Daily Thought Pad: state department

Showing posts with label state department. Show all posts

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Hillaryville Imploding

A brewing scandal that potentially suggests some degree of State Department mismanagement during Hillary Clinton’s tenure could hurt not only her legacy, but also prospects for a 2016 presidential bid, some say. Others just say prosecution(s) are in order.

Photo: As (obvious) recent face work has been completed, a Twitter account has been opened, and the image rebuilding process is underway for another Hillary Clinton run for the presidency (2016), the State Department and Ms. Hillary’s record continues to implode.

By Marion Algier – AskMarion

The latest scandal and cover-up, which we will call State Dept-gate for now, started with a State Department memo alleging involvement with prostitution and drugs.

The timeline surrounding the allegations in said memo places the incidents during former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's tenure, opening the possibility that a widening scandal might taint both her record and her possible political aspirations. Clinton has also taken heat for the department's response to the September 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, but has managed to avoid intense scrutiny or prosecution, at least thus far.

Hillary Clinton's new Twitter page

Having just opened a Twitter account, Hillary Clinton Tweets the future is 'TBD' Some would respond to that with… “Only if the American people and the Congress are stupid will there be anything to announce but jail time or a private life!

The memo itself, purportedly written by Ambassador Larry Dinger, describes some of the information as coming from office chatter.

$Photos: Clinton\'s political career$

Hillary Photo (on a good day): Prior to recent ‘image rebuild’ project

"Sometimes the sources are one or more agents who became aware of the case from colleagues in what, given cubicles, can be a collegial environment," the memo says.

Regarding the latest allegations, supported by documents provided to CNN by a lawyer for a whistle-blower who is a former senior inspector general investigator, they include:

• An active U.S. ambassador "routinely ditched his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children," the memo says. The ambassador's protective detail and others "were well aware of the behavior," the memo asserts. When a diplomatic security officer tried to investigate, undersecretary of state for management Patrick Kennedy allegedly ordered the investigator "not to open a formal investigation."

On Tuesday, CNN obtained a statement from the ambassador, who vigorously denied the allegations, calling them "baseless."

A source close to the investigation of the ambassador told CNN that the ambassador's security detail reported to the inspector general that the ambassador would leave his house at night without notifying the detail. The detail followed the ambassador and saw the ambassador once go to a park that's known for illegal activity, the source told CNN. The detail said they never witnessed the ambassador engage in any sexual activity, the source said.

The ambassador went to Washington and was asked what he was doing and he denied any wrongdoing, the source told CNN. The ambassador explained that sometimes he fights with his wife, needs air and he goes for a walk in the park because he likes it.

Kennedy also issued a statement Tuesday, saying it is his responsibility "to make sure the department and all of our employees -- no matter their rank -- are held to the highest standard, and I have never once interfered, nor would I condone interfering, in any investigation."

• A State Department security official in Beirut allegedly "engaged in sexual assaults" against foreign nationals working as embassy guards. The security official, the Office of the Inspector General says, was also accused of committing "similar assaults during assignments in Baghdad, and possibly Khartoum and Monrovia." The office's memo says that an inspector general's investigator who went to Beirut to try to conduct an investigation was not given enough time to complete the job.

• A member of Clinton's security detail allegedly "engaged prostitutes while on official trips in foreign countries." The inspector general's agent assigned to investigate "concluded" that the "prostitution problem was endemic."

• In Iraq, an "underground drug ring" may have been operating near the U.S. Embassy and "supplying" drugs to State Department security contractors, but an agent sent to investigate the allegations was prevented from completing the job.

The allegations were first reported Monday by CBS.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki responded Monday.

"We hold all employees to the highest standards," she said. "We take allegations of misconduct seriously and we investigate thoroughly. All cases mentioned in the CBS report were thoroughly investigated and under investigation, and the department continues to take action."

During a Tuesday State briefing with reporters, Psaki reiterated that the memo contains "unsubstantiated allegations" and that some cases are ongoing and some are closed. But she would not, though repeatedly pressed by reporters, specify exactly which ones were open or closed.

"As a matter of policy, I'm not going to talk" about specific cases, she said.

"We take every allegation seriously," Psaki added. "We are seeing through the process."

On Tuesday, Nicholas Merrill, a spokesman for Hillary Clinton, said Clinton was completely unaware of any of the investigations mentioned in the Office of the Inspector General's reports and memos, including the case involving her personal security detail allegedly soliciting prostitutes.

"We learned of it from the media and don't know anything beyond what's been reported," Merrill told CNN in a written statement.

Photos: Hillary during Congressional Benghazi Hearing time frame… Is there any question that Hillary wants to run in 2016?

Clinton officially left her post in February, no doubt hoping to distance herself from her mess at the State Department?!?

Also Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Ed Royce, R-California, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he has asked his staff to begin an investigation into the allegations, and sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry demanding an explanation.

"The notion that any or all of these cases would not be investigated thoroughly by the Department is unacceptable," Royce wrote in his letter to Kerry.

CNN obtained a draft, dated December 2012, of a report by the inspector general's office evaluating the performance of the department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security Special Investigations Division.

The report says that the bureau "lacks a firewall" that would preclude higher-ups from "exercising undue influence in particular cases."

The bureau doesn't have a manual with approved guidelines on how to investigate cases, the report also says. Investigators with the inspector general's office "discovered uncertainty" among state agents about how to conduct thorough investigations, and noted that not going through the proper mechanisms can "ruin" a potential criminal investigation.

The report also calls the department's Criminal Investigations Division "unwieldy" and says that "frequent agent turnover" makes it harder for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security to conduct investigations.

The inspector general's office published a February 2013 final report whose key findings are, largely, the same as stated in the December 2012 draft.

The division's current management structure, the report says, does not "foster independence from career pressures and creates significant potential for undue influence, favoritism, and potential retribution.

But things for the State Department just keep getting worse.

Townhall: First we learned from CBS News that Department official covered up and interfered with inspector general investigations of sexual misconduct, including the soliciation of prostitutes by an ambassador. Then we learned those sexual solicitations involved minors. Now, we're learning State Department officials covered up the shooting of four Hondurans.

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

State Department Blocks Lawyers From Representing Benghazi Whistle-blowers

Video: State Department Blocks Lawyers From Representing Benghazi Whistle-blowers

Gateway Pundit:

It’s an Obama world…

According to Joe DiGenova the Obama State Department has blocked lawyers from representing Benghazi whistle-blowers.
WMAL reported:

The State Department is blocking local lawyer Victoria Toensing from representing whistleblowers on the 2012 Benghazi attacks, according to her legal partner and husband Joe DiGenova. Teonsing wants to represent such whistleblowers at the upcoming Congressional hearings about the Benghazi case.

“The Department of State is refusing to grant clearances to Victoria and other people who want to represent the whistleblowers in an attempt to prevent the testimony,” DiGenova said.

INTIMIDATION: State Dept, CIA threatening whistleblowers their careers are over if they come forward on Benghazi

Obama administration officials threatened whistle-blowers on Benghazi, lawyer says

Obama Admin: Our Benghazi Probe ‘Should Be Enough’ For Congress

HUGE: Benghazi whistleblower says admin is lying, multiple assets could have aided our guys by 2nd attack

Benghazi: Survivors Reportedly Now Speaking To Congressional Investigators

6-Month Benghazi Attack Anniversary… Where is the media coverage? The answers? And Where are the Survivors?

Technorati Tags: State Department,smoke and mirrors,lies,truth,demand the truth,manipulation of the public,Benghazi,Whistleblower,Benghazigate,Benghazi survivors,Obamaland,Joe DiGenova,Whistleblowers,Hillary Clinton,BHO,Christopher Stevens,Libya

Tuesday, March 5, 2013

What ever happened to Nidal Hasan? And what is Education Diplomacy?

Exclusive: Joseph Farah asks why 'mass-murdering enemy of America is still breathing'

Hasan-283x275[1] WND: Are you one of those Americans who wonders what happened to the Islamist terrorist who massacred U.S. soldiers at Fort Hood more than three years ago?

Or maybe you’re one of those Americans who assumes Maj. Nidal Hasan long ago assumed room temperature after being summarily executed for murdering 13 and wounding more than 32, while screaming “Allahu Akbar,” or “Allah is greatest.”

There hasn’t been much news on the case. The Big Media would obviously like Americans to forget about this case. The government would like you to forget about it, too. In fact, Attorney General Eric Holder declined to press terrorism charges against Hasan, inexplicably labeling the worst terrorist attack in America since 9/11 as a case of “workplace violence.”

As a result of this callous, politically motivated and criminally devious decision, the victims of Hasan’s shooting spree will not be entitled to the benefits of soldiers wounded or killed in the line of duty.

There is some news on the Nidal Hasan front.

Last week, the Army psychiatrist’s attorneys asked the judge in the case to move his murder trial off the Fort Hood post. They also want changes in the military jury pool. Since, under military judicial rules, one cannot plead guilty to a capital offense, Hasan’s attorneys are asking whether the judge would permit him to plead guilty to lesser charges that would not carry the death penalty.

Are you as confused as I am why this monster has not yet faced trial?

Are you as confused as I am why this mass-murdering enemy of America is still breathing?

Are you as confused as I am about why he’s being treated with kid gloves rather than speedy justice?

Consider this: The same administration that characterized Hasan’s murderous rampage and bloodbath against unarmed soldiers as “workplace violence” targeted for assassination one of his accomplices in crime in a drone attack in Yemen, even though he was technically an American citizen entitled to due process and trial by a jury of his peers just like Hasan.

For at least six months prior to Hasan’s attack on Fort Hood, which amazingly was “gun-free zone” virtually inviting such an assault, the Army psychiatrist was behaving bizarrely enough to have been considered a threat. In postings on the Internet, he likened a suicide bomber who kills women and children to a soldier who throws himself on a grenade to give his life in a “noble cause.”

Intelligence officials also intercepted at least 18 emails between Hasan and the radical American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Hasan told al-Awlaki in one of the emails, “I can’t wait to join you” in paradise. He also asked al-Awlaki whether it was appropriate to kill innocents in a suicide attack, when jihad was acceptable and how to transfer funds without attracting government notice.

It was al-Awlaki who was summarily dispatched to meet Allah in the Yemen drone attack.

Isn’t there something bizarre about the different forms of “justice” applied to these two jihadi friends and cohorts?

Al-Awlaki was accused of killing no one. But he was targeted for assassination.

Hasan murdered in cold blood 13 and attempted to kill 45 and he’s been sitting in a comfortable jail cell for more than three years since shocking the Nov. 5, 2009, massacre. He’s been treated deferentially by Col. Tara Anderson, the new judge in the case. Hasan sports a traditional Islamic beard, which is against Army regulations. But the judge said she would not force Hasan to comply with the same rules that apply to every other soldier who hasn’t murdered 13 and attempted to murder 45.

Before the shooting attack, Hasan was clean shaven. Only after the massacre has Hasan claimed he has the right to wear a beard, in direct contradiction of Army regulations which require a soldier to be clean shaven unless there is a medical reason.

Hasan told the previous judge in the case: “Your honor, in the name of almighty Allah, I am a Muslim. I believe that my religion requires me to wear a beard.”

The judge ruled against Hasan’s right to wear a beard. He was summarily replaced as the judge in the case.

The rules are bent for Hasan, but not for his victims.

Staff Sgt. Shawn Manning was shot six times in the attack, yet he is denied the same benefits a soldier shot in a similar action overseas would receive, thanks to Holder’s designation of the massacre as a matter of “workplace violence.”

Fellow soldiers that day “were killed and wounded by … somebody who was there that day to kill soldiers, to prevent them from deploying,” Manning said. “And if that’s not an act of war, an act of terrorism, I don’t know what is.”

But it gets worse: Survivors and their family are forced to watch while Hasan continues to receive a paycheck and medical benefits from the military.

Col. John Eidsmoe, a former JAG officer and author of “Historical and Theological Foundations of Law,” told WND military justice normally moves much swifter.

“It is definitely not normal for capital cases in the military to take three years to come to trial,” Eidsmoe said. “In the civilian realm, criminal defense attorney may have 100 or so cases they are working on at any given time. In the military you maybe have half a dozen you working on. This gives you more time to devote to the cases you working on, making the whole system move much faster.”

For instance, on Dec. 13, Army Sgt. Vincinte Jackson was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for killing 28-year-old Spc. Brandy Fonteneaux, a fellow soldier at Fort Carson in Colorado. The murder occurred on Jan. 8, 2012.

In July 2011, Sgt. Anthony Silva was shot to death in Denver. Silva was spending the evening at a motel and was waiting for his father to pick him up. Silva was shot and killed by Ricky Scott, who was convicted on one count of first-degree murder on Dec. 14, a year and a half after the shooting.

Why is Hasan getting the benefit where there is no doubt?

That’s the way the wheels of justice roll under Barack Obama. Things are just a little unpredictable. One jihadi murders 13 and attempts to murder 45 American soldiers and is treated like a prince. Another jihadi American citizen who killed no one is ordered to be killed by Obama in a drone attack.

Go figure.

STATE DEPT. TO RAMP UP "EDUCATION DIPLOMACY" BRINGING MORE ISLAMIC SCHOLARS & MUSLIM STUDENTS TO USA

The idea of “education diplomacy” has “really arrived” at the highest levels of American foreign policy, a US State Department official has told an international higher education conference.

Ms. Curtis said that the issue was “advancing on three fronts”: countries increasingly wanting to send their students for a US education; wanting to bring in more American faculty to internationalize campuses; and seeking to build higher education systems in line with the US model to “replicate some of the great work we’ve been doing in our country”.

She also said programs to bring students and scholars from Muslim-majority countries into the US had been “ramped up”.

WHAT A "GREAT IDEA'! LET'S RAMP UP "EDUCATION DIPLOMACY" SO MORE JIHADIS AND HATE PREACHING IMAMS CAN SNEAK INTO OUR COUNTRY.

Technorati Tags: Islam,Jihad,Education Diplomacy,liberal media spin,workplace violence,wake-up Americans,wake-up Christians and Jews,Nidal Hasan,Anwar al-Awlaki,manipulation of the public,WND,wake-up Patriots,loss of common sense,Obamaland,Fort Hood,terrorism,State Department

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Hillary Clinton Aide Tells Reporter To “F _ck Off” And “Have A Good Life”

BuzzFeed Politics:

As the State Department's story about what happened in Benghazi crumbles, Clinton's personal spokesperson, Philippe Reines, loses his temper. “Have a good day. And by good day I mean Fuck Off.”

Clinton and Reines in China in 2010. Source: farm5.staticflickr.com

Posted Sep 24, 2012 1:11pm EDT

On Sunday morning, BuzzFeed correspondent Michael Hastings emailed Philippe Reines, Hillary Clinton's longtime aide and personal spokesman at the State Department, asking a series of pointed questions about State's handling of the Benghazi fiasco, and Reines' over-the-top attack on CNN. The emails quickly got personal, with Reines calling Hastings an "unmitigated asshole" before an exchange of harsh words on both sides.

The email chain concluded with Reines writing that Hastings should "Fuck Off" and "Have a good life."

The full exchange (with one typo fixed) is below.

From: Michael Hastings
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 10:32 AM
To: Reines, Philippe I
Subject: Request for comment

Hey Philippe:

A few quick questions for you. Why didn't the State Department search the consulate and find AMB Steven's diary first? What other potential valuable intelligence was left behind that could have been picked up by apparently anyone searching the grounds? Was any classified or top secret material also left? Do you still feel that there was adequate security at the compound, considering it was not only overrun but sensitive personal effects and possibly other intelligence remained out for anyone passing through to pick up? Your statement on CNN sounded pretty defensive--do you think it's the media's responsibility to help secure State Department assets overseas after they've been attacked?

Let me know if you have a second.Michael

______________________________________
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Reines, Philippe I wrote:

Good morning Michael

I'm adding my colleague Toria Nuland who I believe you know. She has addressed much of your questions below during her daily press briefings, so I'll let her weigh in to remind you of what's already been thoroughly answered. As far as the tone of my email, I think you're misreading mine as much as I'm misreading yours as being needlessly antagonistic.

But on your questions pertaining to CNN's handling of the diary:

• You know that all USG personnel were evacuated from Benghazi after the attack. So I'm not sure why you're asking why State didn't find the diary first.

• On material, I'll let Toria reiterate, but the answer is no. Though you might want to ask CNN if they took anything else from the crime scene that they haven't yet told anyone about.

• In terms of the media's responsibility, I'll start with the outlandish statement that I believe the media does have responsibilities. Your question seems to imply they have none and any expectation of responsible behavior is too much to ask. To be specific:I believe CNN had the responsibility to act as human beings and be sensitive to their loss when they first approached the family.

I believe CNN had a responsibility to not make promises to the family it would not keep.

If that's too much to ask, I believe CNN had at the very least a responsibility to make their intentions on the use of Chris's diary clear to the family from the outset.

I believe CNN had a responsibility to not deceive its own viewers for more than 48 hours on the source of their reporting, using convoluted attribution they themselves had to clarify, before admitting it was the diary they were relying on.

I believe that when they finally did admit to using Chris's diary, they had a responsibility to their viewers and to the family to explain why they broke their pledge.

I believe that many within CNN agree with everything I'm saying.

More than anything else, I believe that CNN - since they had already read every word of the diary before calling the family on Friday the 14th, the day Chris's remains were returned home - had all the information they needed at that point to make an editorial decision on whether the contents of the diary compelled them to report on it. I believe the time to invoke their standards to justify using the diary came six days late. I believe that CNN, if they felt strongly that they had an obligation to use the diary should never have presented the family with a choice in the first place that they'd later disregard.

I don't believe that CNN should get credit for issuing a flimsy confession only when caught with their hands in the cookie jar. I believe the statement CNN issued late last night, 24 hours after Anderson Cooper's ill-conceived statement on air, basically says they agreed not to use it until they didn't feel like it anymore, and only admitted to it when they were about to be caught. I don't believe that's much of a profile in courage.

Lastly, I believe that you of all people, after famously being accused of violating agreed upon ground rules and questionable sourcing, would agree that it's important for a news organization to maintain its own integrity if it is to be trusted. That begins with keeping its word. If you can't manage that, then don't give it.

I realize that the way this works is that you only you get to ask me questions, but I have one for you: if you were in Benghazi, went to the scene of the attack, found the ambassador's diary, read every word of it, would you have called them and asked their permission to use it, then when you weren't granted that permission agree that you wouldn't use it in any way, and then a few days later just change your mind?

If the answer is yes, then you obviously agree that CNN handled this perfectly fine.

If the answer is no, if you would have decided its contents demanded reporting immediately, how would you have handled this differently then CNN?

And you should feel free to use every word above, in its entirety. Though I suspect you won't.

Philippe

______________________________________
From: Michael Hastings
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:04 PM
To: Reines, Philippe I Cc: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Request for comment

Philippe:

Thanks for getting back to me. No, you read my email correctly--I found your statement to CNN offensive.

From my perspective, the scandal here is that the State Department had such inadequate security procedures in place that four Americans were killed. And then the Ambassador's diary--and who knows what else--was left behind for anyone to pick up. Thankfully, it was CNN--and not Al Qaeda or some other militia--that found it and was able to return it to the family. That CNN used portions of the material in the diary they found at the scene--material that appears to contradict the official version of events that State/WH has been putting out--is completely in line with practices of good journalism.

I don't know how involved Arwa Damon has been in this. But for what it's worth, Arwa is one of the best war correspondents working today. She's consistently risked her life to get these stories, and to find out what actually happens in these conflict zones.I do agree that the media has lots of responsibilities, and CNN fulfilled its responsibility by returning the diary while still managing to inform the American public of newsworthy information. So it's unfortunate that you are trying to make a scapegoat out of CNN. That State was forced to flee Benghazi--again, because of such inadequate security, leaving behind all sorts of sensitive information--tells us more about DoS than CNN.

The misinformation here seems largely to be coming from State and the administration. The defense that the administration has offered that there was no intelligence warning of an attack is weak. If there was no intel, then clearly the CIA and other intel agents stationed in Benghazi weren't doing their jobs well. If there was intel, then we have some kind of cover-up--whether out of incompetence or ass covering before the election or just the trauma of losing four good men, it's hard for me to say at this point.

All the best,

Michael

______________________________________
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Reines, Philippe I wrote:

Why do you bother to ask questions you've already decided you know the answers to?

______________________________________
From: Michael Hastings
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:50 PM
To: Reines, Philippe I Cc: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Request for comment

Why don't you give answers that aren't bullshit for a change?

______________________________________
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Reines, Philippe I wrote:
I now understand why the official investigation by the Department of the Defense as reported by The Army Times The Washington Post concluded beyond a doubt that you're an unmitigated asshole.

How's that for a non-bullshit response?

Now that we've gotten that out of our systems, have a good day.

And by good day, I mean Fuck Off

______________________________________
From: Michael Hastings
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 01:40 PM
To: Reines, Philippe I Cc: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Request for comment

Hah--I now understand what women say about you, too! Any new complaints against you lately?

______________________________________
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Reines, Philippe I wrote:

Talk about bullshit - answer me this: Do you only traffic in lies, or are you on the ground floor of creating them?

And since Fuck Off wasn't clear enough, I'm done with you. Inside of 5 minutes when I can log into my desktop, you'll be designated as Junk Mail.

Have a good life Michael.

______________________________________
From: Michael Hastings
Date: Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: Request for comment
To: "Reines, Philippe I" Cc: "Nuland, Victoria J"

I'll take that as a non-denial denial.

All the best,

Michael

Technorati Tags: Hillary,Hillary Clinton,Benghazi,State Department,reporters,media,Hillary Aide,Hillary Clinton Aide,watch the other hand,Philippe Reines

Video: Hillary Clinton Says Burmese Politicians Learned Democracy From "The West Wing"

Libya Threatens Clinton's Legacy — And State Does Damage Control

Colonel: Hillary Made Decision Not to Post Marines at Benghazi

Hillary Clinton, the Law of Karma, and Shattered Dreams

All Starting to Unravel for Obama… and Hillary

No Marines for Libyan Ambassador, Full Security Detail for Valerie Jarrett Vacation

REPORT: Obama administration was warned about attacks, did nothing

Body of lies from Benghazi to Barack — Comprehensive investigative report

Video: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Hussein Obama are so busy apologizing because they agreed to UN Resolution 16/18

Winston Churchill once said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last…

U.S. Embassy Attacked: CNN Breaking News @ 14:06 EDST on 9/11, From Egypt… Then Libya, No Comments From Obama – Updated

Manifesto Puts Hillary’s Deputy Chief In Middle Of Muslim Plot – Please Read more:

Final UN Arms Trade Treaty Disarms America With Clinton’s Signature - Waiting For The ‘Hammer To Fall’ – U.N. Small Arms Treaty Passes During Second Session… But remember… CFR Says Don’t Worry About Hillary’s Small Arms Treaty

Alert: Hillary Clinton Deputy Chief of Staff Tied to Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda

Breaking Hillaryland News: New Evidence Shows Hillary a Mastermind Behind Gunwalker as Her Welcome in Egypt Not So Good

Obama, Clinton Selling Out U.S. Sovereignty In Secret

And Just when you think it can’t get much worse:

Monica Lewinsky Is Back - Gets Bill and Hillary Clinton into Big Trouble Again

Yet Obama Sends These Two Clowns to Represent Him and Us at the UN with the Leaders of the World Including Those from the Middle East… Really? Feeling Safe??

EU Times:

World-famous mistress of former U.S. President Bill Clinton’s Monica Lewinsky decided to make some more money on her controversial past. Lewinsky will write memoires. The former White House trainee negotiates the details of her book with major publishers.

Reportedly, the forgotten sex scandal star has already requested $12 million for her confessions, including those about her relationship with Clinton. Many believe that her story is not worth the money. However, Lewinsky has not signed the deal, although several publishers are interested in the publication of the book.

Meanwhile, American journalists try to show as much humor as they can in their comments about the Lewinsky confessions, BFM.Ru reports. TJ Walker, a famous columnist with Forbes and The Wall Street Journal tried to guess what the new book was going to be about: “What is it? A time capsule? What time is it? 1998? It’s been 14 years since we had to look at this woman day after day. She got her millions from that. She had her Barbara Walters sit-down. And now she is going to write another book. What in the world is she going to say in it? Is it – “nobody has given a damn about me for 14 years?” Second chapter: “I am an idiot. I’ve never done anything interesting in my entire life other than fooling around with the president.” Chapter Three: “I’ve done a handbag campaign and a bunch of other things, but they all were a failure because everyone thought of me as that one thing.”

Monica has not confirmed her plans about the memories yet, but her friends told reporters what her new book could be about. According to one of them, she can share what she knows about Bill’s insatiable desires for threesomes, orgies and sex toys of all kinds, RBC says.

The president’s ex-lover recalled how he spoke disparagingly of his wife, calling her a “cold fish” and making fun of her “non-existent sex life.” Bill Clinton also suggested that Hillary had also cheated on him.

Rumor has it that Hillary Clinton knows about Lewinsky’s plans and is furious about it, Express Gazeta wrote. If the book is ever published, the sitting secretary of state will hardly ever become president.

Of course the possibility of a Hillary Clinton presidency is all but gone now, anyway, now that Americans realize that it was Hillary who made the decision not to send Marines to our Consulate in Benghazi Libya that resulted in the murder and torture of our Ambassador Christopher Stevens and 3 additional Americans, added to by 9-days of lies by Hillary herself, the State Department and the White House about the cause of the events in Egypt, the terror attack on American soil (our Consulate) in Libya and throughout the Middle East and much of the world.

Bill, Ted, Antonio, Joe, Debbie and Friends Take Us All to an Alternative Universe….

Technorati Tags: the Clintons,CNN,Hillary,Hillary Clinton,Benghazi,State Department,reporters,media,Monica Lewinsky,watch the other hand,Bill Clinton,Democrat Party,destroying America,Alinskyites,circus diplomacy,rights of the child,UN small arms treaty,Huma Abedin Weiner,Michael Hastings. The Clintons,Libya

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

U.S. Embassy Attacked: CNN Breaking News @ 14:06 EDST, From Egypt… Then Libya, No Comments From Obama

CNN Breaking News @ 14:06 EDST, from Egypt - – Yep on the anniversary of 9/11, 2012

Angry protesters climbed the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo today and hauled down its U.S. flags, replacing them with black flags with Islamic emblems.

The incident prompted U.S. security guards to fire off a volley of warning shots as a large crowd gathered outside, apparently upset about the production of a Dutch film thought to insult the prophet Mohammed, said CNN producer Mohammed Fahmy, who was on the scene.

An Embassy operator told CNN that the facility had been cleared of diplomatic personnel earlier in the day, ahead of the apparent threat, while Egyptian riot police were called to help secure the Embassy walls.

One CNN Center Atlanta, GA 30303 (c) & (r) 2012 Cable News Network

America apologizes to Egypt… Then Obama says the apology was a mistake.
Earlier in the day… Obama refuses to meet with Bibi Netanyahu and refuses to set down red lines for Iran. Later it is reported that Obama will on Letterman the same say he said he wouldn’t be in NYC to meet with Netanyahu.

Prime Minister Netanyahu: Those in the international community who refuse to set a red line for Iran have no moral right to set one for Israel: “I have had enough those who do not set a red line for Iran on their nuclear program have no right to set a red light on Israel!”

Obama Announces Letterman Appearance on Day He Snubbed Netanyahu

Muslim Brotherhood Blames America For Not Protecting Islam After Mob Attacks U.S. Embassy

Krauthammer on Obama's apology to Egypt today: "it was a hostage statement and we should have told them to go to hell.." See Video

American Embassy worker in Libya was stripped bare and then burnt alive by Salafis in Benghazi on September 11 2012 - Wake-up

Embedded image permalink

Apparently President Obama can’t see Egypt and Libya from his house. On the anniversary of the worst terrorist...

Palin to Obama: Time To Grow A Big Stick

BREAKING NEWS: U.S. State Department Brings U.S. Corporations To Meet Muslim Brotherhood…

Side Story… (looking back to 10.27.11):

State Department spends $70,000 on Obama's books – and stirs a controversy

The US State Department calls the purchase of Obama's books "standard practice," but critics call it "inappropriate."

Records show the US Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, spent more than $40,000 in 2009 on “Dreams From My Father,”

It’s the biggest books shopping spree we’ve seen in a while.

The State Department bought more than $70,000 worth of President Barack Obama’s books, The Washington Times reported Tuesday. The books, mostly Obama’s 1995 bestseller, “Dreams from My Father,” will be used as Christmas gratuities for embassy staff and to stock “key libraries” around the world.

Records show the US Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, spent more than $40,000 in 2009 on “Dreams,” and the US Embassy in South Korea spent $6,061 on the same title, all to be used for Christmas gratuities. Obama reported between $1 million to $5 million in royalties in 2010 for “Dreams From My Father,” and between $100,000 and $1 million in royalties for “The Audacity of Hope,” far more than he has made as President. If he earned 10 percent royalties on roughly $60,000 worth of the State Department purchases, he would pocket about $6,000, notes The Washington Times.

Both the White House – which was not involved in the buying – and the State Department have come under intense fire for the purchases.

“It’s inappropriate for U.S. taxpayer dollars to be spent on this,” Leslie Paige, the spokesman for Citizens Against Government Waste, told The Washington Times. “This sounds like propaganda.”

Tom Schatz, president of Citizens against Government Waste, told CNN that the purchases provide money from the taxpayers to the president in the form of royalties. "[I]n an era where everyone's trying to cut back, it really doesn't look good to the taxpayers to have this being done at the State Department."

The State Department, as expected, is defending its shopping spree.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told CNN it is "longstanding practice" to allow embassies to buy books, "to put them out in libraries ... give them to contacts, which they think will help deepen understanding of the U.S. political system, of U.S. political figures and leaders of U.S. history, U.S. culture."

The purchases, she added are "done in strict accordance with government procurement standards."

"It's the embassies themselves that make the decisions what American books to buy. And they make these decisions based on the interest in the country where they are. But these are not decisions that are made in Washington, and they're not decisions that are directed by Washington."

The White House, for it’s part, is happy to wash its hands of this decision.

"Obviously, the White House didn't have anything to do with this," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters traveling aboard Air Force One on Wednesday. "I think this is an embassy-by-embassy decision based on what they think ... in buying books makes sense for them in terms of advancing American foreign policy interests."

Husna Haq is a Monitor correspondent.

No doubt right now every video of Obama and Hillary praising the Arab Spring is being scrubbed off the internet…

Technorati Tags: connecting the dots,Obamaland,Israel,Iran,Egypt,Libya,Middle East,unpresidential,allies,U.S. Embassies,Letterman,State Department,Charles Krauthammer,Bibi Netanyahu,radicals in the White House,Dreams From My Father,Sarah Palin,Muslim Brotherhood,Islam

Friday, May 4, 2012

Obama Assembling De Facto Propaganda Ministry

By Steve Peacock – WND

The U.S. State Department is planning to “buy” media broadcasts, as the Obama administration assembles a de facto propaganda machine, according to documents that reveal the president’s plans moving closer to the 2012 election.

According to information WND located via routine database research, State’s Bureau of Public Affairs is soliciting the help of “global news coverage service providers” to create and disseminate department “news.”

The selected contractor will provide “full-time, 24/7 service,” the Statement of Work for the plan said.

“The department seeks a service provider for full, turn-key news-style global television coverage of ad hoc open press events featuring the Secretary of State and other officials across the United States and throughout the world,” according to the SOW, “and to send this content back to the department’s Washington headquarters…”

Upon receiving these privately packaged productions, the department, in turn, “will distribute this video content to media organizations through an array of traditional and new media platforms.”

Indeed, just as the department is awaiting contractor bids on the project, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s representative at the World Press Freedom Day in Tunisia heaped accolades upon UNESCO for hosting the annual event.

Read about how the U.S. mission at the United Nations works with reporters, and find out what the White House does with some of those raising questions.

In a “tweet” from Tunisia, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Esther Brimmer said, “I applaud the tireless, continuing work of #UNESCO in promoting the ideals of free and open media.”

Brimmer delivered remarks on behalf of the Obama administration during the opening ceremony, along with presenting a video speech from Clinton.

Referring to the Arab Spring demonstrations across the Middle East and North Africa, Clinton said, according to a prepared statement, “Voice by voice, text by text, Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans and many others have dared to say what they believe and stand up for their own rights.

“Many others have dared to report on what they see happening, even when their lives were at risk.”

The State Department plan is twofold: to hire a single contractor to provide television news crew services on the one hand, and to provide transmission/streaming services as a corollary service.

“The television news crew category is both one and two-person crews, and includes one and multi-camera productions,” the SOW pointed out. “The transmission category includes both traditional fiber, terrestrial and satellite-based as well as file-based and Internet delivery platforms.”

The use of such government- as well as industry-funded broadcasts, known as “video news releases,” or VNRs, has increasingly come under fire in the past decade.

VNRs “are segments designed to be indistinguishable from independently produced news reports that are distributed and promoted to television newsrooms,” according to Source Watch, a Center for Media and Democracy project that chronicles the intersecting of public relations and public policy.

The General Accountability Office – the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress – in 2005 declared that several federal entities, such as the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services, may have violated the law by disseminating VNRs as fact-based news reports.

Subsequent to the GAO’s findings, the “Stop Government Propaganda Act” was introduced to rein in and punish such activities; it died, however, after being introduced in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Proponents of VNR distribution claim that use of the video products is wholly legitimate. The Public Relations Society of America is that a VNR simply is “the video equivalent of a press release.”

The organization does advocate that industry members abide by certain parameters to ensure the integrity of VNR usage:

Organizations that produce VNRs should clearly identify the VNR as such and fully disclose who produced and paid for it at the time the VNR is provided to TV stations.
PRSA recommends that organizations that prepare VNRs should not use the word “reporting” if the narrator is not a reporter.
Use of VNRs or footage provided by sources other than the station or network should be identified as to source by the media outlet when it is aired.

Despite congressional refusal to crack down on VNRs, the Federal Communications Commission issued a reminder to licensees of their sponsor-identification requirements under the Communications Act or 1934. Rather than holding liable the creators of the reports, the commission has placed the burden of disclosure on who ultimately airs the VNR.

“These rules are grounded in the principle that listeners and viewers are entitled to know who seeks to persuade them with the programming offered over broadcast stations and cable systems,” the FCC said.

When such VNRs are aired, “licensees and operators generally must clearly disclose to members of their audiences the nature, source and sponsorship of the material that they are viewing.”

Although the FCC continues to enforce these rules, the penalties arguably have been light.

Last year, for instance, it issued a forfeiture order to Fox Television Stations, Inc. when station affiliate KMSP-TV of Minneapolis used – but failed to identify – a General Motors-provided VNR during a news broadcast.

The FCC fined Fox $4,000 for failing to disclose GM sponsorship of the report.

Among other VNR-related enforcement actions, in 2007 it imposed a $4,000 fine on Comcast Corp. for also violating the sponsorship disclosure rules. Comcast’s CN8 news affiliate in that case had aired a VNR produced on behalf of Nelson’s Rescue Sleep.

The FCC soon after separately slapped a $16,000 forfeiture against Comcast for airing two VNRs from General Mills and Allstate, respectively.

The State Department through May 21 is reviewing contractor proposals in response to the new solicitation. It did not disclose the estimated cost of the endeavor, for which it will award a year contract with four one-year options.

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Obama spreads false claim that Thomas Jefferson hosted first Ramadan iftar dinner at White House

The State Department (Let us not forget the State Dept, Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin Weiner, Muslim Brotherhood Connection) retails the PC myth in this article, "Thomas Jefferson's Iftar," July 29. Nor is this the first time this falsehood has gone around: the State announcement quotes Barack Obama saying last year: “Ramadan is a reminder that Islam has always been a part of America. The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan — making it the first known iftar at the White House, more than 200 years ago.”

Longtime Jihad Watch writer Hugh Fitzgerald busted this myth in his piece "Barack Obama, The New York Times, that Iftar Dinner, and the rewriting of history," which was first published here at Jihad Watch on August 26, 2010. Here it is again:

Barack Obama, The New York Times, that Iftar Dinner, and the rewriting of history
by Hugh Fitzgerald

"The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan --- making it the first known iftar at the White House, more than 200 years ago." -- Barack Obama, speaking on August 14, 2010, at the "Annual Iftar Dinner" at the White House

Really? Is that what happened? Was there a "first known iftar at the White House" given by none other than President Thomas Jefferson for the "first Muslim ambassador to the United States"? That's what Barack Obama and his dutiful speechwriters told the Muslims in attendance at the 2010 "Annual Iftar Dinner," knowing full well that the remarks would be published for all to see. Apparently Obama, and those who wrote this speech for him, and others who vetted it, find nothing wrong with attempting to convince Americans, as part of their policy of trying to win Muslim hearts and Muslim minds, that American history itself can be rewritten. A little insidious nunc pro tunc backdating, to rewrite American history. And that rewrite of American history has the goal of convincing Americans, in order to please Muslims, that the United States and Islam, that Americans and Muslims, go way back.

As Obama so unforgettably put it in his Cairo Speech (possibly the most inaccurate, the most cavalier about historical truth, of any speech by any President in American history):

As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam -- at places like Al-Azhar -- that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities -- (applause) -- it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. (Applause.)
I also know that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have started businesses, they have taught at our universities, they've excelled in our sports arenas, they've won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers -- Thomas Jefferson -- kept in his personal library. (Applause.)

We could go through those two appalling paragraphs with such historians and keen students of history as Gibbon, John Quincy Adams, Tocqueville, Jacob Burckhardt, and Winston Churchill, but that is for another occasion. We could point out that the highly selective quotation - for example from John Adams, whose views on Islam are falsely implied by quoting such a statement as "the United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims" which was mere pleasing rhetoric, and that phrase "in itself" left open the possibility of other reasons for enmity, including Muslim hostility. Not John Adams himself but his son John Quincy Adams (our most learned President), who was far more knowledgeable about Islam, was to write about that:

The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.

But John Adams himself drew conclusions about Muslims and Islam that were far from favorable. John Adams' unfavorable view of Islam was obscured and turned on its head by Obama, in quoting that single phrase that was part of negotiations-cum-treaty designed to free American ships and seaman from the ever-present threat of attack by Muslim pirates in North Africa (known to history as the Barbary Pirates). John Adams' unfavorable view of Islam was shared by all those who, in the young Republic, had any dealings at all with Muslim envoys. Thomas Jefferson had a copy of the Qur'an in his library not because he was an admirer of that book, or the faith of Islam, but because he was both curious and cultivated. Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison used Jefferson's own copy of the Qur'an. Yet that copy, since it was translated into English by George Sale, has for most devout Muslims no validity whatsoever, for the Qur'an must be read and understood in Arabic. A Qur'an in a language other than Arabic cannot even be called the "Holy Qur'an," though apparently Obama, and his speechwriters, did not know this, in their fulsome description of Jefferson's copy of the Sale translation that was appropriated by Representative Ellison for his own crude and transparent political ploy. Obama wrongly refers to Sales' version as the "Holy Qur'an," and every Muslim at that dinner knew such a book could not possibly be called that. A small mistake, but then there are so many mistakes, and Obama and his speechwriters are so eager to please, and yet so ignorant withal, that these mistakes add up.

There is not a single American statesman or traveler or diplomat in the days of the early Republic who had a good word for Islam. Look high, look low, consult whatever you want in the National Archives or the Library of Congress, and you will not find any such testimony. And the very idea that someday Muslims, adherents of the fanatical faith of Islam, would be here and would dare to invoke the Freedom of Conscience that is guaranteed by our First Amendment, through both the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, would have struck them as impossible. For everyone knew then, as so many now apparently do not know, that Islam itself inculcates not freedom of conscience, but blind, unquestioning submission of the individual Muslim to Authority, that is, the Authority of the Qur'an, as glossed by the Sunnah, and the Authority of the Shari'a, the Holy Law of Islam to which all Muslim law codes are supposed to aspire and, ideally, to be modeled on, the Holy Law which embodies, in codified form, the texts and tenets and attitudes of Islam. This, too, Barack Obama and his speechwriters, and such people as John Brennan, Deputy Special Assistant For Homeland Security and Terrorism to the President, apparently do not know.

But let's return to that assertion about Jefferson's "Iftar Dinner," or rather, to that dinner that Barack Obama would have us all believe was the first "Iftar Dinner" at the White House way back in 1805. What actually happened was this.

The American navy, fed up with the constant depredations by Muslim corsairs, who were not so much pirates as Muslims who were encouraged to prey on Christian shipping, and who at times even recorded the areas of the Mediterranean where they planned to go in search of Christian prey, seized a ship that belonged to those who were ruled by the Bey of Tunis. And the Bey of Tunis wanted that ship back. He sent to Washington, for six months, a temporary envoy, one Sidi Soliman Mellimelli, who was not, pace Obama, "the first Muslim ambassador to the United States," but, rather, a temporary envoy.

Here, from the Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia, is a bit of the background to the story:

The crisis with Tunis erupted when the USS Constitution captured Tunisian vessels attempting to run the American blockade of Tripoli. The bey of Tunis threatened war and sent Mellimelli to the United States to negotiate full restitution for the captured vessels and to barter for tribute.
The backdrop to this state visit was the ongoing conflict between the United States and the Barbary states, autonomous provinces of the Ottoman Empire that rimmed the Mediterranean coast of North Africa. Soon after the Revolutionary War and the consequent loss of the British navy's protection, American merchant vessels had become prey for Barbary corsairs. Jefferson was outraged by the demands of ransom for civilians captured from American vessels and the Barbary states' expectation of annual tribute to be paid as insurance against future seizures. He took an uncharacteristically hawkish position against the prevailing thought that it was cheaper to pay tribute than maintain a navy to protect shipping from piracy.

Jefferson balked at paying tribute but accepted the expectation that the host government would cover all expenses for such an emissary. He arranged for Mellimelli and his 11 attendants to be housed at a Washington hotel, and rationalized that the sale of the four horses and other fine gifts sent by the bey of Tunis would cover costs. Mellimelli's request for "concubines" as a part of his accommodations was left to Secretary of State James Madison. Jefferson assured one senator that obtaining peace with the Barbary powers was important enough to "pass unnoticed the irregular conduct of their ministers."

Despite whispers regarding his conduct, Mellimelli received invitations to numerous dinners and balls, and according to one Washington hostess was "the lion of the season." At the president's New Year's Day levee the Tunisian envoy provided "its most brilliant and splendid spectacle," and added to his melodramatic image at a later dinner party hosted by the secretary of state. Upon learning that the Madisons were unhappy at being childless, Mellimelli flung his "magical" cloak around Dolley Madison and murmured an incantation that promised she would bear a male child. His conjuring, however, did not work.

Differences in culture and customs stirred interest on both sides. Mellimelli's generous use of scented rose oil was noted by many of those who met him, and guards had to be posted outside his lodgings to turn away the curious. For his part, the Tunisian was surprised at the social freedom women enjoyed in America and was especially intrigued by several delegations of Native Americans from the western territories then visiting Washington. Mellimelli inquired which prophet the Indians followed: Moses, Jesus Christ or Mohammed. When he was told none of them, that they worshiped "the Great Sprit" alone, he was reported to have pronounced them "vile hereticks."

So that's it. Sidi Soliman Mellimelli installed himself for six months at a Washington hotel, for which the American government apparently picked up the tab. And as to that request for "concubines," apparently Jefferson asked the Secretary of State, James Madison, to attend to the matter. It's amusing to note how little the behavior of Muslim and Arab rulers has changed. It is only we who do not see them, or allow ourselves to see them, as primitive and exotic creatures to be amused by or often contemptuous of, but not as creatures to whom we need accord any undo respect, for their sole claim on our attention is that some of them, through an accident of geology, have acquired a lot of money. And there are people in Washington who are happy, in their desire to do well themselves, to convince the American government that it must bend over backwards in treating of Arabs and Muslims. There is no need to do so, and it is easy to show why not. In fact, the description of Mellimelli's requests may put many in mind of how so many Muslim and Arab rulers, including "plucky little king" Hussein of Jordan, when they used to come to Washington, would have round-the-clock escort girls service them in their hotel rooms. But what was most maddening was that the bills were paid by the ever-compliant C.I.A. I presume the oil money has made that, in some cases, no longer necessary.

Sidi Soliman Mellimelli was quite an exotic specimen:

The curious were not to be disappointed by the appearance of the first Muslim envoy to the United States - a large figure with a full dark beard dressed in robes of richly embroidered fabrics and a turban of fine white muslin.
Over the next six months, this exotic representative from a distant and unfamiliar culture would add spice to the Washington social season but also test the diplomatic abilities of President Jefferson.

During the six solar months Mellimelli was here, the lunar month of Ramadan occurred. And as it happens, during that Ramadan observed by Mellimelli, but naturally unobserved, hardly noticed, by the Americans, President Jefferson invited Sidi Soliman Mellimelli for dinner at the White House. He probably during that six-month period had done it more than once. Mellimelli replied that he could not come at the appointed hour of three thirty in the afternoon (our ancestors rose much earlier, and ate much earlier, and went to bed much earlier, in the pre-Edison days of their existence). That time fell, for him, but not for Thomas Jefferson or anyone else in the United States of America, during the fasting period of the month of Ramadan. He replied that he could not come at the hour set, that is, at half-past three, but only after sundown.

Jefferson, a courteous man, simply moved the dinner forward by a few hours. He didn't change the menu, he didn't change anything else. And moving the dinner forward by a few hours hardly turns that dinner into a soi-disant "Iftar Dinner." Barack Obama's trying to do so, trying that is, to rewrite American history, with some nunc-pro-tunc backdating, in order to flatter or please his Muslim guests, is false. And, being false, is also disgusting. It is disgusting for an American President to misrepresent American history to Americans, including all the schoolchildren who are now being subject to all kinds of Islamic propaganda, cunningly woven into the newly-mandated textbooks, that so favorably misrepresent Islam, as here.

Now there is a kind of coda to this dismal tale, and it is provided by the New York Times, which likes to put on airs and think of itself as "the newspaper of record," whatever that means. The Times carried a front-page story on August 14, 2010, written by one Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and no doubt gone over by many vigilant editors. This story contains a predictably glowing account of Barack Obama's remarks at the "Annual Iftar Dinner." Here is the paragraph that caught my eye:

In hosting the iftar, Mr. Obama was following a White House tradition that, while sporadic, dates to Thomas Jefferson, who held a sunset dinner for the first Muslim ambassador to the United States. President George W. Bush hosted iftars annually.

Question for Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and for her editors at The New York Times: You report that there is a "White House tradition that, while sporadic, dates to Thomas Jefferson." I claim that you are wrong. I claim that there is no White House Tradition at all about Iftar Dinners. I claim that Thomas Jefferson, in moving forward by a few hours a dinner that changed in no other respect, for Sidi Soliman Mellimelli, was not providing the first of the "Annual Iftar Dinners" that, the New York Times tells us, has since Jefferson's non-existent "Iftar Dinner," have been observed "sporadically."

When, then, was the next in this long, but "sporadic" series of iftar dinners? I can find no record of any, for roughly the next two hundred years, until we come to the fall of the year 2001, that is, just after the deadliest attack on American civilians ever recorded, an attack carried out by a novemdectet of Muslims acting according to their understanding of the very same texts -- Qur'an,Hadith, Sira -- that all Muslims read, an understanding that many have demonstrated since that they share, not least in the spontaneous celebrations that were immediately held in Cairo, and Riyadh, and Jeddah, and in Ramallah, and Gaza, and Damascus, and Baghdad, and all over the place, where Muslims felt that they had won a victory over those accursed kuffar, those ingrates, those Infidels. And it was President George Bush who decided that, to win Muslim "trust" or to end Muslim "mistrust" -- I forget which -- so that we could, non-Muslim and Muslim, collaborate on defeating those "violent extremists" who had "hijacked a great religion," started this sporadic ball un-sporadically rolling. And he did it, by golly, he did. He hosted an Iftar Dinner with all the fixins. It was held just the month after the attacks prompted by Islamic texts and tenets and attitudes on the World Trade Center, on the Pentagon, on a plane's doomed pilots and passengers over a field in Pennsylvania.

And thus it is, that ever since 2001, we have had iftar dinner after iftar dinner. But it was not Jefferson or any other of our cultivated and learned Presidents, who started this "tradition" that has been observed only "sporadically" -- i.e., never -- until George Bush came along, unless we are to count as an "iftar dinner" what was merely seen, by Jefferson, as a dinner given at a time convenient for his not-too-honored guest.

Yes, and how splendidly Bush, and now Obama, have proven to Muslims that there are no hard feelings. Do you think the three trillion dollars spent in Iraq and now in Afghanistan (not counting the hundreds of billions that, over time, have gone to Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, even the "Palestinian" territories), have done that? It has all been designed to improve the lot of Muslims on the unproven assumption that this will make them less attentive to the texts, the ideology, of their Total Belief-System, and hence more willing to grandly concede to us Infidels a territory of our own, a place in the sun of our own. Yes, George Bush, that profound student of history and of ideas, kept telling us, in those first few months after 9/11/2001, that as far as he was concerned, by gum, Islam was a religion of "peace and tolerance." And just to prove it, by golly, he'd put on an Iftar Dinner with all the fixins. And that's just what he did. And that's how the "tradition" that Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and her many vetting editors at the newspaper of comical record, The New York Times, began. It's all of nine years old, through the disastrous presidencies of Bush and now of Obama.

And stop rewriting history, in ways little and big, about the American "connection" to Islam - including that absurd attempt on the front page of The New York Times just yesterday, to run a story on Christians from the Middle East, fleeing Islam and Muslims for the United States (as they fled, too, to South America, or to Australia) and appropriating the history of Arabic-speaking Maronite and Orthodox immigrants in that story on "Little Syria" to make American readers think that "see, Arabs, Muslim Arabs, go a long way back in New York City, so let's not get so hot and bothered about a little mosque someone wants to build." Was there ever such deceit, day after day, than in the way The New York Times has become a willing collaborator with the O.I.C., and others who want nonstop Mister Feelgood stories about Islam in America?

I have a request for The New York Times. It's a most modest one. All I ask -- I never ask, or expect, very much -- is that the editors of The New York Times apologize for that paper's misapplication of the adjective "sporadic" in the front-page story by Sheryl Stolberg on the "Annual Iftar" dinner.

Put up, or shut up, dear newspaper of record. Tell us when that "tradition" of "Iftar Dinners" truly began. Cite those Presidents who held dinners that they considered to be "Iftar Dinners." Give us chapter, give us verse. And if, as I believe, that hollow and recent and transparently determined-to-win-Muslim-hearts-and-minds "tradition" began in 2001, then tell us. And since your story was on the front page, do what the lawyers do when they have to make legal announcements, and put your retraction, eat your humble pie, right on the front page.

A failure to do so will be further, and for some the final confirmation, of the sorry record of The New York Times in its coverage of Islam. Most readers with some sense of what Islam is all about, even those who lack detailed knowledge, are now ready to take any coverage of the matter in The New York Times with a grain - with a Pinch - of salt.

Clio, Muse of History, is a stern mistress. Subscribers to stories that live and die between editions may forget or forgive, but Mnemosyne does neither. If I were the "newspaper of record," I'd want to propitiate not the gods, but the most vigilant and meticulous of muses. If I were Pinch Sulzberger, I'd be mortally embarrassed, and determined to make amends. But then, I have standards.

Source: Jihad Watch

Let Congress Hear You... Call, Fax, Email, Write or Show-Up In Their Offices!

The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- Dante Alighieri / Often Quoted by and credited to Mark Twain
If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!
United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224 or 225 -3121
Senators from your State.
Call the White House at 202-456-1414 or 1111 and tell President Obama you have had enough!

Find Out Here: How Did Your Congressman Vote ????

Call the switchboard for the house of Representatives in Washington today... your Congressperson and Nancy Pelosi and tell them "NO on Cap and Trade" & NO on the Carbon Tax!!!

Stop the Insanity!!! Stand-Up American... You Are Not Alone!!!

"...there comes a time, ladies and gentlemen, when ideology can cause death. I am so tired, so tired, of zealots, primarily on the left, putting their insane personal agendas above the safety of fellow Americans. Do you think the brave soldiers and Marines operating in dangerous areas right now want [unreleased photos of alleged abuse of prisoners] all over al-Jazeera and the terror websites? So let's look out for the military, OK? Nancy Pelosi has an obligation to get the loons in her party under control. If the Speaker can't do that, she doesn't deserve her position." ... Bill O'Reilly

Daily Thought Pad