The Jewish Lobby Puppet

Able to leap buildings with a single bound, Obama impressed all, again, with his superior intelligence. During a meeting with Jewish community leaders, he assured them that all his friends in Chicago were Jewish and that in the beginning of his career, he was accused of being a puppet of the Israel lobby. As if that weren’t enough, he also told them that he knew more about Judaism than any other president because…he read about it. Obama’s attempt to out-Biden vice president Biden would be laughable if he were not serious – but he is.

Rest assured that his band of notable Jewish friends, such as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Eric Whitaker, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and even Rod Blagojevich will back him up on his claims, but searching for his Bar Mitzvah certificate will not be as successful as was the search for his birth certificate.

It is embarrassing to watch an egomaniac ring his own bell, but when it is the president of the US it is frightening. Obama believes his own hype and many of his actions have been based on his belief that he knows best about everything. He has ignored professional military advice concerning Afghanistan and, having no military background, he personally selects targets for drones. Incredibly, his justification is that he is a student of Catholic just-war theory or, in other words, he read about it.

Obama is mishandling economic recovery, the budget, health care reform, diplomatic relations, financial reform, immigration reform, and now, even his own image because of his lack of experience. His well-read ego blinds him to it all and the sycophants surrounding him, and in the media, feed the farce. How do we know this? We read about it.

David J. Hentosh

Another Obama Apology

President Obama’s embarrassment for this country caused him to write a letter of apology to Afghan president Hamid Karzai over the burning of copies of the Koran by a US military officer. An insignificant incident arising from ignorance and stupidity brings violent outrage from those who are far too easily outraged, and Obama feels the need to personally apologize. Who, exactly is he representing with this apology?

Karzai has not apologized for the stupid and violent anti-US protests over this unfortunate incident, resulting in at least 14 people dead. He never apologized when there were riots and violent protests over a few silly cartoons. He hasn’t apologized for wanting the US out of his country after Americans died for his country’s welfare. He hasn’t apologized for the Afghan soldier who turned his weapon on US soldiers during one of these recent protests, killing two.

Where are the Mideast letters of apology over the beheadings, kidnappings, suicide bombings, and hatred toward Israel and the US? Have there been apologies for persecuting Christians and burning churches? Where are the letters of apology from Pakistan for harboring Bin Laden? Will Iran apologize for playing Obama like a puppet?

Obama doesn’t feel the need to apologize to outraged Christians for his recent health care decision forcing insurance coverage of contraception and abortions. He hasn’t apologized to the American people for the high gas prices resulting from his “green” policies or for the jobs lost due to his refusal of the Keystone Pipeline (which he now disingenuously blames on Republicans). He hasn’t apologized for his administration’s increased debt that will be passed on to our grandchildren. He certainly won’t apologize for reneging on campaign promises to those who voted for him.

No. Obama does not apologize to the American People for anything because that goes against the grain of anyone weaned in an anti-American atmosphere. The US is always in the wrong and everyone else is a victim – and Obama is conditioned to apologize for it all.

Sure, we need another four years of this.

David J. Hentosh

Afghanistan Spin Same as Vietnam

The weapons, environment, and situation may be different, but the political spin is the same. The war in Afghanistan is being declared over as was the war in Vietnam – for political purposes – and the administration is hiding the truth.

Facing political pressure, President Nixon declared the Vietnam War to be over and removed our troops under the guise of a peace agreement with North Vietnam, promising to back South Vietnam if the North broke that treaty. South Vietnam was not capable of defending itself and never received the aid promised (Congress refused that aid) when the North immediately reneged on the agreement. The result was a quick victory for the North and approximately 3 million people subsequently slaughtered.

President Obama (along with the Pentagon) has declared the war in Afghanistan to be over in much the same way and is spinning conditions in Afghanistan to validate pulling the troops out, a hasty decision made to benefit his re-election campaign. The truth, however, is much different and, thanks to a heads up from Drudge, we get a glimpse of reality from Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis.

Lt. Col. Davis spent much time in Afghanistan and tells us: “I saw little to no evidence the local governments were able to provide for the basic needs of the people”. This, of course, is opposite of what the administration says. Relating several specific observations and situations, Lt. Col. Davis further says: “As the numbers depicting casualties and enemy violence indicate the absence of progress, so too did my observations of the tactical situation all over Afghanistan”.

It seems that the Taliban have almost free reign in Afghanistan and are poised, and eager, to take over once our troops are gone. This is not a secret to the administration, yet, we are being told Obama’s war in Afghanistan is a success and Afghanistan can fend for itself. Having very few accomplishments to campaign on, Obama is spinning this as a “win”.

Our failure to fulfill our commitment in Vietnam is an embarrassment. It also provides the Taliban in Afghanistan incentive to continue fighting, knowing the current administration is poised to repeat that embarrassment. Three million died as a result of political expedience in Vietnam. How many will die in Afghanistan?

David J. Hentosh

Panetta Displays Administration’s Poor Policies

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta can’t seem to stop himself from revealing military strategies to the enemy. His distorted method of defending our country is to let our enemy know our next move in order to…what? It is not clear what he expects from this, but it dovetails well with this administration’s failed approach to foreign policy.

Panetta’s recent revelation of a strong possibility that Israel will attack Iran in April, May or June guarantees that Israel will keep the US out of the loop. Perhaps “plausible deniability” is behind Panetta’s puzzling revelation, thereby, allowing this administration to renege on its commitment to Israel afterwards. Perhaps it was meant to alert the world and Iran so that Israel would be forced to cancel or delay such an attack, thereby, giving Iran another chance to see the error if its ways.

Considering that Panetta has also alerted our enemy by revealing US strategy to end combat missions in Afghanistan by the middle of next year, the revelation of Israel’s possible attack is more likely to be just another bungled move from one ill-suited for the position of Secretary of Defense. Whatever the reason, Panetta and the entire Obama administration seem intent on pursuing an idealistic notion of diplomacy where talking nicely thwarts blood-thirsty aggression and a world court decides US policy.

To that end, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues to request more sanctions against Iran from the UN as if Iran’s nuclear weapons program will evaporate under pronouncements from such an impotent and toothless organization. The only result UN sanctions have produced so far is an increase in Iran’s aggressiveness and more time for Iran’s nuclear weapons program to come to fruition before Obama is voted out of office.

Obama’s focus in now on getting re-elected, so making waves with Iran is the furthest thing from his mind. Unfortunately, this comes at a time when Iran is desperately trying to utilize the window of opportunity it has been given. Panetta’s revelations also reveal this administration’s intent to continue failed policies. Israel and the entire world may suffer the dangerous consequences from this administration’s refusal to “change” its strategy.

David J. Hentosh

Negotiating With Terrorists

Refusal to negotiate with terrorists has been a stern US policy for quite some time but the Obama administration has been quietly replacing it with a softer approach that has yet to deliver positive results. This softer approach failed with Iran, producing only more arrogance and aggressiveness, but the Obama administration seems intent on using it with the Taliban.

News that Talilban “insurgents” (terrorists?) may agree to open a representative office in Qatar is being welcomed by Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Obama administration. While negotiations and talks with any enemy in attempts to stop violence make sense, bribing them to talk doesn’t. It is hard to see Obama’s latest gambit as anything more than hopeful bribery.

Talks are underway to release five Taliban prisoners from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in return for the proposed Taliban “headquarters” in Qatar. The hope is that the Taliban will cut ties with al-Qaida, accept the elected civilian government of Afghanistan, and bargain in good faith. The five released prisoners will most probably be allowed to return to fighting the US on the Afghan battlefield.

Fortunately, the US maintains that it will not back off its Afghan military campaign while it “negotiates”, but that can easily fall by the wayside. It is not hard to imagine a “declaration” of an end to the Afghan war resulting from promises made by ruthless terrorists, especially when the US has five released terrorists invested in the process. The political incentive of placating a far-left base in time for November elections could sweeten the pot.

Iran praised and welcomed Obama’s policy of diplomacy which was used as a stalling tactic that allowed continuance of Iran’s nuclear weapons program. It would be naïve and foolish to think the Taliban are above such tactics. Once it becomes recognized that the US is willing to negotiate and pay ransom, there will be other demands from other “organizations”. This could set a precedent that can get very ugly, very fast.

David J. Hentosh

Reaction to Koran Burning is Pathetic

While the media and the far left (redundant?) refuse to be judgmental concerning the Arab Muslim community in the Middle East, the recent protests over a single act of Koran burning in the US by a foolish and misguided church pastor demand condemnation. Blaming the pastor is a pathetic reaction to a pathetic act.

Protests in Afghanistan over a Florida pastor’s Koran burning have caused the deaths of at least 20 people in the past few days and the violent rioting taking place is an overreaction that many are trying to blame on the ignorant pastor. It was the same with the cartoons that caused previous rioting. The rioters are being rationalized as innocent victims when it is they who are causing the mayhem.

It is an insult to the entire Muslim world to treat those rioters as if they are incapable of acting responsibly and controlling their anger. Yet, many continue to accept this type of behavior, expecting all to be sympathetic to their oversensitivity as if they were an uncivilized tribe of savages shocked by the intrusion of the modern world. That is very condescending, but it is a typical reaction from elites calling themselves “progressive”.

It is that same elite mentality that treats the continuation of many problems in minority communities as being above that community’s capability to comprehend or handle. This allows blame to be placed elsewhere and relieves that community from the responsibility of their own actions. It is very demeaning and it perpetrates a sense of helplessness throughout the community.

It is time to stop being non-judgmental towards acts of incivility and violence. We express outrage at senseless rioting by ignorant fans after NBA championship games, never once blaming the winning team or demanding that the NBA shoulder responsibility. Why, then, do we treat offended Muslims as somehow being less responsible and accept less civilized behavior? It is an insult to Muslims and it is a very misguided and damaging reaction.

David J. Hentosh

UPDATE: Afghan President Hamid Karzai wants US lawmakers to do something about Koran burning he says “triggered” riots, and his advice is being taken seriously. Meanwhile, riots continue while Koran burning pastor is blamed for everything.

DJH

Bias On War

Irresponsible partisan bias is glaringly exposed now, but the mainstream media is pretending it doesn’t exist. That, of course, is because they are guilty of the same bias, particularly when it comes to war. Dan Gainor at NewsBusters delivers a simple expose that should be blatantly obvious to all.  Unfortunately, it isn’t and the media will just continue on their hypocritical path.

From Dan Gainor at NewsBusters

Where have all the war protesters gone…They’re mostly backing Obama’s attack on Libya or at least keeping quiet so they don’t aid those evil conservatives intent on criticizing the president…

It wasn’t so long ago that Code Pinkers were the darlings of journalism. You could find them across the media landscape. The Washington Post had lovingly huge features on them titled “Protesting for Peace With a Vivid Hue and Cry; Code Pink’s Tactics: Often Theatrical, Always Colorful.” “Bring the troops home,” that 2007 story ended. Four years later, we know no one on the left really wanted to send the troops home. They just wanted to send Bush home.

Where did that crowd go? There are no major anti-war rallies on the mall. The crazy lefties that flock to an ANSWER event are nowhere to be seen. There aren’t enough liberals singing “give peace a chance” to fill up your average coffee house.

The 2004 Abu Ghraib scandal gave journalists the chance to talk about the evils of war and blame them on George W. Bush. The Post did more than 1,700 Abu Ghraib stories and about 800 of those mention Bush…Rolling Stone wrote more than 8,000 words how “U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan murdered innocent civilians and mutilated their corpses.” One word wasn’t in that report: Obama. The commander-in-chief.

Read it all here:  Media Now Supporting War

DJH

Troop Frustration in Afghanistan

While the debate in the US rages over the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy of the military and the press continues to make (urge?) repealing that policy a major story, morale of troops in Afghanistan is waning. It is not because of DADT. It is because of other policies brought on by politics.

Afghanistan president Hamid Karzai’s corrupt government has forced the release or transfer of 500 captured Taliban fighters that were being held in a detention center in Parwan. These detainees were being held because they participated in the war as enemy combatants and were determined to be a continuing threat if released.

It is well known that many of those released will end up returning to the battlefield to continue fighting and killing. There are even more being released in smaller outposts before they even officially become detainees. American and NATO troops have witnessed this on many occasions and this latest mass release is very frustrating.

This is Obama’s war and it is being undermined by the very government we allowed to be installed in Afghanistan. That corrupt government is making our troops’ efforts worthless and putting them in more danger than necessary while we do nothing to stop it. Instead, the military issue that the Obama administration is concentrating on is the politically correct one of repealing DADT.

Perhaps it is because Obama understands very little about the military and, in fact, has been weaned on political ideology that holds the military in contempt. Perhaps it is because of his obsession with social issues and the “fundamental transformation” he promised. Whatever the reason, our troops deserve much more attention than they are getting and deserve to be higher on this administration’s priority list.

The press, too, should be much more concerned with this issue. It is a major story and it certainly should replace DADT as a headliner. Unfortunately, it won’t because it would also shed light on this administration’s mishandling of the war they told us was the “right” one.

David J. Hentosh

The Silent Afghanistan War

It is interesting, and quite revealing, that the mass media has been extremely silent on the Afghanistan War. Since it has become “Obama’s War”, there has been a noticeable lack of investigative reporting. It has become the hidden war and it certainly seems to be deliberately hidden.

According to the Associated Press, seventeen international troops were killed in Afghanistan in a recent three-day period, but there has been very little about it in the US media. The death toll in Afghanistan seems to be escalating, causing many alliance countries to seriously consider pulling their forces out. That, too, has not been reported much as the US media concentrates its efforts on negatively distorted reports of Tea Parties and GOP candidates.

NATO confirmed that it is facilitating talks between Taliban leaders and the government of Afghanistan in an effort to try to talk its way to some sort of a settlement. This is because Obama’s surge has not progressed as planned and, described in Bob Woodword’s book entitled “Obama’s Wars”, the main thrust of Obama’s actions in Afghanistan seems to be to get out, not to win.

According to the latest CNN poll, support for the Afghanistan War has never been lower. This low support comes even with little media reporting of the 386 US troops killed in the war this year. This is a stark contrast to the daily death toll reporting during the Iraq War and the dire reports the media fed the public. The Iraq War was labeled “Bush’s War” and it was hated by the media. The Afghanistan War has been labeled “Obama’s War”, but that has not been heard much because reporting of the Afghanistan War has been severely curtailed.

The anti-war protests and marches reported daily by the media during the Iraq War are missing from the Afghanistan War. College campus protests that the media cover are against conservative speakers, not the war. Winning or losing is not discussed. Withdrawal of US forces seems to be the only news worth reporting about the Afghanistan War.

The media that continually scoffs at complaints of biased reporting needs to take an honest look at its coverage. When that happens, get a very large and sturdy umbrella because pigs will be flying overhead.

David J. Hentosh

Obama’s Wars

From the Washington Post

Bob Woodward’s new book, Obama’s Wars, describes the Obama administration as somewhat dysfunctional and goes into detail about the decision making process with regard to the Afghanistan war. One interesting fact is that Obama never talked about “winning”. Very few on the left ever did with respect to the Iraq War, either. He did, however, demand an “exit plan” several times. The book does not shed a good light on the administration and one has to wonder if the mainstream media will continue to treat Bob Woodward favorably after reading his unflattering book about their hero.

The war in Iraq draws no attention in the book, except as a reference point for considering and developing a new Afghanistan strategy…Obama kept asking for “an exit plan” to go along with any further troop commitment, and is shown growing increasingly frustrated with the military hierarchy for not providing one…In the end, Obama essentially designed his own strategy for the 30,000 troops, which some aides considered a compromise…After Obama informed the military of his decision, Woodward writes, the Pentagon kept trying to reopen the decision…

Read the Washington Post article here:  Obama’s Wars

DJH