[jetguyz]

Not content with single-handedly resulted in the downgrading America`s credit rating from S&P in the history of America, the free-falling of the US dollars during Obama regime`s useless bloated Stimulus packages and huge defense bills from his covert wars; it will be the start of the fall of the greenback from grace!

If those stupid Americans re-elect Obama again in 2012, perhaps we will see the US$ trading in the range of Malaysian ringgit or even Obama`s fave country, the Indonesia rupiah in the next few years??!!

Quote

Is China Abandoning the Dollar?

December 28, 2011

China and Japan have taken the first step in abandoning the dollar. I have been waiting for this for years. Now it has happened.

Japan and China will promote direct trading of yen and yuan without using dollars and will encourage the development of a market for companies involved in the exchanges, the Japanese government said over the holiday weekend.

Here is why this is important.

China is Japan’s biggest trading partner with $340 billion in two-way transactions last year. The pacts between the world’s second- and third-largest economies mirror attempts by fund managers to diversify as global, financial markets remain volatile and decaying. It marks a major leap forward of the internationalization of the Chinese currency, a step that has been developing for the last few years, from tiny beginnings. It signals that the Chinese banking system has developed to the stage where they can handle international transactions of note. The development of the banking system is clearly far advanced, so expect the enlargement of the international Yuan market to pause, as this leap in size settles in and any teething problems eliminated.

As time passes the process of the internationalization of the Yuan will primarily be at the expense of the dollar. At some point in this process, the rise of the Yuan and the fall of the dollar from its throne will become visible on foreign exchanges and in the financial picture inside the U.S.A. and Europe. At best, we’ll see the Yuan join the world’s current leading currencies in global trade, but rising in the future to potentially the prime global, reserve currency at worst.

But this process could take more than five years or less if the Chinese government pushes it hard.

Quote

U.S. Dollar Replaced By China, Japan Gold Positive!

28 December, 2011 7:35

Japan and China will promote direct trading of yen and yuan without using dollars and will encourage the development of a market for companies involved in the exchanges, the Japanese government said over the holiday weekend.

Japan will also apply to buy Chinese bonds next year, allowing the investment of Yuan that leaves China to Japan to remain in China, the Japanese government said. Encouraging direct yen- yuan settlement should reduce currency risks and trading costs.

China also announced a 70 billion yuan ($11 billion) currency swap agreement with Thailand last week as part of a plan outlined in October to promote the use of the yuan in the Association of Southeast Asia Nations and establish free trade zones. Central banks from Thailand to Nigeria plan to start buying yuan assets as the global Yuan market continues to be developed quickly. Investing in Chinese debt has become easier for central banks as issuance of yuan-denominated bonds in Hong Kong more than tripled to 112 billion yuan ($18 billion) this year, and institutions were granted quotas to invest onshore. Japan will start to buy “a small amount” of China’s bonds, a Japanese government official said, on condition of anonymity because of the ministry’s policy, without elaborating. Yes, it is small, but the systems are now in place. Expansion of these is happening and has the potential to burgeon!

China is Japan’s biggest trading partner with $340 billion in two-way transactions last year. The pacts between the world’s second- and third-largest economies mirror attempts by fund managers to diversify as global, financial markets remain volatile and decaying. It marks a major leap forward of the internationalization of the Chinese currency, a step that has been developing for the last few years, from tiny beginnings. It signals that the Chinese banking system has developed to the stage where they can handle international transactions of note. The development of the banking system is clearly far advanced, so expect the enlargement of the international Yuan market to pause, as this leap in size settles in and any teething problems eliminated.
Advertisement

The next step after that is to go completely global!

MORE HERE

[jetguyz]

A lair will always be a LIAR.

In fact Obama`s BIGGEST LIE would be his sealing up of his school records. No records of him going to Kindergarten or High School in the USA either. (We only know he attended an Islamic school in Indonesia). He must have signed on as a foreign student. He claimed he grew up in Hawaii. (yet could not produced the original birth cert...and evidences shown that he spend most of his childhood in Indonesia and even Pakistan). In fact; NO SCHOOL RECORDS of him in Hawaii.
He sure is pulling the biggest con on Americans and his herd mentality supporters are just like those naive ignorant aunties who frequently got duped by con-men....too dumb and stupid to see thru` that.

Quote

Obama Admits He Lies!

December 28, 2011

Finally, confirming the suspicions of many and coming across during a 20/20 interview as the epitome of candor, at long last Barack ‘fessed up to Barbara Walters, saying that “Usually, the only time I lie is [in] very personal interactions with family members, who you say, ‘you look great,’ and they don’t. ‘Wonderful dress…’ Uh, not so much.” The operative word here being “usually.”

After the President’s admission, even the first lady chimed in and confessed that she too lies, but only when “truth [is] not helpful.”

Clearly, in the Obama household, as well as on the campaign trail, during fiery speeches, and in policy decisions, ‘hurtful’ and ‘helpful’ are key indicators as to whether what’s being said at any given moment is actually the truth.

Therefore, after also admitting that he’s really a “softie” and doing so on primetime television, it stands to reason that President Obama’s ongoing propensity to lie could just be a considerate attempt on his part to be helpful and not hurtful by extending “You look great” sentiments about an America he really perceives to be an “Uh, not so much” nation: lazy, lacking imagination and ambition and, much like him, “a little soft.”

Moreover, Obama family logic also indicates that the goal of the President’s admitted deceitfulness may be simply to avoid wounding Americans with hurtful truths and to assist the nation with helpful lies. Either that, or Barack Obama’s lying is an unconscious attempt to project his own character weaknesses onto honest, hardworking Americans in order to justify policies he knows we would patently reject.

With that in mind, it certainly wouldn’t hurt and might actually be helpful to know if Obama thinks it is ‘hurtful’ or ‘helpful’ to continue encouraging national division by falsely insisting that the rich don’t contribute their fair share.

How about the helpfulness/hurtfulness of swearing the health care reform bill wouldn’t raise the deficit? And let’s not forget just how helpful it was for the President to promise the American public that the stimulus bill would prevent the unemployment rate from rising above a hurtful 8.5%.

There`s a little ditty by El Lobo Solo which hits the nerve of American taxpayers perfectly:.

LLAMAS FOR OBAMA

"There once was a Llama,
Who said, “lets vote for Obama”.
We will all live without Drama,
And life will be a Delight-O-Rama.
But something got Weird,
By a Chicago Racketeer,
We all got Sheard.
And for “world justice” our fleece was sent a bankrupt Greece,
And shared with the Middle-East."

[jetguyz]

So according to Obama, after waging war with the Taliban for years and thousands of US soldiers died fighting them for their country, Obama now is saying the Taliban is not a terrorist organization anymore, and now encouraging them to set up an Embassy!??

What`s next?
An Al Qaeda Embassy since Obama helped them invade Libya and handed them a rich country with huge resources....too?

Quote

Full-Speed Ahead for Obama-Sanctioned ‘Taliban Embassy’ in Qatar

Posted by Dave Reaboi Dec 17th 2011 at 7:02 pm in Afghanistan, Featured Story, Middle East, News

Qatar: host to the US military, al-Jazeera, the Muslim Brotherhood– ]and now, the world’s first Taliban embassy– at the behest of the Obama administration.

On his Facebook page, Big Peace contributor Walid Phares brought my attention to a report in the Pakistani website The Nation that Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani, the premier of US ally Qatar, is prepared to open an embassy for the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan”– otherwise known as the Taliban. He said, “A solution in Afghanistan requires the participation of the Taliban in a way that must be decided by the Afghans.”

An office of the self-styled Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan would be the first internationally recognized representation for the Taliban since it was ousted from power by the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001…. Western diplomats have said it is hoped the opening of a Taliban office would push forward the prospect of talks intended to reconcile insurgents with the Afghan government and end the decade-long war.

This story was first reported around the time of the 9/11 anniversary and it’s not a surprise that Obama himself downplayed the news. As The Australian wrote in September:

THE US has given its blessing for the Taliban to be brought in from the cold with a critical step towards reconciliation as the world paused to mark the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

Washington has endorsed plans for the Islamist network to open political headquarters in the gulf state of Qatar by the end of the year. The move has been devised so the West can begin formal peace talks with the Taliban.

In addition to being home to In his post, Dr. Phares reminds us that Qatar is the address of al-Jazeera, the Muslim Brotherhood’s most influential figure, Yusef al-Qaradawi, his website OnIslam.net and his popular al-Jazeera tv show, “Shariah and Life”:

The Qatari regime, funding power behind al Jazeera, which expresses [the] Muslim Brotherhood agenda, is calling for the recognition of the Taliban and will be opening an embassy for the Taliban regime.

It was reported that the US Administration has encouraged Qatar to engage in this direction. Note that the United States is at war with the Taliban and considers it as a terrorist organization. Taliban and their allies of al Qaeda have killed thousands of US civilians and military.”

And that comes soon after OBama uses approx: US$6 millions!!!....of taxpayers` money to fund the restorations of mosques and other Islamic sites in the Middle East!

From the Jihad Watch:
"This year, the Obama administration will spend nearly $6 million to restore 63 historic and cultural sites, including mosques and minarets, in 55 nations, according to State Department documents."

Quote

EDITORIAL: Tax dollars to build mosques

U.S. underwrites fund-raising tour for Islamic shrine at Ground Zero

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The State Department is sending Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf - the mastermind of the Ground Zero Mosque - on a trip through the Middle East to foster “greater understanding” about Islam and Muslim communities in the United States. However, important questions are being raised about whether this is simply a taxpayer-funded fundraising jaunt to underwrite his reviled project, which is moving ahead in Lower Manhattan.

Mr. Rauf is scheduled to go to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar, the usual stops for Gulf-based fundraising. The State Department defends the five-country tour saying that Mr. Rauf is “a distinguished Muslim cleric,” but surely the government could find another such figure in the United States who is not seeking millions of dollars to fund a construction project that has so strongly divided America.

By funding the trip so soon after New York City's Landmarks Preservation Commission gave the go-ahead to demolish the building on the proposed mosque site, the State Department is creating the appearance that the U.S. government is facilitating the construction of this shameful structure.

It gives Mr. Rauf not only access but imprimatur to gather up foreign cash. And because Mr. Rauf has refused to reveal how he plans to finance his costly venture, the American public is left with the impression it will be a wholly foreign enterprise.

This contradicts the argument that a mosque is needed in that part of New York City to provide services for a burgeoning Muslim population. If so many people need the mosque so badly, presumably they could figure out a way to pay for it themselves.

Americans also may be surprised to learn that the United States has been an active participant in mosque construction projects overseas.

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers. For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument - and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

The mosques being rebuilt by the United States are used for religious worship, which raises important First Amendment questions. U.S. taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promote Islam, even abroad.

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

For example, our government rebuilt the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, expecting such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”
But Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.” It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.

The State Department is either wittingly or unwittingly using tax money to support Mr. Rauf’s efforts to realize his dream of a supersized mosque blocks away from the sacred ground of the former World Trade Center, which was destroyed by Islamic fanaticism. This ill-considered decision will raise the ire of millions of Americans and illustrates the limits of what the denizens of Foggy Bottom know about diplomacy.

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times,

[jetguyz]

No alternatives will save this arrogant hypocrite deceitful buffoon president come 2012 Election....short of resigning from the presidency himself and ask for forgiveness from the American people.

Lawsuits and International criminal charges awaits....

Quote

Washington Post poll points to a one-term presidency for Barack Obama

The Telegraph By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: October 4th, 2011

Today’s Washington Post/ABC News poll is the latest heavy blow to the White House, and perhaps the clearest indication yet that a majority of Americans believe that Barack Obama will be a one-term president. When asked who they think will win the presidential election next year, 55 per cent of respondents say “a Republican candidate,” as opposed to just 37 per cent who believe Obama will get a second term. At the same time, by a two to one margin, American voters “definitely will not” vote for Obama (46 percent), as opposed to 22 per cent who “definitely will.”

The Washington Post survey also shows the president plummeting to new lows in terms of public approval:

Obama’s approval rating — while not significantly different from a month ago — is at a new career low, his disapproval number at a new high.

In all, 42 percent approve of the job he is doing, while 54 percent disapprove. Barely more than a third of independents give the president positive marks, as 60 percent now disapprove, a new high. For the first time, fewer than half of moderates approve of the way Obama is handling his job.

And highly significantly, according to The Post, even one in three Democrats now think Obama won't be in the Oval Office beyond 2012:

Fully 83 percent of Republicans say the GOP nominee — whoever he or she may be — is likely to claim the presidency next year. Among Democrats, far fewer, 58 percent, say they think Obama will win a second term. A third of Democrats expect a GOP win; just 13 percent of Republicans sense a repeat for Obama.

Combined with a series of Gallup surveys last week that also painted an exceedingly bleak picture for Barack Obama, The Post/ABC News poll is the stuff of nightmares for an increasingly nervous presidency.

Although the presidential election remains 13 months away, practically every major poll now shows Obama in deep trouble.
And with self-described conservatives now outnumbering liberals by 41 per cent to 20 per cent, with declining support among moderates, the president’s Left-wing big government agenda is looking increasingly out of touch with most Americans.
With the economy by far the dominant issue for voters, unemployment stubbornly stuck at above 9 per cent and no sign of sustained job growth, it is hard to see how Mr Obama can claw his way back to a winning position.

Even Obama`s strongest supporter Matt Damon is fed up with this buffoon president.
That must hurt bad....

Quote

Matt Damon dismisses Barack Obama as 'one-term president'

Matt Damon has taken another swipe at Barack Obama and dismissed him as a "one term president".
By Paul Thompson
7:49PM GMT 21 Dec 2011

In his most ferocious attack to date, the Hollywood star vented his anger at the President's failure to bring about change in America.

He said: "I've talked to a lot of people who worked for Obama at the grassroots level. One of them said to me, 'Never again. I will never be fooled again by a politician,'".

"You know, a one-term president with some balls who actually got stuff done would have been, in the long run of the country, much better."

His latest attack was made in an interview for Elle magazine to promote his new film "We Bought a Zoo."

Damon, 41, was one of the biggest Hollywood stars to stump for Obama during his 2008 election campaign.

He attended fund raising events and was vocal in his support for the Democrat who was elected on a mandate of "change" and "hope".

But over the last year the "Bourne Identity" star has changed his opinion – and been more than happy to publicise his disenchantment.

In March, he criticised Obama's education policy, saying "I really think he misinterpreted his mandate.

"A friend of mine said to me the other day, I thought it was a great line, 'I no longer hope for audacity.' He's doubled down on a lot of things."

President Obama even mentioned Damon's change of heart during this year's White House Correspondent's Ball.

He said: "I've even let down my key core constituency: movie stars. Just the other day, Matt Damon – I love Matt Damon, love the guy – Matt Damon said he was disappointed in my performance. Well, Matt, I just saw "The Adjustment Bureau," so -right back atcha, buddy."

[jetguyz]

What idiotic foreign policy coming from the Obama Admin...again.
Sure troop withdrawal is good, but withdrawing from Iraq to score political points somehow backfire, by creating opportunity for Iraq`s former enemy (Iran) to extend co-operation against their common enemy, the USA.

And Obama intends to invade Iran soon?
Would Iraq be drag in?
Imagine pulling troops out of Iraq and then invade Iran/Iraq again?!!

That`s what you get when you have a buffoon in the White House.

Quote

Iran ready to expand military links with Iraq

Monday 26 December 2011 The Telegraph

Iran is ready to expand its military and security ties with Iraq, its armed forces chief of staff has said, a week after the exit of US forces from their neighbour.

General Hassan Firouzabadi hailed the "forced departure" of the US and allied forces that he said "was due to the resistance and determination of the Iraqi people and government," [/b]the state Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

The statements were made in messages Gen Firouzabadi sent to his Iraqi counterpart, Lieutenant General Babaker Zebari, and to Iraq's acting defence minister, Saadun al-Dulaimi, IRNA said.

The departure of the US troops "was due to the resistance and determination of the Iraqi people and government," he said.

"I hope the humiliating failure of the United States after nine years of occupying Iraq will serve as a lesson for them to never think of attacking another country," he said.

Lt Gen Firouzabadi added that Iran was now "ready to expand its military and security ties with Iraq."

Zebari led a delegation of Iraqi military chiefs to Iran last month to explore greater co-operation between the two defence forces.

US analysts have expressed concern that Iran could exploit the vacuum left by the US withdrawal to bolster links with Iraq's Shiite-led government.

The United States frequently accused Iran of arming Iraqi militias that attacked US forces when they were deployed there.

US President Barack Obama said on December 14 that, while the situation left behind in Iraq was not perfect, "we are leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq."

His administration has warned Iran against trying to interfere in Iraq.

[jetguyz]

Does even Obama and his cronies know who are the enemies of the United States?

Why did defense secretary for homeland defense Paul Stockton refuse to say that Al Qaeda are ‘Islamic Radicals"??
And why did the Vice President says that the Taliban is not the enemy of United States when the US have spend years fighting them in Afghanistan?

Perhaps Obama believes Al Qeada and Taliban are his cronies and innocent civilians in Libya and innocent Americans are the enemies!!??

Gee...Families of those thousands of soldiers who died "protecting" the country from Al Qaeda and the Taliban must be comforted to know that they are fighting and getting killed by their president`s Obama`s cronies.

Quote

Denial: VP Biden Says Taliban NOT Our Enemy

Obama Official Refuses to Say al Qaeda are ‘Radical Islamists’

Canada Free Press- Warner Todd Huston Tuesday, December 20, 2011

President Obama and his various quislings and underlings still cannot bring themselves to say that the USA is under attack by radical Islamists. This is the self-destructive garbage that comes from the Obama administration every day. This is the kind of stuff that makes of us the “weak horse” that Islamists use to justify their attacks on the US.

We have two examples of this today, one from a representative of the Department of Homeland Security and one from Gaffemaster Joe Biden.

First up, our erstwhile VP. Ol’ Slow Joe Biden told Newsweek’s Leslie Gelb that the Taliban isn’t our enemy, either. You know, despite that we invaded Afghanistan to oust them from power, and all.

Biden: "Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy. That’s critical. There is not a single statement that the president has ever made in any of our policy assertions that the Taliban is our enemy because it threatens U.S. interests. "

Next we have assistant defense secretary for homeland defense Paul Stockton refusing to agree with Rep. Dan Lungren’s (R.-Calif.) characterization of al Qaeda as “radical Islamists.”

Dan Lungren questions Paul Stockton- Assistant Defense Secretary for Homeland Defense:


The idiocy from the Obama administration is startling. They won’t even deign to identify the enemy and the enemy IS radical, terrorists driven by a fanatical devotion to Islam.

But we can’t even get Obama and his comrades to identify our enemy, an enemy that has no problem announcing their own animus toward the USA.

And here`s the buffoon president Obama`s flip=flopping`s flip flops!

Then-candidate Barack Obama, July 15, 2008:

"Our troops and our NATO allies are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but I have argued for years that we lack the resources to finish the job because of our commitment to Iraq. That’s what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said earlier this month. And that’s why, as President, I will make the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win."

And then in August, before the VFW:

"This is the central front in the war on terrorism. This is where the Taliban is gaining strength and launching new attacks, including one that just took the life of ten French soldiers. This is where Osama bin Laden and the same terrorists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans on our own soil are hiding and plotting seven years after 9/11. This is a war that we have to win.

And then in his convention address:

"I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan."

And then on October 22 2008:

"Abroad, we need a new direction that ends the war in Iraq, focuses on the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, and restores strong alliances and tough American diplomacy."

The New York Times, October 7, 2009 :

President Obama’s national security team is moving to reframe its war strategy by emphasizing the campaign against Al Qaeda in Pakistan while arguing that the Taliban in Afghanistan do not pose a direct threat to the United States, officials said Wednesday.

Fast forward>>>
Obama’s Afghan Pullout Jun 23, 2011 10:14 AM EDT =====
Meanwhile the Taliban are cheering. “This clearly is a defeat for the U.S. in Afghanistan, and the start of the return of the Taliban, [its supreme leader] Mullah Omar, and an Islamic sharia state,” a senior member of the Taliban’s military council told The Daily Beast by cell phone from an undisclosed location, declining to be named for security reasons. “We can’t believe that in the short time of ten years the Taliban are forcing the superpower of the century to pull out its troops.”

Afghans who oppose the Taliban are worried. They wonder if their own security forces will be able to keep the insurgents at bay as the America winds down its troop commitment. A senior Karzai aide shares that concern: “The withdrawal announcement will badly hit the morale of Afghans and the Afghan government and re-energize the morale of the insurgency.”
===============
Most of the more than 30,000 surge forces will keep fighting for at least one more year. U.S. commanders have also drawn up plans for American and Afghan forces to be even more active in hunting down the Taliban and searching out their arms and supply caches this coming winter, a time when the insurgents are generally least prepared to fight. And even as the drawdown proceeds, American artillery, fighter-bomber, helicopter gunship, logistical and medevac support will be assisting the vastly beefed-up Afghan security forces, who will number some 350,000 by next year.

On top of that, US Special Ops forces will be the last to leave—and their night raids on Taliban hideouts have been among the insurgents’ worst problems.

=============

So let me get this straight:
FLIP: Obama stressed that the Taliban is the enemy whilst he was running for presidency.....

FLOP: And after 2 years as president Obama state that the Taliban is not the enemy.

FLIP: Then Obama intend to pull troops out of Afghanistan, stating that the "Taliban does not pose direct threat to the US".....

FLOP: Yet Obama will leave 30,000 surge forces in Afghanistan who will keep fighting against the Taliban for at least one more year. (I thought Obama said the Taliban pose no direct threats against US, so why is US troops still fighting the Taliban?)

Geez!!!
Is there no end to this flip-flopping buffoon?

[jetguyz]

Should Congress be surprised that the flip-flopping arrogant buffoon president intends to disregard the Constitution and Congress... and do as he please?

Surely Congress would know by now that the Constitution is a joke...and that the Obama is a Fascist hypocrite dictator ....right?

It is surely great to see that hypocrite buffoon president dig his grave deeper and deeper with every arrogant stupid behavior, alienating his Dem Party and Congress when the 2012 Election is just around the corner.

Perhaps Congress and intelligent Americans with commonsense (clueless pro-Obama supporters excluded) would have the last laugh when they throw the "Constitution book" at him during 2012 Election?

Quote

President Obama Defies Congress On Czars, Gitmo

Posted: 12/23/11 05:49 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- President Obama left town Friday for vacation not only pocketing a victory on the payroll tax, but leaving behind a message of defiance for Congress.

In signing the bill to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year, the commander in chief also issued a "signing statement" in which he rejected several provisions of the bill, including attempts to take away his czars.

Buried deep in the $1 trillion measure are four provisions in section 627 that say the White House may not use any of the money to fund salaries or expenses for the head of Obama's health reform office, his energy and climate adviser, his car czar, or the head of his urban affairs office.

But Friday, Obama essentially said 'too bad' in issuing a dense, legalistic statement that explains what he won't accept in the bill.

"Several provisions in this bill, including section 627 of Division C and section 512 of Division D, could prevent me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibilities, by denying me the assistance of senior advisers and by obstructing my supervision of executive branch officials in the execution of their statutory responsibilities," Obama wrote. "I have informed the Congress that I will interpret these provisions consistent with my constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

This is not the first time Obama has issued a signing statement -- a practice he criticized as a candidate -- or even the first time he has protected his czars. He did the same last summer, also sending the statement out on a sleepy Friday evening.

The statement also rejects a number of provisions aimed at restricting how the White House deals with the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, prison for terrorism suspects.

"My Administration has repeatedly communicated my objections to these provisions, including my view that they could, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles," Obama wrote. "In approving this bill, I reiterate the objections my Administration has raised."

The bill additionally tries to restrict several other White House initiatives, including spending money on certain military actions and in other foreign policy areas. Obama put Congress on notice that he will interpret those sections as he sees fit under the Constitution.

[One_of_us]

The "Birthers"... What an amazing phenomenon of adults who get infected with a brain desease that makes them behave like children... A passionate obsession with making Obama a native of Kenya instead of Hawaii, even against all evidence

I know personally a few of them, and I recognize in them the same psychosis that affects our beloved Obama Master-Basher jetz, although not so strong because they are still intelligent and productive people.

Things haven't turned out so well for the "birthers". Maybe they need to seek soon another obsession with better chances. This article explains:

Quote

Birther movement suffers another blow as fed appeals court tosses lawsuit on Obama citizenship
By Associated Press, Published: December 22

SAN FRANCISCO — The so-called birther movement was dealt another legal blow Thursday when a federal appeals court tossed out a lawsuit challenging President Barack Obama’s U.S. citizenship and his eligibility to serve as commander in chief.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that none of the challengers had legal standing to file the lawsuit on Jan. 20, 2009, the day Obama was inaugurated. The three-judge panel cited various reasons for disqualifying six sets of plaintiffs, who included Obama’s political rivals, taxpayers and military personnel.

The birther movement has filed multiple lawsuits over the issue, so far with no success. Its leaders have lost similar challenges before the U.S. Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court.

The U.S. Constitution says only “a natural born citizen” may serve as president. The challengers allege that Obama, whose father was Kenyan, was born in that African country, rather than the U.S. state of Hawaii. They claim his Hawaii birth certificate is a forgery.

The appeals court didn’t address the authenticity of the birth certificate, instead ruling that the challengers couldn’t show “concrete injury” from the allegations.

The taxpayers listed in the lawsuit, for instance, failed to show how the citizenship question affected any federal taxing and spending provisions.

The lawsuit was filed in 2009 by 40 plaintiffs, including conservative activists Alan Keyes and Wiley Drake, who ran for president and vice president respectively as members of the American Independent Party against Obama in 2008.

They alleged they had standing to file a lawsuit because of their interest in competing in a fair election. Libertarian Party vice-presidential candidate Gail Lightfoot was also a plaintiff.

Judge Harry Pregerson, writing for the three-judge panel, said Keyes and Drake waited too long to file their lawsuit. The election was over and Obama was already sworn in when the lawsuit was filed.

“Once the 2008 election was over and the President sworn in, Keyes, Drake, and Lightfoot were no longer ‘candidates’ for the 2008 general election,” Pregerson wrote. “Plaintiffs’ competitive interest in running against a qualified candidate had lapsed.”

Orly Taitz, one of the challengers’ lawyers, said she would ask the appeals court to convene a special 11-judge panel to reconsider the case. If she’s turned down there, she said she would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

Taitz said she has filed similar lawsuits in five states and has two other federal appeals pending in Washington, D.C.

The challengers couldn't show "concrete injury". Very true! Who cares WHERE a person is born? In this issue it's just a FORMALITY. But some people cling to formalities to attack others no matter what, and in this case, no matter how wrong they are.

[jetguyz]

Joe Wilson is a smart man to called the lying hypocrite president Obama a "LIAR"!.

Unfortunately too many dumb idiots are in Congress.

Then again..TRUTH prevails!

Quote

Joe Wilson Was Right About ObamaCare for Illegal Immigrants

August 11, 2011 By Karl Filippini
ImmigrationReform.com
On September 9, 2009, President Obama addressed Congress as part of his push for a health care “reform” law. One of the things the President said that night was that “the reforms I am proposing would not apply to those here illegally.”

In response, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), shouted out “You lie!”

Wilson later apologized for the outburst, and the House voted to rebuke him.

However, now that HHS has begun disbursing grants for community health centers for migrant workers, it’s clear to see that President Obama’s promise isn’t bearing up.

Instead, as statements from HHS (reported by CNS news) make clear, these clinics “won’t ask about or collect data on citizenship or other matters not related to the treatment needs of the patients seeking health services at the center.”

These clinics are targeted at a migrant workforce with a significant number of illegal aliens.

Congress should think hard about what the President’s promises are worth the next time an immigration bill comes up for debate, because as the administration’s record on “prosecutorial discretion” has made clear, what the President says and what federal agencies do are not always the same.

[jetguyz]

America will not be the "free country" it once was....where it`s citizens are "innocent until proven guilty".
Instead, if the flip=flopping Obama`s demand for Amendment of NDAA, S. 1867 goes thru`...ALL Americans will be guilty until proven innocent!...or shoot on sight if Obama even has the slightest doubt or think that you have links to terrorist organizations.

Of cos, illegal immigrants will be treated differently from American citizens, cos Obama will handle them with care and concern preventing them from being deported and giving them citizenships so that they would be grateful to vote for him in 2012 Election ....and would even receive free medical care under Obamacare with ...of cos American taxpayers` paying for it!

Quote

NDAA S.1867 Establishes Martial Law in America – Are You Ready?

Forty members of Congress have sent an urgent letter to House and Senate Armed Services Committee leaders protesting certain provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act that would legalize indefinite detention of American citizens without trial. The revised version of the bill heads for a final vote on Thursday.

Here is a passage from the letter:

“The Senate-passed version of the NDAA, S. 1867, contains Section 1031, which authorizes indefinite military detention of suspected terrorists without protecting U.S. citizens’ right to trial. We are deeply concerned that this provision could undermine the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth amendment rights of U.S. citizens who might be subjects of detention or prosecution by the military.”

A lot of people have the mistaken idea that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens.

However, it does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill).

So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens, but it does not have to use its power unless ordered to do so.

Need more proof that this is actually happening? Here is what one of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Lindsey Graham said about it on the Senate floor:

“Section 1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

Another co-sponsor of the bill, Sen. John McCain, said this:

“Americans suspected of terrorism could not only be indefinitely detained, but could be sent to Guantanamo.”

This is what it has come to in America. Under the supposed constant threat of terrorist attacks, everyone has become a suspect. Guilty until proven innocent.

And that`s not the end of it!
American taxpayers will have to pay $662 billion (including funding Obama`s intended war with Iran) for the bill that would treat them like "criminals" in a "free country".!

Now that I would love to see.....

"As noted by The New American’s Joe Wolverton, the revised version of the NDAA bill “will now be sent in its conference form” for a vote in the House and the Senate, and it includes billions of dollars appropriated for a continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wolverton adds that it “greases the skids for the deployment of forces into Iran (after ‘sanctions’ fail to persuade Ahmadinejad to see things our way)” and converts all of the United States into a battlefield, treating all Americans as potential suspects. The entire bill does all of this and more, costing American taxpayers $662 billion.

[jetguyz]

Obama is digging his own grave... deeper and deeper.
Perhaps he intends to drag as many Americans as he can down with him when they hammer the final nail in his coffin?

Wouldn`t be surprised that during the Re-Election 2012, the Military or Feds arresting voters just becos they would not vote for that buffoon, or shooting them if they so much as protest vocally about that deceitful lying Obama ....with just a lame excuse that they have ties with terrorists.

“Congress is poised to affirm that President Obama and his successors can imprison whomever they want, for as long as they want, on no authority but their own, so long as they first assert that the person in question is a terrorist,” writes the Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf. “They needn’t present evidence, or persuade a judge, or get a majority of votes from a jury. Just whispering “he’s a terrorist” is enough. Yes, even if the suspect is an American citizen.”

Stalinist North Korea, Saddam Hussein and Qaddafi seems child-play next to this black US dictator.

Welcome to the Fascist States of Amerika.

Quote

40 Members of Congress Protest ‘Indefinite Detention’ Bill

Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, December 14, 2011

40 members of Congress have sent an urgent letter to House and Senate Armed Services Committee leaders protesting provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act that would legalize indefinite detention of American citizens without trial, as the revised version of the bill heads for a final vote on Thursday.

“The Senate-passed version of the NDAA, S. 1867, contains Section 1031, which authorizes indefinite military detention of suspected terrorists without protecting U.S. citizens’ right to trial. We are deeply concerned that this provision could undermine the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth amendment rights of U.S. citizens who might be subjects of detention or prosecution by the military,” states the letter.

Opposition to the bill has been bipartisan. While the letter is signed mostly by Democratic members of Congress, Republican representatives like Justin Amash, Ron Paul, and Rand Paul have also been vocal in their opposition.

After a weekend of secret meetings, the final version of the bill emerged on Tuesday morning and is set to voted on before the end of the week. Issues the Obama administration had with the bill, which had nothing to do with indefinite detention (indeed it was the White House itself which removed language that would have protected Americans from Section 1031), now appear to have been settled.

Both the ACLU and Human Rights Watch point out that the final version does nothing to protect American citizens against indefinite detention.

“The sponsors of the bill monkeyed around with a few minor details, but all of the core dangers remain – the bill authorizes the president to order the military to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others found far from any battlefield, even in the United States itself,” said the ACLU’s Chris Anders.

“The latest version of the defense authorization bill does nothing to address the bill’s core problems – legislated indefinite detention without charge and the militarization of law enforcement,” concurred HRW’s Andrea Prasow.

Proponent of the legislation Senator Lindsay Graham ironically summed up the nightmare scenario the bill will codify into law – the complete evisceration of all Constitutional protections for U.S. citizens.

“It is not unfair to make an American citizen account for the fact that they decided to help Al Qaeda to kill us all and hold them as long as it takes to find intelligence about what may be coming next,” remarked Graham. “And when they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them, ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer.’”

Of course, the government would not be required to present any evidence whatsoever or go through any legal process to snatch an American citizen off the street and send them to Guantanamo Bay, merely accusing them of aiding terrorists or ‘committing an act of belligerence’ would be enough.

Protests and funeral marches to mark the death of freedom in America and the legalization of permanent martial law, are being planned for Thursday, which ironically is Bill of Rights Day, 220 years since the liberties now about to be eviscerated were first ratified on December 15, 1791.

[jetguyz]

Singapore`s LKY must be so proud that the a "free country" like the USA is following his footsteps and implementing the "Internal Security Act (aka ISA)" to detain American citizens without trail and indefinitely.
Obama even went one step further...the right to assassinate American citizens. (at least Singapore would not sink that low).

And those clueless pro-Obama`s supporters with heads stuck in his "brown mud" must be so ecstatic that their "messiah" can detain them and throw them in jail indefinitely without any reasons, or even assassinate them if he so wishes.

Welcome to the dictator Obama`s regime.

Quote

Obama welcomes new power to detain US citizens without a trial.

Kyle Rogers
, Charleston Conservative Examiner
December 14, 2011

Recently US Senators John McCain, Carl Levin, and Lindsey Graham inserted broad new Federal powers into the NDAA, the annual defense spending authorization bill.

Sections 1031 and 1032 authorize the military to arrest and detain US citizens on US soil. The sections nullify Posse Comitatus and allow the military to suspend a citizens' right to a trial. US citizens can be held "indefinitely."

The bill passed the Senate with the new powers. The House is exspected to vote on the NDAA tomorrow.

It was initially reported that the provisions were drawn up at the request of the Obama administration. However, as public anger mounted, the media reported that Obama would veto the provisions.

Many were skeptical that Obama was sincere about vetoing these broad new Federal powers.

Last October the New York Times blew on the whistle on internal White House documents calling for new assassination powers. The New York Times reported that White House lawyers spent the past year drawing up legal arguments for the assassination of a US citizen. The result was a fifty page memorandum saying that the president of the United State has the right to order the assassination of a US citizen.

Democratic Congressman Carl Levin fired back at Obama last Monday. He announced that Obama had personally requested the new powers. Levin stated that language meant to limit the new powers was removed at Obama's request.

Today Obama dropped the charade and admitted he has no intention of vetoing the new powers.

[jetguyz]

What a hypocrite deceitful moron.
This time it is Obama`s fave crony Eric Holder.

Let`s see....
"He gave a false statement to Congress under oath claiming that he had only learned about the operation "a few weeks ago." Internal DOJ documents prove that he had known about the operation for at least ten months. Shortly after, Barack Obama admitting knowing about the operation for a longer period of time than what Holder had admitted too.

Then Eric Holder turned around and accuse white people of being racist for exposing him as a liar and a hypocrite becos (poor dear) he is African-American...?!!

Even Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson went even farther. He said critics of Eric Holder are "white supremacists."
Like ......huh!?

Tsk...tsk...Seems Obama Admin and his Democrat Party are full of lying hypocrite racist black supremacists who will blame the white people for their crimes.
Looks like the White House is turning into a 1950`s Harlem ghetto.

Quote

Eric Holder "regrets" false letter to Congress, blames white people.

Kyle Rogers
, Charleston Conservative Examiner
December 19, 2011

US Attorney General Eric Holder is feeling the heat over Fast & Furious. His department oversaw a vast gunrunning operation that sent thousands of firearms to Mexican drug cartels. Two members of Americans law enforcement have been murdered with these guns. The Mexican government estimates that over two hundred Mexican citizens, including many law enforcement officers, have been murdered with these weapons.

The operation violated US law, Mexican law, and international treaties between the US and Mexico.

The Wall Street Journal even accused the DOJ of facilitating the sale of fragmentation grenades to Mexican drug cartels. They base they claim on Internet DOJ documents that have been released.

Internal memos show that Fast & Furious was a "false flag" operation to justify more gun control measures in the United States.

Eric Holder gave a statement to Congress under oath claiming that he had only learned about the operation "a few weeks ago." Internal DOJ documents prove that he had known about the operation for at least ten months. Shortly after, Barack Obama admitting knowing about the operation for a longer period of time than what Holder had admitted too.

Holder now tells the press that he "regrets" giving Congress false information in a letter about Fast & Furious. However he has yet to address accusations of perjury in his under oath testimony to Congress.

Sixty US House members are calling for Eric Holder's resignation. Rep. Ron Paul called for his arrest and prosecution. He says the operation was "criminal," and a "false flag."

However, Eric Holder characterized his critics as white racists. He said the scandal has been blown out proportion by white people who are only attacking him because he is "African-American."

Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson went even farther. He said critics of Eric Holder are "white supremecists." Johnson is well known for crazed outbursts. He once stated on the House floor that the island of Guam might "capsize" from overpopulation.

Many of Johnson's black colleagues disagree with his extreme sentiment. A staff member for the Congressional Black Caucus said members are "divided" on Holder. The staffer characterized the position of the caucus as feeling that Holder should be investigated but not subjected to a "witch hunt."

Quote

December 20, 2011
Justice Dept. silent as Holder charges critics with racism

By Matthew Boyle

Attorney General Eric Holder accused his growing chorus of critics of racist motivations in a Sunday interview published in the New York Times.
When reached by The Daily Caller Monday morning, the Department of Justice provided no evidence to support the attorney general’s claims.

Holder said some unspecified faction — what he refers to as the “more extreme segment” — is driven to criticize both him and President Barack Obama due to the color of their skin. Holder did not appear to elaborate on who he considered to make up the “more extreme segment.”

“This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” Holder said, according to the Times. “Both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

The White House hasn’t returned requests for comment on whether President Barack Obama agrees with his top law enforcement officer’s allegations of racial motivations.

Holder’s accusations come as resignation calls mount from a growing list of 60 congressmen, two senators, every major Republican presidential candidate and two sitting governors, spurred on by the congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious.

Additionally, seventy-five congressmen have signed onto a House resolution for a vote of “no confidence” in Holder as attorney general. Between the two lists, there are 86 total in the House who no longer trust Holder to head the Department of Justice.

It’s not the first time the race card has come into play in efforts to protect Holder from criticism.
=============More here

Now what did Eric Holder meant when he said that "due to the nature of our (Obama and him) relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American."

Well, it`s a known fact that both Holder and Obama are 2 lying deceitful "African Americans"...but is he also hinting that he and Obama are having an ... *ahem* ..."oral affairs" nature too?

The noose is slowly tightening.....around the buffoon.

[jetguyz]

In this time of economy crisis, with deficit at all time high in the history of USA, that hypocrite conniving president Obama have no qualms to use taxpayers` hard earned money (more than US$4 million!) to lavish himself, his family and his friends on a 17 day Hawaiian Christmas vacation...while most Americans could not even afford a decent meal for their families.

And that`s not including tins after tins of expensive beluga caviar and lobsters that Michelle Obama will be stuffing her face with from room service.

Obama`s recent speeches for Re-Election are all self-interest, political motivated and clearly that buffoon president don`t give a damn about those starving Americans.....what with his hypocrite America Job Act and Obamacare. tsk...tsk...

Quote

Obama's $4 million, 17-day Hawaiian vacation

Timothy Whiteman
, Wilmington Political Buzz Examiner
December 18, 2011 -

The Obama's are ready to hit the holiday road for their Christmas vacation.

And quite the expensive vacation the American people will be footing the bill for.

According to The Hawaii Reporter, the totality of the South Seas two-week-plus fling will cost well over 4 million of the taxpayers hard earned dollars.

Breakdown, Go Ahead And Give It To Me...

~ TRAVEL: $3,651,626 - The cost of Air Force One, USAF C-17 cargo aircraft that transports the Presidential limos, helicopters and other support equipment, and Mrs. Obama's solo flight to Hawaii sans Barry.

~ HOUSING: $151,200 - The taxpayers foot the the costs for housing U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Coast Guard and Navy SEALs in beach front and canal front homes in Kailua.

~ HOTEL: $72,216 - The President’s staff and White House Press Corps stay at one of Hawaii’s oldest and most elegant hotels, the Moana Surfrider.

~ LOCAL TAXPAYER COSTS: - $260,000. Local police, ambulance crew, overtime, etc.

The total cost (based on what is known) for a 17-day round trip vacation to Hawaii for the President and his family and staff and security is an estimated $4,135,038.

Also cited are the "unknown costs" that the White House refuses to release citing security reasons.

For example, the president’s security usually rents an entire floor of an office building in Kailua on the canal during the president’s stay.
There are security upgrades and additional phone lines to several private homes where Obama and friends are staying. That includes bullet proof glass installed, home security systems disabled, new security measures put into place and additional phone lines added.
There is the cost for car rentals and fuel for White House staff staying at Moana Hotel.
And there are additional travel costs Secret Service and White House staff traveling ahead of the President.

Meanwhile...

In a recent speech in Kansas, the president stated;


"Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments -- wealthier than ever before.

But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren't -- and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up."

The president went on to say;

"what's at stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, secure their retirement."

There was no mention made of "working people" going on a 17-day, $4 million Hawaiian vacation that someone else was going to pay for.

[jetguyz]

Is that lying deceitful Obama trying to "buy votes for his 2012 Re-Election " by dismissing millions of illegal immigrants` deportation (bypassing Congress and deceiving American citizens) and allowing them to become citizens so that they could vote for him in 2012 Election!?

And Obama Admin even considers dismissal of charges for criminals convicted of violent crimes!

Quote

Did Obama Officials Lie About Their Stealth Amnesty Scheme?
by Tom Fitton

The Obama administration stealth amnesty scandal that emerged last year is heating up. It all began with an internal U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services memo outlining ways the Obama administration could bypass Congress to enact amnesty for millions of illegal aliens through “administrative means

And then the Houston Chronicle exposed an effort by the administration to suspend the deportations of illegal aliens that supposedly have not been convicted of any “serious” crimes.

JW filed two FOIA lawsuits against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to get to the truth about this deportation plan. And according to documents our litigation recently pried loose, not only did Obama administration officials skirt congressional authority when implementing this unlawful scheme behind closed doors, but apparently they also lied about it when they got caught.

The documents, which we obtained from the Obama DHS, show that DHS officials misled Congress and the public about the scope of the immigration enforcement policy change which gave wide latitude to local immigration officials to dismiss illegal alien deportation cases.

And perhaps most shocking of all, officials considered the dismissal of charges against illegal alien criminals convicted of violent crimes!

The documents concern the response by Houston immigration officials to a June 30, 2010, memo from John Morton, Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), to all ICE employees instructing local immigration officials to use their discretion in “prioritizing” illegal immigration deportation cases.

This new policy resulted in the dismissal of hundreds of immigration cases and an overall 40% increase in deportation dismissals with local Houston ICE officials taking a particularly aggressive approach to the policy’s implementation.

In response to calls by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for more information regarding this new, relaxed, deportation policy, DHS spokesman Matt Chandler said, “The idea that DHS is engaged in ‘selective enforcement’ couldn’t be further from the truth.” However, the documents uncovered by Judicial Watch show that Houston immigration officials moved quickly to implement a broad interpretation of Morton’s memo, earning praise from ICE agency headquarters:

========memo exchange details here

Moreover, despite the claims of immigration officials, ICE considered ending deportation proceeding for illegal aliens with violent crime offenses. A spreadsheet obtained by Judicial Watch lists the specific violent crimes that immigration officials were prepared to overlook. They include: sexual assault, solicitation of murder, aggravated assault, assaulting a police officer, and kidnapping, as well as numerous drug charges.

A far cry from the “very narrow class of illegal immigrants with pending green card applications” Obama administration officials described to the press, wouldn’t you say?

The documents also show that following the press coverage of the memo, which resulted in widespread outrage, immigration officials sought to contain the damage by narrowing the scope of the policy change:

The June 30, 2010, memo that kicked off our investigation is not the last we’ve heard from John Morton regarding deportations. On June 17, 2011, John Morton sent yet another memo to all field officers, special agents and chief counsel to further define the term “prosecutorial discretion.”

And what does he mean by “prosecutorial discretion?”

Here’s how Morton defines the term: “In basic terms, prosecutorial discretion is the authority of an agency charged with enforcing a law to decide to what degree to enforce the law against a particular individual.”

I would describe it as a permission slip for immigration authorities to ignore federal immigration law. And here’s what I mean.

Thanks to Morton’s new mandate, immigration officials can cancel deportation proceedings against illegal aliens, release illegal aliens on bond, ignore certain kinds of criminal conduct, “settle or dismiss” a proceeding and make a host of other broadly defined immigration enforcement decisions.

And what kind of mitigating factors will these immigration officials consider when deciding which illegal aliens to let off the hook? Morton covers that as well.

An illegal alien’s “length of presence” in the U.S., pursuit of education, age, ties to the community and other factors will all be taken into account. Even the pregnancy status of an illegal alien can be considered, with illegal aliens who are “nursing” apparently at the top of the list for preferential treatment.
(Important to note, the children of illegal aliens born in the United States, called “anchor babies,” automatically become U.S. citizens. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, “In total, 4 million U.S.-born children of unauthorized immigrant parents resided in this country in 2009.”)

Overall, Morton has 19 mitigating factors on his list, which he says is “not exhaustive.” And he does not bother to couch his directive carefully: “[T]he universe of opportunities to exercise prosecutorial discretion is large,” Morton writes. And regarding timing, “It is also preferable for ICE officers, agents and attorneys to consider prosecutorial discretion in cases without waiting for an alien or alien’s advocate or counsel to request a favorable exercise of discretion.”

In other words, it appears that not only does Morton want a “large universe” of illegal aliens to be released. He wants them released quickly.

Morton claims this new policy will help preserve precious government resources, but let’s get real. The Obama administration doesn’t care a whit about government spending. In fact, “the more the better,” has been the Obama mantra. This is just a bald-faced attempt to enact stealth amnesty policies without having to persuade Congress or the American people to change the law.

Morton’s new policies have understandably elicited strong opposition from members of Congress. Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX), for example, announced recently that he plans to fight against Morton’s new directive:
"While this authority is justifiable when exercised responsibly, the Obama administration has made clear that it plans not to use but abuse these powers. That is why I will soon introduce legislation to prevent the Obama administration from abusing this authority. The Obama administration cannot continue to pick and choose which laws it will enforce. It is outrageous that they have put illegal immigrants and their liberal political base ahead of the American people."

We couldn’t agree more.

There is no question these documents show that the Obama administration is implementing “stealth amnesty,” which is an end-run around the rule of law and Congress.

The Obama administration doesn’t seem to care about its constitutional responsibility to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” but instead is pushing the selective enforcement of immigration laws. And they are thumbing their noses at Congress and the American people by stonewalling information requests and lying to cover up their stealth amnesty scheme. Congress should initiate a full investigation to get to the truth of the matter. This lawlessness must stop.====

As suspended deportations of illegal alien criminals continue, expect crime rates to climb.

[jetguyz]

Hypocrisy runs deep in Obama`s Administration....
Perhaps in the near future, the International Criminal Court would evolve and have the power to convict the hypocrite US president Obama for his "collateral-genocide-murder" spree in Libya and Pakistan.

Quote

Could a US president face the International Criminal Court?

Kay Day Examiner
December 5, 2011

Does the world need a permanent war crimes court? Regardless of your opinion, such a court exists and the International Criminal Court will soon prosecute the former president of Cote D’Ivoire, Laurent Gbago.

Gbago disputed the 2010 election results when his opponent Alassane Ouattara claimed victory. Months of violent conflict ensued, with both Gbago and Ouattara’s forces allegedly killing approximately 3,000 people according to media accounts. France and the United Nations intervened, siding with Ouattara.

Cote D’Ivoire or in English, Ivory Coast, is a small country with political turmoil plaguing the government for more than a decade.

President Barack Obama’s legal advisor to the US State Department, Harold Koh, has in the past favored international governance. Koh was a rabid critic of the administration of President George W. Bush’s foreign policy as related to the War on Terror.

Discover the Networks, a conservative research site, describes Koh’s position on international law:
"“The world's most challenging problems—war, terrorism, ‘climate change,’ hunger, financial and social inequalities, diseases, human rights violations, racism, sexism, and xenophobia—are too complex and deep-rooted for any single nation-state to address effectively on its own. The solution, says Koh, would be for all members of the international community to recognize a set of supranational laws and institutions whose authority overrides that of any particular government. Koh believes that such laws should ‘be internalized into the domestic law of even resistant nation-states.’”

Like many extreme liberals, Koh subordinates the tenets of the US Constitution and national sovereignty.

Koh has not been as vocal lately, perhaps because of Obama’s participation in the war on Libya—Obama did not seek approval from Congress. Koh has also been silent on the killing of American citizen Anwar al-Alaki who did not have a trial. Obama also gave orders for the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.

Although most conservatives expressed little concern, some bloggers did point out the hypocritical contradiction between Koh’s rhetoric towards Bush and his silence regarding Obama’s actions.

No media have questioned Koh or Obama on their policy flip-flop.

Issues over international law have arisen before, on matters like death penalty cases for foreign nationals in the U.S. illegally. Those issues have been raised by countries like Mexico even if the convicted murderer grew up in the U.S. and received taxpayer subsidies as children brought here by their illegal alien parents. Liberals view such nationals as de facto American citizens, but they actually enjoy a perk American citizens do not. When these criminals face capital murder charges, their home country is quick to claim them regardless of how long they have lived in the U.S.

In 2010 liberal Democrats like Chicago Mayor Richard Daley suggested Mexico seek redress against US gun manufacturers. That was before Daley and others realized the Obama administration was supplying guns to drug cartels via the scandalous operation known as Fast and Furious.

Furthermore, Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Firdous Ashiq Awan, wants to present information to the ICJ about the ill-fated NATO air strikes that killed two dozen Pakistani troops. Obama admitted culpability when he apologized to Pakistan.

Gbago’s trial is presided over by a judge from Argentina. That country has had human rights issues in years past, with a focus on prison conditions, and Argentina continues to draw attention over controversies and allegations of abuse related to the rights of indigenous communities.

Prosecutors claim the 4-month war in Ivory Coast “displaced more than a million people,” said MSNBC.

The U.S. withdrew acceptance of compulsory ICJ jurisdiction in 2005 under the Bush administration. Obama has definitely benefited from Bush’s decision and Koh has remained silent about the matter.

[jetguyz]

That idiotic and ignorant Obama is at it again.
This time he and his Admin smuggled a Somali terrorist into NYC without Congress or the American public knowledge to face terrorism charges in American civilian court, according him the full rights of American citizen and using whatever limited resources and taxpayers money!!??

I pity NYC when Warsame (the Somali terrorist)`s organization, friends or supporters decide to "free him" or make a statement by bombing the city when he is being sentenced (or release).

Or perhaps the civilian court might dismissed all charges against him since he did not commit any terror acts in American soil. (perhaps that`s what Obama intended thru` secret deals with him, knowing that Military court in Gitmo would convict Warsame, deal or no deal?)

I am sure his case will "attract" lots of terrorists to come to NYC.....erm...for "sight-seeing"....lor!

Quote

Major Terrorist Snuck into U.S. - by Obama Administration

Annemarie McAvoy

Even now, the Obama Administration does not seem to understand fully the risks that terrorism poses to our country. Why else would they commit the outrage of sneaking Ahmed Abdulkadir Warsame, believed to be a senior commander with an al Qaeda group known as al-Shabaab in Somalia, into the middle of NYC from the Persian Gulf ?

Warsame has direct ties to Al Awlaki, one of the most wanted terrorists and the only American citizen with a CIA kill-order on him.
It was not made public that Warsame was being brought to US shores until he was already in New York. Why? So that this Administration could bypass the public outrage they rightfully suffered when they tried to proceed against the 9/11 co-conspirators in federal court in New York.

The Administration seems to purposely ignore the fact that terrorists are at war with America. Terrorists have continued trying to come up with new, frightening schemes to attack America and those on American soil.

On June 3, 2011, an al Qaeda video called on lone wolf attacks to take place in the United States. Thereafter a “hit list” was put on an al Qaeda website which set forth names of forty figures from the US government, the military and the media. It was also recently learned that terrorists may be planning to surgically implant bombs in people, in order to make it virtually impossible to detect the danger prior to the mayhem they will cause. This threat needs to be taken very seriously, and when terrorists are brought into custody they should be handled as people at war with the US, not as simple run-of-the-mill criminals.

There was no reason that Warsame, a citizen of Somalia, should have been brought onto US soil. He was captured on April 19, 2011, in the Persian Gulf while traveling by boat from Somalia to Yemen. Rather than take him to Guantanamo Bay, which is set up to deal with terrorists like Warsame, he was instead interrogated on a US warship for two months in the Gulf Region. Warsame was questioned by the High-Value Interrogation Group, which is led by the FBI but includes CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency specialists. He was advised of his Miranda rights only after these interrogations were completed, about two months following his apprehension. Then an FBI “clean team” was brought in to interview Warsame again.

The Administration, by bringing in the “clean team,” shows it recognizes that there may be problems getting statements and evidence into federal court learned through questioning of Warsame. The belief of the Administration is that once he is Mirandized they can use whatever he says after that. However, the theory of using a “clean team” to essentially come in and sanitize what was done initially is questionable at best. There is a good chance that in a federal court anything that is learned from Warsame will not be able to be used since he was not Mirandized when he was taken into custody in the first place.

Apparently the Obama Administration did not learn any lessons from the near disastrous result of the last terrorism case tried in federal court in NYC. Ahmed Ghailani was a terrorist involved in the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa which killed 224 people. The government’s star witness was not allowed to testify because the existence of that witness came to light as a result of interrogations that did not comport with the requirements of federal courts. Ghailani was convicted of only one out of the 285 counts against him, and it was a relatively minor charge compared to the rest of the counts. In addition, there are issues in federal court relating to having to turn over sensitive information pertaining to our strategies in combatting terrorism and having such information made public at trial.

Warsame was indicted in federal court in the Southern District of New York and pled not guilty there last week. He faces nine counts, including providing material support to al Shabaab and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the Yemen-based branch of al Qaeda. He apparently acted as a conduit between the two groups. According to the indictment, in 2009 Mr. Warsame fought for al Shabaab in Somalia. In addition, he provided money, equipment, and personnel to the group over the next two years. Warsame also received explosives as well as training from al Qaeda in Yemen in 2010 and 2011. He has also been charged with teaching how to make explosives and with brokering a weapons deal with al Qaeda on behalf of al Shabaab.

Without question Warsame should be handled as an enemy of the United States. He should have been brought to the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he could be tried by a military tribunal, instead of to NYC.

As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell pointed out, “The administration has purposefully imported a terrorist into the U.S. and is providing him all the rights of U.S. citizens in court.”
He also correctly stated that “This ideological rigidity being displayed by the administration is harming the national security of the United States of America.”
[b]Congressman Peter King of New York, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, agrees that Warsame should have been brought to Guantanamo, not to a civilian court. He explained that "He is not an American citizen, nor did his criminal acts or his detention occur in the U.S. He is a Somali who traveled to Yemen for terror training. Warsame is a foreigner and an unlawful enemy combatant." Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire stated that "As an active member of two terrorist groups that have planned attacks against Americans and our allies, Warsame should be treated as an enemy combatant and tried in a military commission at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, where classified information and the public can be fully protected."

The Administration continues to ignore the fact that terrorists are in fact enemy combatants who should be treated as such. Currently the Justice Department is prosecuting the case of two men who are charged in federal court in Kentucky with conspiring to send weapons and money to al Qaeda in Iraq, one of whom also is alleged to have attacked US troops in Iraq. There apparently were fingerprints of one of them found on an unexploded Improvised Explosive Device (“IED”) found in Iraq by US forces. One of the first questions that will come up in federal court will be whether the appropriate chain of custody was followed in the handling of that IED as evidence. If not, it will not be admissible. Our forces should not have to have such worries when handling IED’s in the battlefield, with their lives at stake.

If we as Americans do not remain vigilant, and fail to treat terrorists as the enemy combatants they are, the jihadists will become more brazen and will inflict deadly blows. Terrorists are not just run-of-the-mill criminals. They are part of a concerted effort to destroy the US and its way of life.
[b]Our federal justice system is not set up to deal with them, but military commissions in Guantanamo Bay are. The fact that terrorists are now targeting individuals ought to be a grim reminder that they are constantly trying to find new ways to try to hurt us. America must treat these terrorists as the enemy combatants that they are, including trying them in military commissions rather than in federal courts. After all, the terrorists look at this as an all-out war against us. We have to do the same when dealing with them.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Annemarie McAvoy is a former federal prosecutor. She currently is a consultant and teaches Counter-Terrorism, Anti-Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing at Fordham Law School in New York City.

[sailor]

Jetzie.... by now even a blind man is able to see that you don't like Obama.

Nothing wrong with that, but what is the use of burning the man down to the ground in each and every message you write?

Obviously you think you know everything way better than him so, why don't you tell us what he should do instead,since you know so well what should be done?

Breaking someone down is never a solution, you have to point him the right way.

[jetguyz]

Perhaps "clueless self-proclaimed pro-Obama American" might be more than willing to contribute money to Obama`s pet crony organization, ACORN.
Wouldn`t that be akin to aiding and abetting corruption under federal laws.....

In spite of Congress passing a law to banned federal funding for ACORN, The Obama Admin still gave tens of thousands of taxpayers money to ACORN and it`s affiliates!

So much for clueless pro-Obama supporters` deluded opine of their messiah`s "good record without blemishes of lying, stealing, deceiving"...tsk...tsk...

Quote

Justice Department involved in new corruption scandal, says watchdog group

Jim Kouri
, Law Enforcement Examiner
December 5, 2011 -

The already scandal-ridden Obama Justice Department is being accused of more misbehavior, according to a blog this week by a top "Inside the Beltway" watchdog group.

A Justice Department program that distributes hundreds of millions of dollars each year to supposedly combat juvenile delinquency is now under fire for giving a leftist group nailed for rampant corruption in the past -- the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now or ACORN -- taxpayers' money that was fraudulently spent.

According to a report on the Judicial Watch blog, this is just the latest of several controversies for the DOJ’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) which has managed to maintain a significant budget through the years despite multiple allegations of cronyism.

During the George W. Bush Administration, the OJJDP was accused of giving money to politically-connected groups that didn’t necessarily meet the agency’s goals.

Now, the Justice Department's own Inspector General released a report that exposes corruption surrounding a $138,130 grant that OJJDP awarded to an ACORN branch in New York City. The IG's audit found that there were internal control weaknesses, unsupported grant expenditures, lack of contractor monitoring, weaknesses in budget management, inadequate grant reporting, unmet conditions and deficiencies with the program’s overall performance.

The IG also describes the New York group as a “pass-through entity” for ACORN, the crooked nonprofit that’s raked in huge sums of taxpayer dollars over the years.

In 2009, Congress actually passed a law (Defund ACORN Act) to ban federal funding for ACORN after a series of exposés about the group’s illegal activities, which include fraudulent voter registration drives and involvement in the housing market meltdown.

The group has close ties to President Barack Obama, who worked for ACORN as a "community organizer" in Chicago, prior to embarking on his political career.

Earlier this year a Judicial Watch probe found that the Obama Administration violated the ban on federal funding for ACORN by giving the beleaguered group nearly $80,000 to “combat housing and lending discrimination” against minorities.

After sorting through droves of government records, Judicial Watch investigators discovered that an ACORN affiliate in New Orleans, ACORN Housing Corporation Inc., got $79,819 as part of a larger $40 million allocation to “fair housing organizations” that educate the public and combat discrimination.

This year Judicial Watch also published a special report about the organization’s transformation into various spinoffs and affiliated groups. Amid a massive fraud scandal and a series of criminal probes, ACORN supposedly dismantled but the reality is that it simply changed its name.

For instance, under the rebranding New England United 4 Justice, ACORN has been one of the driving forces behind the movement to end economic segregation and social injustice in the U.S. culminating in the current Occupy Wall Street movement.

In fact, former Obama colleague and Green Jobs Czar, Van Jones, was recently hired by Occupy Wall Street and he's being paid by the groups funding the OWS protests, such as the Tides Foundation, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and George Soros' front organizations.

The Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder has been the focus of a number of investigations regarding misconduct and corruption including the New Black Panther Party's voter intimidation case, the investigation of individuals who opposed Obama's policies such as Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and the major scandal involving Operation Fast and Furious that helped Mexican criminals obtain guns and kill U.S. law enforcement agents.

[One_of_us]

jetguyz, on 16 December 2011 - 02:00 AM, said:

Well. didn`t you trust Obama, an inexperienced closet queen senator with no prior accomplishments whatsoever and give your (tax)money to him to administer so that he could give it to those Wall Street fat cats and use your money to build mosques in Mid_east, have 25 personal servants for his wife Michelle, feast on lobsters and caviar whenever they travel...etc...??

Your comment reflects how deluded one can get after having swallowed that poisonous anti-Obama crap you love so dearly and like to quote here.

Candidate Obama had, and president Obama still has a good record without blemishes of lying, stealing, deceiving, something most GOP candidates like Romney and Gingrich don't have.

Quote

Not very smart cos perhaps you keep consoling yourself that you are not an idiot, but just clueless...even tho` Obama has proven without any doubt that he is a deceitful lying hypocrite president who squandered trillions of taxpayers` money (including yours) in just 3 short years as compared to Bush`s 8 years!.

That what your mind makes "without any doubt" is what you should donate to Science by letting the psychiatrists at Woodbridge study it to find ways to fix their most desperate cases

Quote

And in 3 short years Obama has single-handedly wrecked the economy resulting (for the first time in USA history) in the downgrade of credit rating from S&P.

You judge like you were born in 2008 and didn't know that the economy came stumbling down before Obama's term. But more probable is that you knew all this before altzheimer started to erase your few remaining brain cells. But the lack of brain cells hasn't kept you from writing.

The downgrade by S&P is direct consequence of a failure by Congress to raise the debt limit. This act always passed on the first try with ample majority in the past, always supported by republicans as well as democrats. But this time, since there is a black democrat as president, the GOP Tea Party-ers saw an opportunity to sabotage the vote to wreck the economy and make the president look bad.