safe as U.S. trucking. Mexico has resorted to protectionism -- tariffs on many U.S. goods -- in retaliation for Democrats' protection of the Teamsters union.

NAFTA, like all treaties, is the "supreme law of the land." So says the Constitution. It is, however, a cobweb constraint on a Congress that, ignoring the document's unambiguous stipulations that the House shall be composed of members chosen "by the people of the several states," is voting to pretend that the District of Columbia is a state. Hence it supposedly can have a Democratic member of the House and, down the descending road, two Democratic senators. Congress rationalizes this anti-constitutional willfulness by citing the Constitution's language that each house shall be the judge of the "qualifications" of its members and that Congress can "exercise exclusive legislation" over the District. What, then, prevents Congress from giving House and Senate seats to Yellowstone National Park, over which Congress exercises exclusive legislation? Only Congress's capacity for embarrassment. So, not much.

The Federal Reserve, by long practice rather than law, has been insulated from politics in performing its fundamental function of preserving the currency as a store of value -- preventing inflation. Now, however, by undertaking hitherto uncontemplated functions, it has become an appendage of the executive branch. The coming costs, in political manipulation of the money supply, of this forfeiture of independence could be steep.

Jefferson warned that "great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities." But Democrats, who trace their party's pedigree to Jefferson, are contemplating using "reconciliation" -- a legislative maneuver abused by both parties to severely truncate debate and limit the minority's right to resist -- to impose vast and controversial changes on the 17 percent of the economy that is health care. When the Congressional Budget Office announced that the president's budget underestimates by $2.3 trillion the likely deficits over the next decade, his budget director, Peter Orszag, said: All long-range budget forecasts are notoriously unreliable -- so rely on ours.

This is but a partial list of recent lawlessness, situational constitutionalism and institutional derangement. Such political malfeasance is pertinent to the financial meltdown as the administration, desperately seeking confidence, tries to stabilize the economy by vastly enlarging government's role in it.

Well said, Mr. Will...I'm amazed the WAPO printed it.

A skeptic's guide to President Obama's "Nowruz Address"

An excellent video reponse by the good folks at Occidental Soapbox

Labor Votes To Join Israeli Coalition Government

The Labor Party just narrowly voted to agree to join the Israeli coalition government:

The Labor Party voted to join the Likud-led coalition government, virtually guaranteeing that Benjamin Netanyahu will be Israel's next prime minister.

Labor chief Ehud Barak's bid to join Netanyahu's coalition came down to a contentious vote Tuesday night by the party's central committee, with 680 in favor of joining and 570 against.

With Labor behind him, Netanyahu now has the 60-plus Knesset majority necessary to form a government and become prime minister. His other coalition partners include the Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas parties.

Barak argued that Labor joining the Likud-led coalition was best for the country and would not provide cover for a right-wing agenda.

"I am not afraid of Benjamin Netanyahu. We won't be anyone's fig leaf or anyone's third wheel," Barak told the central committee. "We will act as an opposing force that will ensure there will not be a narrow right-wing government, but a real government that looks after the State of Israel."

The deal involves Ehud Barak continuing as defense minister, Likud agreeing to 'continue to work towards regional peace' and agreeing to honor previous Israeli government agreements.

Apparently National Union and UTJ were a bit too greedy with their demands and priced themselves out of the market.

That means that Avigdor Lieberman becomes foreign minister.

And that also means that Tzipi Livni and Kadima are out in the cold, which is a very good thing.Look for most of Kadima to migrate to Labor or to Likud.

Barak is capable of functioning competently as a defense minister provided there's some steel from Netanyahu calling the shots.

I'm very cautiously optimistic.

Israel May Be Seeking A New Best Friend

The Obama Administration has made it crystal clear that they regard Israel as a problem rather than the loyal ally it's been since the Nixon Administration.

Some very influential Israelis are thinking ahead and saying that it's time Israel had a new best friend. No less than Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's presumptive foreign minister has said that Israel's ties with Russia "must rise to the level of a strategic partnership" :

Relations between Russia and Israel must and can rise to a level of strategic partnership, said Avigdor Lieberman, the leader of the Israel is Our Home party and a future member of Israel's new coalition government in an interview with Interfax.

"I've been saying all along that relations between Israel and Russia must rise to a level of strategic partnership. This is even more relevant today, then previously," Lieberman said.

The Israel is Our Home party won the third largest number of votes in the parliamentary elections and it is involved in the talks on the formation of Israel's new government.

"However paradoxical it may seem, the global economic crisis gives Israel new opportunities to reach the Russian market, after many of the Western companies abandoned it," the Israeli politician said.

Lieberman, who co-chaired the Russian-Israeli intergovernmental commission for trade and economic cooperation in 2003-04, said that, the two countries have accomplished "a real breakthrough" in this area, but the potential is far from being exhausted.

The same refers to military-technical cooperation between Israel and Russia, he said.

"Israel has quite a few things to offer Russia in this sector - from the electronic stuffing for fighter jets to drones," Lieberman said.

Could it happen? Possibly. Russia, after all does not really need oil and gas, which is what Iran and the Arabs have to sell. And as the price of oil goes down, countries like Iran have less money to buy what Russia has on offer. And while it's not evident yet, there could be significant conflicts in the future between Russia and Turkey, who are traditional antagonists and Russia and Iran, as the three countries attempt to expand their influence into the gas and oil regions in the old Soviet empire in central Asia.

On the other hand Russia does have a definite need for Israeli high tech, especially when it comes to industrial and defense applications.And the Israelis look like they're definitely thinking along those lines, especially if the Obama Administration continues to alienate them, as seems likely. In that case, the US would need to station significant naval and air forces somewhere in the region ( probably in the Emirates) to protect our interests there, as well as somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean to guard NATO's southern flank, along with a significant number of troops...the cost of which would make the aid we currently give Israel look like a pittance in comparison.

Another Israeli friend in the making appears to be India, the world's largest democracy, and another US ally the Obama Administration has already offended by attempting to stick its nose into Kashmir and by its outreach to Pakistan and the Muslim world. Like Israel, India is a non-Muslim democracy threatened by a neighboring Islamic presence. India has a long history of welcoming Israeli tourists (which is why there was a Chabad center in Mumbai). The two countries have significant trade and the Israeli and Indian militaries have exchanges attaches and even done a few military exercises together at various times. India's latest spy satellite was purchased from Israel, a transaction that should definite boost the security ties between the two countries.

Another country Israel may develop closer ties with is China. While China currently backs countries like Iran and the Sudan in the UN, this is basically a matter of protecting oil and gas sources for its expanding economy rather than any real affinity. In fact China's press coverage of Israel is fairly balanced and the overall image of Israel in China is relatively good.

And China has its own problem with restive Muslims, the Uighers in the west of the country.

While China needs what Iran and the Arabs have to sell, it also has a need for Israeli electronic, agricultural and industrial technology and expertise. The chief friction between China and Israel came some time ago, when the US forced Israel to renege on a contract they had to supply China with delivery of Falcon intelligence planes back in 2000 the US felt had been developed as part of a joint venture. While the Israelis complained (correctly, as it turned out) that this was pressure from Washington designed simply to allow an American company to obtain the contract, they pulled out of the deal, something the Chinese were quite upset about at the time. In an environment where the US-Israeli relationship is not as close as it was, this would no longer present a problem.

It may sound odd, but the loss of the American alliance with Israel might end up affecting the US more than Israel. Hopefully it won't come to that, although the present climate in Washington towards Israel is far from friendly.

Obama's Mistaken Persian Gambit

As you all know by now, President Obama broadcast an extraordinarily video to the government and the people of Iran, ostensibly in honor of Nahruz, the Persian New year, which is celebrated annually at the spring equinox:




I avoided writing about this thus far because I wanted to see the reaction...both from the Mullahs and from several other players in the region

The extraordinary spectacle of the president of the United States, a nation Iran has considered itself in a state of war with for thirty years grovelling in this fashion shows that President Obama has absolutely no clue as to how to deal with these people.

In particular, it's noteworthy that this was addressed not only to the Iranian people, but to the regime.He specifically referred to Iran as an Islamic Republic and called for it to 'take it's rightful place among th4e nations of the world.'

The mullahcracy of Iran is a brutal, totalitarian regime that cheerfully hangs homosexuals, beats women on the streets who the basij , the regime's brown shirts, feel are immodestly dressed and `uppity', and leads the world in juvenile executions. Torture and beatings in secret prisons are the norm.

They train, support and finance terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, who like Iran are officially committed to annihilating Israel, teaching children the glories of 'martyrdom' and in the case of Hamas and Hezbollah, committing genocide against Jews world wide.

And they've been in a declared war for thirty years against the 'Great Satan' - that would be America - that has included targeting America servicemen and civilians over the years, including the bombing of a marine barracks in Beirut that cost 240 lives, the torture murder of Colonel William Buckley, the abduction and execution style killings of four American officers and arming and training our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Not only is Obama prepared to ignore all that, but he's also apparently prepared to allow Iran to have nuclear weapons, and expressly took any forceful response off the table stating that the US was 'fully committed to a diplomatic solution'.


Obama in his video talked a great deal about our “common humanity,” and made a point of discounting dismissed “those who insist we be defined by our differences..”

There are striking resemblances to a speech made a long time ago by another world leader attempting to placate a militant dictatorship : “We are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace… “ That was British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, when he returned from Munich in 1938 — in the statement Chamberlain made that promised “peace for our time.”

The Iranian response was swift and fairly predictable, as Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran responded:

Khamenei set the bar impossibly high, demanding an overhaul of U.S. foreign policy, including giving up "unconditional support" for Israel and halting claims that Iran is seeking nuclear arms. Iran insists its nuclear program is only for peaceful energy purposes.

"Have you released Iranian assets? Have you lifted oppressive sanctions? Have you given up mudslinging and making accusations against the great Iranian nation and its officials?" Khamenei said in a speech in the northeastern city of Mashhad. The crowd chanted "Death to America."

"He (Obama) insulted the Islamic Republic of Iran from the first day. If you are right that change has come, where is that change? What is the sign of that change? Make it clear for us what has changed."

Still, Khamenei left the door open to better ties with America, saying "should you change, our behavior will change, too."

This is far from a kiss off, by the way. There would be absolutely no value in that for Iran. Khamenei is using a classic Persian bazaari gambit of tossing the first offer to do business back at Obama and in essence asking him how far Obama is prepared to go to make a deal.

What the Mullahs want at the very least is to eat up additional time in 'negotiations' to allow them to finish nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Once that's done, the regime is going to be solidly in place, with the ability to black mail the west by threatening to shut off Persian Gulf oil at any time.

The rest of what Iran wants is probably not a problem for Obama.The Iranians want the sanctions lifted, assets that have been frozen since the days of the hostage crisis released to Iran and a free hand in developing its nuclear weapons. They want the US to end or at least severely curtail US support for Israel and apply massive pressure on the Jewish state, especially for concessions to Hamas and Syria. That's something Obama has already shown he has no problem with. They want the US out of Iraq, Iran's historical rival so that Iran can dominate it and the rest of the Persian Gulf region, can have a free hand there, and use Persian Gulf oil and gas to finance its tottering regime so that it can expand without fear of repercussions. And they will want a free hand in Lebanon, with no US interference. In exchange, what Obama will likely get is some meaningless nonsense from the Mullahs about their nuclear weapons program and help from the Mullahs in stabilizing Afghanistan so we can leave. That 'help' will largely consist of ending the arming, training and financial support of our enemies, just as it did in Iraq.

The ready appeasement of Obama's new direction of detente without deterrence towards Iran has been noticed by others and is more likely to lead towards war than any forceful confrontation would.As Amir Taheri notes, the failure of the Bush Administration and the Obama administration to stop Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons has led to a brand new arms race in the region, with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE and even Iraq among others looking to hop aboard the nuclear band wagon.

And as for the Israelis, they've apparently realized that the Obama administration is going to end up being the most anti-Israel in US history. The President is an adherent of the Leftist rhetoric he grew up with that sees Israel as a ' white colonial state' and the Palestinians as deserving 'people of color'..and so do many if not most of his closest advisers and associates. Unless Israel is prepared to knuckle under and make suicidal strategic concessions in exchange for what amounts to paper guarantees that probably won't be honored anyway, they're going to face increasing deterioration of the US/Israeli alliance and an arms embargo is not at all unlikely. So Israel has very little to lose in making a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Given President Obama's craven appeasement and the fact that Israel faces an existential threat, I'd be very surprised if they didn't.

Obama - Dissing France And Sarkozy

You can now add France to the list of our allies that President Barack Hussein Obama has insulted. And oddly enough, it comes at a time when the French have made an historic decision to re-enter NATO and re-integrate their forces with NATO's command structure after forty years.

The Chosen one wrote a special letter pledging cooperation, saying ""I am certain that we will be able to work together, in the coming four years, in a spirit of peace and friendship to build a safer world."

Except he wrote it to our old friend Jaque Chirac, the former president of France rather than to Nicholas Sarkozy, the current one!

Needless to say, Sarkozy, who's been trying unsuccessfully to get some face time with President BHO is not amused, and there's no evidence that the White house has seen fit to apologize.

This has gone almost unnoticed in the US press. Imagine the headlines if President Bush had done something like this.

Does Obama know who the president of France is? Almost certainly, since they did photo-ops and a press conference during the One's campaign tour through Europe.So this comes under the heading of calculated malice rather than a mere gaffe.

The reasons may have been a combination of petty revenge for Sarkozy's criticism of Obama's foreign policy, a disdain for a conservative leader ( at least for France)who was close to former President Bush as opposed to the fairly anti-American Chirac who Obama obviously prefers,an dyet another attempt to curry favor in the Muslim world, where Sarkozy is not popular.

In any event, it adds to a long list of US allies president Zero has offended, as Ace recaps for us:

Making a List:

1. Canada: NAFTA fiasco.
2. Poland: missile shield "misunderstanding".
3. UK: Churchhill bust return.
4. Russia: "overcharge" button.
5. UK: insulting gifts to the Browns.
6. France: not realizing that Chirac has been out of power for two years.

What am I missing? Helpful commenters reminding me:

7. Brazil: Misspelling the president's name.
8. Mexico: NAFTA
9. India: Thinking Kashmir is Pah-kee-stan.

I'll add two more to the list: Dissing Israel in a multitude of ways, including refusing to meet with Israel's Chief of Staff on a special trip here to discuss Iran. And pushing for an end to sanctions against communist Cuba while refusing to ratify a free trade agreement with our ally Columbia.

And those are just the foreign policy screw ups with our allies.Let alone our enemies...

What we have in President Obama is malignant narcissism written large.

Watcher's Council Results, 3/20/09

The Council has spoken! A complete rundown of the voting tallies is here.

IMPORTANT: We have a couple a rare openings for slots on the Council, now that our esteemed co-conspirator Cheat Seeking Missiles has departed to work full time on a novel. These fill quickly, so don't snooze. If you have an excellent blog and think you have what it takes, please leave a comment on this article including an e-mail contact ( which will not be published, of course).

Now, the results...

The winning entry in the Council category this week was my entry at Joshuapundit for What Netanyahu Should Say About Peace To The Arab World - basically an outline of a speech I would give were I Israel's Prime minister that would eithewr be the spark of a monumental breakthrough or - more likely - simply provide clarity on who was really intererested inpeace and who was simply faking it to cover a very different agenda. Many thanks gang for the honor, as always.

In second place was Soccer Dad with If an appointee falls and there’s no msm, is it still a scandal? , a fascinating look at how the media avoided covering the scandalous Charles Freeman appointment until they were forced to.

Also getting votes were Bookworm Room for The New York Times takes off the mask , Rhymes With Right with In Re. Bristol Palin , The Colossus of Rhodey with Chicago ranks “high” in the 25 worst schools in nation and Mere Rhetoric for Government-Linked Thugs Systematically Compiling Full List Of Venezuelan Jews, Launching Attacks On Jewish Centers Gangs ..a four way tie for third which should give you an idea of how high quality these pieces are.

In the Non-Council category, the winner was Nicholas Guariglia writing in Pajamas Media for Welcome to Francis Ford Coppola’s White House , a very funny take on the Godfather.

In second place, we had my nominee, Michael Totten with The Worst Airline In The World something that sounds right out of the old John Candy movie 'Planes, Trains and Airplanes' an dreads like a movie script all in itself.

As always, congratulations not only to the winners but to the participants.

Obama's Brown Shirts?

Remember this?



Obama's vision of a domestic security force "just as strong, just as well funded as our military" ( and presumbly loyal to him personally) just got a lot closer.

The House of representatives has just passed HR 1388 otherwise known as the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act. This reauthorizes through 2014 the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.

However, it not only reauthorizes the programs, but also includes "new programs and studies" and an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

When you look at the language of the bill closely,it gets even more interesting.The bill specifically mentions possibilities if "all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."

If these requirements were made mandatory, the bill says it "would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."

And it mentions "The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives."

Those groups of volunteers would according to the bill, be "grouped together as appropriate in campuses for operational, support, and boarding purposes. The Corps campus for a unit shall be in a facility or central location established as the operational headquarters and boarding place for the unit. … There shall be a superintendent for each camp."

Take a minute to think about the implications of all this, given the sort of person who's in the White House.

All of these things were hidden away within the 200 pages of legislation..and the bill itself was mainly billed as federal support for establishing the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America as "a National Day of Service and Remembrance."

Some of the smarter boys like Duncan Hunter weren't fooled, but a number of others were, and the bill passed with an enthusiastic yes from every Democrat who's been on record as consistently voting against anything to do with our military or national security...Neil Abercrombie, John Conyers, Jim McDermott,George Miller, Jim Moran, Nancy Pelosi..and of course Keith Ellison.The whole crew was there, unfortunately joined by a number of people whom I expected would know better.

Paranoid? Perhaps, but this bears close watching.Why spend six bil on this just now?

Obama is probably quite aware that a significant number of our volunteer miiitary are not exactly his biggest fans.Is he seeking a domestic counterweight, while diminishing the pay and benefits of the regular military? Based on the cuts in defense spending he's proposing and his recent attempt to force wounded servicemen to pay for their own treatment out of their private insurance, it certainly smells that way.

At this point, I don't trust the current occupant of the White House in the least. But you can't say I didn't give him a chance.

AIG - Obama And the Democrats Unconstitutional Shadow Show

Something absolutely outrageous happened last night in Congress, and I'm afraid a number of you missed it.

In an attempt to dramatize the phony outrage the Obama Administration and their accomplices in Congress are voicing over amendments they specifically authorized in order to exempt the bonuses from major campaign donor AIG as part of the Obama bailout legislation, they are targeting a new class of rich kulaks as Enemies Of the People...and dancing on the Constitution to do it.

In a move aimed specifically at AIG, the House voted to impose a 90 percent tax on bonuses given to employees with family incomes above $250,000 at companies that gotten at least $5 billion in government bailout money.Note that this was constructed so as not to apply to Northern Trust, the company that gave the Obamas their below market sweetheart loan for the mansion in Chicago Tony Rezco helped them buy. Nor will it likely apply to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae because of their government charter.

For all the kabuki outrage the actors on Capitol Hill are putting on for your benefit, the fact remains that that the AIG executives did nothing illegal, the bonuses in question were contractually mandated as part of their employment,and the Obama Administration knew about it and took extra care to see that the bonuses were protected as part of the ridiculous $783 billion bail out.

Even more serious, this kind of selective enforcement is blatantly illegal and strictly forbidden by the Constitution, which specifically prohibits ex post facto laws and bills of attainder- because the Founders realized that a jumped up government headed by a wanna be demagogue might come along and be tempted to use Congress to create punitive laws to attack his personal scapegoats and enemies.

Hopefully one of them will take this to court, where it will be revealed for what it is.

For those of you who don't know who the kulaks were, they were a class of prosperous, land owning farmers who resisted Stalin's collectivization. Because of that, they were doing far better than Stalin's forced collectives and making the government look as incompetent and short sighted as it actually was. The way Stalin dealt with them was to use propaganda to demonize them to the masses, appropriate their wealth 'for the people' and then send the NKVD in to ship them to Siberia as criminals.

That's exactly what we have here..where American citizens are being intimidated into returning money they lawfully earned to make tax cheats like Charlie Rangel and Tim Geithner look good and cover up what the Obama administration and its allies in Congress tried to slip through.

In this context,the ACORN mobs targeting the AIG executives' houses and the bill curently in the Senate establishing that mandatory domestic security force Obama wants to be 'just as strong, just as well funded' as our military takes on a sinister new context.

In Stalin's Russia, the term 'kulak' was easily expanded to include any of the State's enemies once the original kulaks were disposed of. Remember that before you succumb to the Obama Administration's little class envy shadow show.

Obama's New Solicitor General, Elena Kagan

Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan has been confirmed by the Senate in pretty much a party-line vote of 61-31. As the new Solicitor General, she's the person charged with being 'the government's lawyer'. Among other things, her job will be to argue the government's case before the Supreme Court.

The appointment is seen as seen as a stepping stone for Kagen towards a Supreme Court appointment from President Obama, who Kagen knew back in Chicago from when Obama and Ayers were hanging tight at the University of Chicago Law School faculty in the 1990s.

Just one thing...she's an academic who has never ever tried a case in court.

Kagen was the first female law school dean of Harvard. They obviously had to do something after Larry Summers gave members of the female faculty the vapors with his semarks at a faculty meeting. While she was dean, she was credited with 'warming up the law school' whatever that means. She also eliminated grades and required students to do pro bono work (translation, staff various lefty interest group projects at the law school).

She's also an ex-Clintonista. From 1995 to 1999, Kagan served as President Bill Clinton's Associate White House Counsel and Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy.I have a feeling that this is a yet another clue about the president's main emphasis - domestic policy.

On the plus side, she appears to be a pretty decent administrator, which is actually an important feature of this particular gig.

Given her lack of practical legal experience and her inner circle Chicago connections to the president and the other Clintonistas in DC, she appears to be a perfect fit for this administration. I'm sure she'll do just fine.

Breaking: Senator Dodd Says He Added AIG Bonus Loophole 'At The Request Of The Administration'

Whoo-ie! Some heads are gonna roll...maybe Geithner?

Hat tip to But As For Me and to Pro for calling it in..

Nancy Pelosi: Enforcing Immigration Laws Is "Unamerican"

Yes, that's what the Speaker of the House had to say at an Illegal Alien Rally in SanFrancisco while pledging to protect the right of illegal aliens to work in America. And this at a time when unemployment in California is at 9% at the state is essentially bankrupt, in part because of the huge cost of social services to those same illegal aliens...

Look for the current occupant of the White House to try and ram this through and register these folks to vote with the help of that $4.5 billion he just gave ACORN...amnestia por todo!

Be ready to go to the wall on this...the numbers are with us.

Hat tip to Jammie Wearing fool

Obama Reverses Himself On Forcing Vets to Pay For Own Medical Treatment

As you recall, the current occupant of the White House decided that those knuckle draggers stupid enough to serve their country in our military and get wounded ought to kick in for his socialist realism by paying for their own medical treatment through their own private insurance, instead of the VA providing it free of charge.

The VA met with the Prevaricator in Chief and were basically told tough tofu, so they got on the phones to a number of Democrat Congressmen... as apparently, so did a number of you.

Well, that was quick:

President Barack Obama reversed course Wednesday on a highly charged proposal to have private insurance companies, instead of the Veterans Affairs Department, pay for veterans' service-related injuries.

The proposed policy shift was aimed at recouping $540 million, but it risked souring goodwill of veterans, an enormous political constituency. And veterans groups, learning of the possibility last month, had quickly mobilized to oppose it. {..}

Later, at another meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), they were assured the president had changed his mind, said Jim King, executive director of Amvets.

"Our message to the president was simple and direct: that our government must not abandon its moral responsibility to the men and women who have sacrificed so much for our freedoms," said David Gorman, executive director of Disabled American Veterans.

At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs issued a statement confirming the reversal, saying the president had listened closely to the veterans' concerns and ordered the proposal "dropped."

Gee, if you click on my original story, apparently president Obama wasn't doing much 'listening' yesterday:

"It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan," said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. "He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it."

What changed for President Zero and his co-conspirators was the vets and those of us who honor them letting Congress know that this was one mugging we weren't going to allow without a fight.

This is a natural issue for 2010, and the GOP needs to have the stones to run with this and remind every vet and those who care about them what Obama tried to do to them.

Back in my old music biz days, there was a well known management company who's two partners were universally known behind their backs as Heartless and Gutless, a play on the initials of their last names. Had B. Hussein Obama been working for them, they could have had two for the price of one.

Absolutely disgraceful.

Hat tip (including a graphic cheerfully swiped) from MataHarley at Flopping Aces

The Gilad Shalit Solution

There has been a great deal written lately about the failed efforts to make a deal with Hamas to free Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier kidnapped by Hamas and held in captivity for 998 days, and it's become a major politicaL issue in Israel.


For almost three years, he's been held incognito. The Red Cross has not been permitted to see him. He's has had no contact with anyone and there is no news about his physical condition or the conditions under which he's being held. Simply put, like every other Israeli captured by the Arabs, he's been treated as less than human.

The Shalit family in particular has been critical of the Olmert government for failing to pay whatever price Hamas asked to bring Shalit home..although they cam pretty close to doing exactly that, including releasing 450 murders convicted in Israeli civil courts with what the Israelis refer to as blood on their hands.

This issue resonates in Israel because of its citizen army, because of a long standing Jewish history of ransoming captives and because of the IDF's tradition of leaving no one behind.

The problems with Shalit started, as far as I'm concerned, once Israel started 'negotiating' with the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah on these matters during Ariel Sharon's tenure as prime minister, and it's gotten worse since Olmert took over. We've seen things like child murderer Samir Kuntar released from Israeli custody in exchange for the tortured and mutilated bodies bodies of two Israeli servicemen who were kidnapped by Hezbollah, the act along with Hezbollah's missile attacks on Israel that precipitated the Lebanon War.

We've also seen numerous good will releases of Arab terrorists during Olmert's tenure as 'gestures' to bolster Fatah capo del tutti Mahmoud Abbas, something that was equally as worthless as the millions of dollars spent by the west to try and provide Abbas with some kind of legitimacy.

As much as I sympathize with the Shalits, trading people like these for one Israeli soldier who may very well be returned dead in a box is a recipe for failure and a horrendous precedent for the future, and Hamas has already said as much. The price just keeps going up, both in terms of how many murderers being released it will take to ransom future kidnap victims and in terms of the number of innocent people who will be victimized by the released murders in the future.

Actually, there's always been a simple way to get Gilad Shalit home, and in one piece. Hamas, among the green hats they wear are also politicians who have to deal with constituents, some of whom have family members in Israeli custody.

If I were dealing with this, I would simply have sent a public message to Hamas to release Shalit unharmed with 48 hours, or Israel would start releasing its Palestinian prisoners in its own way until he was freed...one about every half hour from an airborne helicopter over Gaza, each with a nice piece of pork in his mouth.
And if Hamas did not release him, I would have 'freed' two hundred fifty prisoners in exactly that fashion...as a lesson for the future that kidnapping Israelis was not good business.

Had that been done, Gilad Shalit would likely have been home in one piece a long time ago.

When one deals with the sort of degenerate gangsters happy to welcome into their society the murderers of innocent woman and children, one has to speak in a language they understand.

And for the record, I proposed exactly the same solution 2 years ago.

Selah.

Dodd Admits Responsibility for AIG Bonuses Loophole..

It seems he's changed his story since yesterday.

Actually what this probably amounts to is pressure from the Obama Administration to fall on his sword and divert some of the heat from the president and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner..whom also knew all about this special exemption and were perfectly fine with it...until White House press secretary Gibbs broke down under questioning and this went public.

Either that, or both of them are clueless idiots who signed whatever Pelosi and Reid stuck in front of them.

You pick...

Watcher's Council Nominations, 3/18/09

The Watcher's Council is a group of some of the most incisive blogs in the`sphere. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one of their own and one from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.

So, let's see what we have this week....and do check out the Watcher's splendid take on the recent AIG scandal


COUNCIL

Joshuapundit - What Netanyahu Should Say About Peace To The Arab World I think that prospective Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu has a unique opportunity to reach out to the Arab world and define peace on his terms, and do it in such a way that an Arab rejection would reveal a great deal about who's really serious about resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict and who isn't.

The Provocateur - Rethinking the Federal Reserve - Mike Volpe examines the case for reforming the Fed and comes up with a number of interesting ideas.

The Razor - The Great Academic Swindle - Scott takes an interesting look at academia from a cost/benefit viewpoint and predicts some changes in the near future.

The Glittering Eye - Portrait of a Financial Crisis - Dave Schuler takes a stab at charting and analyzing the present financial crisis.

Right Truth - America Needs Some Leaders With Common Sense - Debbie Hamilton looks at what passes for leadership in both parties and finds a major void there. She's right, but I would also point out that the void is partly in ourselves.

There's an interesting historical theory that I've found to be more correct than not concerning 'resonance' - basically, that when people select leaders they select ones that mirror the qualities they see as symbolizing the times and themselves. Fir instance, Ronald Reagan symbolized a return to optimism and old values after the malaise of the Carter years, Bill Clinton could have been a poster boy for the amoral, do it if it feels good get-rich-quick nineties, Lyndon Johnson reflected a desire to have a continuation of Camelot with a healthy dose of new deal style socialism, and so on.

I think Obama's election represents a desire for many Americans to take a Clintonesque vacation from history with a charismatic new face, although as we see, he was also able to successfully masquerade as a centrist as well which helped spread the fiction. As the masquerade becomes more obvious and people perceive Obama's inexperience and the damage done, they may well seek different qualities for leadership.

Vacuums only last so long.

The New York Times Takes off the mask - Ms. Bookworm examines the desultory coverage given to failed Obama appointee Charles Freeman until it was time to decry the so-called 'Jewish Lobby' and once again shows us how agenda driven the 'news' coverage of Pravda-On-The-Hudson has become.

Rhymes With Right - In Re. Bristol Palin - Greg notes the tabloid style coverage of the Bristol Palin/Levi Johnston breakup, the schadenfreude on the Left and the stifling over righteousness on the Right from those who never liked Bristol's mom anyway and simply saw a teenager's unfortunate pregnancy as a chance to bash the governor and tells them all to just shut the #%#k up.

Well said, sir.

The Colossus of Rhodey - Chicago ranks “high” in the 25 worst schools in nation - Hube notes the relatively low quality of Chicago's public schools after Bil Ayers, the current president and the Annenberg Challenge got through with them.Actually as I documented here, it's even worse on average than Hube documents.

And Arne Duncan, who used to head up this mess is now Secretary of Education..

Mere Rhetoric - Government-Linked Thugs Systematically Compiling Full List Of Venezuelan Jews, Launching Attacks On Jewish Centers Gangs - Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez likes Iran and doesn't like Jews. As Omri documents, there was a sinister break in by government backed thugs designed to compile a list of all Venezuelan Jews in the country - either as part of Chavez's ongoing control freakery or for some more sinister purpose.

It wasn't that long ago that Iran sponsored a particularly vicious terrorist bombing in a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires.

Soccer Dad - If an appointee falls and there’s no msm, is it still a scandal? - Soccer Dad likewise notes the silence of the New York Times and other organs of the dinosaur media over the Freeman Affair..until it came time to make a case demonizing the power of the 'Jewish lobby.'



NON-COUNCIL
Submitted By: The Provocateur - The New York Times - The Case for Paying the AIG Bonus

Submitted By: Joshuapundit - Michael Totten - The Worst Airline In The World

Submitted By: The Razor - You Tube - An American Carol - ACLU

Submitted By: The Glittering Eye - Clay Shirky - Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable

Submitted By: Right Truth - NewsMax - Obama’s Attack on Medical Civil Liberties

Submitted By: Bookworm Room - Pajamas Media - Welcome to Francis Ford Coppola’s White House

Submitted By: Rhymes With Right - Big Hollywood - Sunday Matineé: 1776

Submitted By: The Colossus of Rhodey - Common Sense Political Thought - Does anti-Zionism equal anti-Semitism?

Submitted By: Mere Rhetoric - Washington Post - Blame the ‘Lobby’

Submitted By: Soccer Dad - Pajamas Media - Roger Cohen’s Inexplicable Views on Iranian Jews

Obama To Israel - Get Bent

The Obama Administration is sending a clear message that they no longer consider Israel as one of our most important allies but as an obstruction. And they couldn't care less about making it blatantly obvious.

IDF Chief of Staff General Gaby Ashkenazi made a special trip to Washington DC to discuss the Iran situation, but cut short his trip and left for the simple reason that no one with any major position in the administration wanted to be bothered with listening to anything he had to say:

Last year, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi had no problem setting up meetings with top officials in the U.S. government.

On his current trip to Washington, Ashkenazi sought to meet the administration of President Barack Obama, but most officials were unavailable.

Diplomatic sources said Ashkenazi failed to obtain access to any Cabinet member, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Israeli military chief, who sought to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat, won't even meet his counterpart, Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"The administration is sending a very clear message to Israel, and this is we want to talk about Palestine and not Iran," a diplomat who has been following U.S.-Israel relations said.

On March 12, Ashkenazi left for a five-day visit to the United States meant to lobby the Obama administration to abandon the planned U.S. dialogue with Iran. Ashkenazi, scheduled to meet with the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, was expected to have brought new Israeli intelligence on Iran's nuclear weapons and missile programs.

But the diplomatic sources said the administration made it clear that nobody in a policy-making position was available to sit with Ashkenazi. This included the president, Vice President Joseph Biden, Gates, National Intelligence director Dennis Blair or Mullen.

"The Israeli government and military have been alarmed by the rapid and dramatic reversal in the U.S. policy toward Iran," the source said. "This reversal took place without any consultation with Israel, Gulf Arab countries or even Congress."

The sources said Israel has sought a U.S. commitment to limit its dialogue with Iran. Israel has also urged Obama to make it clear that the military option against Iran's nuclear program exists.

But Obama and his top aides appear uninterested in hearing Israel's position. The sources said a key aim of Ashkenazi was to urge the administration to release weapons and systems long sought by Israel in the area of aerial refueling, air-to-ground weapons, sensors as well as the F-22 fighter-jet.

"Ashkenazi sees this U.S. refusal as what has been undermining Israeli deterrence toward Iran and boosting the confidence of the Teheran regime," the source said. "The mullahs in regime have concluded that America has dropped the military option and won't allow such an option to Israel."

Nor is General Ashkenazi the only one getting stiffed.

Netanyahu's choice for head of his national security council is ex-Mossad chief Uzi Arad. He has been denied a visa to enter the USas an intelligence risk, believe it or not on trumped up charges stemming from the farcical AIPAC case which is on the verge of being thrown out of court. This in a country where Sandy Berger got off for actually stealing classified documents with a mere slap on the wrist, and the Obama Administration just set aside $20.3 million dollars to help Hamas migrate to America!

President Obama's foreign policy direction is crystal clear. He has accepted the leftist doctrine that the problems in the Muslim world are all the fault of the evil colonialist West, so he plans to placate them as much as necessary.That's what's behind his distancing himself and his administration from Israel, and from Britain, which is seen in the Arab world as a former occupier and colonial power.

In that context, the Obama Administration could care less about the implications of Iran having nuclear weapons. They don't see that as a threat to the new policy of moving closer to the Muslim world...and the last thing they want is for those pesky Jews in Israel to upset things.

Part of that policy will also involve maximum pressure Israel to impose a settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict on the Arab's terms, including flooding Israel with thousands of Palestinian 'refugees'. The legitimization of Hamas by the Obama Administration will be just the beginning.

I certainly hope that the many American Jews that helped vote this president into power with the naive idea that he was 'pro-Israel' are starting to realize what they've done.

They'll understand that far better in the future, when, to paraphrase Obama's old mentor Reverend Wright, the chickens come home to roost in a very personal and painful way.

What Netanyahu Should Say About Peace To The Arab World

It should be obvious to anyone who looks at the matter with a shred of honesty that the Middle East peace process as it now stands is a dead issue.

To show how futile it really is, let's take a look at the facts as they stand.

We now have a situation where the West's only course of action seems to be to have its 'preferred' Palestinian capo del tutti Mahmoud Abbas cobble together a unity government with Hamas, an admission in itself that all the billions in aid shovelled at Fatah to 'bolster Abbas' were simply wasted. Abbas now sits propped up by the West and the IDF in Ramallah without a shred of legitimacy, power or credibility, and any unity government would quickly become a Hamas government in both the Palestinian occupied areas of the West Bank and in Gaza.

And after that happens, the same people pushing for a Palestinian 'unity' government will demand that the Israelis somehow negotiate a peace settlement with a genocidal Hamas regime!

It will never happen.

But there is a way to achieve peace in the Arab Israeli conflict..or at least reveal what the real obstacles are, as opposed to the PR. Believe it or not, the solution is in the so-call Saudi Peace Plan of 2002, which has been endorsed by every member of the Arab League.

Now, I could be cynical (and I have been) over the real motivations of the Saudi plan..but I think the time has come for Israel to take this seriously, as an opening gambit to resolve the Arab Israeli conflict and respond in kind.

The Arab-Israeli conflict has been used as a rationale for Muslim attacks on the West for 60 years. Are the Arab nations serious about resolving it - or is it just an excuse for their own failed societies and a means of hoodwinking their own people and gullible westerners?

It's time we found out.

Now that Bibi Netanyahu will be Israel's next prime minister he has a golden opportunity to do exactly that. If I were Israel's Prime Minister, here's the proposal I'd make, broadcast simultaneously to the Arab world in Arabic, to his countrymen in Hebrew and to the rest of the world in English...and it would either be a major breakthrough or reveal whether the Arab nations, once and for all, were serious about peace in the Middle East with Israel:

"Salaam Aliekem, to our Arab brothers. I, the Prime Minister of Israel owe you an apology. You proposed a peace plan through the Arab League that you all have endorsed, and our country has been discourteous enough not to respond directly. I will do so now, in the hope and belief that you seriously want to end the differences between us.

This plan, endorsed by the entire Arab League in Beirut says, essentially, that if Israel retreats back to the pre-1967 borders including Jerusalem and allows all of the Palestinians who claim to be refugees and their descendants to return to Israel, you will respond with what you define as `normal relations.'

I think your proposal addresses all of the main issues between us that need to be dealt with; Jerusalem, the issue of borders, and justice for the refugees. I recommend that we address each one of them in a fair manner, with compassion and with a sense of justice.

I fully support a settlement for the refugees of the Arab Israeli conflict. We must, finally, have justice for the refugees who have been created because of the strife between us. There can be no peace without it.

We Jews know only too well the plight of being a refugee and the bitter pain of losing one's home. It has happened to us too many times in our history. It happened to some 400,000 of the Arabs living in what is now Israel, and it happened to 800,000Jews living in the Arab world in the years between 1948-1967.

There is no possibility now, after all that has happened of those Jews returning to their homes in the Arab world, just as there is no possibility of Arabs returning to their homes in what is now Israel. For either side to insist on this is not only to perpetuate this conflict between us, but to condemn us to interminable war in the future.

I propose the following solution to the problem of refugees: that Israel and the Arab nations cooperate together in setting up a joint committee to arbitrate, process and compensate financially the claims of all of the actual refugees from the conflict, Jewish and Arab, who lived either in what is now Israel or who were expelled from the Arab world as a result of the Arab Israeli conflict and who can also provide legal evidence to substantiate a claim from whichever nation expelled them.

There are numerous precedents for this kind of settlement of refugee issues in history, and they provide a model for us to use to move forward and finally address this. We must provide justice to all the refugees, and we must do it within the framework of the law.

Next, let us turn to the issue of borders, and the desire of the Arab nations to see Israel return to those borders that prevailed before the 1967 war, including half of our capitol, Jerusalem. Since Israel has settled its borders with Egypt and Jordan and has already returned over 80% of the land captured in that conflict, it is obvious that any further land demanded from Israel is intended for a 2nd Arab Palestinian State on our borders.

After much careful thought, I must respectfully say that a second Arab Palestinian state on our borders is an unacceptable risk to peace for us at this time. We wish it were not so, but we must deal with the reality of the last 60 years, and with the reality of Hamas. So much blood has been shed, and so much hatred voiced that we do not feel that a second Palestinian state living in peace next to Israel is possible.

At Oslo, Israel took a major risk for peace and provided the Palestinians with land for a state...perhaps not all that they wanted, but land, nevertheless. We then took another risk and evacuated Jews from their home in Gaza, with the idea that the Palestinians could start to achieve their own destiny there. After seeing how the Palestinians reacted to this, after looking at the results, we have come to the conclusion that these were mistakes. There is simply not room for two antagonistic countries to live next to each other in the small area available, and it is simply a recipe for failure. No country could be expected to live with rockets and mortars being fired at its civilians.

In the interests of peace between us, we would prefer that the areas of Gaza and the West Bank now occupied by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas be the subject of final settlement talks between Israel, Egypt and Jordan, with the idea of providing secure and final borders between our nations, establising homogeneous areas and integrating the Palestinian populations in Gaza and the West Bank, respectively, as part of Egypt and Jordan. We enjoy peaceful relations with both nations, and according to Jordanian law all Arabs residing in the West Bank were Jordanian citizens until 1988 when the law was changed, so this is by no means impossible.

This is particularly fair in our eyes since a substantial part of the land where Jews now live in what we call Judea and Samaria and you call the West Bank - among them the Ariel and the Gush Etzion areas - was legally purchased through the Jewish National Fund from its Arab owners prior to 1948, and seized after that time with no compensation to the owners. We think it would be unfair to dispossess them of their homes a second time. I am certain that you also would recognize the unfairness and injustice of doing so.

Should Egypt and Jordan agree with this proposal, Israel is prepared to do its share to help with the logistic and financial issues involved. Others, such as the US, the UN and the EU who have expressed a desire to assist in promoting peace in our region would undoubtedly be prepared to help with these matters as well.

Should this be unacceptable, a second alternative we would be willing to discuss would be for the Arab nations to provide at least as much land for a future Palestinian State as Israel has provided for a Palestinian state, preferably away from our borders to eliminate any future conflict. Such generosity from the Arab world towards the Palestinians would be a major contribution towards peace in our region and a better life for the Palestinian people.

Jerusalem is the ancient capitol of Israel. It is the single most holy site of our religion, and the spiritual center of our nation and our people. Dividing it would be the equivalent of asking you to divide Mecca with non-Muslims. Yet, for the first 20 years of Israel's rebirth, we were faced with exactly that situation. After 1948, Jews were ethnically cleansed from East Jerusalem, old and historic synagogues were desecrated and destroyed and Jews were forbidden to access their holiest sites.

It is exactly that history, and the modern desecration of holy sites like the tomb of the ancient prophet Joseph and synagogues in Gaza that make us adamant that Jerusalem shall never be divided again.

We recognize that Jerusalem is holy to other faiths besides ours, and we have tried to honor that. I remind you that after 1967, not a single mosque in Jerusalem was destroyed or desecrated in retaliation for what happened 20 years before, and that the waqf in charge of the al Aksa mosque was allowed to remain in control of that area.

Unfortunately, the al Aksa mosque, which is the chief Muslim religious site in Jerusalem has become a symbol of the conflict between us. Erected as a symbol of conquest in the 7th century on the site of our destroyed Holy Temple, as long as it stands where it is Jerusalem will never be accepted by you as the capitol of Israel.

I propose that as part of a peace settlement between us, the al Aksa mosque be moved intact to a place of your choosing, and that Israel pay the cost and provide the labor to do so. As part of this settlement, Israel will also waive compensation and claims for the many synagogues that have been destroyed in the Arab world. Let the new location of the al Aksa mosque become a shrine to peace between our peoples...a settling of accounts and the start of a new beginning.

Not only will this sacrifice for peace on your part be a major symbol of good will between us, but it will allow us to rebuild the Beit Hamikdosh, the Third Holy Temple and thus fulfill the words of a prophet that Muslims also revere, Isaiah: "They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not rise up against nation, neither shall they learn war any more".

Let us make this come true now, and in our time. Let us sit down together like brothers and end this conflict, pursue justice and make a better future for our two peoples. Let us,the children of Abraham, provide an example to the world.

My heart is open, and I await your answer."

Would the Arabs react positively to this? Probably not.

But the way I see it, it's a win either way. For the Arabs to reject it out of hand would reveal that their peace plan is the ultimatum it actually is and that their real aim is not peace, but the conquest and ethnic cleansing of every Jew in Israel. That would provide a valuable clarity to the situation...particularly for the EU and for the current occupant of the White House.

On the other hand, if the Arabs did accept this overture and began negotiations on that basis (and there are certainly reasons why it would be to their advantage ) it would be the start of an actual and workable solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict at long last.

At the very least, it's worth trying.

AIG: Theatrical Outrage After The Fact

The Obama Administration and the Democrats have dropped Rush Limbaugh for the moment and discovered a new and convenient villain to try and distract the public from their corruption and incompetence...AIG, the recipient of over $170 billion dollars in bail out money.

The tag line for this nonsense is around $400 million in bonuses contracted by AIG to be paid to executives in their financial products division.

And Congress and the White House are outraged, outraged!

Never mind that it's a bunch of horse manure.

The White House has known all along that those bonuses are contractual obligations and was absolutely fine with it, until White House press Secretary Robert Gibbs got slapped around over the matter by a couple of reporters like the punk he is.Only when it came to public attention did it become showtime for the Dems in Congress, the president and all his lackeys.

Senator Chris Dodd, who received $103,100 from the good folks at AIG as their largest campaign donations recipient put special protections in the $787 billion stimulus bill for those executive bonuses allowing them to be paid out of the bail out funds. You want to tell me that Congress didn't know about these bonuses until now? Really, bubba?

And how about the White House? AIG picked its last $30 bil in taxpayer bailout funds
last Sunday. You think President Obama and Geithner weren't aware of this? Believe me, if they weren't they're even more clueless than I thought they were. And for the record, Obama was the second largest recipient of campaign donations from AIG, at a cool $101,332.

Even sillier is the nonsense put out by Senators Dodd and Reid about 'special taxes' on these executive's bonuses. I'd love to see them try. The US tax code specifically prohibits that kind of selective enforcement, and even if it didn't, the executives involved and AIG could sue and collect from the Feds since the bonuses were contractually mandated beforehand.

Reid, Dodd and President Obama know this as well as I do, and this selective outrage is just a little razzle dazzle to gin up the peasants and take the spotlight off the fact that one of their sleazy special interest deals got outed in public. It's by no means the only one.

As a matter of fact, I mentioned one yesterday, with a direct connection to the president. You won't see that little item making headlines, I promise you.

This is nothing less than a Chicago-style looting of the Federal treasury, pulled off by a bunch of political animals who have so little respect for the people they supposedly represent that they can't even be bothered to put on a decent act.