Monday, November 24, 2008






Rathergate II: Certification of Live Birth a clear forgery

Posted: November 25, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

The media bought it. The voters bought it. And now some in Congress are resisting the idea of congressional hearings because they believe that Barack Obama's "birth certificate" has been posted online.

Not so.

What was posted was not a birth certificate, but something that resembles a "Certification of Live Birth" or COLB, which, even if authentic, does not prove "natural born" U.S. citizenship. You see, in Hawaii, a Certification of Live Birth is issued within a year of a child's birth to those who register a birth abroad or one that takes place outside a hospital.

It's Rathergate all over again with more amiss than a 1970s Selectric typewriter. But before I tell you what the experts found, let me ask you a few questions:

  1. If you were a natural born American citizen and had it within your means to quiet all the lawsuits and questions with proof, would you do it?

  2. If you were a natural born American citizen, would you spend thousands of dollars to fight the legal cases against you, or would you simply answer the legitimate question of whether you meet the constitutional requirements for office?

  3. If you were a natural born American citizen, would you forge a document called a "Certification of Live Birth" and tell the public it was a real "birth certificate"?

If someone were to violate the law by manufacturing a forgery in order trick the public, would that be enough evidence for members of Congress to conduct hearings and for a court to issue an order for the critical records, including the original long-form birth certificate (signed by the doctor) to ensure that the U.S. constitutional requirements for office were not violated? After all, Congress is sworn to uphold and defend that Constitution, and the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are "guardians" of the Constitution. That's their job, isn't it?

Ron Polarik, who holds a Ph.D. in Instructional Media and specializes in computer graphics with over 20 years experience with computers, printers and typewriters, has come forth with more definitive evidence than the word processor that tried to simulate a 1970s Selectric typewriter.

Polarik has submitted a signed affidavit and has now released his findings on video at with his identity masked and voice altered to guard against the carrying out of threats, which he has already received.






Proofin' the prez: Who's in charge?
Constitutional lawyer says electors have duty to investigate citizenship

Posted: November 24, 2008
9:48 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Barack Obama

A one-time vice presidential candidate who is considered an expert on the U.S. Constitution says it is up the electors from the 50 states to make certain President-elect Barack Obama is a natural-born U.S. citizen before they cast votes for him in the Electoral College Dec. 15.

"If they do their duty, they would make sure that if they cast a vote for Mr. Obama, that Mr. Obama is a natural-born citizen," Herb Titus, the Constitution Party's running mate to Howard Phillips in 1996, told WND today.

"I think it should be resolved. The duty is in the Electoral College. Every Obama elector that is committed to casting a vote on the 15th of December, they have a constitutional duty to make certain whether Mr. Obama is a natural-born citizen," he said.

If the electors fail their duty and Obama proves ultimately to fail the eligibility requirement of the U.S. Constitution, there would be only the laborious, contentious and cumbersome process of impeachment available to those who would wish to follow the Constitution, he suggested.

The issue of Obama's citizenship has been in the news for weeks, as multiple legal claims have asserted the Democrat is not a natural-born U.S. citizen. There have been claims he was born in Kenya, that he's a British subject because of his father and that he lost his citizenship in Indonesia.


Bush warns Israel off attacks on Iran, Hamas, Hizballah - report

DEBKAfile Special Report

November 25, 2008, 9:51 AM (GMT+02:00)

A not-so-friendly farewell

A not-so-friendly farewell

This is reported by TIME magazine.

DEBKAfile’s Washington sources add that prime minister Ehud Olmert accused the Bush administration of establishing relations with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas when he met US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of in Washington Monday, Nov. 23.

Over this issue, Olmert’s meeting with president George W. Bush at the White House, intended to be a farewell between friends, turned into a stormy encounter.

The president again warned the prime minister against resorting to any Israeli military action in the Middle East in the period between the two US presidencies. Olmert for his part accused the administration of using the Jordanian king Abdullah and the Gaza missile crisis to open the door for an approach to the Palestinian Hamas, which Washington lists as a terrorist organization.

The king was asked to relay the Bush administration’s request to Syria and the Damascus-based Hamas leader Khalad Meshaal to make Hamas-Gaza stop firing the scores of missiles then flying over southwestern Israel.

The king complied by sending two high-ranking emissaries to Damascus with the US request.

They returned with Meshaal’s affirmative response. Washington’s next step for averting an Israeli counter-assault in Gaza was to have the king to invite Olmert and defense minister Ehud Barak to Amman. They were astonished to be presented with an accomplished fact: The US, Syria and Jordan had cooked up between them a new “Gaza ceasefire”.

According to our sources, Olmert told Bush that the American initiative had placed his government in an untenable position. It was seen to be failing to fight Hamas’ missile offensive while on the quiet, Washington was using Israeli quiescence to lay the foundations of a negotiating track with Palestinian extremists in Damascus and Gaza.

All the opinion polls agree that Olmert’s Kadima party and its coalition partner, Barak’s Labor, are fighting for their lives in the run-up to Israel’s Feb. 10, 2009 general election, while the right-of-center opposition bloc led by Likud is rising fast, making hay from the government’s weak-kneed military posture in obedience to US pressure.

DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources add that without being explicit, the US request intimated to Hamas leaders that by playing ball they would enhance the prospect of future contacts with Washington – whether with the Bush or Obama administrations was not spelled out. Meshaal took the hint.


Monday, November 24, 2008

Russian analyst predicts decline and breakup of U.S.

MOSCOW, November 24 (RIA Novosti) - A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.

Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily Izvestia published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."

The paper said Panarin's dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year's events.

When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator."

When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: "Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia."

Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: "A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles."

He also cited the "vulnerable political setup", "lack of unified national laws", and "divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions."

He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong.

He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all."

On the fate of the U.S. dollar, he said: "In 2006 a secret agreement was reached between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. on a common Amero currency as a new monetary unit. This could signal preparations to replace the dollar. The one-hundred dollar bills that have flooded the world could be simply frozen. Under the pretext, let's say, that terrorists are forging them and they need to be checked."

When asked how Russia should react to his vision of the future, Panarin said: "Develop the ruble as a regional currency. Create a fully functioning oil exchange, trading in rubles... We must break the strings tying us to the financial Titanic, which in my view will soon sink."

Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare.


Teddy Jacobson - Pistolsmith
281 565 6977



Ammo Confiscation
Sun Nov 23, 2008 16:05

Ammo Confiscation

(*Many* Americans are scared-to-death at what's coming....)

The bill that is being pushed in 18 states (including Illinois and Indiana)
requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacturer in a data
base of all ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what
calibers. Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the
ammunition is coded.

Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1,
2011.(Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax on
every round so every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more!

If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your gun!

This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama, Arizona,
California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland,
Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington.


UK Knife Ban

Posted By: Pete <Send E-Mail>
Date: Mon 14 Jan 2008 8:17 am

From The Times
London, UK
January 14, 2008

Government crackdown on knife crime in cities

Philip Webster, Political Editor

Anyone caught carrying a blade will be prosecuted and will not be allowed to escape with a caution under a crackdown on knife crime promised by Gordon Brown.

Police must prosecute those of any age who are found in possession of a blade in areas where knife crime is high. London, Liverpool, Birmingham and Greater Manchester are among the 12 priority areas.

Mr Brown is bringing forward a Violent Crime Action Plan which will be announced by Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, early next month.

The Government may also introduce an outright ban on some hunting knives.

In an interview with The Sun today, Mr Brown says: “You cannot be casual or cool about knives. Society cannot cope with people carrying guns and knives and threatening to use them.

“There are boundaries you cannot cross and one is this country’s zero tolerance on knives. It is neither cool nor does it make you safer to carry a knife. We must ease people’s fears. They deserve freedom from fear about their safety on the streets.”

Faridon Alizada, 18, from Bexley, southeast London; Bradley Whitfield, 16; and Nassirudeen Osawe, 17, were all murdered recently in stabbings.

Mr Brown wants the 12 worst-hit areas to receive a zero-tolerance message. In the interview he says: “It is completely unacceptable to carry a knife or a gun. We are to step up action. Where the police have previously been cautioning people there now has to be a presumption of prosecution. We will charge, not caution.”

The Prime Minister also expresses concern at computer games that show characters surviving being stabbed, but he cannot ban them. “I am very worried about video and computer games,” he says. “The industry has some responsibility to society and needs to exercise that responsibility.”

Have your say

Knife crime is so bad in Scotland that it doesn't even make the news and our government are focussed on banning air rifles... muppets.

Graeme, Edinburgh,

Slightly silly to ban all knives - a blanket ban will stopp people from legally buying kitchen knives and carrying them home! Or people like myself who carry a swiss army knife - not to threaten or harm anyone, but because the attachements aer useful! Instead of a bn on carrying, why not look at the causes of the problem - why is criminal behaviour on the rise? What are the underlying causes that are making these people so miserable or confused that they feel the need to (or do not understand the problem with) stabbing and attacking people? But as always, the British govenment deals with symptoms, not diseases, because it is easier.

Marianne, London, London

What on earth have hunting knives got to do with it ? Your average thug on the street with a knife will have his mums kitchen knife in his pocket. Should we ban them too ?
The way to deal with it is to enforce the existing laws, something no politician has ever suceeded in doing because it costs real money, and doesn't get instant media coverage.
Remeber criminals don't obey laws. Bringing out new ones makes no difference to them, it only affects the majority law abiding !

M Hill, Wigan, UK

And the penalties?

John Punshon, Milton Keynes, UK

How will this Zero-tolerance thing actually help anything, with cheap "kitchen knives" being sold in £1 shops across the country, these are basically disposable weapons.

UK knife law is already extremely Strict this is the government going in ham fisted again, lets ban everything with out thinking... how can HUNTING knife be defined, what about skinners, bowies, etc all have legitimate uses?

skip, London,

Brown is totally wrong here. We should have the right to defend ourselves, the right to bear arms (guns and knives), like in the USA. Currently, the criminals have weapons. This new legislation won't change this.

But the average law-abiding citizen can't do a thing to defend themselves.

On New Year's Eve, in the North of England, a guy was beaten to death after going out to look for his dog.

Yet in Florida, not long before, a guy was surrounded by four men, one of whom put a gun to his head. They asked him for money. Instead, he pulled out a gun (which he had a permit for) and fired on them, driving them off.

He came out without a scratch. Yet the defenceless guy in the UK is dead.

We need to be able to defend ourselves in Britain. I'm a true crime author and research crime on a daily basis. Because of this, I'm totally in favour of having the right to bear arms. We need more guns and knives; not less.

And, remember, it's alright for Gordon Brown; he's got bodyguards.

Jimmy Lee Shreeve, Norwich, UK

This law already exists, why doesn't Gordon Bean provide the police to enforce it?

Neil, Cheltenham, England

This is insane - as a serving officer so please excuse lack of full name - we recently attended an incident where security at tourist attraction had found a knife in a bag - the "knife carrier" was a American eagle scout, in the company of with his parents and grandparents, the knife in question being the folding blade on his eagle scout penknife. In future we will have to cuff Elmer (not his real name) in front of his parents and grandparents, and jail him for a substantial time?

Robbing police and courts of intelligent discretion for the sake of a headline is utterly destructive. We currently don't let bad hats 'get away with it', we have full powers to prosecute whenever we like. What we also have is the discretion not to in obviously inoffensive or accidental cases. Losing this is a disaster.

NB Anyone with a knife in their picnic basket is also going down - understood? Possession of salami and a crusty loaf will be no excuse...

"A Relief", Liverpool, UK


Monday, November 24, 2008

Kenyan Ambassador to the United States, His Excellency Peter Ogengo, Admits Obama Born in Kenya

Update 24 NOVEMBER 28: Kenyan Ambassador Peter Nicholas Rateng’ Oginga Ogego appears to be finding himself in hot water both in Washington and in Kenya. However, that hot water is not due to his on-air comments to Detroit's WRIF FM 101 "Mike in the Morning" program regarding Barack Obama's Kenyan birthplace, the hot water is due to Ambassador Ogego's stinging criticism of Senator Barack Obama before Mr. Peter Oginga Ogego officially became Kenya's Ambassador to the United States on 5 September 2006 and two years prior to Barack Obama's apparent victory in the U.S. Presidential election.

Mr. Ogego's criticism of Senator Obama was as follows according to the Kenyan Daily Nation newspaper:

“You deliberately, without real cause or reason, other than what appears to be to seek cheap publicity and inconsequential populism, chose to publicly attack the democratically elected Government of Kenya, in total disregard for the requisite protocol and acceptable methods to address the issues you raised, what with programmed appointments to meet Cabinet ministers and even the Head of State, since your visit was official.”

In 2006, speaking as a Kenyan citizen Mr. Ogego was rightfully incensed at Barack Obama's insertion of himself into Kenyan politics as well as Barack Obama's uncalled for attack on the democratically elected Government of Kenya during an official visit to the country. This blatant interference in Kenyan politics occured when Barack Obama was in Kenya to campaign and provide financial support to his cousin, Raila Odinga, prior to the violence which was deliberately set in motion by the Odinga camp when he lost the election. Violence we have detailed in this blog previously. Keep an eye on Ambassador Ogego, this is not over by a long shot. For the record, Ambassador Ogego's diplomatic portfolio is HERE.

22 NOVEMBER 2008: During a recent program aired on Detroit's WRIF 101 FM "Mike in the Morning" radio program a decision was made to make a phone call to the Kenyan Embassy in Washington D.C. for the obvious purpose of having a little fun and in order to congratulate Kenyan's on the occassion of Barack Obama's election.

During the course of the call Mike and his co-host Trudy were connected to the Ambassador's office and after a short conversation with a secretary the Ambassador, His Excellency Peter OGEGO, pictured below, picked up the call.

At approximately 12:30 into the MP3 recording another of Mike's co-hosts asks Ambassador, "President-elect Obama's birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?"

Ambassador Ogego responds, "It's, um, already an attraction. His, his, uh, pateral grandmother is still alive..."

The questioner then interjects, "But his birthplace, they'll put up a marker there?"

Ambassador Ogego responds, "It depends on the government, it's already well known."

Kenyan Ambassador Peter Ogego just annouced to the whole world on live radio that our assumed President-elect Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya, his birthplace is already an attraction, and placing a marker is up to the Kenyan government, but the location is already well known, intimating the the location does not need anything further to distinguish it.
This admission is a confirmation of the multiple statements made by Obama's paternal grandmother, referenced by Ambassador Ogego, about Obama's Kenyan birthplace.

Uphold the U.S. Constitution -
Demand of your Senator and Representative in the House as well as the Supreme Court of the United States that they uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, Article II, Section 1: "No person except a natural born citizen ... shall be eligible to the office of President;" and to this end the President of the Senate shall not count as valid any electoral votes from any state elector cast for Barack Hussein Obama.


Afghanistan fight 'doomed to failure'
Intel says Taliban 'resilient, certainly quite dangerous, impervious to losses'

Posted: November 23, 2008
6:23 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Editor's Note: The following report is excerpted from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium online newsletter published by the founder of WND.

The military in Afghanistan (Army photo)

British officials have declared the NATO mission in Afghanistan to be "doomed to failure" with a military victory "neither feasible nor supportable," according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

The declaration comes both at the diplomatic and military levels of the British government.

In what is said to have been a recently leaked cable by deputy French ambassador

to Afghanistan Francois Fitou, the British ambassador, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, told him that the NATO strategy is "doomed to failure."

The cable, addressed to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, said that the British ambassador had declared that the British want to be part of a winning strategy, "not a losing one. The American strategy is doomed to fail."


Surprise! CAIR officials slapped with subpoenas Terror-linked Muslim lobby's dinner turns into public relations nightmare

Posted: November 23, 2008
9:40 pm Eastern

By Joseph Farah
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Nihad Awad, director of CAIR, being served a subpoena

WASHINGTON – When the Council on American-Islamic Relations held its 14th Annual Banquet at the Marriott Crystal Gateway Hotel tonight, it was planning to raise funds and honor some of its supporters, but instead several top officials of the Muslim lobby group were served with subpoenas for various civil and criminal offenses.

The dramatic surprise, caught on video, was a result of the research work of the Mapping Sharia Project, headed by Dave Gaubatz. He personally served CAIR Director Nihad Awad at the banquet tonight while North Carolina state Sen. Larry Shaw, D-N.C., a CAIR national board member, was addressing the festivities.

Four CAIR clients have filed a federal civil complaint alleging criminal fraud and racketeering against CAIR, a self-described public interest civil rights law firm. The lawsuit also names CAIR's national leadership as individual defendants.

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that Morris Days, the "resident attorney" and "manager for civil rights" at the now defunct CAIR MD/VA chapter in Herndon, Va., was in fact not an attorney and that he failed to provide legal services for clients who came to CAIR for assistance and who had paid for CAIR legal services.

Be sure never to miss another hot WND exclusive like this, again! Sign up right now for FREE WND news alerts right now.

While attorney David Yerushalmi represents the four plaintiffs in this particular lawsuit, two of whom are African-American Muslims, the complaint alleges that, according to CAIR internal documents, there were hundreds of victims of fraud scheme by CAIR and Days.

According to the complaint, CAIR failed to conduct a background check on Days prior to hiring him and when the group discovered the fraud, it set about a cover-up.

The suit charges CAIR officials purposefully concealed the truth about Days from their clients, law enforcement, the Virginia and D.C. state bar associations and the media. When CAIR got irate calls from clients about Days' failure to provide competent legal services, CAIR is charged with fraudulently deceiving clients about Days' relationship to CAIR, concealing the fact that CAIR had fired him for criminal fraud.

"The evidence has long suggested that CAIR is a criminal organization set up by the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas to further its aims of stealth Jihad in the U.S.," Yerushalmi said referring to the fact that CAIR has been named by the federal government as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial. "But our investigation and this complaint makes clear that CAIR’s criminal activities know no bounds."

Yerushalmi alleges CAIR has engaged in a massive cover-up of a criminal fraud in which hundreds of CAIR clients have been victimized.

"The fact that CAIR has victimized Muslims and non-Muslims alike demonstrates that CAIR is only looking out for CAIR and its ongoing effort to bilk donors out of millions of dollars of charitable donations thinking they are supporting a legitimate organization," he said.

The complaint also alleges that in addition to covering up the Days fraud scheme, CAIR officials in D.C. forced angry clients who were demanding a return of their legal fees to sign a release that bought the client-victims' silence by prohibiting them from informing law enforcement or the media about the CAIR-Days fraud. According to the agreement, if the "settling" clients said anything to anyone about the fraud scheme, CAIR would be able to sue them for $25,000.

The four plaintiffs contacted their attorney David Yerushalmi only after they had spoken to Gaubatz, a private researcher who had been investigating CAIR for its connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and its ties to global jihad.

The complaint identifies CAIR as a racketeering enterprise under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), which is a criminal racketeering statute that allows victims to sue the defendants in civil court. In addition to damages, the plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief under this and other statutes to shut down CAIR and to prevent the individual defendants from engaging in public interest legal work in the future.

The named defendants are: the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action Network Inc. (dba CAIR); Nihad Awad aka Nihad Hammad, who serves as executive director of CAIR National; Parvez Ahmed, who was the chairman of the board of CAIR National during the relevant time period; Tahra Goraya, who was the national director of CAIR but who has since resigned; Khadijah Athman, who is the manager of the "civil rights" division of CAIR; and Nadhira al-Khalili, Esq., who is in-house legal counsel for CAIR. All were handed subpoenas this evening.

According to the complaint, CAIR's in-house Washington, D.C.-based attorney Khalili was directly involved in taking the legal files out of the CAIR Virginia office and concealing them in the D.C. office.

Also named as defendants are Ibrahim Hooper and Amina Rubin, CAIR's director of communications and coordinator of communications, respectively. According to the complaint, these two were directly responsible for issuing fraudulent press releases about the Days fraud scheme, thus aiding and abetting the CAIR cover-up.

CAIR officials were not available for comment tonight.

Also addressing the dinner was Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the nation's first Muslim member of Congress. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, reportedly turned down an invitation to address the banquet.

As WND previously reported, CAIR allegedly defrauded a number of Muslims recently seeking help with citizenship delays, and then threatened to sue them if they complained to the media, according to a security watchdog group which has obtained internal CAIR documents.

The former legal director of CAIR's Maryland/Virginia chapter shook down Muslim hardship cases for thousands of dollars without providing promised services, officials with the Mapping Sharia Project charge.




Somali Pirates Expose America’s Broken Will

November 21, 2008 | From

Defense Department “stunned” by the audacious attacks—but no plans for retaliation.

“In an indirect sense, the brutal Dey of Algiers was a Founding Father of the Constitution,” noted 20th-century historian Thomas Bailey. In 1785, Dey Muhammad of Algiers declared war on America’s fledgling confederation of colonies by abducting several American merchant ships in the Mediterranean, holding their crews for ransom or selling them into Moroccan slave markets.

Before the Revolution, America’s ocean-going vessels had relied solely on Great Britain’s naval and diplomatic power for protection against pirate brigades. After winning independence from Britain during the Revolution, however, American ships were left to themselves in facing the perilous dangers of traversing the sea along the Barbary Coast.

Alarmed by the hijackings and fearing it would be perceived as weak by its enemies, America’s earliest reformers argued for a more powerful central government. In “The Federalist No. 41,” for example, James Madison wrote that a stronger federal government was needed to “maintain a navy” that would “be a principal source of her security against danger from abroad.” America’s international trade and commerce, Madison wrote (emphasis mine throughout),

the great reservoir of its wealth, lies every moment at the mercy of events, and may almost be regarded as a hostage for ignominious compliances with the dictates of a foreign enemy, or even with the rapacious demands of pirates and barbarians.

In replacing the Articles of Confederation with the United States Constitution in 1789, the founders gave the federal government the power it needed to levy taxes on its citizenry, to raise and support a national army, to provide and maintain a navy and to declare war on enemy combatants.

Even after it adopted the Constitution, many of America’s founders remained wary of a powerful centralized government—particularly one with an established naval force. But the scourge of piracy in the waters of the Mediterranean helped tip the balance in favor of naval shipbuilding. “The majority of the members of Congress, irrespective of their feelings toward federalism, could no longer bear the disgrace of kowtowing to Barbary,” Michael Oren wrote in Power, Faith and Fantasy.

“The liberation of our citizens has an intimate connection with the liberation of our commerce in the Mediterranean,” said then Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson. President George Washington added, “If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it.”

So Congress authorized the construction of six frigates and the U.S. Navy was born. Soon after, the United States of America waged its first overseas war—against pirates of the Mediterranean.

Somalia Again Humbles American Might

Today, more than 200 years later, the United States has the largest, most powerful navy in the world—by far. Yet last week, Somali pirates aboard speed boats embarrassed the American superpower when they hijacked a massive oil tanker bound for the U.S. through a waterway patrolled by the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, admitted to being “stunned” by the “extraordinary rise” in hijacking attempts. Over the last 12 days, Somali pirates have seized nine vessels passing through the Gulf of Aden. All totaled, 18 ships and crews are currently being held hostage by Somalia. Yet Vice Adm. William E. Gortney, who commands the Fifth Fleet, told the New York Times that there were no plans to rescue any of them.

The most powerful naval force in the world simply will not act!

Admiral Mullen complained earlier this week about “legal and military obstacles” to fighting piracy. “One of the challenges that you have in piracy, clearly, is, if you are intervening and you capture pirates, is there a path to prosecute them?” Mullen asked.

This is what most concerns America’s military brass—whether or not pirates can be prosecuted?

After some criticism had been leveled at the United States for not taking a lead role in defeating the pirates, Defense Department press secretary Geoff Morrell strenuously defended the Navy. “This notion that there’s inaction out there is just utterly false,” Morrell said at a press conference earlier this week.

Morrell admitted that the Navy was at least partly responsible for protecting international shipping lanes. “But the companies … also have an obligation to secure their ships to prevent incidents such that we’ve been seeing at alarming rates over the past several months,” he added, suggesting companies take additional precautions like adding armed guards.

What a comfort that must be to international shipping merchants. You’re on your own fellas! And think of the clear message America’s inaction sends to hostile powers. In the days of Washington, Adams and Jefferson, at least America was concerned about being perceived as weak.

But not anymore!

Regarding the oil tanker en route to America, as reported on Wednesday, the U.S. Navy knows where the captured ship is located. It even has permission from the United Nations to enter Somali waters in pursuit of the pirates.

But it lacks the will to act.

“We know where these guys live and where their ships and boats operate from—it’d be a simple mission to take them out,” a retired Marine general told Time. “There was talk of the U.S. military doing some kind of mission—the Navy would love to do it—but there’s no stomach for it right now.”

Awesome military might—and pitifully weak willpower to go with it. America’s top military brass no longer view aggressive action against murderous thugs as a commonsense approach to combating terrorism. That approach is now being employed by other, much less powerful nations.

Take India, for example. On Tuesday, a pirate ship launched grenades on the Indian ship Tabar and then attempted to ram the vessel. But instead of running away from the would-be hijackers, the Indians fired back—sinking one of the pirates’ mother-ships! It was the second ship the Indians have sunk in two weeks. As the Investor’s Business Daily noted, India’s approach

contrasts sharply with the handwringing helplessness of other navies patrolling the area under a United Nations mandate. Their mission is proving ineffective, and the enemy is growing bolder. …

India showed that the only message with authority in this perversely incentivized void is force. The West may have bigger, more technologically advanced navies than India’s 118-ship naval flotilla, but only India has demonstrated the way to raise the cost of piracy.

The article predicted that from now on, ships flying the Indian flag will most likely pass through the Gulf of Aden without incident!

America used to have that kind of pride in its power, back when leaders were more inclined to act courageously against the forces of terror. When North African pirates, for example, demanded tribute from the U.S. government to ensure safe passage for American ships through the Mediterranean, Thomas Jefferson’s reply was unambiguous: “The style of the demand admitted but one answer. I sent a small squadron of frigates into the Mediterranean.”

And that was when the United States had a tiny fraction of the power that it has today. Like present-day India , there was much less power, but a lot more pride.

There may still be plenty of power in America today, but the will to use it—as God has prophesied in Leviticus 26:19—has been completely crushed.

Citibail: Another in an endless series of doomed, late-night bailouts; 1 am Eastern update: Citicorp to receive $306 billion fed backing + $20 billion more from Crap Sandwich

By Michelle Malkin • November 23, 2008 10:45 PM

Citicorp’s $306 billion + $20 billion bailout agreement reached…Treasury/FDIC/Federal Reserve issue statement…Bottom line: We’re Screwed ‘08!


Foreclosures, delinquencies skyrocketing among 'prime' borrowers

Nationwide, 3.07% of prime mortgages were in foreclosure or at least 60 days late in the second quarter of this year, easily topping the previous record of 1.97% set in 1985.
By E. Scott Reckard
November 24, 2008
By this year, the bleeding housing market had drained the equity from Judy Jones' home in Murrieta, but her life still seemed secure. She had a government job, after all, and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at 5.875%, unlike the shaky, variable-rate loans of many of her Inland Empire neighbors.

Then her employer, the city of Corona, decided to deal with the economic slump by eliminating 112 positions, including Jones' job as a code enforcer. Last month, at age 61, she joined a surge of once-solid borrowers who no longer could afford their mortgages.


Found! Obama's birth certificate

Posted: November 24, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008