RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/mission_accomplished_obama_gets_americans_killed_to_kill_the_constitution.html
Mission Accomplished: Obama Gets Americans Killed to Kill the Constitution

Are you surprised that Vogue’s Anna Wintour is squeezing fashionistas to go all out for Obama? It makes sense, since the icy-eyed editrix knows style, and Obama certainly has a presidential style that’s all his own. After all, Obama is the only commander-in-chief to ever manipulate Americans into getting killed so that he can kill the Constitution.

We first saw Obama’s murderous stylings in Operation Fast and Furious, a brazenly criminal scheme in which he cuddled up to Mexican drug gangs, giving them thousands of state-of-the-art firearms. Obama’s narco-killer partners then obligingly used their new presents to murder U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and ICE Agent Jaime Zapata, as well as hundreds of Mexican men, women and children.

The grieving parents of the four Americans just slaughtered in Libya might want to contact the parents of slain ICE Agent Jaime Zapata and get the name of their lawyer. Mary and Amador Zapata have filed a $25 million wrongful death suit against the U.S. government, claiming that Jaime Zapata informed his supervisors he had misgivings about the safety of his Mexican trip, but was ordered to go anyway. “All of these legitimate concerns were put aside… and agents Avila and Zapata were required to follow orders,” the lawyers wrote. Sources say Zapata was investigating Fast and Furious at the time of his murder.

Sound familiar? It should, because Obama has now refined his Fast and Furious killing techniques into the wildly successful butchery of Benghazi. Let’s review what we know. First, Obama denied repeated requests for more security from the increasingly desperate Libyan ambassador, Christopher Stevens. Second, he blithely skipped 60% of his intelligence briefings, including every single one in the critical week leading up to 9/11. (Just to be consistent, he also skipped his briefing on 9/12, the day after the murders of Ambassador Stevens and three other brave Americans.)

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/28/Hillary-Asked-For-More-Security-In-Benghazi-Obama-Said-No
Reports suggest that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama didn’t see things the same on Benghazi. She wanted more security for diplomatic personnel, but Obama said no.

Rush Limbaugh predicted as much when Clinton took the blame for not upping the security forces in Benghazi and Obama threw her under the bus by telling the world the responsibility rested with him.

Limbaugh has consistently maintained that Clinton had a way out, and that she had created some wiggle room for herself so that things could not be laid at her feet.

And here it is: reports that Clinton wanted more security but Obama said “no.”

It is possible that Clinton’s legal counsel may have revealed this story to various sources, in hopes of protecting her reputation. Reports also indicate that former President Bill Clinton has urged his wife to release State Department documents “that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya.”

Those same, unconfirmed reports indicate Obama will almost certainly lose the election if those documents are released.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1908/member_of_european_parliament_in_holocaust_scandal

Tudor has been a this for many years….see this story from 2004: http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4606_13.htm

“ADL Praises Elie Wiesel for Returning Romanian Honor Now Conferred on Two Anti-Semites
New York, NY, December 16, 2004 …The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today praised the bold action of Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel for returning an award he received from Romania in protest of the same award being bestowed on two anti-Semites.Prof. Wiesel decided to return the Star of Romania Award, his native country’s highest honor which he received from President Ion Iliescu in 2002 after the same honor was conferred on Corneliu Vadim Tudor, head of the Greater Romania Party, an extreme nationalistic political group, and Gheorghe Buzatu, another party member on December 13. The party has a long and entrenched history of anti-Semitism, anti-Jewish conspiracy theories and Holocaust denial insofar as it relates to Romania.”

BUT, THERE IS A BIG BUT HERE HOW COME NOBODY COMMENTS ON ABU MAZEN,ABBAS—-THE SO CALLED HEAD OF THE PALARABS WHO IS ON RECORD FOR DENYING THE HOLOCAUST?…..RSK

Member of the European Parliament has denied that the Holocaust took place in Romania.Leader of the nationalist Greater Romania Party, Cornelui Vadim Tudor appeared on Romania’s network channel, Realitatea TV show “reality of the report” last Thursday.

In a statement issued by the Bucharest-based Elie Wiesel National Institute for the study of Holocaust in Romania, the public institution said that on October 18, Tudor stated, “In Romania there was never a holocaust” and further added: “I will deny it till I die because I love my people”.

The MEP is a member of the Committee on Culture and Education, a member of the Delegation for relations with Switzerland and Norway and to the EU-Iceland Joint Parliamentary Committee and the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee.

Tudor is also a substitute member for the Committee on Foreign Affairs and a member of the Delegation to the European Union-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee.

Tudor has regrettably followed in the footsteps of Romanian senator, lawyer and former Social Democrat Party (SDP) spokesman Dan Sova. In March, Sova gave a televised interview in which he made explicit anti-Semitic remarks. He proclaimed that “no Jew suffered on Romanian territory”.

In the same interview, Sova also claimed that “only 24 Romanian citizens of Jewish descent were killed” in an act “carried out by German soldiers. Romanian soldiers were not involved in the action. This is a historical fact”. Just five months later, Sova was appointed as Romania’s Minister for Parliamentary relations and retracted from his statements on holocaust denial.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203922804578080990821307624.html?KEYWORDS=MARK+HELPRIN

China’s maritime power and aggressive posture is rising while the size of the U.S. Navy continues to shrink.

During the recent foreign policy debate, the president presumed to instruct his opponent: “Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we’re counting ships. It’s what are our capabilities.”

Yes, the Army’s horses have been superseded by tanks and helicopters, and its bayonets rendered mainly ceremonial by armor and long-range, automatic fire, but what, precisely, has superseded ships in the Navy? The commander in chief patronizingly shared his epiphany that the ships of today could beat the hell out of those of 1916. To which one could say, like Neil Kinnock, “I know that, Prime Minister,” and go on to add that we must configure the Navy to face not the dreadnoughts of 1916 but “things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them,” and “ships that go underwater,” and also ballistic missiles, land-based aviation, and electronic warfare.

To hold that numbers and mass in war are unnecessary is as dangerous as believing that they are sufficient. Defense contractor Norman Augustine famously observed that at the rate fighter planes are becoming complex and expensive, soon we will be able to build just one. Neither a plane nor a ship, no matter how capable, can be in more than one place at once. And if one ship that is in some ways equivalent to 100 is damaged or lost, we have lost the equivalent of 100. But, in fact, except for advances in situational awareness, missile defense, and the effect of precision-guided munitions in greatly multiplying the target coverage of carrier-launched aircraft, the Navy is significantly less capable than it was a relatively short time ago in antisubmarine warfare, mine warfare, the ability to return ships to battle, and the numbers required to accomplish the tasks of deterrence or war.

For example, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s diplomacy in the South China Sea is doomed to impotence because it consists entirely of declarations without the backing of sufficient naval potential, even now when China’s navy is not half of what it will be in a decade. China’s claims, equivalent to American expropriation of Caribbean waters all the way to the coast of Venezuela, are much like Hitler’s annexations. But we no longer have bases in the area, our supply lines are attenuated across the vastness of the Pacific, we have much more than decimated our long-range aircraft, and even with a maximum carrier surge we would have to battle at least twice as many Chinese fighters.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Stennis-admiral-reassigned-amid-allegations-of-inappropriate-judgment-176099991.html WASHINGTON (AP) – The Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment. Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette is being sent back to the USS John C. Stennis’ home port […]

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=6220

MY E-PAL STEVE PLAUT HAS BEEN MONITORING THE ROT IN ISRAEL’S ACADEMIA AND DENOUNCING THOSE TREASONOUS PROFESSORS FOR YEARS IN ADDITION TO HIS EXCELLENT COLUMNS AGAINST THE TWO STATE DISSOLUTION OF ISRAEL….RSK
http://isracampus.org.il/
Monitoring Israel’s Academic Fifth Column
Following anti-Israel Extremism on
the Israeli Campus

Professor Ziva Shamir, a high-ranking researcher of literature in Israel and abroad, recently published a sharply worded essay against “the political anarchy in academia” • She says that university faculties have become breeding grounds for lecturers with radical world views, and that they “harass students politically” • “The greats of Hebrew literature — Bialik and Alterman — have become a platform that staff members use to present their radical opinions,” says Shamir, “Hebrew literature was the dove that heralded Zionism. It must not become the raven that heralds its destruction.”

I first met Professor Ziva Shamir about 20 years ago through her seminal book, “The Vagrant Bard: Avant-Garde and Alterman’s Poetic Style,” a look at Nathan Alterman’s poetry through the lens of modernism. Since then, I have recommended that excellent book as an introduction for people who want to learn about the work of one of Israel’s greatest poets.

Shamir, who took her first steps into the world of literature research in the late 1960s, has written many books, mostly about Hayim Nahman Bialik and Alterman. Now she has published her latest work, “The Child Is the Father of the Man,” about Bialik’s long narrative poems for children. For 40 years, she taught in the Hebrew literature department at Tel Aviv University. After her retirement, she continued to teach at Kibbutzim College and the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya. She offers an uncommon perspective about the intellectual world in Israel.

This article is reprinted from RadicalIslam.org.

To order Jamie Glazov’s new book, High Noon For America: The Coming Showdown, click here.

Dr. Jamie Glazov is the editor of FrontPage Magazine and the author of the new book, High Noon for America: The Coming Showdown. Glazov is the son of Soviet dissidents Yuri and Marina Glazov. He holds a Ph.D. in history from York University.The following is RadicalIslam.org’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro interview with Jamie Glazov:

Ryan Mauro: Your book’s title states that there is a “coming showdown.” Who is this showdown between, and when should we expect it?

Jamie Glazov: The showdown is between the free world and Sharia. The showdown is already here. We have a U.S. president who is telling the world: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” In other words, the leader of the free world is now ready to carry out Islamic blasphemy laws. This kind of attitude is of course leading to a much more serious showdown on the horizon. Very soon we will have to take a concrete stand, either for our free way of life or for Sharia. We will also have to face Iran — and the Muslim Brotherhood that is coming to power all over the Middle East, thanks to Obama. An attack on Israel is mounting, and we have to ask ourselves: Are we on the side of Israel and freedom, or will we cave in to jihad and Sharia?

Mauro: To be fair, in his speech at the U.N., President Obama did rule out placing restrictions on criticism of religion. He said, “Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs.”

Glazov: When Obama announces to the world that, ”The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” it contradicts and cancels out anything else he says that seems to be in defense of free speech. When Obama oversees Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the filmmaker behind the controversial movie “Innocence of Muslims,” being dragged out of his house on U.S. territory by law enforcement for some kind of parole violation, it sends the message to the Islamic world: You are right, and we are carrying out your blasphemy laws for you. When you ponder these realities, you have to ask yourself: Is it a coincidence that Obama has also facilitated the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power throughout the Middle East and, as Frank Gaffney has meticulously documented, its penetration of the U.S. government?

“Standing Down” in Benghazi — on The Glazov Gang
by Jamie Glazov
Exploring the ugly details of why backup was denied to save American lives in Benghazi.
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/jamie-glazov/standing-down-in-benghazi-on-the-glazov-gang-2/

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3417/real-islamophobia “Islamophobia” is not, as claimed by some critics, just a concept invented by Islamist organizations to distract from their own fundamentalism; it is is a form of prejudice, exacerbated by governments, university faculties, the media and even interfaith groups. The greatest threat to moderate Islam and its assimilation with democratic values are those people […]

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3420/benghazi-sharia According to Sharia law, it is a capital crime for a Muslim to shoot another Muslim to protect a non-Muslim. To jihadists, Obama is just another disbeliever American President who should not be trusted. Not only did the Obama administration never receive even a promise of peace from the Muslim world; the murder of […]