Obama visits Dresden
Posted June 5, 2009 by jolynn480

The latter part of this article really pissed me off. His wife AND daughters flew into Paris for a "holiday." I really think Obama is dumb (as in mentally). Did he not realize the backlash of his "date night"-- How else can he think it's A-OK to waste more taxpayer money?

DRESDEN, Germany - President Obama toured a World War II concentration camp Friday after prodding the international community to redouble efforts toward separate Israeli and Palestinian states in hopes of resolving a conflict fueled by the Jewish nation's post-Holocaust creation.

"These sites have not lost their horror with the passage of time," Obama said after seeing crematory ovens, barbed-wire fences and guard towers at the Buchenwald camp. "More than half a century later, our grief and our outrage over what happened have not diminished."

Earlier in Dresden, alongside German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the U.S. president pressed for progress toward Mideast peace, saying: "The moment is now for us to act."

He added: "The United States can't force peace upon the parties" but America has "at least created the space, the atmosphere, in which talks can restart."

The president also announced he was dispatching special envoy George J. Mitchell to the region next week to follow up on his speech in Cairo a day earlier, in which he called for both Israelis and Palestinians to make concessions in the standoff.

Fresh from visits to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Obama said that while regional and worldwide powers must help achieve peace, responsibility ultimately falls to Israelis and Palestinians to reach an accord.

He said Israel must live up to commitments it made under the so-called "Road Map" peace outline to stop constructing settlements, adding: "I recognize the very difficult politics in Israel of getting that done." He also said Palestinians must control violence-inciting acts and statements, saying Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas "has made progress on this issue, but not enough."

Merkel, for her part, promised to cooperate on the long-sought goal. She said the two leaders discussed a time frame for a peace process but did not elaborate.

"With the new American government and the president, there is a truly unique opportunity to revive this peace process or, let us put this very cautiously, this process of negotiations," Merkel said.

Added Obama: "I think the moment is now for us to act on what we all know to be the truth, which is each side is going to have to make some difficult compromises."

While Obama did not address benchmarks, he told international reporters Thursday in Egypt: "I don't want to impose an artificial timeline." He added: "When things stall, everybody knows it ... I want to have a sense of movement and progress."

Touching Friday on an issue that has strained American-German relations, Obama also said he didn't seek any commitments from Germany to take a dozen terrorism suspects when the United States closes its prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. German officials have said most should be resettled in America.

Merkel said her country is prepared to "constructively contribute" to U.S. closure efforts and said she was confident of eventually reaching a "common solution" on the prisoners' fate.

The two leaders spoke to reporters after meeting privately at a castle in this east Germany city with bitter wartime memories. Starting on the night of Feb. 13, 1945, first British, then American bombers pounded the defenseless and largely non-strategic architectural gem, igniting a firestorm in which 25,000 people died -- and in so doing, creating an enduring controversy.

Obama did not address the firebombing, and was in Dresden at the invitation of Merkel, who hails from her country's East.

Later, Obama became the first U.S. president to visit the Buchenwald concentration camp. An estimated 56,000 people, including some 11,000 Jews, perished there at the hands of Nazis. The stop was personal. A great-uncle helped liberate a nearby satellite camp, Ohrdruf, in early April 1945, days before other U.S. Army units overran Buchenwald.

Accompanying Obama was Merkel; Elie Wiesel, a 1986 Nobel Peace Prize winner, author and Holocaust survivor whose father died of starvation at Buchenwald three months before liberation; and Bertrand Herz, another Buchenwald survivor. Each one laid a long-stemmed white rose at a steel memorial. They were later joined by Volkhard Knigge, head of the Buchenwald memorial.

"To this day, there are those who insist the Holocaust never happened," Obama said. "This place is the ultimate rebuke to such thoughts, a reminder of our duty to confront those who would tell lies about our history."

"This place teaches us that we must be ever vigilant about the spread of evil in our own time," Obama added.

It was a pointed message to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has expressed doubts that 6 million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis.

"He should make his own visit" to Buchenwald, Obama told NBC in an interview earlier Friday. He added: "I have no patience for people who would deny history."

Separately, the president told reporters: "The international community has an obligation, even when it's inconvenient, to act when genocide is occurring."

After the tour, Obama was flying to Landstuhl medical hospital, also in Germany, for private visits with U.S. troops recovering from wounds sustained in Iraq and Afghanistan. His day was ending in Paris, with a reunion with his wife, Michelle, and daughters Malia and Sasha, who planned a brief holiday in the City of Light after Saturday's commemoration of the 65th anniversary of the Allies' D-Day invasion in France.

Network Operations
The Obama Deception
Posted June 3, 2009 by Network Operations

“The Obama Deception” is a documentary film about why and how the economy has fallen, and what the character Obama is really playing in all of this. It’s spelled out very clearly.

Obama has gone 180 degrees on virtually EVERY promise he has made to the American People. There is some powerful factual research in between the “Trilateral Commission”, etc. conspiracy stuff. But if you want to know the future, this film is a must see.

-Above Review from

The truth is that this is a prime example on why you must work hard at waking up fellow Americans to third Party options. If you truly want change it is time to push for a National Socialist victory. IF not, puppets like Obama, Bush and those that continue to support a system that has been compromised in that the democracy which was supposed to be for the people has been purchased by the highest bidders. Democracy has failed because it can be purchased thus controlled while giving the average people a sense of part in the government that has full control over them and has no true interest in their future or well being.

While the United States pours billions of your tax dollars into Israel each year they have a hard time saving General Motors - a corporation which served this nation in time of war and is responsible for the lives or millions of Americans that work for the corporation. Rather then investing in General Motors and making the Federal Government a shareholder in which they will have power in making sure financial direction is kept on course - they would instead like to give your tax money to Israel, illegal wars for their sponsors and other such non-sense such as pension raises for Congressmen - "The Club".

Watch this film. Some of it is a bit may be conspiracy theory but what is a conspiracy but a label those being targeted use to try and cover up such evidence. No matter, if you want a future for America you must work hard at pushing for a Third Party solution such as National Socialist party or give up now. Thomas Jefferson would be sick if he were alive today to see what American government under the control of the Democrats and Republicans both compromised by the ability to be purchased by the highest bidders each election. RNC = DNC ... DNC = RNC it is one and the same. So, push away those that waste time and are immature as this is YOUR future .... spend your energy on securing tomorrow!

<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>


<TABLE style="WIDTH: 100%"> <TBODY> <TR> <TD style="WIDTH: 5%"></TD> <TD class=color style="FONT-SIZE: 8pt; WIDTH: 95%">

Ok, Hollywood is trying to stamp out whites!!!!  It goes back to Will Smith playing "Wild Wild West" and now his son is going to play the "Karate Kid" re-make, what a lame attempt he did taking over the awsome roll of Vincent Price in his shitty film I am Legend". did you notice the bad guys were all whte skinheads?? So now we have Jamie Fox the guy who played Ray Charles (was fitting for him) but now he is set to play FRANK SINATRA. If there are any rreal mafia guys out there - Im sure you are gearing up for cement shoes or something. Frank must be turning!!!  NO MORE OLE BLUE EYES.


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama tapped federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice.

If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Two officials described Obama's decision on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.

Administration officials say Sotomayor, with 17 years on the bench, would bring more judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice confirmed in the past 70 years. <script type="text/javascript">OAS_AD('ArticleFlex_1')</script> <script style="display: none;" text="text/javascript" src=";;cookie=info;loc=100;tar get=_blank;grp=186082;misc=1243347150773"></script>

A formal announcement was expected at midmorning.

Obama had said publicly he wanted a justice who combined intellect and empathy — the ability to understand the troubles of everyday Americans.

While Republican critics chafed at that, Democrats hold a large majority in the Senate, and barring the unexpected, Sotomayor's confirmation should be assured. If approved, she would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the current court.

In one of Sotomayor's most notable decisions, as an appellate judge she sided last year with the city of New Haven, Conn., in a discrimination case brought by white firefighters. The city threw out results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough. Ironically, that case is now before the Supreme Court.

That ruling has already drawn criticism from conservatives, and is likely to play a role in her confirmation hearing.

Sotomayor is a self-described “Newyorkrican” who grew up in a Bronx housing project after her parents moved to New York from Puerto Rico. She has dealt with diabetes since age 8 and lost her father at age 9, growing up under the care of her mother in humble surroundings. As a girl, inspired by the Perry Mason television show, she knew she wanted to be a judge.

A graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School, a former prosecutor and private attorney, Sotomayor became a federal judge for the Southern District of New York in 1992. She became an appeals judge in 1998 for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which covers New York, Vermont and Connecticut.

As a judge, she has a bipartisan pedigree. She was first appointed by a Republican, President George H.W. Bush, and won Senate confirmation without dissent. She was named an appeals judge by President Bill Clinton in 1997.

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, “I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it.”

In one of her most memorable rulings as federal district judge, Sotomayor essentially salvaged baseball in 1995, ruling with players over owners in a labor strike that had led to the cancellation of the World Series.

Obama's nomination is the first by a Democratic president in 15 years.

His announcement also leaves the Senate four months — more than enough by traditional standards — to complete confirmation proceedings before the Court begins its next term in the fall.

Republicans have issued conflicting signals about their intentions. While some have threatened filibusters if they deemed Obama's pick too liberal, others have said that is unlikely.

Given Sotomayor's selection, any decision to filibuster would presumably carry political risks — Hispanics are the fastest-growing segment of the population and an increasingly important one politically.

One conservative group did not wait for the formal announcement. Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network, issued a statement calling Sotomayor a “liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written.”

Abortion rights have been a flashpoint in several recent Supreme Court confirmations, although Sotomayor has not authored any controversial rulings on the subject.

As a federal appeals court judge in 2002, Sotomayor ruled against an abortion rights group that had challenged a government policy prohibiting foreign organizations receiving U.S. funds from performing or supporting abortions.

In her opinion, Sotomayor wrote that the government was free to favor the anti-abortion position over a pro-choice position when public funds are involved.

Sotomayor's elevation to the appeals court was delayed by Republicans, in part out of concerns she might someday be selected for the Supreme Court. She was ultimately confirmed for the appeals court in 1998 on a 68-28 vote, gathering some Republican support.

Among those voting against her was Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, now the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee that will hold sway over her confirmation.

“I'd say the stakes are higher for the Supreme Court,” he said recently. “The Supreme Court sometimes seems to be acting as a continuing constitutional convention, so I am concerned about that.” He said Sotomayor would be entitled to a “fair hearing” if nominated.

Sotomayor possesses credentials Sessions said he wanted in a pick for the high court — years of experience on the bench. Obama had talked openly about the upside of choosing someone outside the judiciary — every single current justice is a former federal appeals court judge — but passed on at least two serious candidates who had never been judges.

Sotomayor has spoken openly about her pride in being Latina, and that personal experiences “affect the facts that judges choose to see.”

“I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging,” she said in a speech in 2002. “But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.”

From the moment Souter announced his resignation, it was widely assumed Obama would select a woman to replace him, and perhaps a Hispanic as well.

Others known to have been considered included federal appeals judge Diane Wood, who was a colleague of the president's at the University of Chicago law school, as well as two members of his administration, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Solicitor General-nominee Elena Kagan.

If confirmed, Sotomayor is unlikely to alter the ideological balance of the court, since Souter generally sides with the so-called liberals on key 5-4 rulings.

But at 54, she is a generation younger that Souter, and liberal outside groups hope she would provide a counterpoint to some of the sharply worded conservative rulings.

Obama came to office at a time when several potential vacancies loomed on the high court. Justice John Paul Stevens at is 89, and Ginsburg recently underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer.

Tags: Politics, Obama, Law

Hmmm...I wonder who he really has in mind. You don't could be...Folk like us? Nah...he's "The Savior" after all.

NY Times article

WASHINGTON — President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House on Wednesday that he was mulling the need for a “preventive detention” system that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried, two participants in the private session said.

The discussion, in a 90-minute meeting in the Cabinet Room that included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and other top administration officials, came on the eve of a much-anticipated speech Mr. Obama is to give Thursday on a number of thorny national security matters, including his promise to close the detention center at the naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Human rights advocates are growing deeply uneasy with Mr. Obama’s stance on these issues, especially his recent move to block the release of photographs showing abuse of detainees, and his announcement that he is willing to try terrorism suspects in military commissions — a concept he criticized bitterly as a presidential candidate.

The two participants, outsiders who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the session was intended to be off the record, said they left the meeting dismayed.

They said Mr. Obama told them he was thinking about “the long game” — how to establish a legal system that would endure for future presidents. He raised the issue of preventive detention himself, but made clear that he had not made a decision on it. Several senior White House officials did not respond to requests for comment on the outsiders’ accounts.

“He was almost ruminating over the need for statutory change to the laws so that we can deal with individuals who we can’t charge and detain,” one participant said. “We’ve known this is on the horizon for many years, but we were able to hold it off with George Bush. The idea that we might find ourselves fighting with the Obama administration over these powers is really stunning.”

The other participant said Mr. Obama did not seem to be thinking about preventive detention for terrorism suspects now held at Guantánamo Bay, but rather for those captured in the future, in settings other than a legitimate battlefield like Afghanistan. “The issue is,” the participant said, “What are the options left open to a future president?”

Mr. Obama did not specify how he intended to deal with Guantánamo detainees who posed a threat and could not be tried, nor did he share the contents of Thursday’s speech, the participants said.

He will deliver the speech at a site laden with symbolism — the National Archives, home to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Across town, his biggest Republican critic, former Vice President Dick Cheney, will deliver a speech at the American Enterprise Institute.

Mr. Cheney and other hawkish critics have sought to portray Mr. Obama as weak on terror, and their argument seems to be catching on with the public. On Tuesday, Senate Democrats, in a clear rebuke to the White House, blocked the $80 million Mr. Obama had requested in financing to close the Guantánamo prison.

The lawmakers say they want a detailed plan before releasing the money; there is deep opposition on Capitol Hill to housing terrorism suspects inside the United States.

“He needs to convince people that he’s got a game plan that will protect us as well as be fair to the detainees,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who agrees with Mr. Obama that the prison should be closed. “If he can do that, then we’re back on track. But if he doesn’t make that case, then we’ve lost control of this debate.”

But Mr. Obama will not use the speech to provide the details lawmakers want.

“What it’s not going to be is a prescriptive speech,” said David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser. “The president wants to take some time and put this whole issue in perspective to identify what the challenges are and how he will approach dealing with them.”

Tags: Obama
Displaying 21 to 25 of 52