Read My Book and War With Hamas!

---
Krauthammer expresses his thoughts regarding Petraeus. (See 1 below.)

 And another slant on the same matter and really far out. (See 1a below.)
---
A review of what is happening in Israel. (See 2 and 2a  below.)
 ---
Obama reverses on arms trade matters. (See 3 below.)
---
More evidence of voter fraud. (See 4 below.)

 In the ensuing days I suspect there will be a lot of articles of a conspiratorial nature. I have no doubt fraud occurred during the last election but not to the extent that it would actually change the presidential election. Obama won and I have no doubt received foreign money and other violations of our election laws occurred but nothing will be done about it. Furthermore, I suspect future elections will build upon these violations and much greater events will become common place.
---
More commentary regarding 'Obamascare' or The Affordable Care Act . (See 5 below.)
---
The legal basis for Israel's response. (See 6 below.)
---
Your government at work and some of the  rules. (See 7 below.)
---
Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)Krauthammer: White House May Have Used Petraeus Affair to Influence Benghazi Testimony
 By Bill Hoffmann

 Government officials may have used former CIA director David Petraeus’ affair with Paula Broadwell as a bargaining chip to influence what he told Congress about the September 11th attack of the U.S. Embassy in Libya, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer says.

 “Here’s a man who knows the administration holds his fate in his hands,’’ Krauthammer told Fox News’ “Special Report’’ on Tuesday night.

 “And he gives testimony completely at variance with what the secretary of defense had said the day before, at variance with what he heard from the station chief in Tripoli, and with everything that we had heard.

 “Was he influenced by the fact he knew his fate was held by people in the administration at that time?”

 Krauthammer said he found it “shocking’’ Petraeus “thought and hoped he could keep his job.

 “He thought that it might and would be kept secret, and then he could stay in his position. I think what that tells us is really important. “It meant that he understood that the FBI obviously knew what was going on.

He was hoping that those administration officials would not disclose what had happen and therefore hoping that he would keep his job.

 “And that meant that he understood that his job, his reputation, his legacy, his whole celebrated life was in the hands of the administration. And he expected they would protect him by keeping it quiet.”

Petraeus reportedly told congressional intelligence leaders days after the attack that he believed it was spontaneous. “That brings us to the ultimate issue, and that is his testimony on Sept. 13,”

Krauthammer said. “That’s the thing that connects the two scandals. And that’s the only thing that makes the sex scandal relevant. Otherwise it would be exercise in sensationalism and voyeurism, and nothing else.’’

 1a)Subject: Underestimating American Warriors

 This may help explain why Petreaus was forced out a few days before the Benghazi hearings. It explains a lot of behavior by Obama and his administration; the pulled security, the "stand down" orders, and blaming a video.

 According to sources in the State Department and the CIA, and intercepted communications from the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama "staged" the attack in Benghazi in order to create a monumental "October Surprise" that would guarantee him re-election.

 Obama, we now know, is and has been working with the Muslim Brotherhood secretly to engineer the release of the "Blind Sheik," Omar Abdel Rahman, the mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center attack. In Obama's October Surprise, he intentionally set up the consulate to have no security so that Chris Stevens could be kidnapped, and held for ransom by Al-Qaeda (and the Muslim Brotherhood). Then, several days before the election, the plan was to trade Chris Stevens for the Blind Sheik, making himself look like a hero, and guaranteeing re-election. This was one of the top reasons why Obama was so insistent on the Muslim Brotherhood getting $1.2 Billion in U.S. Aid.

They were to have a primary role in getting Obama re-elected. That is why, even though they knew days before the attack that it was going to occur, no effort was made to bolster security. The Libyan security forces were intended to quietly slip into the night when the attack began. And they did, just as planned. That is why, even though two C-130U gunships, which were built SPECIFICALLY for this kind of attack, and which could have saved the lives of our people and were a mere 45 minutes away, were never scrambled at any time during the attack. There was to be no resistance whatsoever.

There were not one, but TWO armed drones flying over the consulate during the attack. Our CIA operatives on the ground were painting targets because they knew air cover was available. That is why, even though requesting support and backup three times, their requests were NOT ignored, but were intentionally, specifically DENIED three times, and they were told to "stand down." That was Obama's plan. They were not to fight back. That would potentially undermine the kidnapping effort and cause unnecessary "complications."

That is why, even though the CIA operatives and ex-Navy Seals were on the ground, providing real-time reports, and even though they were "lighting up" the source of the mortars attacking the compound with lasers, no gunships or support ever came. They weren't supposed to resist That wasn't "part of the plan." It also wasn't part of the plan for one of the CIA operatives to intentionally defy Obama's orders, and rescue the body of Ambassador Chris Stevens and engage the enemy who was attacking American soil. Kidnap the Ambassador and get out.

Then Save The Day in the "nick of time." They didn't factor in a tiny group of highly trained ex-Navy Seals/CIA operatives... American Patriots and heroes. Even though they eventually lost their lives in the firefight, they managed to employ the full measure of their skills, and took out over 80 attackers in the process... which enraged the attackers, who were led to believe that they would encounter no resistance. THAT is why Ambassador Stevens was raped (sodomized), murdered, and dragged through the streets. They believed that they had been betrayed by the U.S. They believed that Obama was their friend. They believed that they were going to get their beloved Blind Sheik back.

And yet, here were 80 of their own... dead by American warriors. Obama was asked directly in an interview if he denied their request for assistance, he refused to answer, and instead droned on with a canned response promising to "bring those responsible to justice Former CIA and State Dept. personnel are coming out now with damning evidence reveals the truth about what happened. It remains to be seen if the establishment media will investigate and report the facts. Don’t count on it. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)Israel responds to rocket fire with military operation.

 As you will have heard, earlier today, in response to rocket fire, Israel targeted terror activity sites and Hamas leaders in the Gaza Strip. Key Points · Following several days of Palestinian rocket fire from Gaza at Israeli towns, on 14 November Israel launched a military operation beginning with a series of targeted airstrikes against senior Hamas military commanders and weapons facilities in the Gaza Strip.

The first target was top Hamas military commander Ahmed al-Jabari. · Between 10 and 13 November there was a barrage of rocket fire from Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups aimed at Israeli towns, forcing hundreds of thousands of Israelis into shelters. · Escalations in rocket fire from Gaza at Israeli towns have become increasingly frequent in the last year, with Israeli decision makers until now choosing a relatively low key response to prevent a more serious conflict developing. However, with normal life for Israeli civilians in southern Israel deteriorating rapidly, Israel has now been forced to act.

What has happened today?

Following several days of Palestinian rocket fire from Gaza at Israeli towns, on 14 November Israel launched a military operation called ‘Pillar of Cloud,’ beginning with a series of targeted airstrikes against senior militant leaders and weapons facilities in the Gaza Strip. The first targeted was a top Hamas commander Ahmed al-Jabari. ·

 Other key Hamas militant leaders have also been targeted, reportedly including al-Jabari’s number two, Raed al-Atar, as well as Hamas’s longer range Fajr rockets. Why has Israel launched this operation now? · The last year has seen a pattern of periodic escalations of rocket and mortar fired at Israeli towns by Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip, lasting several days, followed by periods of relative calm. In recent months the escalations have become more frequent. In all over 750 rockets have been fired into Israel this year. ·

 Most analysts assume that Hamas itself has not been the main instigator of these escalations, and that it is has been dragged into these exchanges by smaller factions, which it is failing to control. However, Hamas in recent escalations has increasingly joined in the launching of rockets. Israel has consistently made clear that it holds Hamas, the group which controls the Gaza Strip, responsible for all rockets fired. ·

 The latest escalation began on Saturday, and was triggered by a Palestinian armed group firing an advanced anti-tank missile at an Israeli jeep patrolling the Gaza-Israel border, injuring four soldiers, two of them seriously. Israel retaliated with tanks shelling the source of the fire. This in turn sparked a volley of over 100 rockets and mortars fired from Gaza at Israeli towns and cities between 10 and 12 November, for which a number of armed groups claimed joint responsibility, including Hamas. · Israeli casualties have remained relatively low, in part due to early warning sirens and the Iron Dome anti-missile system, but the lives of Israelis living within range have been seriously affected, with hundreds of thousands taking refuge in bomb shelters. ·

Israel responded over the weekend with airstrikes on weapons storage sites and rocket firing crews, but threatened a more extensive response to restore calm for its Southern residents. ·

 Until now Israel has been reluctant to launch a major military operation on the scale of Operation Cast Lead at the end of 2008, not wanting to trigger a larger conflict with Palestinian armed groups that would further disrupt the lives of Israelis in the south of the country. It has also been concerned about the potential diplomatic cost in terms of international opinion, and, in the context of the Arab Spring, its extremely fragile relationship with Egypt. But with normal life for Israeli civilians in southern Israel deteriorating rapidly, Israel has now been forced to act. ·

Key stats for November 10-13: Rockets and mortars fired at Israel: 112 (causing 8 injuries) Israeli airstrikes into Gaza: 14 (causing 7 deaths and 26 injuries according to Palestinian reports) Iron Dome rocket interceptions: 6 Who was Ahmed al-Jabari? ·

Today (14/11/2012) two of Hamas’ top military commanders, Ahmed al-Jabari and Raed al-Atar, were killed in targeted assassinations in Gaza City. Both men on a day-to-day basis commanded Hamas’ military wing, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, coordinating attacks against both Israeli soldiers and civilians. Most recently, the al-Qassam Brigades have been one of the main groups in Gaza behind the recent escalation, with over a 100 rockets landing in southern Israel. ·

Arrested in 1982, al-Jabari spent 13 years in prison for planning deadly attacks, where he met some of Hamas’ top leaders and decided to join the movement. In 2002, al-Jabari became the operational head of the militant wing at the height of the Second Intifada. Al-Jabari, as a high ranking Hamas member, played a leading role in Hamas’ forcible takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, in which Fatah forces after a week of bloody fighting were expelled. ·

As an operational commander of Hamas military wing al-Jabari was in charge of overseeing the imprisonment of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who was captured by Hamas in 2006 and held in captivity for 1,941 days Our thoughts are with the people of Israel at this difficult time. 

Best wishes,

 Luke Akehurst Director


2a)

Israel is finally getting back at the Hamas terrorists in Gaza after 12 years of shooting rockets at innocent Israeli civilians and in response to over 150 rocket attacks on Israel over the past 4 days. The world wouldn't do anything, so we will take care of this terror menace ourselves! Unfortunately, Israel just experienced the death of 3 innocent civilians in the town of Kiriyat Malachi. A rocket landed on an apartment building with a direct hit in a families apartment. Oh, by the way, the situation in Gaza finally reached the New York Times! Surprise, surprise, they don't focus on the fact that 1 million Israelis have been living in fear for their lives the past 4 days due to 150 rockets. Rather they focus on "Israeli aggression" in killing the hamas military leader! Go complain to the NYT on its horribly biased, anti-Israel reporting -http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/15/world/middleeast/israeli-strike-in-gaza-kills-the-military-leader-of-hamas.html?hp&_r=2& ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3)U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade WASHINGTON (Reuters) -

The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better. On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States.

The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.

The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms. The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws.

 Does that mean Obama is telling the truth? What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership.

And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment. This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)Allen West, Mitt Romney and the Massive Voter Fraud Machine

 A funny thing is happening after Democrats thought they won the elections. Not only are there rampant stories of voter fraud, but it appears that this time, oddly enough, some people seem inclined to do something about it.

 Congressman Allen West is demanding a complete recount of ballots in his 18th Congressional District race, which Democrat Patrick Murphy claims to have won. A partial recount over the weekend had West losing by 1,907 votes. West actually lost 132 votes in that recount, but his opponent somehow “lost” 667.

Apparently, a large number of “vapor ballots” have been floating around, and there are a lot of irregularities coming out of St. Lucie County, where voters actually protested outside the elections supervisor’s office to demand an accurate count. According to West’s people, nearly a 1,000 ballots have vanished from St. Lucie County, and they hope a complete recount might swing in West’s favor. Suspicions were first aroused on Election Night, when at around 1 a.m. West was ahead by 1,700 votes, then with no explanation, 4,000 votes came in at one time and he was suddenly trailing by 2,000.

 On the national front, there have been widespread stories of electronic voting machines switching votes for Mitt Romney to votes for Barack Obama. The reports began with early voting in some states and continued through Election Day. Now, a Chicago technician named Steve Pickrum, who worked for the election supervisor, is saying that when he was called to service some voting machines on Election Day, he observed that the machines were not counting votes for Romney. “On early voting, when I did work on the floor when voters needed help using the equipment, I was able to see the preference of the voter, and every time that I saw a voter voted for Romney, a ‘voter save failure’ message came up on the screen,” he said.

He also said when he went to vote, he got the same error message and told a poll worker, who replied that he should just assume his vote was counted. He demanded that the worker check the vote record, and his vote had not been recorded. Pickrum said he never saw the error occur when someone voted for Obama.

A poll watcher in Pennsylvania reported that up to 10 percent of the ballots observed reverted to a “default,” which automatically gave the vote to Obama, no matter who the voter cast a ballot for. Pennsylvania is the state where Obama got 100 percent of the vote in 59 voting divisions. Pennsylvania on Election Day also had reports of GOP poll observers being locked out of polling places by Democrats. Similarly in Ohio, one of the battleground states, 100 precincts reported that Obama got an improbable 99 percent of the vote.

 Auditor Robert Ashcroft said on Election Night, he observed that the polling software would switch to a default for Obama in about 5 to 10 percent of cases. He questioned how pre-election polls showed Obama and Romney virtually tied, but then on Election Day, Obama got a huge groundswell of support.

 According to an analysis by World Net Daily, Obama also recorded much larger margins of support in states that do not require voter ID than he did in states that check voter identification.

Readers may recall the rumors months before the election that voting machines were being supplied by a foreign company owned by George Soros. Those stories were hotly denied by liberal bloggers and sites like Snopes.com and Huffington Post, which themselves have ties to the conservative-hating multibillionaire.

Considering the information now coming out about the voting machines, perhaps the liberal media doth protest too much.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5)End of the Threat to Obamacare? Not at All
By Stuart M. Butler, Ph.D.

President Obama’s narrow victory has left proponents of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) breathing a collective sigh of relief, believing that the legislation is safe. It’s true, of course, that the election’s outcome has ended the prospect of a new administration using Republican majorities in both chambers and the budget reconciliation process to force outright repeal. But the reality of the economic and political situation means the core elements of the ACA remain very much in play.

The primary reasons for this are the continuing problems with the federal budget deficit and the national debt and the worrying long-term weakness of the economy. Add to that the increasing skepticism that the ACA’s blunt tools will slow costs.

Let’s remember that the most important provisions of the ACA, such as penalties for Americans lacking insurance and firms not offering it, the expansion of Medicaid, and the heavily subsidized exchange-based coverage, do not go into effect until 2014. Meanwhile, new taxes on self-employment and limits on flexible spending accounts are scheduled to go into effect next year, just as Congress will be trying to boost employment growth. Additionally, lawmakers will be desperately searching for ways to delay or cut spending to deal with the deficit. That adds up to 2013 being a year for buyer’s remorse in Congress and around the country.

The reaction of employers to the ACA is likely to be the first pressure point for changes in the ACA or at least the suspension of some of its provisions. Employers have been reporting for some time that concerns about mandatory benefits are slowing their hiring. And as the Wall Street Journal recently reported, lower-wage employers are moving towards hiring part-time employees to avoid the ACA’s penalties. These patterns will only grow in 2013 as many employers eye the prospect of putting their employees into the heavily subsidized exchange plans. And the possibility of larger-than-expected enrollment in health insurance exchanges will sharply increase the budget costs, adding to the deficit pressures to curb the ACA.

These developments in the economy will force Congress to reopen key ACA coverage provisions, perhaps as part of a deficit reduction package. Effects on employment and continued increases in health care costs could also increase the prospects of a bipartisan redesign of employer-based coverage within a tax reform package. That could involve switching clumsy mandates and penalties on employers for the kind of structural tax reform that many Republican and administration insiders have actually long supported—measures that gradually curb and eventually replace the current tax exclusion for employer-sponsored coverage with tax credits and subsidies that would apply to all employees.

It’s also hard to imagine the expansion of Medicaid proceeding as planned. The number of Republican governors has now grown to at least 30, from 29. If slow economic growth continues, and statehouse fears of unsustainable employee pensions and other mounting costs continue to grow, even the short-term prospect of Washington picking up expanded Medicaid costs is not likely to prevent a strong pushback by states. That’s going to be exacerbated by a Congress that is desperately trying to curb spending. So expect structural reform of the ACA’s Medicaid, including some version of a block grant, to be on the deficit-reduction table.

Perhaps most important of all, the prospects for serious Medicare reform are actually on the rise. The Ryan version of premium support (in which the federal government would provide a limited payment to beneficiaries that could be used toward purchasing a private insurance plan or for the traditional Medicare program) was initially seen by the Obama campaign as a gift from heaven that would doom Romney among the elderly. But that didn’t happen. Indeed Obama’s initial large lead as the best defender of Medicare slid to just 5 points by the election. Exit polls show Romney also won the senior vote (and those older than 45 years) and even increased the Republican share over 2008.

What this suggests is that a version of premium support is now likely to gain renewed traction as budget pressures and underlying costs of health care force congressional action. The approach has actually had bipartisan support since the Clinton Administration and, in private, among many Democratic politicians. Versions have garnered strong support in the Bowles-Simpson Commission, from leading organizations outside Congress, such as the Bipartisan Policy Center and the Brookings Institution. And compared with alternative ways of slowing Medicare spending, it doesn’t look so bad politically. Relying on the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) of experts in health care economics and the health care system to crack down on physicians and hospitals is hardly going to make the ACA more popular among seniors. Let’s remember that repealing the IPAB had strong bipartisan support in the House, with even liberal Rep Barney Frank (D, Mass) as a cosponsor.

The Obama administration is arguing that the election means the ACA is a settled issue. It is far from that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6)Gaza and International Law

November 15 2012 | Eli E. Hertz

What unites Palestinian Arabs is their opposition to Jewish nationalism and a desire to stamp it out - not aspirations for their own state. Murdering Jews is a collective Palestinian Arab effort that requires a collectively sensible response.

Israel's reaction to nearly ten years of shelling Israeli civilian population centers from the Gaza Strip is nothing more than a measured, fair response, designed to effectively terminate armed attacks and more importantly - to prevent its recurrence. All of Israel’s actions in this regard are supported by international law.

Hamas - a United States designated foreign terrorist organization, by their aggression and initial use of armed force against Israeli civilians and non-combatant Jews in breach of the United Nations Charter, constituted prima facie [Latin: on its face] evidence of an act of aggression - aggression being defined by international law as "the most serious and dangerous form of illegal use of force."[1]

Therefore, the rule of proportionality in this case of continuous aggression, needs to be met by Israeli acts that will induce the aggressor to comply with international obligations. A countermeasure need not be the exact equivalent of the breaching act.[2]

United Nations Resolutions demand of states to combat terrorism and reaffirm their:

“unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed.” [3]

Judge Schwebel, the former President of the International Court of Justice is quoted saying:

"In the case of action taken for the specific purpose of halting and repelling an armed attack, this does not mean that the action should be more or less commensurate with the attack."

1 See: UN Resolution 3314 (XXIX). Definition of Aggression.

2 United States Department of State, Draft Articles on State Responsibility, Comments of the Government of the United States of America, March 1, 2001. See: www.state.gov/documents/organization/28993.pdf.

3 See: UNSC 1269, 1368, 1373, 1377

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7)

RULES ARE RULES!

 

Yep....this is our government at work.

The Good news:It was a normal day in Sharon Springs , Kansas , when a Union Pacific crew boarded a loaded coal train for the long trek to Salina.
The Bad news:Just a few miles into the trip a wheel bearing became overheated and melted, letting a metal support drop down and grind on the rail, creating white hot molten metal droppings spewing down to the rail.
The Good news:A very alert crew noticed smoke about halfway back in the train and immediately stopped the train in compliance with the Governmental Regulations.
The Bad news:The train stopped with the hot wheel over a wooden bridge with creosote ties and trusses. When crew tried to explain to higher-ups they needed to move the train, they were instructednot to move the train because Federal Regulations prohibit moving the train when a part is defective. Well okee-dokey then, and the pictures tell the rest. As always the Government knows what is best for us.




REMEMBER, RULES ARE RULES!Don't ever let common sense get in the way of aGovernment Regulation.= And now they will decide your health care ! ! !