Can't Squeeze Blood Out Of Turnip- Can Out of Taxpayer!

This from a dear friend, like family, and fellow memo reader of many years: "Balanced, as always. Rush Limbaugh pointed out this morning, that Bill Clinton, an accused rapist and female harasser, will introduce Obama at the DNC convention. He’s a hero in their minds. Go figure."
---
Will Obama run a campaign of win at any cost? Why not. That is the historical Chicago way. My friend,Stella Paul, hates to pursue the unthinkable but takes a stab at it anyway. Some of her fears are probably overblown but I have no doubt a win at any price campaign is what we are in for.

If you have a doubt you might click on this: http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/08/21/white-house-insider-issues-warning-false-flag-planned-for-gop-convention/ and (See 1 below.)

More buyer's remorse from my organization:  

RJC Rolls Out New
Buyer's Remorse Ad: "Brad"  

The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) today released the next ad in its "My Buyer's Remorse" series, entitled "Brad."

"Brad" is an attorney who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and even donated money to his campaign. But now he says: "I don't think we can afford another four years of an administration that thinks it can create economic opportunity and growth by taxing people into submission.... I wish I didn't have to say it, but where we are right now and the situation we are in, domestically, and in my view internationally, I think we can do better than Barack Obama."

The new video is part of an ongoing series, in which real people tell their stories of why they voted for Barack Obama in 2008, how they became disillusioned with him, and why they won't vote for him in 2012.

RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks said, "The recession, unemployment, and the lack of opportunity in this economy are serious concerns for voters this year, including Jewish voters. Candidate Obama made a lot of promises about jobs and taxes and economic growth that President Obama has failed to keep. There is an increasing sense in the Jewish community that we're on the wrong track, and the RJC is letting individuals with buyer's remorse express that to a national audience."

The new ad and previous ads in the series can be seen athttp://www.MyBuyersRemorse.com.

Then we have some not so politically correct but factual warnings regarding Muslims. I have posted this before and do not subscribe to the entire message but this is where we are heading if we do not wake up and smell the "Koran."(See 1a below.)
---
There is an old corny joke about a teacher who gave her class and assignment: "draw a lesson from studying Hopalong Cassidy." One kid wrote: "He wore a white hat." One kid wrote: "He saved women and loved children.". One Jewish kid wrote: " Don't f--- with Hoppy!" (See 2 below.)

 And then we have president talk tough! (See 2a below.)
---
 'Obamascare' has some hidden taxes but the czars have authorized several aspirins. Can't squeeze blood out of a turnip but can out of a taxpayer! (See 3 below.)
 ---

 Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1)Will Obama Keep Power 'by Any Means Necessary'?
By Stella Paul

Let's go there: if Obama thinks he's losing, will he allow safe and fair elections on November 6?  And if he does lose, will he peacefully turn over power to Mitt Romney on January 20, 2013?  Or will he cling to power "by any means necessary," as a highly placed insider alleges?

Now, I'm truly sorry to raise such disgusting, un-American, crazy-sounding questions, but, alas, they're not crazy, and I've got a disquieting amount of evidence.  The Democrats have already accused Romney of murdering a woman with cancer, financial felonies, and not filing taxes for ten years -- the last charge delivered by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the Senate floor, on the basis of absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

By Democrat standards, I've got enough proof to put away Obama, et al. for life without parole.

Whatever chicanery Obama and his investors may be contemplating, it will probably unfold against some gargantuan crisis, manufactured or otherwise.  So cast your mind back to September 11, 2001, the day of the New York mayoral primary. 

In the chaos after the attacks, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who was term-limited from running, pleaded that his leadership was essential and that he should be granted an extra three months in office after his term ran out on January 1.  Giuliani's unprecedented power-grab was rightfully scorned by his eventual successor, Michael Bloomberg.  So what did Bloomberg do when he ran into term limits?  He deployed his multi-billion-dollar fortune to manipulate the law and buy himself a quasi-legal third term, claiming that only he had the expertise to handle the 2008 financial crisis.

My point?  Politicians a great deal more conventional than Obama have loathed giving up power, and they have used crises and unethical machinations to try to keep it.

Now, let's look at just some of the disturbing evidence that indicates that Obama and his investors are plotting something big:

Super-High-Level Trial Balloons

USA Today reported that on September 27, 2011, Governor Beverly Perdue, Democrat of North Carolina, told a Rotary Club audience, "I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won't hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover[.] ... You want people who don't worry about the next election."  When outrage greeted her suggestion, she retreated to the standard defense: she was just joking.  What a kidder!

Meanwhile, that same month, Peter Orszag, Obama's former director of the Office of Management and Budget, published an article in The New Republic titled "Too Much of A Good Thing: Why We Need Less Democracy."  In it, he posited that the country was too polarized; hence, "radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic."

Please note that these suggestions to suspend elections and radically reduce democratic control did not come from basement-dwelling bloggers.  They came from the governor of the very state in which the Democrats are holding their national convention and from one of Obama's most prominent Cabinet members.  Their close timing suggests that these ideas were circulating at the highest levels of the Democrat power elite.

"Whom Does the Government Intend to Shoot?"

That's the question recently posed by retired Major General Jerry Curry in the Daily Caller, in light of horrifying reports that the Social Security Administration is buying 174,000 rounds of hollow-point bullets for distribution to 41 locations in the U.S.

According to Major General Curry, Social Security's ammo spree follows the purchase by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of 46,000 rounds of hollow-point ammunition.  Will they be shooting fish in a barrel?

Most terrifying of all, Major General Curry reports that the Department of Homeland Security ordered 750 million rounds of hollow-point ammunition in March, then subsequently ordered an additional 750 million rounds, including bullets capable of penetrating walls.

"This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen," writes Major General Curry, who wonders what plan might require "so many dead Americans."

I strongly suggest that you read Major General Curry's article for yourself, so you can appreciate the full horror of what he describes.  After pointing out that Congress has done nothing to investigate these weapon purchases, Major General Curry, a 40-year veteran, concludes with these chilling words:

This is a deadly serious business. I hope I'm wrong, but something smells rotten. And If the Congress isn't going to do its duty and investigate this matter fully, the military will have to protect the Constitution, the nation, and our citizens.

Executive Orders

Obama may not be fond of governing, but he certainly does enjoy issuing executive orders -- 135 so far.  As American Thinker's Warren Beatty points out, these little-reported edicts reveal an all-too-predictable pattern: concentrating all national power and resources in Obama's hands, in case of "emergency."

So far, Obama has granted himself the right to control all transportation, including highways, airports, seaports, and railroads, and all modes of communication, storage facilities, electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

Should you resist any of these emergency measures, rest assured that the U.S. government is now well supplied with bullets.

Openly War-Gaming against American Citizens

A recent issue of the well-respected Small Wars Journal featured an article titled "Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A 'Vision' of the Future."  Written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army's University of Foreign Military and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert, the article helpfully game-played, in full operational detail, how the Army would destroy a local Tea Party insurrection.

The authors claim that should Tea Party rebels take over a City Hall, "Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas"; therefore, "the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment."

The brazenness of this scheme for the U.S. military to kill Americans created a small, temporary stir.  The Washington Times editorialized, "This is a dark, pessimistic and wrongheaded view of what military leaders should spend their time studying."  The Washington Times also noted:

A professor at the Joint Forces Staff College was relieved of duty in June for uttering the heresy that the United States is at war with Islam. The Obama administration contended the professor had to be relieved because what he was teaching was not U.S. policy. Because there is no disclaimer attached to the Small Wars piece, it is fair to ask, at least in Col. Benson's case, whether his views reflect official policy regarding the use of U.S. military force against American citizens.

Active Partnership with America's Foreign Enemies

Many spectacles have enlivened presidential elections over the years, but 2012 marks the first time that high-level military personnel have felt compelled to publicly tell the president to stop leaking national security secrets.

A group of former U.S. intelligence and Special Forces operatives created a 22-minute video, "Dishonorable Disclosures," to shame Obama into shutting up about priceless intelligence related to bin Laden's death, British-Saudi penetration of al-Qaeda, and the Israeli-American Stuxnet virus attack on Iran's nuclear program.

Normally, presidents don't want to endanger American citizens and military personnel by leaking top-secret information -- but aiding and abetting the enemy is apparently all in a day's work for Obama.

And so, if he wants to stir up trouble before the election, either at home or abroad, he'll have plenty of enemy partners to help.  First, he's got the Russians, to whose president he was caught whispering on a hot mic about missile defense, "This is my last election[.] ... After my election, I have more flexibility."

Second, Obama is this close to the Muslim Brotherhood, who are world-class experts on unleashing political violence.  Obama helped the Muslim Brotherhood ascend to power in Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, and Libya, and he's placed its operatives in the highest levels of the American government.  Surely, such clever characters as Huma Abedin, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's deputy chief of staff, and Mohamed Elibiary, a Homeland Security Advisory committee member, can be trusted to think up some exciting turmoil to apply where needed.

And finally, close to home, Obama can rely on the Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico, whom he supplied with thousands of guns.  Gratefully, they used their American taxpayer-funded AK-47s to wipe out rival drug gangs and to murder Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.  Attorney General Eric Holder is presently in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over documents on Operation Fast and Furious, and Obama ("President Transparency") has claimed executive privilege to withhold them.

Sending hordes of expensively armed drug gang members across our border should be a snap, now that Obama has crippled our Border Patrol.  Just think of all the headline-grabbing distractions these energetic young men can unleash!

Active Partnership with Domestic Criminal Groups

When Louis Farrakhan met Ahmadinejad: now there's a romance made in the bowels of hell.  Toss in the head of the New Black Panthers and fifty radical imams, and you've got the "Beast Axis" that was forged in a Manhattan hotel on September 27, 2010, according to The Blaze.

New Black Panther Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz boasted on Black Panther Radio that he "stands on solid ideological ground" with "His Excellency, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad," who understands "the dynamics and the politics of world revolution."

Apparently, Obama approves of these antics, because his attorney general, Eric Holder, dropped charges against the New Black Panthers, even though they were caught on tape allegedly intimidating Philadelphia voters in the 2008 elections.  Naturally, Holder's Department of Justice then lied about its actions, covering up its political motivations.

Holder specifically protected King Samir Shabazz, who now serves as national field marshal for the New Black Panthers.  Shabazz spearheads the Panthers' ambitious new plan to "create inner city militaries that would go into nurseries and kill white babies and murder white people in the street."

Let's hope this "inner city military" is not what candidate Obama mysteriously referred to in 2008 when he pledged, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.  We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Imagine, for one monstrous moment, the destructive potential of this burgeoning alliance between the Obama-protected New Black Panthers, Obama's old Chicago associate Louis Farrakhan, and the genocidally obsessed Ahmadinejad.  If your blood didn't run cold, you weren't imagining hard enough.

A Tsunami of Voter Fraud

On June 15, 2012, Obama bypassed Congress and issued de facto amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens.  Suddenly, whole new vistas of voter fraud opened up to the Democrats.  Admittedly, they've got to ramp up quickly for November, but this gang should prove up to the challenge.

Helping matters along, Holder is busy suing states that require photo ID to vote and attempting to disenfranchise the military.  Together, these well-coordinated efforts should provide Obama with the means to pull off staggering amounts of voter fraud.

"By Any Means Necessary"

If all else fails, Obama and his investors may be prepared to keep power "By Any Means Necessary."  This information comes from an uncannily predictive website called The Ulsterman Report.  Those who have followed its fascinating interviews over the last couple of years with two anonymous sources, Wall Street Insider and White House Insider, have seen its scoops confirmed again and again. 

Well over a year ahead of any other media, The Ulsterman Report was informing readers that Valerie Jarrett ran the White House and that Obama was strangely disengaged from the actual tasks of governing.  It predicted the emergence of obscure figures -- Kamala D. Harris, who's now attorney general of California, and her brother-in-law, Tony West, the newly named acting associate attorney general at the Department of Justice, who's being groomed as Holder's successor.

Most crucially, shortly after the bin Laden operation, the Ulsterman Report revealed that Valerie Jarrett had canceled three previous bin Laden raids.  That information now has been confirmed by Richard Miniter in his book, Leading from Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him.

Recently, a source known as Military Insider (MI) met with Ulsterman (UM) at the urging of Wall Street Insider (WSI) to issue a warning.  A section of their conversation follows below:

MI: Approximately two years ago...not quite two years ago...I received information pertaining to an election contingency plan.  For 2012.  After the 2010 elections there were particular operatives...specific to the Obama administration and Democratic Party leadership...indicating an overwhelming need to secure a second term for President Obama.  That document's title was...(pauses)

WSI: He can be trusted - I give you my word.  Please proceed.

MI: That document's title was "By Any Means Necessary".  It was unofficial - but we know it came directly from channels specific to the administration.  We confirmed that.

UM: What channels?  Who are you talking about?

MI: We believe it to have been authored by Mr. Sunstein.  Reviewed and approved by Valerie Jarrett.  Preparations for implementation are being done in part by Mr. Leo Gerard coordinating with...with high ranking officials within the Department of Justice, Homeland Security...and...the U.S. military.

We could dismiss the anonymous Military Insider's warning as overheated, unsourced hysteria.  Or we could examine it as one more piece of evidence to place alongside all the evidence I've described above.

The greatest asset of Obama and his investors has been their warp-speed audacity.  We're too stunned to believe what's happening in front of our eyes, and too embarrassed to mention it.  Who wants to speak up and be ridiculed as an unhinged paranoid, marching with the tinfoil hat brigade?

But our best bet -- perhaps our only bet -- is to frankly confront this ugly reality.  As Iran prepares to go nuclear and the global economy teeters, any number of "national emergencies" can suddenly erupt, demanding unprecedented measures by Obama to "save" us.  We must be prepared with skepticism, outrage, and defiance of any actions to deprive us of our Constitutional rights.

America remains the last best hope on earth.  And We the People must keep our power, by any means necessary.

correction: erroneous link to executive orders removed

correction: refernce to work briagades and relocation centers removed

correction: number of executive orders issued by Obama changed to 135

Write Stella Paul at stellapundit@aol.com

1a)Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. 

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components.

 The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

 Here's how it works: As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens.
This is the case in: United States -- Muslim 0.6% Australia -- Muslim 1.5% Canada -- Muslim 1.9%China -- Muslim 1.8% Italy -- Muslim 1.5% Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

 At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in: Denmark -- Muslim 2% Germany -- Muslim 3.7% United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% Spain -- Muslim 4% Thailand -- Muslim 4.6% From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

For example, they will push for the introduction of Halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature Halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in: France -- Muslim 8% Philippines -- 5% Sweden -- Muslim 5% Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3% The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5% Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

 At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law.

The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

 When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions.

In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.

Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in: Guyana -- Muslim 10% India -- Muslim 13.4% Israel -- Muslim 16% Kenya -- Muslim 10% Russia -- Muslim 15%

 After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in: Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

 At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in: Bosnia -- Muslim 40% Chad -- Muslim 53.1% Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

 From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in: Albania -- Muslim 70% Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4% (True - there are 2 systems of taxations here) Qatar -- Muslim 77.5% Sudan -- Muslim 70% 

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in: Bangladesh -- Muslim 83% Egypt -- Muslim 90% Gaza -- Muslim 98.7% Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1% Iran -- Muslim 98% Iraq -- Muslim 97% Jordan -- Muslim 92% Morocco -- Muslim 98.7% Pakistan -- Muslim 97% Palestine -- Muslim 99% Syria -- Muslim 90% Tajikistan -- Muslim 90% Turkey -- Muslim 99.8% United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

 100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace.

Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrassas are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in: Afghanistan -- Muslim 100% Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100% Somalia -- Muslim 100% Yemen -- Muslim 100%

 Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% Muslim states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

 'Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'TheHaj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law.

The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend Madrassas. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death.
Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate. Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers.

Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century. Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse. The wolves will be herding the sheep! Obama appoints two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts. Doesn't this make you feel safer already? Obama and Janet Napolitano appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim who was born in Damascus , Syria , as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

 NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering... Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions? Doesn't this make you feel safer already?? That should make the US ' homeland much safer, huh!!Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. buildings 8 years ago? Was it not a Devout Muslim who killed 13 at Fort Hood ?

 Also: This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities.

 Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply: Theologically -- no . . . Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia Religiously – no… Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256) Scripturally - no… Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran. Geographically – no… Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day. Socially - no… Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.. Politically - no…Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan. Domestically - no… Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34) Intellectually - no… Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt. Philosophically - no… Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression..

Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist.

Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic. Spiritually - no… Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly Father, nor is he ever called ‘Love’ in The Quran's 99 excellent names. Therefore, after much study and deliberation...perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. --

They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans.

 Call it what you wish, it's still the truth.

You had better believe it.

The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand. Can a Muslim be a good soldier??? Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13.

He is a good Muslim!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)Iranian leaders in Israel’s sights after calling for its destruction

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu have bandied thousands of words in their dispute over an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear sites. For a time, their argument muffled the abiding ambition of the Islamic Republic to destroy Israel - come what may.

However, the message roared by Iranian leaders over last weekend - before and after Al Quds Day - was quite simply this: Israel must be destroyed, irrespective of whether or not it attacks the Islamic Republic

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was cheered by half a million demonstrators in Tehran shouting: Death to Israel! Death to America! when he declared Israel is a "cancerous tumor" that will soon be finished off in the new Middle East. He called “the Zionist regime’s existence an insult to all humanity.”

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said:  “The fake Zionist (regime) will disappear from the landscape of geography,”

And although both were severely rebuked by world leaders for their violent invective, it continued to pour out of Tehran in a comment by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Force Chief, Brig. Gen. Amir Hajizadeh who said an Israeli attack would be welcome “as a pretext to get rid of Israel for good."

Israel’s new Home Defense Minister Avi Dichter laid it out in plain language: While Syria, Lebanon and Gaza confront Israel with a strategic threat, Iran imperils our very existence.”

Certain Western intelligence sources were reminded of a speech by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in 2006 when he quoted a Holocaust survivor as saying:  “My main lesson from the Holocaust is that if someone tells you he is going to exterminate you, believe him. And I add to that. Believe him and stop him!”

Six years later, those sources now suggest, after America’s top soldier Gen. Martin Dempsey offered the opinion that Israel can no longer destroy Iran’s nuclear weapon capacity – only delay it , that Netanyahu may be willing to go further: Not only to stop them, but kill them.
They are quietly using the term “decapitation.”

They point to the Israeli Mossad’s long record of targeted covert operations for dealing with past and would-be annihilators: In the fifties, the Mossad captured the Nazi criminal Adolf Eichmann in Operational Finale.

In the seventies, Golda Meir ordered Operation Wrath of God to hunt down and pick off one by one the Palestinian Black September murderers of 11 Israeli sportsmen at the 1972 Munich Olympics.

In February 2008, Iran’s senior terrorist operations commander, Hizballah’s Imad Mughniyeh, was liquidated in Damascus, so ending a bloody career of assassinations, terrorism and abductions against US and other Western targets as well as Israel.

Hizballah’s chief Hassan Nasrallah knows the score: He has spent six years hunkered down in a fortified bunker, taking care never to  broadcast his inflammatory speeches calling for Israel’s destruction live, only by video.

It cannot be ruled out that this point, Israel may decide to disable Iran’s nuclear program by going for its leaders

2a)Talk v. action: Why Obama Still Won't Go to Israel

By Jonathan Tobin

Why has Obama always been so reluctant to show the Israelis some love when it would cost him so little and bring such a great reward? 

The disagreement between Israel and the Obama administration over whether it's time to acknowledge that diplomacy has failed to stop Iran's nuclear program is starting to make a lot of people nervous. Both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak seem to be interpreting the administration's staunch refusal to abandon a diplomatic track that has already clearly failed as meaning that the president won't make good on his promise to stop Iran from going nuclear. That has led to talk that Israel will strike Iran without U.S. assistance or permission and that it may do so even before the November presidential election.

The Americans are doing everything they can to persuade the Israelis to stand down but in the absence of trust in the president, mere words may not be enough. That's why one of Obama's leading Jewish supporters, columnist Jeffrey Goldberg, believes it's time for some symbolism.

Goldberg writes in Bloomberg that a long sought presidential visit to Israel before the election would do the trick. He's right. If President Obama were to take time out from the campaign for a stop in Israel some time in the next few weeks, Netanyahu would have no choice but to postpone any attack plans. Though it is possible that Obama will listen to Goldberg, such a visit with less than 90 days before the election is a long shot. It is far more likely that the president will rely on his usual mode of communication with the Israelis: pressure and threats. But since that has never worked in the past, Obama's supporters ought to be asking themselves what's behind the president's reluctance to act in a manner that might convince both Israelis and their Iranian foes that he isn't fibbing about being prepared to act on the issue during his second term.

Though the Democrat's campaign staff may think any time not spent in a swing state is a bad idea, an Obama visit to Israel now would be a coup for the president. It would monopolize media attention during the trip and thus hurt Mitt Romney. It would also bolster the president's sagging Jewish support.

Even more important, such a dramatic gesture accompanied by a presidential speech in which he warned Iran that they must halt their nuclear program or face the consequences would convince the Israeli public that he could be relied upon to keep the promise he first made about stopping Tehran during the 2008 campaign. Under those circumstances, there would be no possibility of a unilateral Israeli attack since Netanyahu could not then justify such a move by pointing to distrust of Washington.

It would all be so easy but the question to ask about this scenario is why the president has always been so reluctant to show the Israelis some love when it would cost him so little and bring such a great reward?

The only possible answer is the one we always are forced to return to when discussing the problematic relationship between the Obama administration and Israel: the president's equivocal feelings about the Jewish state. As veteran diplomat Aaron David Miller memorably put it a few weeks ago, Barack Obama is the first president in a generation "not in love with the idea of Israel." That's compounded by his open and very public dislike of Benjamin Netanyahu.

While Obama's defenders are right to note that there's nothing all that unusual about the lack of a visit to Israel during a first term, this is a president who has gone out of his way to pick fights with Jerusalem and to avoid the country during trips to the region. It appears that if Obama is to go to Israel, as his campaign hinted earlier during this summer, it would only be as a re-elected president with the whip hand over Netanyahu and not as a candidate who has to show some deference to his ally.

One imagines that Obama is recoiling at the very idea of being forced to pretend to be friendly with Netanyahu even if it meant avoiding an attack on Iran that he opposes or helping his re-election. Given the stakes involved, his refusal to take some good advice from a supporter tells us all we need to know about the president's attitude toward Israel

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)

ObamaCare's 18 New Tax Hikes Net $100 BILLION Per Year

Thought the $716 billion Congress took out of Medicare to pay for his legislative pet project known as ObamaCare was bad? Well, it gets worse, because Barack Obama's socialist class warfare has resulted in 18 New Tax Hikes on the job creators in America, with Americans being forced to pay a second Medicare tax starting next year, in 2013.  The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation's (JCT) updated the costs of ObamaCare tax hikes and penalties, and the numbers are staggering. As part of the Leftwing's scheme to make ObamaCare appear deficit-neutral while the monster-bill drains federal coffers,18 new tax hikes will take an estimated $836.3 billion out of the hands of the American people in nine short years. According to The Heritage Foundation, five of the 18 tax hikes go into effect in 2013 squeezing $36.3 billion out of the private sector next year:   That's roughly $100 billion paid in ObamaCare taxes, fees, mandates, penalties per year being placed straight into those of the bureaucratic blow-hards on Capitol Hill to spend as they please!   Queen Nancy Pelosi told America that we must pass the bill to find out what's in it. Instead of sounding the alarm on both sides of the aisle, her fellow Leftwing minions clicked their heels and passed this encroaching, tax-happy healthcare overhaul. You'd think common sense would tell anyone, especially as our country is BROKE, that taking $836.3 BILLION out of the private sector and putting it into the hands of the frivolous, wasteful and mismanaged federal government was a BAD idea. Instead, we get more government and more taxes - WE THE PEOPLE can only wonder how this will pan out... Remember, the federal government already levies a 2.9 percent Medicare payroll tax on all wages, with the individual and the employer each paying half. Now, thanks to ObamaCare, hardworking Americans making more than $250,000 as a couple or individuals making $200,000 will have to pay an additional 3.8 percent Medicare tax in addition to the 20-40 percent capital gains tax already paid on any investment income. Instead of incentivizing much-needed investment in the private sector, which creates jobs, these successful Americans will now be punished for investing their money back into the economy! And let's not forget that Medicare fraud is estimated at $60 billion annually and is still, despite ol' Obama's healthcare overhaul, a booming business. After all, what con artist is going to be afraid of an even bigger bureaucratic mess cutting the checks?  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -