The Saudis Just Flipped Obama the Bird

President Obama- face-WH-photo SC

If you thought you’d heard the end of Obama’s foreign policy mistakes in Syria, think again. America’s longtime Mideast ally, Saudi Arabia, is now displaying its disgust for Obama’s work.

Saudi Arabia was recently offered a long-coveted seat on the U.N. Security Council. But the Saudis unexpectedly flipped the U.N. the diplomatic bird. How shocking was this move? No nation had ever turned its back on the increased power and prestige that come with a seat on the Council.

The Saudis were blunt in their reasoning, saying that they couldn’t do the job because of others’ failures.

“Double standards existing in the Security Council prevent it from performing its duties and assuming its responsibilities… leading to the continued disruption of peace and security, the expansion of the injustices against peoples, the violation of rights, and the spread of conflicts and wars.”

The Saudis continued, “Allowing the ruling regime in Syria to kill its people and burn them with chemical weapons in front of the entire world and without any deterrent or punishment is clear proof and evidence of the U.N. Security Council’s inability to perform its duties.”

When questioned about the decision, Saudi Arabia indicated that its anger is aimed at Obama. Saudi Arabia’s intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan (who spent 22 years as the Saudi ambassador to Washington), made it known that relations between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. are getting worse. The relationship between the two countries was already strained because of America’s missteps in Egypt, Libya, and Iran.

More importantly, bin Sultan told Reuters that Saudi Arabia will cut its cooperation with U.S. intelligence agencies. Unfortunately, I would venture to guess that most Americans don’t understand the significance of this shift.

Cataclysmic Change

To understand the importance of Saudi support in the Mideast, you have to understand the sectarian nature of the fighting taking place. Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad and his allies, Iran and Hezbollah, are Shia Muslim. Meanwhile, the Syrian rebels – along with Al Qaeda – are mostly Sunnis. The sectarian lines are similar to those seen during the Iraq war.

While Syria was spinning out of control, Saudi Arabia stepped up to help the non-Al Qaeda Sunni rebel factions. America encouraged this Saudi engagement and convinced the entire leadership of the Mideast that it was serious about removing Assad.

Once it became clear that Obama was anything but serious, the Sunni rebels turned to Al Qaeda, a Sunni Muslim organization.

Now, according to Saudi intelligence estimates, as many as 6,000 Al Qaeda fighters have flooded into Syria. They’ve filled the power vacuum left by a retreating and inconsistent United States. In essence, the Syrian civil war has breathed new life into Al Qaeda. The Saudis believe that by spring, another 6,000 to 8,000 fighters will have arrived as reinforcements.

Losing Saudi Arabia’s intelligence support couldn’t have come at a worse time. Until now, Saudi Arabia has been a vital ally in the fight against Al Qaeda. The Saudis have allowed America to operate drones in Saudi airspace for attacks in Yemen. They’ve also cracked down on Al Qaeda and friends inside their own country, as well as in the strategically important Gulf Oil states.

Furthermore, Saudi Arabia has been, along with Israel, our best partner while trying to contain Iran’s nuclear program. The Saudis rightly fear a nuclear-armed Iran just across the already-tense Persian Gulf.

And now, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Israel also fear a radicalized Syria, controlled by either Al Qaeda or Iran. America’s unorganized and hasty retreat from the Mideast leaves our one-time allies high and dry, forcing them to look to China and others to fill the power void Obama has left.

The losers in this whole debacle are the exact people America should’ve been supporting: Western-friendly Muslims who might make peace with Israel and be allied with the Saudis.


This commentary originally appeared at and is reprinted here with permission. 



Communists Defend Democrat NYC Mayoral Candidate

Photo credit: azipaybarah (Creative Commons)

Bill de Blasio, the Obama-backed Democrat “progressive” poised to become New York City’s mayor, is under attack by “Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid empire,” his supporters are charging. It’s a reference to the New York Post examining the candidate’s ties to the Nicaraguan Solidarity Network, a Communist-front organization that still supports the Marxist regime in Nicaragua headed by Communist Sandinista Daniel Ortega.

In fact, however, it was The New York Times that originally disclosed de Blasio’s fondness for the “foreign revolution” in Nicaragua, in a major piece that shocked even some liberals. The Times article revealed de Blasio’s pro-communist activities and his prediction back in 1991 that Islam would become a major political force.

Combined with de Blasio’s anti-police views, including his announced desire to can the tough New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, the revelations are worrying New Yorkers concerned about terrorism coming back to the city in a major way. The September 11, 2001 Islamic terrorist attacks in the city killed nearly 3,000 people. Years before that, the Cuban-backed Puerto Rican terrorist group, the FALN, carried out numerous terrorist bombings in the city, including an attack on Fraunces Tavern in 1975, which killed four people.

De Blasio’s comrades in the Communist Nicaraguan Sandinista movement were praised by Libya’s lunatic leader Muammar Gaddafi as having the will to “fight America on its own ground,” and they promised a “revolution beyond our borders” in Nicaragua. The Sandinistas, who were backed by the Soviet Union and Castro’s Cuba, seized power in Nicaragua in 1979 and fought in the Middle East with the PLO. In 2012, Sandinista leader and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega hosted former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a guest of honor.

The Nicaraguan Solidarity Network, which still exists, has run an item, “Nicaragua Solidarity Back in the News,” noting the media focus on its former comrade de Blasio. It points out that he not only visited Nicaragua, in order to support the regime, but went on a “honeymoon” to Castro’s Cuba. The nature of this “honeymoon” has never been fully explained, and the New York media don’t seem particularly interested in this aspect of his background. He is married to a former lesbian who joined what would become the Combahee River Collective, described by The New York Times as “an influential collection of black feminist intellectuals.”

Castro’s Cuba protects several fugitives from American justice, including FALN leader William Morales and convicted cop-killer and Black Liberation Army terrorist Joanne Chesimard.

We conducted our own inquiry into the nature of de Blasio’s “solidarity” activity by taking a look at the records of the U.S. Peace Council, housed in the “Peace Collection” at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania. The U.S. Peace Council was a Communist Party-dominated organization associated with the World Peace Council, a Soviet front. It played a mostly behind-the-scenes role in “peace” activities throughout the 1980s, although Congress and the FBI did probe its Communist ties in various hearings and investigations.

One of the documents identified the U.S. Peace Council as having helped “initiate” the Nicaraguan Solidarity Network. One of the Peace Council officials, Robert Cohen, a member of the National Lawyers Guild, played the role in starting up the pro-Sandinista organization. “We are doing the same with El Salvador now,” said the document, alluding to the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, also known as CISPES.

These activities took place during the late 1970s and ‘80s when communists were threatening a complete takeover of Central America and the Caribbean. President Ronald Reagan liberated the island of Grenada in 1983 from a Communist seizure of power and supported anti-Sandinista freedom fighters and the pro-American government of El Salvador. Eventually, the Sandinistas were forced under U.S. military pressure to hold free elections, and the Communist terrorists in El Salvador made a peace deal with the government.

De Blasio, who captured the Democratic nomination for mayor of New York City on September 10, is running against Republican Joe Lhota in the general election on November 5. De Blasio’s Marxist views were largely ignored during the campaign because of the media interest in another Democratic primary candidate, sex pervert and former congressman Anthony Weiner.

But after de Blasio won the nomination, The New York Times apparently thought his background deserved some attention, and the story about his pro-Sandinista activities was published. The paper sent a reporter to examine the records of the Nicaragua Solidarity Network of Greater New York, which included incriminating documents about de Blasio.

After these revelations, De Blasio was even asked about the influence of Marxism on his current views, a question he dismissed as antiquated. Still, he has not disavowed previous statements in support of “liberation theology” and “democratic socialism.”

He was an aide to former New York City Mayor David Dinkins, who was closely associated with the Democratic Socialists of America.

Curiously, it also turns out that de Blasio has had three different names; but he refuses to talk about that in any depth, either.

Now that de Blasio is positioned to crush Lhota, in a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans by six to one, some media attention is being paid to his far-left views; and it appears that de Blasio’s Marxist supporters are starting to get worried. Hence, their attacks on the “Murdoch Empire” and the New York Post, the paper following up on de Blasio’s extreme views.

The Nicaragua Solidarity Network is advising its activists to write a letter to the editor of the New York Post protesting the paper’s scrutiny of de Blasio.

The national office of the group says, “Former Nicaragua solidarity activist Bill de Blasio is the frontrunner in the NYC mayoral election. The right-wing is pulling out all the old lies against Nicaragua from Reagan’s dirty war against the Sandinistas in order to tar de Blasio. While the Nicaragua Network/Alliance for Global Justice has no position for or against any candidate for political office in New York or anywhere else, we do have an interest in countering the current slanders against Nicaragua.”

The Alliance for Global Justice, the parent organization, is funded by billionaire leftist George Soros and provides money and support for such organizations as Occupy Wall Street and the Bradley Manning Support Network, named for the Army traitor. Soros has personally endorsed de Blasio for mayor.

As we noted in a previous article, beneficiaries of largesse from the Alliance for Global Justice have also included Code Pink, the Venezuela Solidarity Network, and ANSWER—the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism group.

Code Pink is the hard-left organization that includes luminaries such as Medea Benjamin and Jodie Evans, a fundraiser for Obama. When they are not protesting U.S. foreign policy, they are working to undermine Israel.

De Blasio is their candidate in New York City.


This commentary originally appeared at and is reprinted here with permission. 

Photo credit: azipaybarah (Creative Commons)

Video: Fox And Friends: Obama Sent More Security To WWII Memorial Than Benghazi

On Fox & Friends, the hosts attacked the federal government’s decision to send a number of security personnel to ensure that tourists and veterans do not access sites like the World War II Memorial during the government shutdown. Echoing Rand Paul’s tweet on Wednesday, the hosts observed that the administration sent more security personnel to the Memorial than they did to Libya during the September 11, 2012 attack on an American consulate.

O’Blunder Exemplified


Obama Prophet SC OBlunder exemplified

Barack O’Blunder never learns. If adaptation is the best indicator of intelligence, this character is dumber than dirt.

For example: just recently, he declared war on Syria and within hours retreated without firing a shot, surrendering without fighting a fight. Then he allowed the Russians to completely humiliate him on the world stage, sending messages to all our enemies and allies—-”The U.S. is a big, cowardly, ignorant pushover.”  (Hagel and Kerry can take credit for this fiasco as well.)

Example: O’Blunder stands mute and impotent as terrorists slaughter people in Nairobi, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Mali. Most recently, 44 students were murdered in their sleep in Nigeria.  O’Blunder tells us the war on terror is over and that Al Qaeda and related groups are on the run.  The watch word at the White House appears to be: never allow evidence to interfere with the narrative; Republicans opposed to ObamaCare are terrorists; the actual terrorists are either freedom fighters, victims of discrimination, or individuals involved in workplace violence.

Example: by behaving like a spoiled child, refusing to negotiate, and insisting on his own way, O’Blunder causes a government shutdown. Then he stands back and cries and whines, blaming others.  He never takes responsibility for anything, and always blames others.  Pathological.   No federal budget has passed during his entire term.  There’s leadership for you.

Example: he pushed the idea of a sequester in the never-ending budget battle he started, allowed it to happen because he doesn’t have a clue how to work with Congress, and then tried blaming Republicans for the fallout (and even told us the sky was falling because of the sequester.)  The sky is still up there.

Example: years ago, O’Blunder as a senator said that raising the debt limit was a sign of incompetence, as well as evidence of Bush being unpatriotic.  Today, O’Blunder insists we raise the debt ceiling without limit, this coming from a president responsible for adding more debt than all presidents combined.  Recently, he said, incredibly:  “Raising the debt ceiling does not increase our debt.” Complete hypocrite.

Example: ObamaCare.  At this point, everyone except O’Blunder’s inner circle hates it. Holding a gun to everyone’s head, he insists we comply with the multiplication of ‘mandates.’  A mandate, by the way, is the command of a king.  O’Blunder’s attempt to take over the entire U.S. economy is blowing up in his face; but, he refuses to learn, adjust course, adapt, or even talk about alternatives.  His attitude belies a deepening delusional orientation that borders on psychotic.

Example:  Let’s place a call to the Terrorists in Tehran a day before we meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu!  Don’t you love diplomacy articulated by professionals with a firm grasp on international realities?  Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, and terrorists get the upper hand, develop nukes, and threaten the entire world.  In the face of all this, all that O’Blunder can muster is a stupid phone call that insults our ally Israel and embarrasses everyone at home.  What a complete disgrace.

Example:  Benghazi.

Example: SEALs murdered in Afghanistan two years ago, still no answers, no investigation.

Example:  Associated Press and Fox News scandals.

Example: IRS scandal.

Example: Fast & Furious criminality.

Example: Funding Al Qaeda in Syria.  Funding the Muslim Brotherhood.  Both acts of treason.

Example: sponsoring subversion in Egypt, causing chaos, death, and mayhem.

Example: illegal war in Libya.

Example: killing American citizens with drones, including innocent teenage boys.

Example: NSA scandal, spying on citizens.

Example: illegal executive orders to skirt the will of Congress and the People.

Example: recess appointments that violate the Constitution.


The only achievements so far by O’Blunder?

Nixon is no longer the most hated president.

Carter is no longer considered the worst president in history.


Photo credit: terrellaftermath

Commission Seeks Answers On Benghazi

Obama Who Is Benghazi SC Commission Seeks Answers on Benghazi

The Obama administration has been supporting jihadists and the Muslim Brotherhood abroad, thereby furthering the goals of Islamists in the Middle East, argued several speakers at Accuracy in Media’s Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi (CCB) conference last week. Why is this important to the exploration of what happened in Benghazi on September 11, 2012? First of all, it provides context for the terrible conditions that Ambassador Stevens faced when he traveled there that September, and the make-up of those who attacked our facilities there. It could also partially explain the administration’s eagerness to falsely blame the attack on a YouTube video that Muslims found offensive, rather than acknowledge poor security conditions and a growing al-Qaeda movement in the region. After all, the President believes that al Qaeda is on the run.

“Here’s the sentence, here’s the headline, that the Obama administration does not want broadcast anywhere or printed anywhere: ‘Obama Administration Arms Al Qaeda,’” Chris Farrell, Director of Research and Investigation at Judicial Watch, said at the conference. “That’s it, right there.”

Judicial Watch is the only organization litigating in Federal Court on Benghazi to date. It recently issued a new report, the second of two, on the Benghazi attacks and the Administration’s subsequent stonewalling.

“Look, this attack in Benghazi did not happen in a vacuum. It wasn’t a fluke. It didn’t just occur,” argued author and investigative journalist Ken Timmerman. “It was a policy shift that took place as soon as Obama took power to overturn our longstanding national security alliances in the Middle East and to support the Muslim Brotherhood.”

“I think the path, I think the green light, if you will, even, was given by President Obama in his 2009 speech in Cairo, Egypt, when he green-lighted the Islamic uprising that would follow over the next two years,” said Clare Lopez, a senior fellow at the Center for Security Policy. Lopez is a former CIA operations officer and a member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi. “What happened in Libya was a follow-on to that green light, as well as what happened in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood rose up and seized power for a time.”

During the aforementioned Cairo speech, noted Timmerman, “sitting behind the President of the United States as he’s giving the speech, so they’re pictured in all of the news footage of it, are top members of the Muslim Brotherhood—at that point still an outlawed group although tolerated by the Mubarak regime.” Hosni Mubarak, the president of Egypt at that time, was not invited. This sends a clear message from our President.

As for Muammar Qaddafi, he was a brutal dictator, but “He had al-Qaeda jihadis in his jails,” said Lopez. “And yet, in March of 2011, the United States, together with NATO allies Italy, France, and others, decided to intervene in Libya. Why? To assist al Qaeda militias to overthrow a sovereign government that was no threat to the United States.” Those skeptical of the al Qaeda connections to Libya Shield, Ansar al Sharia, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), and other Libyan “liberation” freedom fighters should read John Rosenthal’s The Jihadist Plot, which details al Qaeda’s intricate plan to overthrow the apostate Qaddafi.

“As we know, we’ve had step-by-step accounts of the killing of Osama bin Laden, and some information that was probably classified,” noted Kevin Shipp, a former CIA officer and author of From the Company of Shadows, at the conference. “We’ve had step-by-step accounts of what’s going on in Syria, with the exceptions of some things about the gas. We’ve been given nothing about Benghazi. No, not even the smallest detail regarding what happened that evening.”

The reason we’ve been given step-by-step accounts of Osama bin Laden’s death is partially because it helped the President politically. Similarly, knowledge of Syria’s conflict assisted the President in making the case to send military and non-military aid. But Benghazi, where four people died? President Obama would rather that issue be swept under the rug.

Members of the Commission expressed their dismay that the administration did not mount a more vigorous attempt to rescue the Benghazi four and that, they argue, stand down orders were given.

“If the President’s child were in Benghazi, would the rescue attempt have been more aggressive?” asked Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, at the conference. Tyrone Woods was one of two former Navy SEALs who, along with Ambassador Chris Stevens and information officer Sean Smith, was killed that day in Benghazi. Charles Woods asked the same question at a hearing before Darrell Issa’s (R-CA) committee three days later. At the hearing, Rep. Issa announced that he had subpoenaed two Diplomatic Security agents who were on the ground in Benghazi that night. He said that the State Department had suggested to him that these two might not want to come forward because there was an FBI investigation ongoing.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), who also spoke at the conference, noted that those involved were consistently politicizing the FBI investigation by using it as an excuse to not provide information.

“I appreciate the fact that this Citizens’ Committee is here, but I wish that it wasn’t necessary,” said Woods. “I wish that it was not necessary, because the truth voluntarily should have been presented by our administration.”

The Commission is dedicated to finding out the truth behind the Benghazi attacks, and this work is ongoing. Captain Larry Bailey (Ret.) invited confidential sources to contact him and to be assured of total privacy and anonymity. Videos and transcripts from the September 16th conference are being posted at the CCB website.


This commentary originally appeared at and is reprinted here with permission.