Monday, May 20, 2013

OBAMA'S CRONY CAPITALISM; Hotel workers union rejects Pritzker as Commerce nominee - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

Hotel workers union rejects Pritzker as Commerce nominee - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

OBAMA and his culture of BANKSTER LOOTING of America.

Is Penny Pritzker Obama’s newest BANKSTER?

Obama warns against “cynicism” at Ohio State commencement address


do a google of Obama’s BIG BANKSTER DONORS and you will find a list of the banks that have looted this nation, yet found a place in the corrupt Obama administration!

*                                                                                  

OBAMA’S BILLIONAIRE NOMINEE FOR COMMERCE, PENNY PRITZKER… BILLION$$$$ MADE OFF HIRING CHEAP ILLEGAL LABOR??? show me even one dem billionaire that does not push for obama’s agenda of OPEN BORDERS, NO E-VERIFY and NO ENFORCEMENT of LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT of ILLEGALS…even one!


Based in Chicago, Pritzker operates an international empire based on low-wage service work in Hyatt-operated hotels and nursing homes, along with several investment firms.

OBAMA'S BLANKET AMNESTY EXPOSED: Labor union chief calls immigration bill dangerous, sees agency as 'approval machine' - Washington Times

Labor union chief calls immigration bill dangerous, sees agency as 'approval machine' - Washington Times


Union for immigration enforcement officers to oppose Senate bill

“In a statement, National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council (NCISC) president Kenneth Palinkas said the bill would create an “insurmountable bureaucracy” within his agency, and argued the legislation would interfere with the independent judgment of officers who were already “pressured to rubber stamp applications instead of conducting diligent case review and investigation.”

Repeating Past Mistakes on Immigration

 May 17, 2013

By: James Walsh

The immigration reform bill being proposed by the U.S. Senate’s Gang of Eight contains legislative excesses that could create an immigration-welfare complex.


*

OBAMA’S WATERGATES… IRS DEBACLE, BENGHAZI TRAGEDY, SABOTAGE OF AMERICAN BORDERS TO ILLEGALS, PARTNERING WITH LOOTING BANKSTERS


Moreover, the Inspector General released a report last year showing that illegal aliens received an astounding $4.2 billion in taxpayer dollars by claiming the ACTC in 2010.

Inspector General: IRS Management Discouraged Employees from Discovering Illegal Alien Tax Fraud

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration released a report last week indicating that Internal Revenue Service (IRS) managers discouraged their employees from detecting illegal alien tax fraud.

NAFTA – OBAMA’S AGENDA OF A BORDERLESS LOOTING ZONE FOR LA RAZA!
THE OBAMA – McCAIN  STEALTH SURRENDER of OUR BORDERS
“What we're seeing is our Congress and national leadership dismantling our laws by not enforcing them. Lawlessness becomes the norm, just like Third World corruption. Illegal aliens now have more rights and privileges than Americans. If you are an illegal alien, you can drive a car without a driver's license or insurance. You may obtain medical care without paying. You may work without paying taxes. Your children enjoy free education at the expense of taxpaying Americans.”
AMNESTY: WILLIAM GHEEN (ALIPAC) EXPOSES OBAMA’S AGENDA TO SURRENDER OUR BORDERS TO MEXICO
WIKILEAKS EXPOSES OBAMA’S AGENDA OF ASSAULTING OUR BORDERS, AMERICANS IN JOBS HE WANTS TO FILL WITH ILLEGALS
See: CFR’s Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada
*
The Great Alien Invasion - What's Happening Now
OBAMA’S CYNICAL JOKE of HOMELAND SECURITY
According to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the department.
Obama Quietly Erasing Borders

WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Dem administration advancing 'North American Union' agenda

Published: 12/15/2010 at 10:20 PM
*
*
OBAMA’S CYNICAL JOKE of HOMELAND SECURITY
 
According to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the department.
'We're being inundated': Vigilante Group uses secret cameras to record the flow of illegal immigrants across the border
RASSMUSEN REPORT:
But if immigration reform legislation passes, just nine percent (9%) believe it is Very Likely the federal government will actually try to secure the border. That’s an important point because, even among supporters of comprehensive reform, 64% think border security should come before legalizing the status of those here illegally.
JUDICIAL WATCH:
It proves the Obama administration is willing to go to any extent - including gaming the courts - to continue stonewalling the full story of its lawless release of illegal aliens. Now, with the prison floodgates being thrown open to illegal aliens under the phony pretense of abiding by sequester cuts, it is more important that details of this threat to the public safety be revealed.
Obama’s Promise of Homeland Security to Americans (Legals) and his Vow to Illegals of Open and Undefended Borders With Narcomex
HERITAGE FOUNDATION: OBAMA’S AMNESTY WOULD ADD 100 MORE ILLEGALS AND COST AMERICANS (Legals) BILLIONS AND BILLIONS
Obama’s Promise of Homeland Security to Americans (Legals) and his Vow to Illegals of Open and Undefended Borders With Narcomex
How To Accurately Detect Disingenuous Politicians

"Just look for the ones talking about jobs, taxes, health care, education, and government budgets, without addressing the negative impact of illegal immigration." -- William Gheen, President of ALIPAC.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/how-to-accurately-detect-disingenuous.html
 

OBAMA'S AMNESTY IS AN INVITATION TO LOOT SOCIAL SECURITY - Analysis: Immigration bill would add millions of US taxpayers - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

Analysis: Immigration bill would add millions of US taxpayers - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room


Repeating Past Mistakes on Immigration

 May 17, 2013

By: James Walsh

The immigration reform bill being proposed by the U.S. Senate’s Gang of Eight contains legislative excesses that could create an immigration-welfare complex.
 http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2013/05/james-walsh-amnesty-conspiracy.html

WHAT WOULD SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, RED CHINA'S AGENT IN THE SENATE DO? nada! Report: China renews hacking attacks despite Obama administration's warnings - The Hill's Global Affairs

Report: China renews hacking attacks despite Obama administration's warnings - The Hill's Global Affairs

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2013/02/amnesty-advocate-and-obama-donor-sen.html
 
THE CHINA FEINSTEIN DEALS
 
NO WONDER FEINSTEIN IS A GENEROUS DONOR TO OBAMA!
 
CULTURE OF CORRUPTION
 
"There is no doubt in my mind that, if Dianne Feinstein had a pattern of taking positions on U.S.China policy that Chinese officials disliked, Mr. Blum would have a great deal more difficulty doing business in China and probably would find it impossible to do." Senator Is Warned of China Overtures Already, federal investigators have detected that the Chinese government might attempt to seek favor with Feinstein”

Obama Tells Morehouse Graduates, ' I Might Have Been in Prison' BUT GOT OFF WITH IMPEACHMENT ONLY - CNS News

Obama Tells Morehouse Graduates, ' I Might Have Been in Prison' | CNS News

WHAT HAS BARACK OBAMA DONE FOR BLACK AMERICA…? NAME ONE THING. THEN ADD UP THE STAGGERING LIST OF THINGS HE’S DONE FOR ILLEGALS, AND THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZAZ!


BLACK AMERICA....who has been most harmed by Obama's endless hispandering and sabotage of our laws to put more illegals in our jobs?

CRONY KING OBAMA: CURL: The Obamas live the 1 percent life


OBAMA’S LA RAZA WELFARE STATE in AMERICAN BORDERS

HOW OBAMA SOLD OUT AMERICANS (Legals) TO BUILD HIS LA RAZA PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS… Who gets the tax bills for all Mexico’s looting?


THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!
 
THE AMERICAN WORKER IN AMERICAN BORDERS vs the OBAMA ILLEGAL STEALING AMERICAN JOBS,WELFARE AND BEING HANDED LA RAZA SUPREMACY BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY:



"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."

Obama and Justice Sotomayor Vow to Illegals to SABOTAGE E-verify!

VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY?


“What employers really want in many cases by hiring immigrants is to hold down wage costs, experts say.”

UNDER OBAMA, TWO-THIRDS OF JOBS GO TO HIS PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS!


“At the hearing, Dr. Rakesh Kochar, Associate Director for Research at the Pew Hispanic Center, testified that in the year following the official end of the recession (June 2009), foreign-born workers gained 656,000 jobs while native-born workers lost an additional 1.2 million jobs.”

"We have a situation where the job market — the bottom fell out, yet we kept legal immigration relatively high without even a national debate," he said. "As a consequence, a lot of the job growth has been going to immigrants."

Mr. Obama did take action this year to grant many illegal immigrants up to 30 years of age a tentative legal status that prevents them from being deported and authorizes them to work in the United States.

Some Republicans in Congress have criticized Mr. Obama's policy, saying it violates his powers and will mean more competition for scarce jobs.


...please post this article on FACEBOOK and e-send to your family and friends. email links for these services at bottom of this article

THE OBAMA ASSAULT on the AMERICAN STUDENT - The higher ed bubble is bursting (continued) | WashingtonExaminer.com

The higher ed bubble is bursting (continued) | WashingtonExaminer.com

WE DON'T NEED TO EDUCATE AMERICANS, AS WE CAN SIMPLY IMPORT IN MILLIONS OF EDUCATED THIRD WORLDERS TO TAKE OUR JOBS FOR LESS THAN AN AMERICAN WOULD.


DURING BARACK OBAMA’S FIRST TERM, 2/3s OF ALL JOBS WENT TO IMMIGRANTS, BOTH LEGAL AND ILLEGAL.

IT’S ALL ABOUT MAKING BILLIONAIRES BY KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED.

SHOULD WE KEEP IMPORTING FOREIGN BORN TECH WORKERS YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR?

Silicon Valley Poverty Is Often Ignored By The Tech Hub's Elite


Tech firms fight hiring rules in immigration bill


Fredreka Schouten, USA TODAY1:21 a.m. EDT May 7, 2013

Americans would "be shocked to know that most of the H-1B visas … are going to outsourcing companies," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said during a recent hearing.

Story Highlights


  • Bill provision that would require firms to post jobs for Americans is targeted
  • Technology firms have spent millions on lobbying on immigration
  • Judiciary Committee set to start working on bill

WASHINGTON – Technology firms, exercising new political clout on Capitol Hill, are lobbying against a measure in the leading Senate immigration bill that would make it harder for them to recruit workers from abroad without first taking steps to hire Americans for highly skilled jobs in programming, engineering and other fields.

The measure, part of a sweeping compromise bill drafted by a bipartisan group of eight senators, would require job openings to be posted on a new government website for 30 days and order companies to first extend job offers to "equally or better qualified" U.S. workers. It would give the U.S. Labor Department the power to review and challenge those hiring decisions.

Proponents say the measures are needed to curb abuses by companies who they say use the visa program to hire cheaper labor. Technology companies say the proposed rules would cripple their ability to hire the best employees from a global workforce and represent inappropriate government intrusion in internal hiring decisions.

The fight over hiring practices is part of the massive lobbying campaign underway on the immigration measure and will offer a fresh test of the technology industry's growing influence in Washington. The companies involved in the computer and Internet sectors spent nearly $140 million in lobbying last year -- more than twice the $69 million the industry poured into influencing Washington a decade earlier, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks political spending.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to begin work on the bill Thursday.

The hiring battle centers on the program that grants H-1B visas, which go mostly to college-educated foreigners in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields. Technology companies say they face a chronic shortage of qualified workers in these fields. The United States sets an annual limit of 85,000 visas for these companies, and the competition for them is intense: This year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services opened up the application process April 1, and the cap was reached within a week.

Industry groups have made big gains in the Senate's immigration proposal. The bill, for instance, Would increase the H-1B cap to 205,000 annually. However, tech officials warn the new recruiting requirements could drive companies to move their skilled jobs overseas, rather than comply. A commonly cited example: Microsoft's decision to open a software center in Vancouver, British Columbia, after Congress failed to pass immigration legislation in 2007 that would have significantly increased the number of H-1B visas.

Under the bill, "employers are going to have an arbitrary government standard imposed on every hiring decision," said Robert Hoffman, the top lobbyist for the Information Technology Industry Council, a trade group. The proposed rule, he said, ignores subjective factors that influence hiring. "A perfect example: How does one define whether or not someone has the personality to fit into a corporate culture?" he said.

"We are not trying to change any of the fundamental policy goals that they are trying to achieve" in the Senate, Hoffman said. "We are just trying to tweak it, so that these goals and other goals, like retaining the best and brightest and growing in the United States, so that those types of goals are advanced as well."

Ron Hira, an associate professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, has criticized the visa program, saying it allows firms to hire "cheap indentured labor."

"The technology industry is asking the government to come in and intervene in the normal functioning of the U.S. labor market, specifically on their behalf," Hira said.

Bruce Morrison, a former Connecticut congressman who lobbies on behalf of a group that represents American engineers, said the organization will object to any effort to "dilute worker protections" as the measure moves through the Senate. "The arguments from the companies is that there aren't any Americans to take these jobs," he said, "so there shouldn't be any problem."

The biggest users of H-1B visas are not brand-name companies, but little-known staffing companies that provide foreign workers on a temporary basis to U.S. companies — including banks, health insurance companies and big retailers. Cognizant, a New Jersey-based company that employs 27,000 people in the USA, is the top user of the temporary visas, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services records show. Most of its workers come from India.

In addition, three India-based outsourcing companies rank among the top five recipients of H-1Bs, according to the federal data.

Americans would "be shocked to know that most of the H-1B visas … are going to outsourcing companies," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., one of eight senators who drafted the immigration bill, said during a recent hearing. "They're going to these firms, largely in India, who are finding workers, engineers, who will work at low wages in the U.S."

Durbin is a driving force behind the hiring requirements in the Senate proposal.

The measure would make business harder for staffing companies dependent on foreign workers. It would impose higher fees on firms that rely on overseas employees for more than 30% of their workforce. Starting in 2016, the bill would bar granting any new temporary visas for foreign workers at companies with more than half their workers on the visas. Both measures apply to companies that employ more than 50 people.

Cognizant spokesman John Procter said he did not have a breakdown on the percentage of the company's workers in the USA on H-1B visas. He said the bill imposes an "arbitrary, detrimental restriction on the number of skilled immigrants."

"It would really change the way America does business," he said. "The company is very focused on educating legislators and making sure this language doesn't make its way into any final outcome."

Cognizant hired its first federal lobbyist in 2010 andby last year, it had spent nearly $1 million on federal lobbying, congressional records show. Its team includes Democratic power broker Heather Podesta, who did not return a telephone call. Other companies also have stepped up their political activity.

Last month, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, Netflix's Reed Hastings, Google's Eric Schmidt and other technology executives teamed up to underwrite an advocacy group to promote their views on immigration. Two of its subsidiaries began a seven-figure advertising campaign to shore up voter support for key senators in the immigration debate.

The tech industry "has clearly come of age," said Ellen Miller, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation. "In the last decade, we've seen this tremendous recognition from Silicon Valley of the need to play in the power circles — to both protect their bottom line and to alter the political scene to their advantage."

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/06/tech-firms-lobbying-against-labor-immigration-measure/2137837/

*

Obama and Justice Sotomayor (A LA RAZA PARTY MEMBER) Vow to Illegals to SABOTAGE E-verify!

VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY?

during Obama's first term, 2/3s of all jobs went to immigrants... BOTH LEGAL and ILLEGAL... and workplace enforcement of FED LAWS PROHIBTING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS plummeted 70%!

given Obama was reelected by LA RAZA, enforcement is expected to be nonexistent.

assault on America – THE OBAMA – JP MORGAN LOOTING of a nation:
DID OBAMA PUNKED US OR IS HE SIMPLY A  FAILED PRESIDENCY?
OBAMA, THE MAN THAT NEVER VOTED DURING THE BRIEF PERIOD HE WAS IN THE SENATE, OWNED AND OPERATED BY BIG BANKSTERS, IS NOTHING BUT A CON JOB CALLED “CHANGE”… OR DICTATOR IN THE MAKING.
EITHER WAY HE IS THE MOST FAILED PRESIDENCY IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY.
...please post this article on FACEBOOK and e-send to your family and friends. email links for these services at bottom of this article

The Rise Again of Criminal Bank JP Morgan and the Fall of Barack Obama - No President in American History has Served Bankers More

...even before his first term, Barack Obama had collected more banking industry bribes than any American president in history... WHAT DID THE BANKSTERS KNOW THAT WE DID NOT?

assault on America – THE OBAMA – JP MORGAN LOOTING of a nation:


DID OBAMA PUNKED US OR IS HE SIMPLY A  FAILED PRESIDENCY?

OBAMA, THE MAN THAT NEVER VOTED DURING THE BRIEF PERIOD HE WAS IN THE SENATE, OWNED AND OPERATED BY BIG BANKSTERS, IS NOTHING BUT A CON JOB CALLED “CHANGE”… OR DICTATOR IN THE MAKING.


EITHER WAY HE IS THE MOST FAILED PRESIDENCY IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY.

OBAMA-STYLE CRONY CAPITALISM… business as usual for Obama’s banksters!

OBAMA AND HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTERS… THE LOOTING GOES ON, AND AS PER OBAMA’S PROMISE…NONE HAVE GONE TO PRISON!


“The changes to the rule, which will be announced on Thursday, could effectively empower a few big banks to continue controlling the derivatives market, a main culprit in the financial crisis.”
 

Big Banks Get Break in Rules to Limit Risks


Obama now looting the American student while he hands billions in DEM DREAM ACTS of WELFARE to illegals… his bankster cronies at JPMorgan cleaning up on students also!

“But as the Federal Reserve attempts to lower borrowing costs for everyone from households and small businesses to large corporations and Wall Street banks, student borrowers have not been able to benefit.”

 
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2013/05/student-loan-profiteering-by-obama-on.html



 

OBAMA REMINDS HIS LA RAZA PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS, AND HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTER DONORS THAT THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS CAN STILL BE SOAKED!

TRILLIONS HANDED OVER TO OBAMA’S LOOTING BANKSTERS AND SIPHONED OFF THE ECONOMY BY MEXICO’S LOOTING… WITH NO END IN SIGHT!

 

A FEW BASIC FACTS ABOUT OBAMA:

“Behind the thin rhetoric about reigniting a “thriving middle class,” Obama made clear that the administration’s policies in its second term will be subordinated entirely to the interests of big business, beginning with plans to slash hundreds of billions more from health care programs.”


OBAMA IS BUSH’S THIRD AND FOURTH TERM. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT HE WAS REELECTED BY ILLEGALS!

The committee’s support for Lew’s appointment underscores the bipartisan commitment to cut corporate taxes, raise taxes on workers and slash social programs.

...please post this article on FACEBOOK and e-send to your family and friends. email links for these services at bottom of this article

45% Rate Obama Administration’s Benghazi Response As Poor - 99% Think Obama Will Be Impeached - Rasmussen Reports™

45% Rate Obama Administration’s Benghazi Response As Poor - Rasmussen Reports™


OBAMA’S WATERGATES… IRS DEBACLE, BENGHAZI TRAGEDY, SABOTAGE OF AMERICAN BORDERS TO ILLEGALS, PARTNERING WITH LOOTING BANKSTERS


Moreover, the Inspector General released a report last year showing that illegal aliens received an astounding $4.2 billion in taxpayer dollars by claiming the ACTC in 2010.

*

Inspector General: IRS Management Discouraged Employees from Discovering Illegal Alien Tax Fraud

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration released a report last week indicating that Internal Revenue Service (IRS) managers discouraged their employees from detecting illegal alien tax fraud.

WILL THE OBAMA - McCAIN AMNESTY DESTROY AMMERICA? OR ONLY THE GOP? Opinion: GOP leaders have to sell immigration reform to base - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com

Opinion: GOP leaders have to sell immigration reform to base - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com


HOW AMNESTY DESTROYED GOP

HOW SENS. JOHN McCAIN and MARCO RUBIO BUILT OBAMA’S LA RAZA DEM PARTY and the MEXICAN WEFLARE STATE in AMERICA and DESTROYED THE GOP IN SO DOING.

 


 

“In other words, the Republican Party is finished. As their numbers grow through immigration and welfare, democrats will become the wholesale dominant party in America until everyone’s money runs out by all those who milk the system, i.e., 45.2 million Americans subsisting on food stamps and assisted house, energy, medical care and electricity—will ultimately grow to 90 million and more. All of who work will be paying for all those who choose to live for free forever.”

Who are Obama’s LA RAZA party base of illegals. How much of a threat to America is this Mexican fascism?

"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens --- was the last gasp of white America in California." --- Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party… NOW THE PARTY for LA RAZA SUPREMACY

 

THE FILTHY MUSLIM DICTATORSHIP OBAMA and HILLARY CLINTON BANKROLL AND STUFFED THE BALLOT BOX FOR! VIDEO: Afghan Parliament Blocks Landmark Women's Rights Bill

VIDEO: Afghan Parliament Blocks Landmark Women's Rights Bill

Karzai denies CIA cash bought support of Afghan warlords, asks US to continue payments
Get short URL
Published time: May 04, 2013 14:44
 
Hamid Karzai (AFP Photo / Massoud Hossaini)
Tags
Afghan President Hamid Karzai denies that CIA cash delivered to his office each month was used to buy the support of warlords who could tip the country into another civil war. Karzai insists the cash was used for above-board purposes.
Karzai’s statement comes less than one week after The New York Times alleged that Afghan top officials had been receiving payments from the CIA and that some of those funds were used to bribe warlords into supporting Karzai’s US-backed government, ahead of NATO’s troop withdrawal next year.

While Karzai openly admitted to receiving the cash, he adamantly denied that any of it was used to buy the loyalty of warlords. Instead, he said the money – which was allegedly packed in suitcases, backpacks, and plastic shopping bags – was used for such causes as healthcare and scholarships.

"This money was not given to warlords," he told a Saturday press conference in Kabul. "The major part of this money was spent on government employees such as our guards...it has been paid to individuals, not movements…we give receipts for all these expenditures to the US government."

Karzai declined to confirm just how much money his office received each month from the CIA, although he previously stated that the cash was a
"small amount."

“Yes, the office of the national security has been receiving support from the United States for the past 10 years,” Karzai said in an earlier statement. “Monthly. Not a big amount. A small amount which has been used for various purposes.”

However, Karzai’s former and current advisers said that tens of millions of dollars were given to the leader over the past decade.

Despite protests in Washington and criticism from Afghan opposition groups, Karzai asked US officials on Saturday to continue the cash deliveries.

"Just this morning I met with the station chief of the CIA in Kabul and I thanked him for the support given to us in the past 10 years and I asked him to continue the support," Karzai said. He added that the money was "flowing to" Afghanistan's intelligence agency, the National Directorate of Security.

"In the situation of Afghanistan where there is so much need...it proves extremely helpful."

After 11 years of fighting in Afghanistan, international experts worry that NATO’s planned 2014 pullout will leave Kabul unable to survive a Taliban onslaught – and that Karzai’s government won’t last without US support.

A report by a British Ministry of Defense think tank, which was released in March, said NATO troops will leave Afghanistan in a
fragile state.

“The country will again be left with a severely damaged and very weak economic base, heavily dependent upon external aid,” the report said.
*

Karzai: CIA vows cash payments will continue despite scandal

By Julian Pecquet - 05/04/13 10:32 AM ET

Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Saturday he's been assured by the CIA's Kabul station chief that regular cash payments to his government will continue after a New York Times exposé created a scandal in his country and the United States.
 “The help and assistance from the U.S. is for our National Directorate of Security. That is state-to-state, government-to-government regular assistance,” Karzai said, according to the AP. “So that is a government institution helping another government institution, and we appreciate all this assistance and help, all this assistance is very useful for us. We have spent it in different areas (and) solved lots of our problems.”
The New York Times first brought the payments to light last weekend. The newspaper estimated that the cash transfers, which were brought in plastic bags and suitcases and referred to as “ghost money” by Karzai aides, totaled tens of millions of dollars since the U.S. invasion of 2001.
The report created a firestorm of controversy in Afghanistan, with opposition lawmakers calling Karzai a traitor for accepting money from a foreign government without any accountability.
"These payments highlight President Karzai's lack of loyalty," Sayed Fazel Sancharaki, a spokesman for the opposition National Coalition, told the Agence France-Presse. "It's very unfortunate that such money is given in a non-transparent way and by foreign intelligence agencies."
U.S. lawmakers, for their part, demanded an explanation, saying such opaque payments “promote corruption.”
“Our support for the Karzai administration should have evolved long ago into regular and more sustainable efforts that are fully coordinated across the government and are calibrated to ensure collaboration with U.S. policies,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, wrote in a letter to President Obama on Thursday. “The alleged arrangements make accountability impossible and promote corruption at the top levels of the Afghan government, as well as break trust with the American taxpayer.
“Please provide an explanation, with a classified annex if necessary, for how this alleged policy fits within overall U.S. objectives in Afghanistan.”
WHO SHAMES THIS NATION MORE BY KISSING DICTATORS’ ASSES? BUSH OR OBAMA? BUT THEN ISN’T OBAMA SIMPLY BUSH IN DRAG?
IF YOU WERE TO ASK THE BANKSTERS, THEY’D TELL YOU. NO CHANGE!
Fucker karzai only had to slip a few million over the table to his opponent, and viola! He’s outta there!
We all have an unfortunately clear picture that OBAMA is as ethically squalid as Bush, Hillary, Billary, Bush! “Change!” was this actor’s line. The banksters love his no-change guy, like they love the no-banksters regulation!
We wanted to puke when Obama made a monkey of himself, no different than “W”, bending over to kiss the Saudi dictator’s ass. GOOGLE OUR 9-11 INVADERS AND WAHHABI-SAUDI MUSLIM FASCIST and BUSH CARLYLE GROUP SAUDI)
Now we’re back to sending a message to the world that our government, when it’s not in bed with banksters, crawls in bed with filthy dictators, and their drug dealer brothers, like Karazi’s.
Democracy? We don’t have it in the  United States. Our government works for WALL ST and ILLEGALS. The rest of us just pay their fucking bills, including those to defend the filthy Saudis in the Bush family’s two wars with Iraq, from Saddam!
VISUALIZE REVOLUTION TO RESTORE DEMOCRACY IN THE CORPORATE OWNED COUNTRY!
*
Afghan's Karzai effectively handed 2nd term
By HEIDI VOGT and ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writers Heidi Vogt And Robert H. Reid, Associated Press Writers 12 mins ago
KABUL – President Hamid Karzai was effectively handed a second five-year term Sunday when his only challenger dropped out of the race, and the Obama administration said it was prepared to work with the man it has previously criticized to combat corruption and confront the Taliban insurgency.
President Barack Obama has been waiting for a new government in Kabul to announce whether he will send tens of thousands of new troops to Afghanistan. The war has intensified and October was the deadliest month of the eight-year war for U.S. forces.
Former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah announced his decision to quit six days before the runoff election, after last-minute talks led by the U.S. and United Nations failed to produce a power-sharing agreement acceptable to Karzai, according to a Western diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the negotiations.
In an emotional speech, Abdullah told supporters that he could not accept an runoff led by the same Karzai-appointed election commission that managed the fraud-marred vote in August. The runoff was set for Nov. 7 after U.N.-backed auditors annulled nearly a third of Karzai's votes as fakes.
"I will not participate in the Nov. 7 election," Abdullah said, because a "transparent election is not possible."
The Obama administration, which had been critical of Karzai's leadership, appeared to accept the outcome.
Senior Obama adviser David Axelrod said most polls showed Abdullah would have lost the runoff anyway "so we are going to deal with the government that is there."
"And obviously there are issues we need to discuss, such as reducing the high level of corruption," Axelrod said on "Face the Nation." "These are issues we'll take up with President Karzai."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton congratulated Abdullah for a "dignified and constructive" campaign and said the United States "will support the next president and the people of Afghanistan, who seek and deserve a better future."
Axelrod said Obama would announce a war strategy "within weeks." A senior U.S. official told The Associated Press that Obama has still not yet decided what to do, and it remains unclear whether he will decide before he goes to Asia on Nov. 11.
The official spoke on condition of anonymity to speak more frankly about Obama's decision-making process.
About 68,000 American troops already have been ordered to report to Afghanistan by the end of the year.
The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, wants the Pentagon to send him an additional 40,000 troops to prevent the Taliban from letting al-Qaida once again use Afghanistan as a haven — as it was in the days leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
Despite misgivings over Karzai, the U.S. has little choice but to support a leader who was once the toast of Washington for his charm, his fluent English and his role as a conciliator in the wake of the Taliban collapse. Fluent in both major Afghan languages, he could reach out to different ethnic groups, including his fellow Pashtuns who also form the overwhelming majority of the Taliban.
But critics say he has been reluctant to rein in some of the former warlords whose support he sought to bolster his own political power but who are allegedly responsible for much of the corruption that plagues the government.
His own half brother Ahmed Wali Karzai has been rumored to be involved in the drug trade, charges that he vigorously denies.
Karzai insists he fell out of favor in Washington when he openly criticized U.S. military tactics, including the heavy use of air power that has killed many civilians. McChrystal has ordered troops to use air power sparingly to avoid turning Afghans against the NATO mission.
Abdullah stopped short of calling on supporters to boycott the polls — a move U.S. officials feared would have enflamed tensions. He also urged his followers "not to go into the streets" to protest the election.
"The people have the right to have a fair election," Abdullah said. "But this election was a failure. It was not independent. It was not transparent."
Karzai's campaign spokesman, Waheed Omar, said it was "very unfortunate" that Abdullah had withdrawn but insisted that the Saturday runoff should proceed as planned.
"We believe that the elections have to go on, the process has to complete itself, the people of Afghanistan have to be given the right to vote," Omar said.
Some analysts believed Karzai wanted a runoff as an affirmation of his leadership after the humiliation of having so many of his August votes stripped away.
However, given the risk of Taliban attacks, the expense and the huge logistical challenge, it seemed doubtful that the second round would be held.
"It's difficult to see how you can have a runoff with only one candidate," U.N. spokesman Aleem Siddique said.
Abdullah's withdrawal was the latest chapter in a deeply troubled election, the first run by Afghans since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.
The process has been marked by delays, fraud, Taliban violence and an internal dispute within the U.N. that led to the dismissal of the American deputy chief, who accused his boss of failing to prevent cheating.
After the U.N.-backed panel confirmed massive fraud, Karzai accepted a runoff but only under intense U.S. pressure. The U.N.-backed panel challenged figures from the government election commission showing Karzai had won the August vote with an absolute majority in the 36-candidate race.
Once the runoff was called, Abdullah put forward several demands, including replacing the top three officials in the election commission. When Karzai refused, Abdullah's supporters said last week he would quit the race.
U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry and the U.N. chief Kai Eide negotiated with the two camps late into the night Saturday about a power-sharing deal, according to the Western diplomat.
But the negotiations broke down early Sunday when Karzai refused a formula for dividing Cabinet posts. If the deal had been accepted, Abdullah would have conceded rather than simply withdraw his candidacy, the diplomat said. Abdullah's decision not to call for a boycott indicated he was open to future talks.
 
*
Victory (for a crooked, corrupt and discredited government)
Special report by Patrick Cockburn
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
The IndependentClose
Reuters
The US and its allies may now push for a national unity government between Mr Karzai (pictured) and Abdullah Abdullah
sponsored links:
Ads by Google

War On The Dollar Exposed
Get The Shocking Bulletin Obama &Bernanke Do Not Want You To Read!
www.UncommonWisdomDaily.com

Could my Husband be Gay?
Worried your husband might be Gay?Take the test & See. Free Online
www.mydailymoment.com

How to make electricity
$198 shocking new homeowner's kithas Power Co execs red in the face
www.Power4Home.com

NEU Online MBA Program
Earn an MBA Online at NortheasternUniversity. No GMAT, Free Brochure.
OnlineMBA.NEU.Edu
The election in Afghanistan has turned into a disaster for all who promoted it. Hamid Karzai has been declared re-elected as President of the country for the next five years though his allies inside and outside Afghanistan know that he owes his success to open fraud. Instead of increasing his government's legitimacy, the poll has further de-legitimised it.
From Mr Karzai's point of view he won through at the end and showed that nobody is strong enough to get rid of him. For the US President, Barack Obama, the election has no silver lining. It has left him poised to send tens of thousands more US troops to fight a war in defence of one of the world's most crooked, corrupt and discredited governments. "It is not that the Taliban is so strong, but the government is so weak," was a common saying among Afghans before the election. This will be even truer in future.
The US and its allies may now push for a national unity government between Mr Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah, his main rival for the presidency. This might look good on paper, or at least better than the alternative of Mr Karzai ruling alone. But enforced unity between men who detest each other will institutionalise divisions. Its value will largely be in terms of propaganda for external consumption.
On 4 November 2008, when Mr Obama won the US election, he must have believed he had been right to take a soft line on Iraq and a hard one on Afghanistan. The former looked much the more dangerous place. Just 12 months later he is discovering that the reverse is true and Afghanistan is the biggest foreign policy problem facing the US. It is a more dangerous place for the US and its allies than Iraq ever was.
In Iraq, unlike Afghanistan, the government was democratically elected by a huge majority in 2005. There was a savage civil war because the fifth of the population, who are Sunni Arabs, did not accept that victory. The Shia did not relish US occupation, but they were prepared to co-operate with it while they took power. Only the Kurds were long-term US allies.
In Iraq the state was previously strong and can be made strong again. Above all the Iraqi government had money. Its oil revenues were $62bn (£38bn) last year. The Afghan government has in the past had limited authority outside the cities and it has no money apart from foreign aid handouts.
Another important difference between the two countries is geography. Iraq is flat outside Kurdistan and the great majority live in cities and towns on the Tigris and Euphrates. It is not good terrain for guerrilla fighters in contrast to Afghanistan with its high mountains, broken hills and isolated villages.
The Taliban have been able to use safe havens in the Pashtun belt of north-west Pakistan. These areas are now under attack from US drones and the Pakistani army. But the suicide bombers who killed 35 people in Rawalpindi and maimed at least seven in Lahore yesterday showed that the cost to Pakistan of attacking an insurgency firmly rooted in its Pashtun community will be high.
One of the few benefits of the Afghan election might be a more realistic understanding in the US and Europe – particularly in Britain – of the mechanics of Afghan politics. These were eloquently summarised in his resignation letter to the US State Department by Matthew Hoh, the senior American civilian representative in Zabul province. He was previously a US Marine officer in Iraq. Mr Hoh makes the important point that the US has joined one side in what is effectively a 35-year-long civil war in Afghanistan. He sees this as being between the urban, educated, secular, modern Afghanistan against the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional Pashtun.
"The US and Nato presence and operations in Pashtun valleys and villages, as well as Afghan army and police units that are led and composed of non-Pashtun soldiers and police, provide an occupation force against which the insurgency is justified," concludes Mr Hoh. "I have observed that the bulk of the insurgency fights not for the white banner of the Taliban, but rather against the presence of foreign soldiers and taxes imposed by an unrepresentative government in Kabul."
Mr Hoh's observations are confirmed by opinion polls in Afghanistan. The majority of Afghans do not want more foreign troops. They think their arrival will mean more dead Afghans. The areas where the Taliban is most acceptable is where US and allied planes and artillery have killed civilians. The idea that the US Army is going to turn into a glorified Peace Corps is romantic and unrealistic.
Washington and London should really wonder after Afghanistan's farcical election if their political and military investment in the country is worth it. Their policy of propping up and strengthening the central government looks more ludicrous than before. There is something sickening when British troops had their legs blown off securing polling stations where Afghans could vote, when the British-supported government in Kabul was busily fabricating the vote so the presence or absence of polling booths was entirely irrelevant.
The US and Britain have joined somebody else's civil war. It is not one that the Taliban are likely to win, because they rely on the Pashtun community which makes up only 42 per cent of the population. By the same token they are not likely to lose either. American troop reinforcements would give the anti-Taliban forces control over more of the country but would also intensify the war. The context of greater US involvement will be, thanks to the election, a weaker Karzai government so Americans, not Afghans, will take the vital political and military decisions. To Afghans this means the foreign presence will look even more like an imperial occupation.
*
Understanding the Wahhabist Infiltration of America
Frank Salvato
Part of the reason many Americans don’t appreciate the significance of Osama bin Laden’s declarations of war against the United States and the West is because they are completely oblivious to the in‑roads radical Islam has made within the United States. Radical Islamists (i.e., Islamofascists, Wahhabis) understand that the conflict must take place on multiple fronts: militarily, economically, diplomatically and ideologically. Because they understand the complexity of the confrontation and the ability of the West to adapt to challenges – albeit lethargically – they employ multiple tactics in their aggressive pursuit of victory. The West’s addiction to sensationalism, epitomized by our limited attention to detail, unless it plays in the superficial 24‑hour news cycle, facilitates the successful infiltration of radical ideology into Western society.
Much to the chagrin of the multicultural and the proponents of diversity, those who promote radical Islamist ideology thrive on the fact that the politically correct culture of the West – and the United States in particular – deems it inappropriate to question religious practices or teachings. With this politically correct “wall of separation” in place little if any scrutiny is given to the information disseminated within any given religious institution. This directly facilitates the ideological advancement of Wahhabism, the most radical and puritanical form of Islam, within the mosques of the United States.
To accurately understand the depth of infiltration of the Wahhabist ideology on American soil we need to examine the ideology and how it is advanced within the United States.
Wahhabism is a fiercely fundamentalist form of orthodox Sunni Islam. After a brief examination of its tenets it is clear that it is one of division, domination and hate.
Wahhabism originated circa 1703 and is the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia. Wahhabists believe that any and all evolution of the Islamic faith after the 3rd century of the Muslim era – after 950 A.D. – was specious and must be expunged. Consequently, Wahhabism is the form of Islam that Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahri practice.
This radically fundamentalist dogma is fanatically bigoted, xenophobic and lends itself to serve as the catalyst for much of the Islamofascist aggression being perpetrated around the world. It is a wrathful doctrine that rejects the legitimacy of all religious philosophy but its own. Wahhabism condemns Christians, Jews and all other non‑Muslims, as well as non‑Wahhabi Muslims. Wahhabists believe it is a religious obligation for Muslims to hate Christians and Jews.
It stresses a worldview in which there exist two opposing realms that can never be reconciled ‑‑ Dar al‑Islam, or House of Islam, and Dar al‑Har, or House of War, also referred to as Dar al‑Kufr, House of the Infidel. When Muslims are in the Dar al‑Har, they must behave as if they were operatives in a conflict who have been tasked with going behind enemy lines. The Wahhabist ideology permits Muslims to exist “behind enemy lines” for only a few reasons: to acquire knowledge, to make money to be later employed in the jihad against the infidels, or to proselytize the infidels in an effort to convert them to Islam.
Wahhabist doctrine specifically warns Muslims not to imitate, befriend or help “infidels” in any way. It instills hatred for United States because we are ruled by legislated constitutional law rather than by tyrannical Sharia law. Wahhabists are instructed by edict to, above all, work for the creation of an Islamic state where ever they may dwell.
 
It is because of the Wahhabist ideology’s cruel and unyielding fanaticism that we in the United States should be concerned with its prevalence within the mosques of our nation.
After the Iranian Islamic Revolution of 1979 – an unprecedented action by the fundamentalists of the Shi’ite sect, the Saudi Arabian government responded by coming to terms with the fundamentalist Wahhabist movement of the Sunni sect. The Saudis, in return for a declaration of non‑aggression, began to finance the construction of mosques in countries around the world. An estimated $45 billion has been spent by the Saudis to finance the building and operational costs of mosques and Islamic schools in foreign countries, including in North America.


Through the funding of mosques, Islamic Centers and their operations, Saudi Arabia is exporting the Wahhabist ideology. It is not unusual to find that the presiding cleric in any given mosque within the United States is a Wahhabist and that his teachings have been sanctioned and financed by the Saudi government and vetted by the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

Two of the more predominant mosques in the United States that have received funding from the Saudi government, and that adhere to the Wahhabist ideology, are the al Farooq mosque in Brooklyn, New York, and the King Fahd mosque in Los Angeles, California. Both mosques welcomed a number of the hijackers who piloted the planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania on September 11th, 2001.

 

In 2005, Freedom House, a 501(c)(3) organization concerned with the mounting threats to peace and democracy, released a report titled, Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Invade American Mosques. This examination of a comprehensive sampling of mosques and Islamic Centers across America shows that literature available in an overwhelming number of them indicates deference for the Wahhabist ideology.

 

Among some of the edicts – or fatwas – issued through this literature:

 

?? “[I]t is basic Islam to believe that everyone who does not embrace Islam is an unbeliever, and must be called an unbeliever, and that they are enemies to Allah, his Prophet and believers.”

 

?? “[O]ur doctrine states that if you accept any religion other than Islam, like Judaism or Christianity, which are not acceptable, you become an unbeliever. If you do not repent, you are an apostate and you should be killed because you have denied the Koran.”

 

?? “Be dissociated from the infidels, hate them for their religion, leave them, never rely on them for support, do not admire them, and always oppose them in every way according to Islamic law.”

 

?? “Never greet the Christian or Jew first. Never congratulate the infidel on his holiday. Never befriend an infidel unless it is to convert him. Never imitate the infidel. Never work for an infidel. Do not wear a graduation gown because this imitates the infidel.”

?? “Those who reside in the land of unbelief out of their own choice and desire to be with the people of that land, accepting the way they are regarding their faith, or giving compliments to them, or pleasing them by pointing out something wrong with the Muslims, they become unbelievers and enemies to Allah and his messenger.”

 

?? “To be true Muslims, we must prepare and be ready for jihad in Allah’s way. It is the duty of the citizen and the government. The military education is glued to faith and its meaning, and the duty to follow it.”

 

With this ideology being taught in mosques across America, there is little reason for speculating as to why hatred exists for American principles, culture and ideology not only within the Islamic community, but among the societally disenfranchised and ideologically vulnerable in the United States who are being indoctrinated into this radical form of Islam.

 

This brings to the forefront a bothersome question. Why aren’t those of the American Fifth Column, who are predisposed to seeking out the haters among us, calling out the Wahhabist bigots who preach their hate in American mosques?

 

We in the West – and especially in the United States – must immediately seek out a greater understanding of not only the basic elements of the threat of radical Islam, but the extent to which it has already infiltrated our society. If we continue to remain ignorant of the facts surrounding this very real war against our way of life, we will lose our nation with nary a shot being fired.

 

 

Related Reading:

 

Freedom House

http://www.freedomhouse.org

 

Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Invade American Mosques

http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/special_report/45.pdf

 

Basics Project: Terrorism – Ideology

http://www.basicsproject.org/terrorism/ideology.htm#Wahhabism

*

Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism (Paperback)


by DORE GOLD

Dore Gold (Author)


Find all the books, read about the author, and more.

See search results for this author

Are you an author? Learn about Author Central

Editorial Reviews


Amazon.com Review
In the global search for culprits and causes in the rise of terrorism, former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations Dore Gold shines a spotlight on a nation many think of as a close ally of the United States: Saudi Arabia. As he explains in Hatred’s Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism, Gold believes that the Saudi government is greatly influenced by the Islamist sect known as Wahhabism and, he explains, that influence has lead to Saudi support of terrorism in the Middle East, Europe, the United States and around the world. The historical portion of Gold’s argument, where he traces the emergence of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and the changing face of Saudi leadership, is admirably extensive and detailed. His modern research is a little more uneven, relying on statements by various Muslim clergy members, letters to the editors of newspapers, opinion pieces, and other evidence that is rarely damnable. Curiously, mentions of Israel and the long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict are much more infrequent than one would expect from an Israeli diplomat and scholar. But regardless of one’s opinion of Gold’s research or his alarming conclusions, the book offers something not often found in modern political nonfiction: a coherent structure, exhaustive research, and a clear and consistent perspective on the ongoing threat of terrorism. --John Moe --This text refers to the
Hardcover edition.

Review
If you read one book to understand al-Qaeda’s fury...to us within the Muslim world, it should be this -- R. James Woolsey, former director of the CIA --This text refers to the
Audio Cassette edition.

*