Busted: Sen. Schumer Coaches Fellow Democrats On Conference Call Before Speaking to Reporters
======================
Extremist Linked Sen. Schumer: “I Always Use the Word Extreme”
On Tuesday March 29, 2011 Senator Charles Schumer, New York was on a conference call talking to his colleagues (fellow Senators), but what he didn’t know is that reporters were also listening in to the call.
On the call, He made reference to the Democrat’s plan to use the word “extreme” to label the Tea Party for their calls for a balanced budget. Here’s a segment of the audio which was recorded:
Transcript: “I always use the word extreme, that’s what the caucus instructed me to do…, extreme cuts and all these riders, and Boehner’s in a box. But if he supports the Tea Party there’s going to inevitably [be] a shutdown. What we are trying to do here…” (audio cut off at this point)
Senator Schumer has clear ties to three extreme organizations.
-
The Council for a Livable World, founded in 1962 by long-time socialist activist and alleged Soviet agent, Leo Szilard, is a non-profit advocacy organization that seeks to “reduce the danger of nuclear weapons and increase national security”, primarily through supporting progressive, congressional candidates who support their policies. The Council supported Charles E. Schumer in his initial successful Senate run as candidate for New York.
-
In 1997, Schumer was one of 33 co-sponsors of H.R. 950, the Job Creation and Infrastructure Restoration Act. The bill had originally been sponsored by Congressman Matthew Martinez at the request of over 50 prominent labor leaders – all of whom were known supporters or members of the Communist Party USA. The Communist party even delegated senior member Evelina Alarcon to oversee the bill’s progress.
-
In 1998 Schumer enjoyed electoral support from Communist Party breakaway group, Committees of Correspondence.
…And he’s got the audacity to call the Tea Party extreme?
H/T Trevor Loudon
LINK
=========================
“The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men.”
-Samuel Adams”
Another stunner behind Obama’s Libya doctrine; Hanan Ashrawi whose Father Founded the PLO with Arafat. **A Must Read in Entirety**
========================
**A MUST READ OF THE ENTIRE ARTICLE***
The ties that bind
From WorldNet Daily:
By Aaron Klein
March 29, 2011
WARS AND RUMORS OF WARS
Another stunner behind Obama’s Libya doctrine
You won’t believe who helped devise policy used by president
TEL AVIV – A staunch denier of the Holocaust who long served as the deputy of late PLO leader Yasser Arafat served on the committee that invented the militarydoctrineused by President Obama as the main justification for U.S. and international airstrikes against Libya.
As WND first reported, billionaire philanthropist George Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of theGlobalCentre for Responsibility to Protect, the world’s leading organization pushing the militarydoctrine. Several of the doctrine’s main founders sit on multiple boards with Soros.
The doctrine and its founders, as WND reported, have been deeply tied to Obama aide Samantha Power, who reportedly heavily influenced Obama in consultations leading to the decision to bomb Libya. Power is the National Security Council special adviser to Obama on human rights.
See what it’s going to take to stop CAIR and the “Muslim Mafia” from Islamizing America
Now it has emerged that Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi served on the advisory board of the 2001 commission that originally founded Responsibility to Protect.
That commission is called the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. It invented the term “Responsibility to Protect,” while defining its guidelines.
Ashrawi is an infamous defender of Palestinian terrorism. Her father, Daoud Mikhail, was a co-founder of the PLO with Arafat. The PLO was engaged in scores of international terrorist acts and was declared a terrorist group by the U.S. in 1987.
During the First Palestinian Intifada, or war of “resistance” against Israel, in 1988, Ashrawi joined what was known as the Intifada Political Committee, which sought to advance Palestinian goals through both politics and “resistance.” She served there until 1993.
In 1991, Arafat appointed Ashrawi to serve as the PLO’s Minister of Higher Education and Research. The Palestinian school system is notorious for its glorification of “martyrdom,” or suicide bombings, and has long preached against the existence of Israel.
Discover the Networks notes Ashrawi has long defended the Hamas terror group as a legitimate component of the Palestinian “political spectrum.”
She has stated she does not “think of Hamas as a terrorist group.”
“We coordinate [with Hamas] politically,” she said in April 1993, “the people we know and talk to are not terrorists.”
In 1998 Ashrawi founded MIFTAH, anonprofitthat seeks to undermine Israel’s legitimacy and refers to that Jewish state’s 1948 creation as “Al Nakba,” or “The Catastrophe.”
Ashrawi has long been a Holocaust denier. In the July 2, 1998, edition of the official Palestinian Authority newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda, she published an article calling the Holocaust “a deceitful myth, which the Jews have … exploited to get sympathy.”
In 2001 Ashrawi became a spokeswoman for the Arab League.
Notably, Amre Moussa, Secretary General of the Arab League, served as an adviser to the same 2001 commission that invented the “Responsibility to Protect”doctrine.
Ashrawi, meanwhile, was a protégé and later colleague and close friend of late Columbia University Professor Edward Said, another notorious apologist for Palestinian terrorism.
Said was replaced by Rashid Khalidi, a close personal friend to Obama.
Read more:Another stunner behind Obama’s Libya doctrinehttp://www.wnd.com/?pageId=281065#ixzz1I5hto7ie
[Emphasis added]
=======================
Don’t Be FOOLED America; YOU and the ISRAELI people are being played in the game of military doctrine called the Responsibility to Protect plan…….Obama’s Lybia “plan” has NOTHING to do with Lybia. It has EVERYTHING to do with utilizing/initiating/employing the Responsiblity to Protect plan through the United Nations.
U.S. Dues and Contributions to the United Nations
There are two sources of funding for the UN and its agencies:
- Assessed contributions that finance the UN’s regular budget, peacekeeping operations, and specialized agencies like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); and
- Voluntary contributions to funds and programs such as the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) as well as subsidiary organizations of the UN.
The current payment structure for UN regular budget dues sets maximum and minimum rates for all nations. The maximum “ceiling” rate is 22 percent. The minimum “floor” rate for poorer countries is 0.001 percent. The U.S. pays the maximum rate and has negotiated several reductions in this rate over time, the most notably from 25 percent to 22 percent. The assessment rate is primarily determined by per capita income, of which the U.S. has one of the highest in the world.
The U.S. assessed contribution to the UN’s regular budget is included, along with 43 other UN-system, regional, and non-UN organizations, in the State Department’s Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account. Since the 1980s, the U.S. has deferred payments to international organizations through this account by withholding dues payments by at least nine months—into the next fiscal year. The fiscal year for international organizations begins on January 1, but the U.S. does not provide payment until October 1 or when the foreign operations appropriations bills pass. This delay leaves the U.S. chronically behind and requires international organizations to take fiscally undesirable measures to meet their payroll and other obligations, including extensive internal and external borrowing.
Paying Our Dues: UN Peacekeeping Budget
Although the UN’s peacekeeping budget is separate from the regular budget it is also financed by assessments to member states. The UN’s peacekeeping assessment formula mirrors the regular budget rate structure but gives greater discounts to poorer nations. The resulting funding deficit is compensated for by the five permanent members of the Security Council, the U.S., the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China. Each of these five has
unique voting and veto rights at the Security Council to authorize or suspend any peacekeeping operation. While the permanent members of the Security Council pay a slightly higher rate, the vast majority of UN peacekeepers come from developing countries such as: Pakistan; Bangladesh; Nepal; and Ghana.
The U.S. assessed contributions to the UN’s peacekeeping operations are funded through the State Department’s Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) account. For any mission, which must be approved by the U.S. in the Security Council, other countries pay almost 75% of the costs.
Current Funding Levels for UN Regular & Peacekeeping Budget
Last year, Congress returned the U.S. to good financial standing at the UN and honored its obligations by fully funding the regular and peacekeeping budgets. In addition, the U.S. paid its arrears to the UN.
In the coming year, we ask that Congress maintain its support. Full funding for the UN ensures it can carry out its vital humanitarian, peacekeeping, democracy-building, and development work, all of which serves U.S foreign policy interests. As the U.S. is the UN’s largest contributor, Congressional funding shortfalls significantly impact the UN’s ability to carry out its operations. It is critical that Congress fully meet its commitments to the UN regular and peacekeeping budgets.
=============================
US lawmaker defends UN payments
(AFP) – 1 day ago
WASHINGTON — A lawmaker from President Barack Obama’s Democratic Party called Monday for the United States to keep up its financial support for the United Nations as he met with UN chief Ban Ki-moon.
Representative Mike Honda, as former head of the Asian American caucus in the US Congress, led a delegation of five lawmakers for talks in New York with the secretary-general and other senior officials.
“If we don’t continue our dues-paying role, we don’t have a platform to stand on to be able to take a role in the UN, and we wouldn’t have the moral ground to criticize anybody,” Honda told AFP after the meeting.
The United States is the biggest contributor to the United Nations, paying more than 2.5 billion dollars to the UN peacekeeping and regular budgets last year.
Obama on taking office in 2009 pledged to pay dues on time. But the rival Republican Party, which swept November elections, has pledged to cut spending on foreign programs including contributions to the United Nations.
Honda said Ban told the lawmakers that there was “such a lift in the UN” when Washington came forward with its dues and that it returned the United States to its “proper place” in the world body.
[***NOte added here***......"Proper Place" in the WORLD? What happened to Obama's speech about exceptionalism?]
LINK
===========================
DEFUND the UNITED NATIONS.
Enlightenment
Education
Empowerment
Is George Soros the PuppetMaster or Innocence Personified (As Claimed)? White House Thinking OF ARMING Radicals in Lybia?
========================
Soros’ guerilla war against the TRUTH.
America MUST stand with Israel.
Most ideology and statements are “scheduled” to occur in September of THIS YEAR……..9/11
Part#1:
I Stand With Israel!
=========================
Part#2:
No “I” in the word TEAM.
Drop the radical MEANS for the radical ENDS
Propaganda utilized against our military.
Rebels in Libya that the White House is thinking of arming were the radicals our military fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.
======================
Part#3
“Set the world on fire and wash it with blood”…….
FAITH. HOPE. CHARITY.
FAITH. HOPE. LOVE. (MLK)
What government has “cooked up” to get us out of debt.
1. Inflate the money supply.
2. Force people to buy Treasury Bills.
HOW ABOUT THIS? STOP/CUT SPENDING!
Obama’s BUD Jeffrey Immelt CEO of GE bilked system to NOT pay ANY TAXES last year; made $14.2 BILLION dollars in profit in 2010…got TARP money, etc. Great to be a friend of Obama’s……
WHERE are the UNIONS marching against GE?
=====================
Enlightenment
Education
Empowerment
The One Opinion Piece the New York Times Didn’t Want YOU to Read
====================
March 29, 2011
In the weeks since Governor Walker introduced his reforms to balance the budget and protect middle-class taxpayers the New York Times has repeatedly used its editorial pages to opine on the reforms. All told there have been at least seven editorials, op-eds or columns in the paper about the Wisconsin reforms.
Below is the Op-Ed that Governor Walker wrote that the New York Times chose not to run:
In nearly every state across America, Governors are facing major budget deficits. Many, Democrat and Republican alike, are cutting state aid to schools and other local governments – which will force massive layoffs, massive property tax increases or both.
In Wisconsin, we are doing something progressive in the best sense of the word. We are implementing reforms to protect middle class jobs and middle class taxpayers. While our idea may be a bold political move it is a very modest request of our employees.
We are reforming the bargaining system so our state and local governments can ask employees to contribute 5.8% for pension and 12.6% for health insurance premiums. These reforms will help them balance their budgets. In total, our reforms save local governments more than $700 million each year.
Most workers outside of government would love our proposal. Over the past several months, I have visited numerous factories and small businesses across Wisconsin. On these tours, workers tell me that they pay anywhere from 15% to 50% of their health insurance premium costs. The average middle class worker is paying more than 20% of his or her premium.
Even federal employees pay more than twice what we are asking state and local government workers to pay and most of them don’t have collective bargaining for wages or benefits. These facts beg the question as to why the protesters are in Wisconsin and not in Washington, D.C. By nearly any measure, our requests are quite reasonable.
Beyond helping to balance current and future budgets, our reforms will improve the quality of our governments. No longer will hiring and firing be done solely based on seniority and union contracts. Instead, schools – as well as state and local governments – will be able to make decisions based on merit and performance.
This concept works well in Indiana. In 2005, Governor Mitch Daniels reformed collective bargaining. In turn, the government got more efficient, more effective and more accountable to the public. Governor Daniels even encouraged employees to come forward with ways to save taxpayer dollars and they responded. Eventually, the state was able to reward top performing employees. This is true reform – making government work for the people.
A recent columnist on these pages opined that “common problems deserve common solutions” suggesting that Republicans and Democrats work together. In principle, that is a good idea.
Since January 3rd, we passed some of the most aggressive economic development legislation in the country. And on nearly every measure, many Democrats joined with all of the Republicans and an Independent to vote in favor of the various pieces of legislation. The Wisconsin legislature recognized that we are growing, not Republican or Democratic jobs, butWisconsin jobs. Together, we worked to show that Wisconsin is open for business.
But sometimes, bi-partisanship is not so good. During several of the past budgets, members of both political parties raided segregated funds, used questionable accounting principles and deferred tough decisions. This, along with the use of billions of dollars worth of one-time federal stimulus money for the budget two years ago, left Wisconsin with the current $3.6 billion deficit.
Our reforms allow us to take a new and better approach. Instead of avoiding the hard decisions and searching for short-term solutions, we make a commitment to the future. The choices we are making now inWisconsin will make sure our children are not left picking up the pieces of the broken state budget left behind. Our reforms create the lowest structural deficit in recent history ensuring our budget is stable for decades to come. These changes will give businesses the confidence they need to grow and invest in our state.
We live in the greatest nation on earth because for more than 200 years we’ve had leaders who cared more about their children and grandchildren than themselves. Having the courage to make decisions in the best interest of the next generation – despite external pressures – is a concept that America has always admired, but is forgetting today. My hope is thatWisconsin will remind the nation what makes our country great.
LINK
*******************************
************************
***************
Illegal Aliens will do JOBS Americans Won’t Do? Obama wants them to Succeed!
======================
Pennsylvania:
BUSTED: Illegal Alien Workers at Whiting-Turner Construction Project (PA)
=====================
Illegal Aliens To Get 300 Thousand American Stimulus Jobs
Airing Date March.09, 2009
***Note what is said about the Senate at 0:25 to 0:40**
=====================
Illegal Immigrants Do Take Jobs That Americans Want_Part 2
=====================
Harry Reid: Illegal Aliens Don’t Work on Construction Jobs in Nevada…..
Really?
WHO blocked E-Verify?
=====================
OBAMA TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS: WE WANT YOU TO SUCCEED!
March 28, 2011
CNS News reports:
When questioned by an illegal alien student today who showed him a deportation letter, President Barack Obama said he did not want to deport illegal alien students like the one who questioned him, he wanted them to succeed.
The exchange came during a town hall event sponsored by the Spanish-language television network Univision at a Washington, D.C., school. An illegal alien student, who appeared via Skype, asked: “My question for the president is, why [is the government] saying that deportations have stopped or the detention of many students like me, why is it that we are still receiving deportation letters like this one?”
Obama answered, “We have redesigned our enforcement practices under the law to make sure that we’re focusing primarily on criminals, and so our deportation of criminals are up about 70 percent. Our deportation of non-criminals are down, and that’s because we want to focus our resources on those folks who are destructive to the community.
“And for a young person like that young woman that we just spoke to who’s going to school, doing all the right things, we want them to succeed,” Obama said.
MORE…….
========================
Illegal is illegal……The CRIME? There are already US laws against illegal immigration on the books. A CRIME is committed the minute they come into America without legal papers.
SUPPORT ARIZONA!
SUPPORT other STATES working on legislation similar to Arizona……
======================
US Border Patrol “About 1 in every 10 we catch is an (OTM) Other Than Mexican from a country like Yemen or Egypt.” (Terrorists may have been sneaking in beginning in 2002)
Border Patrol spokesperson Rene Noriega stated that the number of other-than-Mexican detentions has grown by 42 percent. Most of the non-Mexican migrants are from El Salvador and other parts of Central America, she said, but added that agents have picked up people from all over the world, including the former Soviet Union, Asia and the Middle East.
Arabs have been reported crossing the Arizona border for an unknown period. Border rancher George Morgan encounters thousands of illegals crossing his ranch on a well-used trail. He relates a holiday event: “It was Thanksgiving 1998, and I stepped outside my house and there were over a hundred ‘crossers’ in my yard. Damnedest bunch of illegals I ever saw. All of them were wearing black pants, white shirts and string ties. Maybe they were hoping to blend in,” he chuckled. “They took off, I called the Border Patrol, and a while later, an agent, Dan Green, let me know that they had caught them. He said that they were all Iranians.”
According to Border Patrol spokesperson Rob Daniels, “Ten Egyptians were arrested recently near Douglas, Arizona. Each had paid $7,000 to be brought from Guatemala into Mexico and then across the border.”
According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, hours after the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, an anonymous caller led Mexican immigration agents to 41 undocumented Iraqis waiting to cross into the United States.
The Associated Press reported that Mexican immigration police detained 13 citizens of Yemen on Sept. 24, 2001, who were reportedly waiting to cross the border into Arizona. The Yemenis were arrested Sunday in Agua Prieta, across the border from Douglas. Luis Teran Balaguer, assistant head of immigration in the northern state of Sonora, said, “The evidence indicates that they have nothing to do with terrorist activities.”
The Agua Prieta, Mexico newspaper, El Ciarin, clearly did not agree with Balaguer’s assessment. The editor, Jose Noriega Durazo, claimed in a front-page El Ciarin headline, “ESTUVIERON AQUI TERRORISTAS ARABES!” (The Arab terrorists were here!) El Ciarin quoted Agua Prieta police officials as identifying the 13 Yemenis as terrorists. Reportedly, the Mexican immigration police returned the Yemenis to a federal detention center near Mexico City, but new information would indicate that they were “released” and returned to Agua Prieta.
Carlos X. Carrillo, assistant chief U. S. Border Patrol, Tucson Sector, told WorldNetDaily in a telephone interview Monday that nine Yemenis were reportedly holed up in a hotel in the border town of Agua Prieta, Sonora, Mexico, across the border from Douglas, Ariz.
“We have passed this tip to the FBI,” said Carrillo.
When pressed for more information, he said he could not confirm the number of OTMs or Middle-Easterners apprehended while crossing the American/Mexican border. “We are under OP/SEC and cannot divulge this,” the chief said. (OP/SEC is a counter-intelligence acronym for operations security.)
A Border Patrol field patrol agent, who spoke anonymously, confirmed the presence of the nine Yemenis. The agent said, “They can’t get a coyote to transport them and they are offering $30,000 per person with no takers.”
On Oct. 12, a Mexican national, associated with the hotel in Agua Prieta, abandoned it and moved to Arizona — to hide out. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he told WND: “There were 13 Arabs there when I left. They were paying the coyotes 30 to 50,000 bucks, apiece, to transport them safely into the U.S. I became so frightened I left. They are genuinely bad hombres.” Since Carrillo had reported only nine Arabs at the hotel, it is unclear if the missing five Yemenis made it into the U.S. as reported
On Oct. 12, a Mexican national, associated with the hotel in Agua Prieta, abandoned it and moved to Arizona — to hide out. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he told WND: “There were 13 Arabs there when I left. They were paying the coyotes 30 to 50,000 bucks, apiece, to transport them safely into the U.S. I became so frightened I left. They are genuinely bad hombres.” Since Carrillo had reported only nine Arabs at the hotel, it is unclear if the missing five Yemenis made it into the U.S. as reported
Potential terrorists, stealing across the border, had been predicted well in advance of the World Trade Center disaster. In a May 1, 2000, Report to Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, the General Accounting Office reported, “Alien smuggling is a significant and growing problem. Some are smuggled as part of a criminal or terrorist enterprise that can pose a serious threat to U.S. national security.”
LINK
======================
Just WHO is the West Helping in Libya? *UPDATED**
=========================
From Trevor Loudon of http://www.newzeal.blogspot.com
AND
http://keywiki.org
Just WHO is the West Helping in Libya?
From The Telegraph
 |
| Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi |
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.
In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited “around 25″ men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are “today are on the front lines in Adjabiya”.
Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but added that the “members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader”.
His revelations came even as Idriss Deby Itno, Chad’s president, said al-Qaeda had managed to pillage military arsenals in the Libyan rebel zone and acquired arms, “including surface-to-air missiles, which were then smuggled into their sanctuaries”.
Mr al-Hasidi admitted he had earlier fought against “the foreign invasion” in Afghanistan, before being “captured in 2002 in Peshwar, in Pakistan”. He was later handed over to the US, and then held in Libya before being released in 2008.
US and British government sources said Mr al-Hasidi was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, or LIFG, which killed dozens of Libyan troops in guerrilla attacks around Derna and Benghazi in 1995 and 1996.
Even though the LIFG is not part of the al-Qaeda organisation, the United States military’s West Point academy has said the two share an “increasingly co-operative relationship”. In 2007, documents captured by allied forces from the town of Sinjar, showed LIFG emmbers made up the second-largest cohort of foreign fighters in Iraq, after Saudi Arabia.
Earlier this month, al-Qaeda issued a call for supporters to back the Libyan rebellion, which it said would lead to the imposition of “the stage of Islam” in the country.
Yep, that’s what we all want. Western blood and treasure making the world safer for al-Qaeda.
LINK
=========================
=========================
Related Links: Read by clicking on Blue link below:
Jihadis who killed Americans get U.S. support in Libya
*************************
***UPDATE***
March 29, 2011
Read by clicking on blue link below
NATO Delays Taking Libya Command
AFP-
NATO reportedly puts planned takeover of Libya mission on hold as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. says White House hasn’t ruled out arming rebels battling Qaddafi forces.
=====================
Is this starting to “smell” and look like what happened in Afghanistan years ago? Training and arming Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda to fight the evil Russian invaders?
Turmoil in Arab World: Deepening Divisions or Turning a New Page?
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, former U.S. national security adviser: They are, of course, all connected in a way, but also, of course, each of them has its own independent dimension.
Still, I think we’re dealing with a phenomenon which, if not handled correctly, can either plunge the region into increasing violence, disarray, or alternatively, after a period of time, begins to settle and evolve and stabilize. So, how we play it and how our friends play it, and how the international community plays it, and ultimately also how the Arab League plays it, is absolutely, critically important.
Zbigniew Brzezinski held that post (U.S. National Security Advisor)for President Carter. He’s now a counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june11/overview_03-21.html
WHY hasn’t the Arab League been at the forefront of all of this? WHY isn’t the Arab League leading the involvement of the “No Fly Zone” (just approve the actions)? WHY did France lead the charge (was it OIL?)?
AMERICA…….ARE YOU WATCHING?
===================
Biden Locks Reporter in Closet
======================
March 28, 2011
Reporter Confined in Closet During Biden Fundraiser
Staffers with Vice President Joe Biden confined an Orlando Sentinel reporter in a closet this week to keep him from mingling with high-powered guests gathered for a Democratic fundraiser.
Reporter Scott Powers was the designated “pool reporter” for the vice president’s Wednesday visit to the massive Winter Park, Fla., home of developer and philanthropist Alan Ginsburg. The veep hadn’t arrived yet but most of the 150 guests (minimum $500 donation) had. Read more at drudgereport.com.
Biden Aide Apologizes After Reporter Kept in Storage Closet During Fundraiser
…Biden spokeswoman Elizabeth Alexander, responding to coverage of that account, said in a written statement Sunday that the decision to hold Powers there was a “mistake” and that the reporter has accepted her “unequivocal apology.” The apology was made shortly after the fundraiser.
“This was the unfortunate mistake of an inexperienced staffer and the vice president’s office has made sure it will never happen again,” she said. Read more at foxnews.com.
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/joe-biden/2011/03/27/biden-locks-reporter-closet#ixzz1Hu563w7W
=======================
Does this reek of false imprisonment to you?
False imprisonment:
The illegal confinement of one individual against his or her will by another individual in such a manner as to violate the confined individual’s right to be free from restraint of movement.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/False+Imprisonment
Were OTHER “pool reporters” detained in a storage closet?
Should charges be brought against the Biden staffer?
Did Biden have knowledge of this?
=======================
HEARING THIS WEEK OVER CHARGES OBAMA ADMIN. STONEWALLING INFO. REQUESTS
=================
March 28, 2011
By Jonathon M. Seidl
WASHINGTON (AP) — Insiders at the Homeland Security Department warned for months that senior Obama administration appointees were improperly delaying the releases of government files on politically sensitive topics as sought by citizens, journalists and watchdog groups under the Freedom of Information Act, according to uncensored emails newly obtained by The Associated Press.
The highly unusual political vetting was described as “meddling,“ ”crazy“ and ”bananas!” It is the subject of a congressional hearing later this week and an ongoing inquiry by the department’s inspector general.
Concerns came even from the official put in charge of submitting files to the political staff of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano for the secretive reviews. Chief Privacy Officer Mary Ellen Callahan, who was appointed by Napolitano, complained in late 2009 that the vetting process was burdensome and said she wanted to change it.
Callahan is expected to be a central witness during an oversight hearing Thursday by the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee. In emails, she warned that the Homeland Security Department might be sued over delays the political reviews were causing, and she hinted that a reporter might find out about the political scrutiny.
“This level of attention is CRAZY,” Callahan wrote in December 2009 to her then-deputy, Catherine Papoi. Callahan said she hoped someone outside the Obama administration would discover details of the political reviews, possibly by asking for evidence of them under the Freedom of Information Act itself: “I really really want someone to FOIA this whole damn process,” Callahan wrote.
Less than one week after Callahan’s email, on Dec. 21, the AP formally requested the records about the controversial political vetting. The agency ultimately turned over more than 995 pages of emails last summer, after a seven-month fight, and the AP wrote about the program. But the emails were heavily censored under provisions in the Freedom of Information Act allowing the government to withhold passages that describe internal policy-making deliberations.
The newly obtained versions of the same internal emails are not censored. Together with other confidential emails obtained by the AP for the first time, the files reflect deep unease about the reviews plus new concerns about whether Napolitano’s senior political advisers might have hidden embarrassing or sensitive emails that journalists and watchdog groups had requested.
Catherine Papoi
After an admitted al-Qaida operative tried to blow up a commercial airliner flying to Detroit on Christmas 2009, the AP asked for emails sent among Napolitano; her chief of staff, Noah Kroloff; deputy chief of staff Amy Shlossman; and four others. But the number of printed pages that Kroloff and Shlossman turned over to the FOIA unit was much less than what a computer search indicated should have existed, according to emails.
“When (the chief information office) pulled off the emails for these individuals, the page count is much higher, indicating that Shlossman and Kroloff possibly did not retrieve all the responsive emails or opted not to produce all responsive emails,” Papoi wrote in May to Callahan. “I think we have an obligation to compare the hard copy emails to those pulled by the CIO from the individuals’ email accounts to determine why the discrepancy.”
More recently, immigration rights advocates asked the Homeland Security Department for emails that political advisers exchanged with U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement about a controversial enforcement program. Inside the government, the search turned up emails described as “embarrassing, crude exchanges.” But the political advisers never turned over their own embarrassing emails; these were revealed only when the recipients elsewhere in the department provided them.
“Apparently these embarrassing exchanges didn’t get turned over when the (political) front office conducted its search but they did when the ICE employees copied on these exchanges coughed up the responsive records,” the FOIA unit’s associate director, William Holzerland, wrote in January to Papoi.
Papoi responded, “They don’t like to abide by the law or be reminded that they are breaking it.”
Continue reading here…….
=========================
Enlightenment
Education
Empowerment
“Responsibility to Protect”: The End of United States Sovereignty as WE Know It?
=====================
Posted with permission and assistance of Trevor Loudon of:
http://www.newzeal.blogspot.com
AND
http://keywiki.org
=============================
“Responsibility to Protect” – The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Why Did U.S. President Barack Obama order a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress – as he is constitutionally obliged to do?
Glenn Beck has explained President Obama’s decision to attack Libya in terms of the United Nations’ “Responsibility to Protect Doctrine”
Mr Beck is right.
According to Radio Free Europe
Those who justify the Libyan intervention on humanitarian grounds draw much of their logic from a concept which has dramatically gained ground over recent decades. The concept is known as “R2P,” shorthand for the world’s “Responsibility to Protect” civilians.
But what does this catchy little phrase mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications?
The United Nations reported in July 2009;
The Obama administration is supporting moves to implement an U.N. doctrine calling for collective military action to halt genocide. In a week-long debate on implementing the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, the U.S. joined a majority of U.N. countries, including Russia and China, in supporting implementation of the policy. The doctrine itself was approved in 2005 by more than 150 states including the U.S.
The doctrine specifies that diplomatic options such as internal conflict resolution, sanctions, and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, should be used first. If they don’t work, then a multi-national force approved by the Security Council would be deployed.
In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government’s behavior, and that government’s leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attackeded militarily.
The U.S. organization supporting this concept, named unsurprisingly Responsibility to Protect is affiliated to a financial planning firm, General Welfare Group LLC, based in Oak Brook Illinois.
According to the Responsibility to Protect website
The doctrine of the responsibility to protect was first elaborated in 2001 by a group of prominent international human rights leaders comprising the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. Under their mandate, the Commission sought to undertake the two-fold challenge of reconciling the international community’s responsibility to address massive violations of humanitarian norms and ensuring respect for the sovereign rights of nation states.
Led by Gareth Evans, former Foreign Minister of Australia, and Mohamed Sahnoun, Special Advisor to the UN Secretary-General, the Commission issued its report in December 2001. Focusing on the “right of humanitarian intervention”, this report examined when, if ever, it is appropriate for states for take coercive – and in particular military – action, against another state for the purpose of protecting populations at risk. In essence, the group concluded that when a group (or groups) of people is suffering from egregious acts of violence resulting from internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure, and the state where these crimes are taking place is unable or unwilling to act to prevent or protect its peoples, the international community has a moral duty to intervene to avert or halt these atrocities from occurring.
Gareth Evans, an Australian Fabian Socialist and Mohamed Sahnoun both worked with leftist financier George Soros in the highly influential International Crisis Group.
The “responsibility to protect” doctrine received renewed emphasis in 2004 when the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan created the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change. The Panel was established to “identify major threats facing the international community in the broad field of peace and security and to generate new ideas about policies and institutions aimed at preventing or confronting these challenges”.
Panelists included;
- Mary Chinery-Hess (Ghana), Vice-Chairman, National Development Planning Commission of Ghana and former Deputy Director-General, International Labour Organization;
- Gareth Evans (Australia), President of the International Crisis Group and former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Australia;
- Amre Moussa (Egypt), Secretary-General of the League of Arab States;
- Yevgeny Primakov (Russia), former Prime Minister of the Russian Federation;
- Qian Oichen (China), former Vice Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China;
- Nafis Sadik (Pakistan), former Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund;
- Salim Ahmed Salim (United Republic of Tanzania), former Secretary-General of the Organization of African Unity; and
- Brent Snowcroft (United States), former Lt. General in the United States Air Force and United States National Security Adviser.
With respect to “Responsibility to Protect”, the Panel endorsed this “emerging norm”, stating that:
There is a growing recognition that the issue is not the “right to intervene” of any State, but the “responsibility to protect” of every State when it comes to people suffering from avoidable catastrophe mass murder and rape, ethnic cleansing by forcible expulsion and terror, and deliberate starvation and exposure to disease. And there is a growing acceptance that while sovereign Governments have the primary responsibility to protect their own citizens from such catastrophes, when they are unable or unwilling to do so that responsibility should be taken up by the wider international community… ”
We endorse the emerging norm that there is a collective international responsibility to protect, exercisable by the Security Council authorizing military intervention as a last resort, in the event of genocide and other large scale killing, ethnic cleansing or serious violations of international humanitarian law which sovereign Governments have proved powerless or unwilling to prevent.”
In September 2005, “Responsibility to Protect” “was once again enlivened”, this time with the “full support of the international community”. At the 60th session of the U.N. General Assembly gathering, 191 heads of state and government representatives unanimously endorsed a resolution supporting the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. This resolution laid the foundations for a new global moral compact between every State and every population on earth. As adopted, atrocity crimes “ genocide, crimes against humanity (including ethnic cleansing) and war crimes” – were considered a universal concern and therefore were responsibility of the international community.
During the 2005 General Assembly World Summit, world leaders stated:
Each and individual State has the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This responsibility entails the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means. We accept that responsibility and will act in accordance with it. The international community should, as appropriate, encourage and help States to exercise this responsibility and support the United Nations in establishing an early warning capability.
The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
The support of the U.S. was of course crucial for this radical new approach to international relations. The U.S. under President George Bush would not even sign up to the International Criminal Court, a key component of the proposed new order.
Therefore the U.S. Responsibility to Protect organization re-committed itself to its goals. The mission of Responsibility to Protect is
- To convince the American people and its leaders to embrace the norm of the responsibility to protect as a domestic and foreign policy priority.
- To convince our political leadership that the US must join the International Criminal Court.
- To convince our political leadership to empower the UN and the ICC with a legitimate and effective deterrent and enforcement mechanism – an International Marshals Service – a standing international police force to arrest atrocity crimes indictees.
Responsibility to Protect knew they would get nowhere under Bush, but viewed the 2008 elections as an opportunity for change.
The upcoming 2008 presidential election and the general debate that will precede provide an opportunity to bring this new norm in the public and leaders’ discourse over America’s domestic and foreign policy, and to get our nation to take the necessary bold steps that are called for to implement this bold principle.
Clearly, the Obama Administration has proven far more sympathetic to Responsibility to Protect’s agenda than was that of President Bush.
While few seem to realize the significance of the new doctrine, Responsibility to Protect convenor Richard H. Cooper fully understands its transformational potential.
Cooper writes on the Responsibility to Protect website
Yet as I write, a quiet revolution is under way. In September 2005, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a declaration – the World Summit Outcome – whereby each and every State in the world accepted its responsibility to protect populations from genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and war crimes. The declaration also emphasizes that if a State relinquishes its responsibility to protect – whether by will or lack of capacity – this responsibility must be borne by the international community that can decide to intervene as a last resort. In the face of mass atrocities, every nation and thus every people on earth have pledged to be our brothers’ keepers. Without fanfare and with little notice, the obsolete principles underlying the Westphalian ordering of world affairs have been dramatically rewritten. We can no longer hide behind State sovereignty, a 400-years old shield, to excuse the shameful reflex and ongoing practice of remaining passive in the face of the most outrageous behaviors…
“We can no longer hide behind state sovereignty.“
Let that sink in reader. That is what this is all about.
“Responsibility to Protect” means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state’s legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed “rogue” nation – does Israel spring to mind?
“Responsibility to Protect” – three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world.
LINK
=========================
Enlightenment
Education
Empowerment
