Saturday, June 13, 2009







US Naval Academy Grads

Disarmed To Protect Obama
The 'Commander-in-Chief' required that all
Naval officers in his presence be disarmed


The End of the U.S.-Israeli Alliance
June 12, 2009 | From
Obama abandons historic ally to win favor from Muslims.
Shepard Smith
Image:Shepard Smith 20071115.jpg
Shepard Smith anchoring Studio B, November 15, 2007
Born David Shepard Smith Jr.
January 14, 1964 (age 45)
(1964-01-14) United States
Education University of Mississippi
Occupation News anchor for Fox News Channel
Other names Shep
Salary US$7 to 8 million



North Korea in 'early phase of all-out confrontation with US'

North Korea has pledged to begin work "weaponising" plutonium to create another nuclear bomb as it delivered a furious response to a UN resolution ordering a fresh round of sanctions against the rogue Stalinist state.

Obama fires watchdog who barked at his crony
Rush Limbaugh calls action illegal, 'bigger' than Alberto Gonzales fray

Posted: June 13, 2009
7:25 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Gerald Walpin

Former Inspector General Gerald Walpin filed two reports exposing gross misappropriation of federal AmeriCorps funds

by a prominent Barack Obama supporter and was shortly thereafter fired by the White House, circumstances he told WND are likely linked and others have called an outright illegal action by the administration.

"I think you have to look at the facts and the circumstances and reach your conclusions," Walpin said in a WND interview. "I will tell you that [my firing] came only after we had issued those two reports to Congress, and I don't think that's a coincidence."

Further, Walpin said, "I am convinced that I and my office are not guilty of any impropriety. In essence, I was fired for doing my job."

Independent, federal inspectors general are supposed to be granted special protection from political interference – thanks in part to a law co-sponsored by the then-Senator Barack Obama – to ensure that they are free to investigate waste and fraud uninfluenced by political cronyism.

But after Walpin dared to push for action against the St. HOPE Academy program – run by Obama supporter and former NBA star Kevin Johnson – which had misappropriated hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal AmeriCorps funds, he nonetheless found himself fired by the White House under circumstances that have led some to wonder if Obama has violated his own co-sponsored law in retaliation.

"There are two big questions about the president's actions," writes Byron York, chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner. "One, why did he decide to fire Walpin? And two, did he abide by the law that he himself co-sponsored?"

Discover how government is grinding away Americans' individual liberties in "Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws."

Radio talk host Rush Limbaugh fired off an answer to York's questions on his program yesterday:

"Firing an inspector general is a big deal. If you'll remember, Alberto Gonzales as attorney general fired a couple of U.S. attorneys. He took hell for it. This is bigger. Inspectors general are supposed to be completely above politics," Limbaugh commented. "This is big. This is political cronyism, power and so forth. … I'm telling you, firing an I.G., because they're not political, it is a much bigger deal than replacing United States attorneys."

Furthermore, Limbaugh stated, the unusual circumstances surrounding the night before Walpin's dismissal constitutes a clear violation of the very law Obama helped to pass as a senator.

"The Obama administration did it overnight," Limbaugh stated. "[It] broke the law firing the AmeriCorps I.G."


President Obama favored losing candidate in Iran's election

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis

June 13, 2009

Backers of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi

Backers of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi

Friday night, June 12, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was already on his way to victory in Iran's turbulent presidential election although only the first votes had been counted. By Saturday morning, it was clear he had won a landslide for a second term, widening the gap with his closest rival opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi. According to final results, the incumbent won 62.6 percent of the vote, Mousavi 33.75 percent.

This contradicted Western predictions that the record-breaking turnout of 85 percent of Iran's 46 million eligible voters favored the challenger.

Yet strangely enough, even then, Washington and the US media were still doggedly insisting that that the reformist Mousavi could still make it in a run-off, although that door had been finally slammed shut by the president's broad majority.

Indeed a high-ranking White House official, quoted by a British TV correspondent, even stated that a second round was inevitable and Mir Hossein Mousavi was bound to win. Even before that, President Barack Obama said optimistically: "Whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact there has been a robust debate hopefully will advance our ability to engage them in new ways."

Their insistence on hoping against hope for a change of presidents in Tehran remains a big puzzle, now that it is obvious that the Islamic Republic's exercise in democracy was carefully stage-managed for a predetermined outcome. This became apparent in the next developments.

By Saturday afternoon, riot police and Revolutionary Guards thugs were clashing with thousands of protesters who surged onto the streets of Tehran after their defeated hero, Mousavi, said he strongly protests "the many obvious violations that could lead to tyranny in Iran."

Police blocked him when he tried to hold a press conference and blacked his efforts to send text messages to his supporters. Iran's ultimate authority, supreme ruler Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered "all Iranians to support the elected president."

So how come the Obama administration, with so much at stake, continued to back the loser well after his defeat could no longer be denied?

DEBKAfile's Washington sources have two explanations:

1. The White House was given erroneous intelligence evaluations about the way Iran's presidential election was managed. The administration's Iranian experts missed the point that in Middle East politics (except for Israel) it is not the people who determine an election, the shape of government and its policies but the unelected head of the tribe - in this case supreme ruler Khamenei.

This was the second time in a week that an American intelligence prediction missed out on a Middle East election result. Having widely anticipated a massive Hizballah win in Lebanon's parliamentary elections of Sunday, June 7, Washington was stunned by the victory of the pro-Western camp.

2. Mousavi's portrayal as a "reformist" by the Western media was false. As prime minister in the 1980s under the Islamic revolution's founding father, Ayatollah Khomeini, he laid the foundations for Iran's nuclear program and international terror network ("exporting revolution"). He was therefore hardly the figure to step out of the Islamic regime's value system and make good on his campaign platform of change.

But the White House decided to seize on Mousavi's build-up as a candidate capable of beating the hard-line Ahmadinjed and leading Iran to change in order to vindicate Obama's hopes of a successful dialogue with Tehran.

By falling through, this scheme placed a big question mark over the US president's essential strategy of diplomatically engaging rogue states to de-emphasize conflict.

The way the North Korean crisis was handled illustrates this point. Closely in step with Iran on their nuclear and missile development, Pyongyang has brought its relations with the United States to the brink of a military confrontation whose conclusion no one can predict.

Finally removing the gloves, Washington persuade UN Security Council members to unite Friday, June 12, behind a resolution imposing harsh sanctions for the North Korean nuclear test last month. US warships were authorized to search North Korean vessels for suspected nuclear materials, financial measures were tightened.

The Obama administration will now have to follow through on the Security Council's directives - even in the face of North Korea's threat to treat a US embargo as "an act of war" and respond with military, including nuclear, action. Failure to do so would make America a paper tiger which no US president can afford especially under the eye of the re-elected Ahmadinejad.

Newly empowered for a second four-year term in office, Ahmadinejad need not be expected to let Obama off the hook for supporting his leading challenger. The tough Iranian president will drive a harder bargain than ever when they sit down to talk.

And in other parts of the Middle East, despite the US envoy George Mitchell's unquestioned diplomatic skills, the tour he began in Israel and the Palestinian Authority, moving on to Cairo, Amman, Beirut and finally Damascus on Saturday, has produced no breakthroughs. Iran's election results, hailed enthusiastically by the Palestinian Hamas and Jihad Islami, are a shot in the arm for the most radical forces in the region, such as Syria and the Lebanese Hizballah.

DEBKAfile's political sources advise Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, to take Ahmadinejad's victory into account when he finalizes the text of the major policy speech he is scheduled to deliver at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv Sunday, June 14.

Israel is stuck for another four years with the same aggressive champion of a nuclear-armed Iran and radical Islamic terror, hater of Israel and Holocaust denier, as before. He will now maintain that his positions are endorsed by the Iranian people.

Originally billed as the Israeli response to Obama's Cairo speech of June 4 and his policies on the issues in dispute between them, Netanyahu has the choice of echoing Washington's wishful thinking on the Middle East or looking at the real problems of the region squarely through the prism of Israel's interests.

If he wavers between the two courses, he will end up with a wishy-washy product that satisfies no one.






Government Demands Inventory of All VFW Weapons



My son Charles and his band "Soundforge" on Youtube:
Please watch their videos and leave a comment/rating!



Tehran: Ahmadinejad wins second presidential term up to 2013

DEBKAfile Special Report

June 13, 2009, 3:47 AM (GMT+02:00)

Tehran rules: Ahmadinejad is the winner. Mousavi claims election irregularities

Tehran rules: Ahmadinejad is the winner. Mousavi claims election irregularities

With most of the votes counted, the election committee chairman in Tehran awarded president Mahound Ahmadinejad a 66 percent victory over his main reformist challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi's 33 percent with the remainder divided among the two last contestants in Iran's highly-charged presidential election. .

Earlier, Mousavi claimed to have toppled the president with 65 percent of the record-breaking turnout and alleged widespread irregularities. His disappointed supporters clashed with police in Tehran when the apparent results unfolded.

Turnout is estimated to top 80 percent of Iran's 46 million eligible voters. If the official results are confirmed, no run-off will be necessary.

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that the Islamic Republic's authorities appear to have swung into action to ensure the hard-line president's re-election and try and stop Moussavi, whose promise of change attracted many of the under-30s who make up three-quarters of the electorate.

The apparent freedom of debate permitted in the election campaign was held up in the West as denoting a certain easing in the regime's autocratic rule and a pointer to Mousavi's election which was heavily staked by the US administration, Western and Israeli media. DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that in Tehran, the winner is preparing to raise the ante for consenting to dialogue with the parties who backed his rival.

While improving its image abroad, the authorities were accused by Mousavi's supporters of quietly preparing mechanisms to rig the results to make sure Ahmadinejad won the election in the first round.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly 400 published June 11 disclosed some of the alleged ruses:

Interior minister Sadeqh Mahsooli was accused of planting "mirror ballot boxes" at voting stations, pre-stuffed with mostly Ahmadinejad ballots ready to switch with the real ballots in precincts where opposition support was preponderant.

By not requiring voters to present photo IDs and running off more than a million fake IDs in Qatar for use by the hundreds of thousands of loyal "bassij" (voluntary militiamen), the Tehran establishment made it possible for a huge number of voters to cast ballots in more than one polling station and substantially pad Ahmadinejad's support.

The Iranian government also set up a vast number of mobile ballots where voters were not required to provide their addresses. In former elections, bogus votes were uncovered by comparing the numbers cast with the number of registered voters in a given precinct. This kind of supervision is ruled out by mobile stations.

Crucial policies are not determined by the president but by the clerical establishment headed by the supreme ruler and the president of Iran


Michelle Obama Baby Bombshell!

FURIOUS Michelle Obama insists a new baby will silence - once and for all - a controversial writer who claims he had a gay fling with the President, insiders say. GLOBE brings you the exclusive word on the First Lady's pregnancy shocker. It's must reading for every American.


U.S. battlefield superiority for sale to America's enemies
Report says illegal exports of military-critical systems on rise

Posted: June 12, 2009
10:50 pm Eastern

© 2009 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. Subscriptions are $99 a year or, for monthly trials, just $9.95 per month for credit card users, and provide instant access for the complete reports.

A new report raises alarms about existing U.S. export controls over militarily-sensitive high technology, suggesting they are are insufficient to prevent them from illegal export, theft, espionage or reverse engineering, according to a report in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

The result could be a loss of the historic U.S. battlefield superiority because of the billions of dollars the Defense Department spends to produce advanced weapons systems.

In addition, sensitive dual-use and military technology can be easily and legally purchased from manufacturers and distributors within the United States and illegally exported without detection, the report says.

These and other conclusions from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, or GAO, come at a time when such technologies increasingly are making their way into the hands of such proliferating countries as Iran, North Korea and Syria, and to such major countries as China, India and Pakistan which act as conduits to these proliferators, some of which are regarded as state sponsors of terrorism.