RUTHFULLY YOURS

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/daniel-greenfield/obama%e2%80%99s-big-afghanistan-lie/

David Plouffe, Obama’s former campaign manager and current senior advisor, claimed this week that the Romney campaign is built “on a foundation of absolute lies.” Speaking of absolute lies, there is the lie being put out that the War in Afghanistan has been won by the Obama administration.

Under the category of “TAKING THE FIGHT TO AL-QAEDA,” the Obama campaign website boasts that Obama refocused efforts on defeating Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. This would have proven surprisingly easy as Al Qaeda in Afghanistan had already been defeated by the Bush Administration.

As documented in my Freedom Center pamphlet, “The Great Betrayal”, Obama’s campaign promise in the last election to go after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan was false because Al Qaeda had already shifted its operations away from there.

In 2009, General Petraeus, while serving as head of U.S. Central Command under Obama, said that Al Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan. Intelligence estimates before that and afterward put the possible number of Al Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan at around 100. Obama’s surge of 100,000 troops was clearly not needed to fight 100 Al Qaeda terrorists at a ratio of 1,000 soldiers to each Al Qaeda terrorist.

The National Security page of the Obama campaign repeatedly talks about Al Qaeda, but it makes no mention of the Taliban at all. This is a strange omission as American soldiers have spent the past few years taking severe casualties fighting the Taliban, not Al Qaeda. Still it is natural for Obama not to want to talk about the Taliban because his goal of pushing them back with the Afghanistan Surge failed.

Obama is running on Bush’s successes in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda, while completely ignoring his own failures against the Taliban. It is as if Dewey had won the 1944 Presidential election and then taken office in 1945, after the liberation of Paris and the Battle of the Bulge, and insisted on taking credit for the defeat of Germany while ignoring the existence of the Japanese front.

Clinton’s convention speech eyes Hillary 2016
Los Angeles Times
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
News
Clinton’s convention speech eyes Hillary 2016

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz25bEE3DGr
Ryan: Obama presidency worse than Carter’s
CBS News
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
News
Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan on Tuesday called President Obama worse than Jimmy Carter, the Democratic president who lost his reelection bid to President Reagan in 1980. Read more…
Former Gore supporters say he’s irrelevant
Politico
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
News
“Al Gore has proven incapable of developing policies that have broad political appeal, and the party is looking to others,” said Paul Bledsoe, who was communications director for the White House Climate Change Task Force under President Bill Clinton and is now a senior adviser at the Bipartisan Policy Center. Read more…
Record number of Muslims attend Dem convention
Newsmax
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
News
A record number of Muslim delegates are attending this year’s Democratic National Convention, according to the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Read more…
Dems trounce Romney for quote he never said
Roll Call
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
News
From dawn to dusk on the first day of the Democratic National Convention, Democratic leaders seemingly used Mitt Romney’s own words against him in front of delegations and national television audiences. Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz25bEn5xHY

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/315757/confident-ignorance-barack-obama-thomas-sowell After I read Barack Obama’s book Dreams from My Father, it became painfully clear to me that he has not been searching for the truth, because he assumed from an early age that he had already found the truth — and now it was just a question of filling in the details and deciding […]

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-prime-minister-david.html#more
An Open Letter to Prime Minister David Cameron

In the wake of last Saturday’s fiasco in Walthamstow, Paul Weston, the Chairman of British Freedom, has written the following letter to Prime Minister David Cameron.

Dear Prime Minister,

I find it very disturbing that as a founding signatory of Unite Against Fascism (UAF), you are effectively endorsing totalitarianism and violence.

As you may be aware, the UAF were involved in large scale violence last Saturday in Walthamstow. Their objective was to ensure that Freedom of Assembly and Freedom of Speech were denied to the English Defence League.

In a previous open letter to you — along with fellow Conservative MP Sir Peter Bottomley — I asked if you were aware the UAF had appointed as their Vice-Chair a Mr Azad Ali, a known al-Qaeda sympathiser and anti-Semite. You clearly felt this to be a matter of such little importance it did not warrant a reply.

No matter. I’m sure you have far more pressing matters of national importance to deal with than the trifling issue of Islamic supremacism, but could I ask that you watch the two videos embedded here? Having done so, perhaps you could answer the following questions:

* Do you think it is morally and politically acceptable for a British Prime Minister to publicly endorse the UAF, which as evidenced in the videos is both anti-democratic and violent?
* Whilst your views on the EDL are well known (you have called them “sick”) are you not horrified to see bricks, bottles and stones being thrown at a group of outnumbered people – including women – gathered together to exercise their democratic rights?
* You will notice the police are visibly shaken by the violence effectively carried out in your name. Were they under government orders to allow the situation to develop to the extent it became uncontrollable and therefore had to be closed down in the interests of public safety?
* You will also notice that not one of the people throwing potentially deadly projectiles was arrested. Why was this?
* Who gave the order that violent Muslims and Communists should be treated with kid-gloves?
* Were police commanders acting on their own initiative, or were they following government policy?
* Although the EDL refused to become involved in the violence initiated by the UAF, many were arrested on false grounds. Was this done in order that Freedom of Assembly becomes such a tortuous ordeal many people will simply give up?
* Do you consider the arrest policy to be within the law?
* If not, do you really think the police can behave unlawfully simply because they assume the working class men and women arrested are unlikely to have access to expensive barristers?
* Again, I imagine this is being carried in accordance with government policy. I must seek your assurance therefore that this is not the case and that you fully support the EDL’s democratic right to Freedom of Assembly and Freedom of Speech?
* Are you really not aware that the UAF is a Communist organisation?
* Have you really accepted the left-wing propaganda which paints the EDL as a violent and racist movement?
* Has it not occurred to you that despite being rough around the edges the EDL exists only to stand up to the ever growing demands radical Islam places on our liberal democracy?
* Can you please explain why violent left-wingers and radical Muslims can behave as they did on Saturday and remain free, whilst peaceful EDL members were arrested and not allowed to exercise their democratic rights?
* Does this not suggest something is very rotten in Cameron’s Britain?
* Is it not a sign of a genuine Police State that such a blatant disregard for democracy and law not only took place, but that the government and media subsequently remained silent?
* Is this really your vision of a democratic country, or are you just intent on enjoying your time in office, which means cracking down on the group which is easier to crush, no matter that the EDL stand for pro-democracy, pro-British, pro-conservative values whilst their opponents most emphatically do not?

You must forgive my asking these questions, Prime Minister, but I value the democratic freedoms long associated with Great Britain — which I am ashamed to say now seem threatened under your leadership. These freedoms were bequeathed to us via the blood and sacrifice of our immediate ancestors. They are not something you can just casually cast aside.

What happened on Saturday in Walthamstow should never have happened in a country with a valid claim to democracy. It is essential, given the seriousness of the situation, that you find the time to answer the questions posed in this letter.

On a final note, I do hope you will consider dropping your official endorsement of the UAF. Surely you must realise that a British Prime Minister should distance himself from such a violent, anti-Semitic, anti-British and anti-democratic movement which the UAF so obviously is?

So, Prime Minister, what say you?

Respectfully,

Paul Weston
Chairman, British Freedom Party

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/315886/president-incomplete-rich-lowry ‘Are people better off than they were four years ago?” is hardly a trick question. It’s one of the most reliable clichés in American politics. So Governor Martin O’Malley, a Democrat from Maryland, should have been ready with some handy dodge when he was asked the question by Bob Schieffer of Face the Nation. […]

Islam vs. Man’s Best Friend?
THE IMAM’S PET PEEVE?…RSK

http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2012/08/28/islam-vs-mans-best-friend/?print=1

Not long ago, I took my dog Shiba for an afternoon workout at our town beach on the Ottawa River, a lovely crescent of yellow sand and shade trees patronized by visitors from as far away as Montreal. A pure Siberian husky packing the energy of the Big Bang in her muscles, Shiba looks forward to these outings when she can entertain herself swimming furiously toward the horizon after lobbed twigs and tennis balls. With her striking white pelt, blue eyes, children-loving temperament and dolphin-like swimming motion, she is generally the center of attention and has made many admiring friends among the company of beach-goers.

Not everyone, however, is appreciative of Shiba’s playful and rambunctious presence. As I was about to launch another tennis ball for her to retrieve, I was approached by two attractive, deeply tanned young women who objected to Shiba’s performance, or, rather, to Shiba herself. They demanded that we cease and desist. When I inquired why I should comply, I was informed that dogs were unclean creatures and that Shiba prevented them from bathing since the water would be polluted by her thrashing about.

Needless to say, I was initially taken aback. After all, Shiba was a community favorite who posed no threat to anyone. Moreover, the women were not local residents but visitors from the big city. Additionally, my municipal taxes paid for the upkeep of the beach, which they enjoyed at no cost to themselves. The plain fact was that they had no stake in the matter and were, to put it somewhat wryly, completely out of their depth.

But, as my readers have surmised, they were of the Islamic persuasion. True, they were not garbed in traditional dress and seemed for all intents and purposes to be “modern” young women; yet they had no compunction against affirming their traditional and, indeed, alien values, which they attempted to impose as of right. I did my best to remain polite, but could not resist suggesting that they find some other beach to visit and that Shiba, whose license I had also paid for and who was more of a resident than they were, was far more entitled to the privilege of the river than interlopers from elsewhere.

“In May 2007 a small group of religious leaders met in the E.U. headquarters in Brussels with the three most significant leaders of Europe: Angela Merkel, German Chancellor and at the time president of the European Council; Jose-Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission; and Hans-Gert Pöttering, President of the European Parliament.

The meeting was one of those semiformal occasions at which little is said, and a great deal of time taken in saying it. Concerned at the return of anti-Semitism to Europe within living memory of the Holocaust, I decided that the time had come to break protocol and speak plainly, even bluntly.

I gave the shortest speech of my life. Sitting directly opposite the three leaders, I said this:

“Jews and Europe go back a long way. The experience of Jews in Europe has added several words to the human vocabulary — words like expulsion, public disputation, forced conversion, inquisition, auto-da-fe, blood libel, ghetto and pogrom, without even mentioning the word Holocaust. That is the past. My concern is with the future. Today the Jews of Europe are asking whether there is a future for Jews in Europe, and that should concern you, the leaders of Europe”….

So recalled the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Britain and the Commonwealth, Lord Sacks, earlier this year, against the backdrop of Germany’s assault on circumcision. He went on:

Am I the only one who is disgusted by the rebranding of Bill Clinton? Well, perhaps just some of the victims of the Rwanda genocide agree with me. After all, this great humanist completely ignored the brutality, the violence, the horror in Rwanda. He did sort of apologize for that omission. This is also the man who had a chance to capture Obama in Khartoum but under the advice of stocking stuffer Sandy Berger and his comely Secretary of State he nixed the offer from Khartoum. Lo0k, cut him a little slack. He was too busy trying to corner Israel into signing a suicide note for Yasser Arafat at the Wye Plantation.

And there was that little dalliance..but never mind. Even John Edwards wanted to be President. That’s just the unending Spitzerama of the Democrats.

And, how about this nugget? You think only Obama falterS on Iran? Here is Bill in his own words in an interview by Charlie Rose during the 2005 Economic Forum in Davos:

Clinton: …” Iran’s a whole different kettle of fish—but it’s a sad story that really began in the 1950s when the United States deposed Mr. Mossadegh, who was an elected parliamentary democrat, and brought the Shah back in—] and then he was overturned by the Ayatollah Khomeini, driving us into the arms of one Saddam Hussein. Most of the terrible things Saddam Hussein did in the 1980s he did with the full, knowing support of the United States government, because he was in Iran, and Iran was what it was because we got rid of the parliamentary democracy back in the ’50s; at least, that is my belief.I know it is not popular for an American ever to say anything like this, but I think it’s true and I apologized when President Khatami was elected. I publicly acknowledged that the United States had actively overthrown Mossadegh and I apologized for it, and I hope that we could have some rapprochement with Iran. I think basically the Europeans’ initiative to Iran to try to figure out a way to defuse the nuclear crisis is a good one.”

And then he continued with this one:

But Iran is the most perplexing problem … we face, for the following reasons: It is the only country in the world with two governments, and the only country in the world that has now had six elections since the first election of President Khatami. [It is] the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections: two for President; two for the parliament, the Majlis; two for the mayoralities.

In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70% of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

“Whither goest thou, America, in thy shiny car in the night?” Jack Kerouac asked in On the Road That was the Fifties. That shiny car is pretty beat up these days. It’s supposed to get 100 miles to the gallon, so long as the temperature never drops below 75 and the gasoline has additives like the joy of children and the smiles of unicorns. And you can’t buy the car because you can’t get approved for that loan. Instead you ride a bicycle, pedaling furiously, dodging trucks delivering goods from factories in Shanghai, on your way to a job that may not last.
“What do we want” is the ritual chant of every political assembly. The RNC’s chant is jobs. The DNC’s chant is abortion. Both are solutions of a sort. There are two ways to tackle unemployment. You can either make more jobs or make less people. If you make more jobs then families will make more little people and be able to afford them. If you make less people, then singles will be more economically secure but unable to start families.

“Whither goest thou, America,” the pollsters and pundits asked the country four years ago. And the answer was a superwide highway lined with shovel-ready jobs and a new era in history. We drove on that highway and went as fast as we could, and still we could not escape the blight in every direction. The faster we drove, the worse it got. The gasoline cost a fortune and there were no jobs to be found to pay for it.

As night gave way not to morning but a sullen overclouded dusk, we realized that we had taken the wrong road. We were no longer in America anymore. Maybe we were in Mexico or Pakistan. It was hard to say where exactly the dark highway had taken us, but the place we were at now was not the place we wanted to be.

Down the road was a strange place rife with political corruption, everyone had a hand out for a bribe and there was no longer a highway, just a million dirt roads segregated by race and gender, by class and creed, where all the drivers are angry all the time and the traffic cops are there to spread the misery in equal proportion. It might be Russia or Ecuador, it might be anywhere, but it’s not America.

http://www.jewishideasdaily.com/4918/features/munich-misremembered/

TONY KUSHNER, WELL KNOWN “CALUMNIST” OF ISRAEL WROTE THE SCRIPT FOR THE MOVIE “MUNICH” WHICH WAS AN ATTEMPT TO DRAW EQUIVALENCE BETWEEN THE TERRORISTS AND THOSE IN THE MOSSAD WHO HUNTED THEM DOWN. STEPHEN SPIELBERG WHO IS SO CORRECTLY DEVOTED TO CATALOGING EVENTS AND TESTIMONY FROM THE HOLOCAUST, WON KUDOS FOR THIS SHAMELESS FILM ON MUNICH. THE MASSACRE WAS ANOTHER FRONT IN THE WAR AGAINST THE JEWS….THE JIHAD FRONT…..TOO BAD THAT ISN’T INCLUDED IN SPIELBERG’S WRATH…..RSK

Forty years ago, on September 5, 1972, eight Arab terrorists broke into the Israeli apartments at the Munich Olympic village, murdered two athletes, and took nine hostage. After a day of failed negotiations, aborted rescue attempts, and a shootout at nearby Fürstenfeldbruck airport, not a single hostage survived. A month later, the Germans compounded what Simon Reeve, in his seminal book One Day in September, called their “criminally shambolic failure” to rescue the Israeli hostages: The terrorist group Black September hijacked a Lufthansa jet and demanded the release of the three surviving Munich terrorists; the Germans complied.

Good books have been written about the Munich massacre, but David Clay Large’s recent Munich 1972: Tragedy, Terror, and Triumph at the Olympic Games isn’t one of them. There is no triumph in this book, and not enough about terror and tragedy. Unlike Reeve’s book or Aaron J. Klein’s excellent Striking Back, Munich 1972 is about sports, not terrorism. Large thinks it a great shame that terror ruined the ’72 Games and overshadowed the great sporting events that took place there.

In this respect, Large is in tune with the times. The International Olympic Committee refused to honor the Israeli dead with a moment of silence at the London Games. (They refuse at every Olympics.) IOC President Jacques Rogge said “the Opening Ceremony is an atmosphere that is not fit to remember such a tragic incident.” The chairman of the Palestinian Olympic Committee thanked Rogge in a letter: “Sport must not be a cause for divisiveness and for the spreading of racism.”

Large describes the massacre and continues with the Munich Games (just as the Games were continued over Israeli objections). He doesn’t seem to grasp that America’s loss to East Germany in pole-vaulting (for example) is so unspeakably trivial in comparison to the terrorist outrage that the attention he gives it is embarrassing.

Large regards himself as a historian above history. He calls the Black September terrorists fedayeen (“self-sacrificers,” their own preferred name) and compares them to Zionists, who “frequently resorted to terror tactics in their own struggle.” He makes nothing of the Irgun’s having attacked military targets, while Black September targeted civilians. “Apologists,” Large writes, “will undoubtedly deny the claim [of] ‘innocence’ for the Israeli Olympians on grounds that no Israeli could ever be innocent.” Large does not endorse this view; neither does he reject it. Faults on both sides, tit-for-tat.

Large assumes the legitimacy of the Palestinian “grievance.” World opinion—even Israeli opinion—increasingly seems to agree. Where does the idea come from?