July 2, 2013
David Knight speaks with Mike Zullo of Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse regarding new findings and the media silence on the Obama Birth Certificate Issue.
July 2, 2013
David Knight speaks with Mike Zullo of Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse regarding new findings and the media silence on the Obama Birth Certificate Issue.
(Reuters) – Thousands of Sudanese called for the overthrow of veteran President Omar Hassan al-Bashir on Saturday, spurred on by an opposition trying to stoke an Arab Spring style uprising.
The opposition, capitalizing on anger over soaring food prices and corruption, has threatened to stage mass protests to topple Bashir within 100 days.
The uprisings that shook the Arab world have passed Sudan by as the security forces usually break up the frequent small street protests by students before they have a chance to spread.
But on Saturday, several thousand people – possibly as many as 10,000, according to witnesses – rallied in a square in Khartoum’s twin city Omdurman, the biggest rally in years.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has just two weeks left to forge a new coalition government, but the Obama administration is working feverishly to prevent him from succeeding and force him from office, according to Middle East expert Dr. Michael Evans.
Evans is the author of numerous books about the various crises in the Middle East, including “Atomic Iran: Countdown to Armageddon” and the book he wrote with WND’s Jerome Corsi, “Showdown with Nuclear Iran.” He told WND it’s very clear why Netanyahu hasn’t put a new government together.
“The biggest stumbling block is the Big O, Mr. Obama. Mr. Obama’s got his team over there. They’ve been over there a couple weeks, and they’re meeting with the opposition leaders,” Evans said. “This is fairly existential. Obama doesn’t dislike Netanyahu. He hates him. He hates him. Netanyahu has been able to succeed against Obama. How did he do it? He went directly to the House of Representatives and got 18 standing ovations. He went to the U.S. media. But now he’s come to power weakened. Obama’s come into power strengthened.”
Evans said the argument made by Obama emissaries to Israeli lawmakers is that Netanyahu won’t last much longer in power so Israelis would be smart to go with a new leader now so as to forge a better working relationship with the U.S. Evans said that’s just a smokescreen.
“Obama’s people don’t want Netanyahu back in office. Obama’s people want a divided Jerusalem. They want a Palestinian state. They want Judea and Samaria settlements to stop, etc., etc.,” he said. “Anything they can do to weaken Netanyahu, they’re doing and they’re succeeding at it.”
While Obama’s efforts are working for the moment, Evans believes Netanyahu will cobble together a government in the coming days, but not as strong of one as he would like.
“I think ultimately Bibi’s going to put his cabinet together. It won’t be strong. He wants it to have a broad coalition of maybe 75-80 out of 120 (seats in the Israeli Knesset). I don’t think he’s going to get that. I think he’s probably going to get something in the high fifties or, maximum, in the low sixties,” Evans said. “It’s possible that within a year or two, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will run again and try to defeat him.”
If Netanyahu cannot build a coalition government within the next two weeks, Israeli President Shimon Peres will invite second-place finisher Yair Lapid to forge a group that would make him the new prime minister. If he also fails, new elections would be called.
“I think it’s very likely that Netanyahu will be able to put a coalition together, but here’s the problem: Right now, to put a coalition together, he’s going to have to compromise on his core values. What he compromises to gain he will ultimately lose,” said Evans, noting that Netanyahu will feel pressured by the U.S. to make concessions toward Palestinian statehood and those concessions will mean the crumbling of the coalition.
But Netanyahu will also feel pressure to accommodate Obama on statehood because of the specter of diminished U.S. foreign aid to Israel. Evans said Obama will use the current sequestration fight and other looming fiscal debates to force Netanyahu’s hand by threatening air defense assistance and other vital programs.
“It’s an existential dilemma for the prime minister. Any direction he goes, he falls on his own sword,” Evans said.
According to Evans, Obama has already made it clear that he views Israel as the problem when it comes to the Mideast crisis.
“Obama gave his addiction speech in his first term, declaring that the greatest instability in the Middle East was al-Qaida. The second greatest was Israel,” Evans said.
When pressed to clarify when and how Obama made that contention, Evans pointed to the president’s highly touted speech in the region early in his presidency.
“It was the speech he gave in Cairo at the university in his first term that he talked about instability in the Middle East. He talked about the Palestinian crisis as the second most significant cause of instability and Israel gets blamed,” Evans said. “There isn’t any Arab regime, no thugocracy wants to solve the Palestinian crisis because to have an army you need an enemy, and Israel is perfect for the family owned corporations called countries to blame for all their problems as opposed to blaming themselves. So Israel’s got to be the tar baby.”
As for the Israeli public, Evans said most people are willing to take steps to resolve the Palestinian crisis, but there’s a limit to what they’ll approve to make nice with the Obama administration.
“They can’t support a Palestinian state that has an army, that has airspace and has treaties. An army, airspace and treaties with a Palestinian state would be an existential threat against the state of Israel and would be its downfall, because that Palestinian state could bring in Iran and other nations that hate Israel,” Evans said.
“This is a very serious crisis for the Jewish people,” he said.
The craze started when Nobel-winning author Toni Morrison, writing in the New Yorker in 1998, described Bill Clinton as the “first black president.”
Everybody got it: “White skin notwithstanding,” explained Morrison, “this is our first black President. Blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children’s lifetime. After all, Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald’s-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas.”
Thus was born an enduring cultural idiom Atlantic Wire recently called the “first something president” – by which a president is labeled as part of a group with which, though not actually a member, he strongly identifies in terms of his experiences, loyalties and policies.
Once Barack Obama emerged onto the presidential scene – remember, he’s the guy who boasted in “The Audacity of Hope” that “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their views” – he became the “first everything president.”
OK, so let’s take stock: Obama is black, he’s white, he’s both male and female, he’s straight and gay, he’s Hispanic, Asian-American and American Indian. He’s Christian. He’s Jewish.
‘My Muslim President Obama’
For a president whose policies over the past four years, both at home and abroad, have been passionately and relentlessly pro-Muslim, one wonders how the elite media could somehow have missed the camel in the living room: Barack Obama is the “first Muslim president.”
This is not breaking news. As American Muslim writer Asma Gull Hasan wrote in a widely read Forbes article titled “My Muslim President Obama”: “I know President Obama is not Muslim, but I am tempted nevertheless to think that he is, as are most Muslims I know. In a very unscientific oral poll, ranging from family members to Muslim acquaintances, many of us feel … that we have our first American Muslim president in Barack Hussein Obama.”
“Since Election Day,” Hasan confesses, “I have been part of more and more conversations with Muslims in which it was either offhandedly agreed that Obama is Muslim or enthusiastically blurted out. In commenting on our new president, ‘I have to support my fellow Muslim brother,’ would slip out of my mouth before I had a chance to think twice.”
But another aspect of having elected our “first Muslim president” is much more consequential, as veteran CIA officer and intelligence expert Clare Lopez chronicles. Under Obama, she writes:
“America’s involvement in the global jihad against Western civilization – on the side of the jihadis – is accelerating. Instead of standing firm as leader of the free world and defender of inalienable human rights, U.S. policy is shifting demonstrably to the defense of those who systematically deny such rights to their own people and seek to suppress them everywhere.”
Noting that since 2009, “U.S. foreign policy has backed al-Qaida and Muslim Brotherhood power plays in Libya, Egypt and now Syria, too,” Lopez reports that our State Department “is working closely with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, whose top objective is the criminalization of the criticism of Islam.”
Meanwhile, adds Lopez, here in the U.S. “the White House cultivates relationships with CAIR/Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood leadership figures and associates,” while “instructors, trainers and any curriculum that would describe accurately the link between Islamic doctrine, law and scripture and Islamic terrorism have been methodically purged from U.S. government, intelligence and law enforcement classrooms.”
So, according to the established cultural norm of what constitutes a “first something president,” Obama qualifies as “Muslim” at least as much as Bill Clinton qualifies as “black.”
But let’s go a little further: How much literal truth might there be to this honorary title no one in the establishment press sees fit to confer on Barack Obama?
Respected Islam expert Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum, has exhaustively documented “Obama’s Muslim childhood.” Here are just a few of the dozens of non-disputable evidentiary facts cited by Pipes:
“The record,” concludes Pipes, “points to Obama having been born a Muslim to a non-practicing Muslim father and having lived for four years in a fully Muslim milieu under the auspices of his Muslim Indonesian stepfather. For these reasons, those who knew Obama in Indonesia considered him a Muslim.”
All right, that was then. But what about today?
Even as president, observes Pipes:
“… when addressing Muslim audiences, Obama uses specifically Muslim phrases that recall his Muslim identity. He addressed audiences both in Cairo (in June 2009) and Jakarta (in November 2010) with ‘as-salaamu alaykum,’ a greeting that he, who went to Koran class, knows is reserved for one Muslim addressing another. In Cairo, he also deployed several other pious terms that signal to Muslims he is one of them:
Beyond all these things, what honest conclusion – other than that the president has a tremendous hidden attachment to Islam – could one possibly draw after reading Obama’s March 2007 interview with the New York Times’ Nicholas D. Kristof, who wrote:
“Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as ‘one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.’”
’The grand jihad’
Ironically, none of Obama’s documented Islamic background may matter very much, since his demonstrated camaraderie with Islamists is typical of far-leftists and doesn’t require a personal Muslim upbringing such as Obama had.
In his bestselling book, “The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America,” former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains how and why hardcore leftists and radical Muslims – despite their obvious differences – work together.
“Like the neocommunist, the Islamist works to impose his version of ‘social justice.’ It is a very specific Islamic prescription, and elements of it diverge markedly from the neocommunist’s more amorphous utopia. But the essentials of their visions coalesce: They are totalitarian, collectivist, and antithetical to the core conceit of American constitutional democracy, individual liberty. Today’s left-leaning, Islamophilic Obamedia consciously ignores the convergence, but America’s 44th president and America’s enemies have a common dream.”
Thus, while there is no evidence Obama is today a practicing Muslim, what is far more important than his current religious affiliation is what his deep-down sympathies, affinities and loyalties truly are – and what sorts of policies those affinities lead him to pursue.
One final thought: Having lived through a tumultuous era in which the two biggest geopolitical challenges to America’s very existence as a free nation have been Marxism and Shariah Islam, it’s a testament to modern Americans’ advancing spiritual blindness that we have chosen – twice – a president in thrall to both.
There’s a perfect logic to the “grand jihad” uniting these two ungodly forces against the rare and exotic bloom of individual liberty. Both movements are based on rejection of Christianity, Judaism and the “Judeo-Christian values” that comprise the moral foundation of Western Civilization. Both are fixated to an ecstatic vision of a utopia that cannot exist in reality because it defies all the laws of God and man and human nature and common sense.
And, although superficially incompatible with each other, both are on the same side of the great war between good and evil, each intent on captivating as many free people as possible in the process of imposing a deluded paradise that never was, and never can be.
Excerpted from the January issue of WND’s acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine, edited by David Kupelian.
Before President Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to his third and fourth terms in office, U.S. presidents had honored the limit established by George Washington that a president should serve no more than two.
And after, the 22nd Amendment formally restricted service in the Oval Office to two terms.
Serrano has attempted this before, in 2003, 2009 and 2011 with little luck. H.J.R. 15 would require a two-thirds majority vote in favor in both the House and Senate and a majority of support from state legislatures.
With the debate over the fiscal cliff dominating most of the discussion on Capitol Hill of late, this legislation has managed to slip under the radar.
It was introduced on Jan. 4 and immediately referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
It was Washington who originally declined to run for a third term, despite his wide popularity. Thomas Jefferson later foreshadowed the need for a formal limit when, in 1805, he wrote to John Taylor that he would follow Washington’s example.
Two years later he delivered a warning that U.S. presidents would become like kings, which the colonists had fought a bloody war to escape, without term limits.
“If some termination to the services of the chief magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution or supplied in practice,” Jefferson wrote to the Vermont Legislature, “his office, nominally for years, will in fact become for life; and history shows how easily that degenerates into an inheritance.”
Formal limits were added on March 21, 1947, when Congress passed the 22nd Amendment. Then by Feb. 26, 1951, the amendment was ratified by the required number of states and was added to the Constitution.
The 22nd Amendment states, “No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice, and no person who has held the office of president, or acted as president, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected president shall be elected to the office of the president more than once.”
Serrano’s bill currently has no co-sponsors.
It states, “Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as president.”
It continues: “Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification.”
WND reported four years ago when Obama was preparing for his 2009 inauguration gala, the same plan was before the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary.
At that time, Serrano’s project was H.J.R. 5, which, according to the bill’s language, proposed “an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as president.”
Eisenhower, Clinton and Reagan all were critical of the amendment at times.
The amendment limits presidents to a maximum of eight years in office – or, under unusual circumstances, such as succession following the death of a president, a maximum of 10 years in office. Should Serrano succeed in repealing the amendment, Obama would be cleared to run for an unlimited number of terms, restricted only by the vote of the electorate.
To achieve repeal of the 22nd Amendment, Serrano’s proposal must be approved by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and ratified by three-quarters of the states’ legislatures.
“Gen. Washington set the example of voluntary retirement after eight years,” Jefferson wrote in an 1805 letter to John Taylor. “I shall follow it, and a few more precedents will oppose the obstacle of habit to anyone after a while who shall endeavor to extend his term. Perhaps it may beget a disposition to establish it by an amendment of the Constitution.”
In the same letter to the Vermont Legislature in which he warned of a presidential monarchy, Jefferson further explained why he refused to run for a third term.
“Believing that a representative government, responsible at short periods of election, is that which produces the greatest sum of happiness to mankind,” Jefferson wrote, “I feel it a duty to do no act which shall essentially impair that principle; and I should unwillingly be the person who, disregarding the sound precedent set by an illustrious predecessor, should furnish the first example of prolongation beyond the second term of office.”
Sound off on plan to repeal 22nd Amendment and allow 3rd term for Obama
www.israelnationalnews.com – By Elad Benari
The United States on Wednesday urged Israel and the Palestinian Authority to resume direct talks in 2013 and move toward peace.
“As we turn the calendar to 2013… now is the time for leaders on both sides to display real leadership, to focus on the work that’s necessary to return to direct negotiations,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland was quoted by AFP as having said.
The U.S. urged “both sides to clearly demonstrate that they are serious about achieving two states living side by side in peace and security,” she said, calling on both sides to halt any “counter-productive unilateral actions.”
Nuland stressed that with President Barack Obama starting his second White House term this month and upcoming elections in Israel, the two sides are heading into a particularly important period.
“We have an environment that was quite fraught and quite difficult at the end of 2012, so the question is whether we can make a fresh start in 2013, and that’s going to require restraint on all sides,” Nuland said, according to AFP.
“We want 2013 to be a better year, we really do,” she added.
Since 2009 Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has refused to come to the negotiating table with Israel and has continuously tried to impose preconditions on talks.
One of his longstanding demands is that Israel accept the pre-1967 lines as final borders. He has also demanded that Israel release all Arab terrorists from its jails, and halt construction in Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem for a second time before talks begin. At the same time, he has refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist. His Fatah party’s newly adopted logo shows all of Israel as Palestine.
Even when Israel imposed a ten-month freeze on Jewish construction in an attempt to bring Abbas back to the negotiating table, he refused, choosing instead to impose more preconditions.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has called Abbas back to the negotiating table several times, but Abbas has refused. Instead, he opted for unilateral moves such as upgrading the PA’s status in the United Nations to a non-member observer state.
This week he said that the UN vote was the “birth certificate” of a Palestinian state.
“We have a birth certificate… and we want to complete the march toward full independence,” Abbas said. “Next year, 2013, will be the year of statehood and independence.”
www.xfinity.comcast.net – Mexico’s new President Enrique Pena Nieto swore in today amidst violent riots and protestors. Several hundred protesters threw fire bombs at police and smashed plate-glass windows in Mexico City. At least 76 people were treated for injuries, including 26 who were hospitalized, as the result of clashes between protesters and tear-gas firing police, the Red Cross said. Lines of riot police closed down streets around the Fine Arts Palace near where Pena Nieto gave his speech.
Peace and Security. We sure hear that a lot lately. Isn’t that what the New World Leader will proclaim to the World?