Iranium-The Film Iran Would Rather You Not See

Re=posted from Blackfive

A film so damaging, Iran won't even let Canadians watch it

Posted: 19 Jan 2011 12:23 PM PST

Update 19 Jan, 2011 @ 14:19 - Canada's Heritage Minister has ordered the Library & Archives Canada to proceed with the screening.

I just finished screening the upcoming documentary Iranium. This excellent film exposes what politicians and the media are afraid to tell us: that Iran has apocalyptic intentions and a focus on destroying the United States and Israel. Historically, nations have always denied their development of a nuclear weapons program, but Iranium shows Iran's leaders proudly announcing to their people that they (1) are developing nuclear weapons, (2) nothing can stop them, and (3) they plan on using them. Iran tells American media an entirely different - and much more pleasant - story, and unless you stay on top of geopolitics or watch this video, you won't hear about the imminent threat Iran poses to the West - and Americans in particular.

Iranium has already generated controversy as a screening at the Canadian National Archives was shut down Monday following a cancellation request from the Iranian Embassy. On Tuesday, Canadian officials received threats of violence and protest, and a hazardous materials unit investigated two suspicious packages related to the incident.

Viewers will be able to watch Iranium free online on February 8, 2011. You can register at the website or buy the DVD.

Morning Emails from DCExaminer

Byron York - GOP Obamacare strategy: Try repeal, then cut
There's an ongoing debate among Republicans about what it means to repeal Obamacare. Does it mean abolishing the whole thing? Does it mean nullifying just the most troublesome parts? Repealing and simultaneously enacting a new set of reforms? Or repealing and then starting a new debate on what reforms to make?
"House Republicans will not rest until we repeal Obamacare lock, stock and barrel," Rep. Mike Pence, head of the House Republican Conference, told me from Arizona, where he had gone to campaign for GOP candidates. "I believe that's the uniform position of the Republican leadership."

Susan Ferrechio - Obama nuke treaty has a tough path ahead in Senate
It will take 67 senators to ratify the new treaty, a successor to the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which means at least eight Republicans must endorse it, assuming it wins the support of all 57 Democrats and two independents.

David Freddoso - McDonnell’s first serious gaffe
Yesterday, McDonnell added a section on slavery, with an apology for the omission. Good for him.

Gallup: Independents worried about economy, deficit
The economy is the No. 1 concern for a majority of voters heading into 2010’s midterm elections, but the deficit comes in close behind, particularly with all-important independent voters, according to a new Gallup poll.
The economy tops a list of concerns, unsurprisingly, for 57 percent of voters, with health care (49%) and unemployment (46%) rounding out the top three. But when you examine the numbers among just independent voters, the federal budget deficit becomes the second-most important issue at 52 percent.

DCExaminer Morrning Email

Byron York - Fear and loathing in the RNC
Among members and insiders at the Republican National Committee, the feelings about chairman Michael Steele boil down to this: Many would be delighted if Steele were to leave the committee and take his controversies with him, but no one, at least so far, is willing to call on Steele to step down.

Susan Ferrechio - Boxer's luck runs out for this year's Senate run
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., is used to sailing with the prevailing political breeze, but this year she is heading into a storm.

Michael Barone - America losing the stomach for humanitarian interventions
Over the last two decades the United States has intervened militarily in several countries to protect human rights. Now, writes historian Mark Mazower in World Affairs, "The concept of humanitarian intervention is dying if not dead." And a good thing too, he concludes.

Julie Mason - Obama looks to legacy with nuclear disarmament moves
Taken together, the president's nuclear policy moves are steeped in the kind of history-making, heavily symbolic atmospherics that deeply appeal to Obama and his ambitions for leadership .

John McCormack - In Pennsylvania, Obama underwater, Toomey leads
Barack Obama beat John McCain in Pennsylvania by 11 points (55% to 44%) in 2008. A new poll by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling shows Obama’s approval rating in the Keystone state at 46%, with 50% of voters disapproving.

Morning Bell-Undermining National Security

A START towards Undermining Our Nuclear Security

Yesterday the Kremlin announced that the Obama administration and Russia had reached agreement on a new nuclear arms agreement intended to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).

The declaration appeared to surprise the White House, as Press Secretary Robert Gibbs could only confirm that the two sides were "close" to a treaty. But U.S. officials confirm that "all major obstacles" in negotiations with Moscow have been cleared.Russian approval of a new START agreement has been the cornerstone of President Barack Obama's "long road toward eliminating nuclear weapons" policy. President Obama's desire to appease Russia is why he began negotiations by unilaterally surrendering to Kremlin demands that the United States betray our Czech Republic and Polish allies by going back on our promise to build ballistic missile defense facilities in Eastern Europe.

Russians took President Obama's easy and early capitulation on missile defense as a sign of naivete and weakness and concluded that the Obama administration was far more desperate for a new nuclear treaty than they were and, as The Los Angeles Times reports, "used that fact in negotiations."

The full text of the new agreement has not been released, but early reports indicate that it will not adequately address three key issues and would therefore compromise U.S. national security:

Verification: The Russians have a long and well documented history of violating arms control agreements. By focusing intently on the reduction in each nation’s strategic arsenal, the U.S. has lost some negotiating ground on the issue of verification. The Senate must ensure that the new treaty is adequately verifiable. There is no reason to sign the treaty if the verification mechanisms fall by the wayside.

Nuclear Modernization: Some arms control advocates insist that the U.S. has a robust nuclear modernization program. This claim is simply inaccurate. The truth is that America’s nuclear infrastructure is rapidly aging, in deep atrophy, and is losing its reliability and effectiveness. The U.S. is not producing new nuclear weapons, and its ICBM force is shrinking and not being modernized. In contrast, Russia and China are engaged in a major modernization effort. On December 16, 41 U.S. Senators voiced their concerns and signed a letter saying they will oppose the new treaty if it does not include specific plans for U.S. nuclear modernization as stipulated in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.

Missile Defense: It is absolutely imperative that a new START agreement not undermine our post-Cold War defensive posture by linking offensive weapons with missile defense. But early reports indicate that the treaty does exactly that. The New York Times reports: "Administration officials describing the draft treaty said its preamble recognized the relationship between offensive weapons and missile defense, but that the language was not binding." But the Times goes on to quote retired major general Vladimir Dvorkin who says Moscow will scrap the treaty if the U.S. pursues missile defense: "If, for example, the U.S. unilaterally deploys considerable amounts of missile defense, then Russia has the right to withdraw from the agreement because the spirit of the preamble has been violated."

The Obama Administration's arms control strategy has been deeply flawed. It is based on outdated 1970s arms control strategy and 1960s idealism and naivete. It will not work because it does not account for Russian nuclear strategy, which is based on approximate parity between the two sides, Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), denial of missile defenses to the U.S., and nuclear warfighting capability.

The U.S. needs to reset the reset before the Obama administration is allowed to seriously undermine our national security.

Morning Must Reads from DCExaminer

Baghdaddy Bob Gibbs "eggs, milk, bread....." Apparently Baghdad Bob has some ADD issues with a grocery list.

Two Parties Join Together, Then Resume Divided Ways
When will President Obama give up on the Robert Gibbs experiment?
Immediately after Obama made a surprise appearance in a snow-emptied press briefing room to emphasize that he was sincere about his new call for bipartisanship, Gibb took the podium for a bit of prop comedy at the expense of the GOP.

In taking follow-up questions from reporters, Gibbs went into a rehearsed, tedious bit Sarah Palin writing talking points on her hand. He wrote his grocery list and “ hope and change” on his own hand. That he lacked the good sense to keep his palm on the podium after Obama’s remarks should be enough to get him sacked.

Gibbs, who often uses sarcasm and put downs, immediately undercut Obama’s message about seeking an open dialogue with a petty attack totally out of place for anyone working at the White House, let alone the public face of the administration. If Obama ever needed proof of what a liability Gibbs has become, Tuesday’s performance should prove that his press secretary is far out of his depth.

Writers Helene Cooper and Carl Hulse look at the uneven efforts of the Obama White House to prove that the president has rediscovered post-partisanship.
“Tuesday’s meeting was the first in what administration officials say will be monthly bipartisan sessions, which Mr. Obama called for in the State of the Union address. Mr. Obama declared that ‘a sense of purpose that transcends petty politics’ must be forged by Democrats and Republicans to address national problems.”

Wall Street Journal -- Union-Backed Nominee Blocked in Senate
The president has a bipartisanship image problem, but when it comes to passing legislation, his challenges are all Democratic in nature.
Republicans were ready to use their newly enlarged minority for a first party-line filibuster to stop the appointment of a hard-line union lawyer to the National Labor Relations Board. But before they could try their first Brown-out, key Democrats abandoned ship. Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln both jumped off the train and joined the Republican filibuster against the personification of Card Check.

While party leaders got some moderates facing voters this fall, like Indiana’s Evan Bayh and Colorado’s Michael Bennet, to back the controversial nominee, the defection of four Democratic Senators (Landrieu of Louisiana and Pryor of Arkansas both sat out the vote once it was clear the president and his labor allies had been shut down) reveals again why Democrats, despite supermajority control of Washington for most of a year, accomplished so little.

Writers Melanie Trottman and Kris Maher look at what’s next for Democrats and big labor (aside from pinning the blame on the GOP):
“Richard Trumka, president of labor federation AFL-CIO, called the outcome Washington politics-as-usual and said it was ‘reprehensible that a minority in the U.S. Senate has blocked an up-or-down vote’ on Mr. Becker. Mr. Trumka said he would support President Barack Obama in making recess appointments of critical government posts ‘if that's what it takes to get around minority delay and obstruction.’”

Los Angeles Times -- Senate jobs bill a show of bipartisanship
The bipartisanship being lately embraced by the majority party was supposed to be capped off by some Republican support for a Senate jobs/stimulus/unemployment bill. But the evil winter weather pushed back the timeline and left the Democrat’s claims resting on bipartisan opposition to one of the president’s key nominees and the schlock comedy of the White House press secretary.

Writers By Janet Hook and Christi Parsons look at what will likely be in the bill that Harry Reid hopes will get some love from across the aisle. To make that happen, Reid may need to sweeten his offer.
“[The] cornerstone would be a proposal to give businesses that hire unemployed workers this year an exemption from the 6.2% Social Security payroll tax. If they keep those workers more than a year, employers would get an additional $1,000 tax credit per employee.
Other provisions of the bill are, for the most part, expansions or extensions of existing policies. The tax break for new equipment purchases by small businesses would be increased. The bill expands the Build America Bonds program, which subsidizes interest costs for state and local bonds issued to finance infrastructure projects. It extends until May 31 unemployment payments and healthcare subsidies for the jobless, which otherwise would expire for many people at the end of the month.”

New York Times -- House Closes for 2 Weeks; Senate In and Out
I have to shovel some new pathways into the back yard because the dog is running out of operational space after six days of snow siege.

Writer David Herszenhorn tells us that the House is giving up – they’re gone until Feb. 22. Harry Reid, who is such a bad poker player that he even tries to bluff a blizzard, is talking about jamming through his jobs bill on Thursday.
Republicans need a couple more days to get on board through negotiations, and the conditions here are so dreadful – howling winds, drifting snow and no public transportation – that getting staffers to the Senate is too tough.
“If comity prevails, the Senate could finish up votes on the jobs bill on Thursday, and senators could head out for their own Presidents’ Day recess. If not, Mr. Reid indicated that he may need to schedule a vote next weekend.”

New York Times -- U.S. Eyes Tougher Sanctions Over Iran Nuclear Program
While the administration is very busy defending itself against charges that the president has been soft on terrorism, pressure is mounting on the diplomatic front as well.
Iran is tweaking Obama over uranium enrichment, making more demands about how and where the delivery of nuclear fuel should be made and promising to make their own if the West does not comply.

That again leaves Obama doing an unconvincing Bush impersonation in talking about tough new sanctions and isolation for Iran as a year of engagement and dialogue produce nothing but an emboldened regime in Tehran.

Writers Helene Cooper and Mark Landler look at the administration’s frustrations.
“As the Obama administration lays the groundwork for a resolution, it is racing against a couple of timetables. The first is set by Iran’s nuclear program and the administration’s sense of urgency to act. The second is set by the dynamics of the Security Council, where France currently presides.

The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has been aggressive in pushing for new sanctions, especially in the energy sector, according to American and European officials. The next member to hold the chair is Gabon, an African nation less likely to push hard for a resolution.”

MyHeritage-Iran and February 11

February 9, 2010 By Amanda Reinecker
Expect the Unexpected from Iran

Iran's hard-line president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently warned that his country will deliver a harsh blow to "global arrogance" on Thursday, February 11, the anniversary of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution. But what on earth did he mean?

Heritage Middle East expert Jim Phillips weighs in on what Iran's latest provocation likely means. He writes:

In Ahmadinejad's twisted mind, Iran is a world power that leads a global alliance against a United States that seeks to dominate the world. Any action that signifies Iranian independence and progress on the political, military, nuclear, technological or economic fronts therefore is a blow against the United States. Ahmadinejad already has lauded the launch of an Iranian research rocket [last week] -- a "big event" and more ballistic missile tests may follow. Or perhaps an announcement on the nuclear front.

One thing seems certain: the "annual regime-supported demonstrations in support of Iran's Islamic revolution, with their customary chants of 'death to America', will not be the harsh blow that Ahmadinejad has in mind," Phillips explains.

Some signs suggest the blow will be "an announcement on the nuclear front."

Just today, Iranian officials announced that they have initiated the process for making higher-grade nuclear fuel. The Obama administration announced today that it is pushing for a new U.N. Security Council resolution targeting Iran's nuclear program more directly and firmly. But Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told Fox News that, though the process would be expedited, it could take weeks. This announcement also sparked concern overseas. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to Iran's defiant nuclear progress with a call for "crippling sanctions [which] must be applied right now." Even Russia, which has often defended Iran, scolded the rogue country for its nuclear provocations.

Iran may be faced with a harsh blow itself, not from the free world but from within. Iran's opposition leaders and their Green Movement, who made their debut to the world during the controversial elections last summer, continue to bravely demand long-overdue reforms in Iran.

"If large numbers of Iranians demonstrate on February 11 in support of the Green Movement," writes Phillips, "that will be a harsh blow to Ahmadinejad and his thuggish regime."

» Get the latest on Iran plus all the facts at Heritage's Iran Briefing Room

Israel Knows How To Handle Rogue Religious Zealots

Security and Defense: To attack or not to attack...?
Yaakov Katz - Oct 02, 2009
The Jerusalem Post

As the talks with Iran opened on Thursday, one of the main questions on all of the participants` minds was what the one key country not at the talks - Israel - would do. Would it accept a deal struck between the United States, Russia, the European Union and Iran allowing the Islamic Republic to advance with a supervised civilian nuclear program, or would it decide to strike?

An attack on Iran`s nuclear facilities is not a simple operation and cannot be compared to the two previous strikes Israel carried out against the Syrian reactor in 2007 and the Iraqi reactor in 1981. In those two cases, the reactors consisted of one main facility, above ground and without advanced air defenses.

The same cannot be said of Iran`s nuclear program. As discovered last week, the second uranium enrichment facility near Qom was dug inside a mountain with two tunnels for access. According to intelligence revelations, the facility contains 3,000 centrifuges - allegedly to enrich uranium to military levels - that would become operational by the middle of next year.

THIS NEW facility could be just the beginning. According to an article in Foreign Policy this week, the Qom facility is likely not the only nuclear installation that Iran has been hiding.

...snip/

An analysis of an Israeli attack plan, published by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington earlier this year, claimed that a strike would focus on four main facilities - the Natanz enrichment facility, the Bushehr light-water nuclear power reactor, the Arak heavy water facility and the conversion plant in Esfahan. According to the report, Israel would likely have to use close to 100 fighter jets, as well as its entire fleet of aerial fuel tankers.

According to the research, the shortest route for Israel would be via the North, while straddling the Syrian-Turkish border and then the Turkish-Iraqi border all the way to Iran. An alternative could be what is called the central route - flying directly over Jordan and Iraq into Iran. Each route has its political and operational risks.

NEEDLESS TO say, Israel is very skeptical of the possibility that the talks in Geneva that began on Thursday will produce a positive outcome. The discovery of the facility near Qom is the third time Iran has been caught red-handed deceiving the world about the extent of its project.

...snip/

Even if the dialogue fails, Israel will still need to wait to give the EU, Russia, the US and China the chance to impose tough sanctions on Iran, particularly in the energy sector and the supply of refined fuel, a measure believed to be capable of having a real effect on the regime. If the talks do fail, though, and the sanctions imposed are not tough, Israel will be left to decide what to do.

Alternatively the talks may succeed, and if the US reaches a deal under which the Islamic Republic is allowed to continue enriching uranium at low levels for energy purposes, Israel`s hands will be tied again.

Our Friends At FDD Have A Plan

Iran Missile Test Shows Need for Gasoline Sanctions
Perhaps Last Peaceful Path to End Nuclear Weapons Program

Washington, DC (May 20, 2009) -- The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) said that Iran's successful test of a medium range missile showed the need for tough sanctions and other steps to stop Iran from importing the gasoline that it needs to fuel its economy and military.

"This latest test-firing of an Iranian missile and the regime's aggressive pursuit of its illegal nuclear program threaten the region as well as American security," said FDD Executive Director Mark Dubowitz. "If talks with Iran are to succeed in ending Iran's nuclear weapons program, the Obama administration will need some real leverage when it sits down with Tehran's master negotiators. Iran's heavy dependence on foreign gasoline may be the last, best chance we have to peacefully change the regime's behavior."

Senators Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) today introduced an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill being considered by the Senate to prohibit companies that sell refined petroleum to Iran from receiving contracts to fill the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve. In the last month, Democrats and Republicans in the Senate and House introduced three bills focused on limiting Iran's ability to import gasoline.

"Iran's need to import 40 percent of its gasoline is its economic Achilles' Heel," said Orde Kittrie, an FDD senior fellow, law professor at Arizona State University, and former U.S. State Department official. "Iran relies on a handful of foreign energy companies, all with significant business interests in the United States, to supply it with the gasoline it needs. If these companies end their business relationships with Iran, Iran's economy will slow dramatically, its military will have to look elsewhere for fuel, and the Iranian people may demand that their government start investing in refineries rather than continue pouring money into its illegal and dangerous nuclear program."

Although Iran is a major producer of crude oil, it must import approximately 40 percent of the gasoline it needs because it lacks adequate refinery capacity at home. Companies supplying gasoline to Iran include Vitol, Trafigura, Reliance Industries Ltd., and Total. Glencore and Shell have also provided periodic shipments.

FDD has provided substantial research and analysis on Iran's dependence on imported gasoline, including identifying points of leverage over the foreign energy companies that supply Iran with the majority of gasoline it imports.

FDD's work includes:
FDD National Post oped on the prospects for using gasoline sales to end Iran's nuclear program is here.
FDD Wall Street Journal oped on the companies supplying Iran with gasoline is here.
Wall Street Journal editorial quoting FDD's Mark Dubowitz on the effectiveness of gasoline sanctions is here.
FDD document outlining the strong, bipartisan support that sanctioning gasoline sales to Iran has received is here.
A summary of Congressional action taken to address Iran's dependence on imported gasoline is here.
For more background on the issue, please visit FDD's Iran Energy Project page here.

ACTION ALERT!!!!!

Our good friends over at Foundation for Defense of Democracies have a favor to ask. They'd like everyone to call the senators listed below and express their support for the amendment by John Kyl and Joe Lieberman. The folks over at FDD are patriots and work very hard to keep our liberties and freedoms intact.

(and my contact is a smokin' hot baby doll. Yeah yeah...its a Marine thing. It's not my fault all conservative women are smokin' hot and incredibly intelligent.)

From my contact:

Every single day Iran inches closer to obtaining the world’s most dangerous and deadly weapon known to man – a nuclear weapon. They must be stopped!

We already know the Iranian regime funds and trains terrorists who are killing American soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan. The President of Iran has also threatened to wipe the United States and Israel off the map – calling us the “Great Satan.” These people simply cannot be trusted with nuclear capabilities!

Senators Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) have sponsored an amendment to President Obama’s budget that will hit Iran where it hurts – by making sure your U.S. tax dollars DO NOT support companies that do business with Iran’s energy sector. This may be the last peaceful way to stop Iran from getting the bomb.

The Senate will vote on this amendment TODAY and we need you to do your part to pressure Congress by telling them to vote in favor of the Kyl/ Lieberman Amendment #932.

Please take less than 5 minutes to call the Senators listed! Tell them to stop Iran’s nuclear bomb by voting in favor of Amendment 932!

Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) -- 202-224-5623

Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) -- 202-224-2043

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) – 202-224-3224

Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) – 202-224-2621

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) – 202-224-6542

Thank you for taking action today!!

Foreign Policy Experience?

GPOUSA Dr. Thomas Sowell

Now that the Democrats have recovered from the shock of Governor Sarah Palin's nomination as the Republican's candidate for vice president, they have suddenly discovered that her lack of experience in general-- and foreign policy experience in particular-- is a terrible danger in someone just a heartbeat away from being President of the United States.

For those who are satisfied with talking points, there is no need to go any further. But, for those who still consider substance relevant, this is an incredible argument coming from those whose presidential candidate has even less experience in public office than Sarah Palin, and none in foreign policy.

Moreover, if Senator Barack Obama is elected, he will not be a heartbeat away from the presidency, his would be the heartbeat of the president-- and he would be the one making foreign policy.

But the big talking point is that the Democrats' vice-presidential nominee, Senator Joe Biden, has years of foreign policy experience as a member, and now chairman, of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

That all depends on what the definition of "experience" is.

The fact that Senator Joe Biden has for years listened to all sorts of people testify on all sorts of foreign policy issues tells us nothing about how well he understood the issues.

Out of the four presidential and vice-presidential candidates this year, only Governor Palin has had to make executive decisions and live with the consequences.

As for Senator Obama, his various pronouncements on foreign policy have been as immature as they have been presumptuous.

He talked publicly about taking military action against Pakistan, one of our few Islamic allies and a nation with nuclear weapons.

Barack Obama's first response to the Russian invasion of Georgia was to urge "all sides" to negotiate a cease-fire and take their issues to the United Nations. That is standard liberal talk, which even Obama had second thoughts about, after Senator John McCain gave a more grown-up response.

We should all have second thoughts about what is, and is not, foreign policy "experience."

Foreign Policy Experience?

Blogger Anti-mullah is reporting that n0bama has already initiated back door communications with the jihad regime in Iran.

Not waiting to be elected, Obama has already started secret, unconditional talks with the islamic regime of Mullah iran behind America's back. By proxy.

And has reached an agreement with them!

Which partly explains why his advisor Tony Lake made his rather strange and very public statement to C-SPAN that his boss Obama wanted to go on record (again?) that the first order of priority when he was in the White House would be to start immediate - unconditional - talks with islamic iran.

We reported Tony Lake's remark but the news behind it has only just reached us in usable form. Actual names of those involved will be divulged later.

Reportedly, through Obama VP candidate Joe Biden's long standing friendship with the islamic regime's established representative in the USA, Houshang AmirAhmadi, the Obama camp set up a meeting in the USA with an official delegate of the Mullahs.

Last week, three Iranian men and one Iranian woman, ostensibly Democrat activists but reportedly paid Mullah agents in the USA met at a restaurant with an fully authorized Obama senior representative and a man sent from Tehran by the islamic regime.The Tehran man, dressed unusually in a suit and tie to avoid showing his Mullah regime status and membership in the islamic regime's nuclear program, brought a slew of documentation with him, trying to prove the regime wanted peaceful use of their nuclear efforts.

The four Iranian locals were mostly window dressing.

Ramblings for a Monday

From the Suck it Up Department:

Biden quoted as saying that Israel will have to reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran
By Haaretz Service
Tags: Biden, Obama, Jews

Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden was quoted Monday as telling senior Israeli officials behind closed doors that the Jewish state will have to reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran. In the unsourced report, Army Radio also quoted Biden as saying that he opposed "opening a additional military and diplomatic front." Biden, chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has long been considered strongly pro-Israel. His nomination as Barack Obama's running mate had been expected to shore up the Democrats' strength with U.S. Jewish voters.
Army Radio said Israeli officials expressed "amazement" over the remarks attributed to him.

Michelle Malkin has a PDS Alert (Palin Derangement Syndrome)

We noted the nutroots’ deepening Palin Derangement Syndrome over the weekend, topped by a diarist at the Daily Kos who’s been spreading disgusting, bottom-of-the-barrel rumors — picked up by the excitable and shameless Andrew Sullivan — about Gov. Sarah Palin’s youngest child and attacking one of Palin’s daughters as the mother of Trig.
The Free Republic fights back with photos of a very pregnant Gov. Palin in late February. I linked to an April blog post from an airline passenger who met the pregnant governor on a flight from Fairbanks. It is unbelievably surreal that this dirtbag Kossack rumor has to be debunked.

Everyone (well, on the left), is calling the choice by Senator John SIDNEY McCain of Governor Sarah Palin to be the Republican Vice President a last minute, all in, desparation move.

I can't believe they actually fell for that trick.
Sarah Palin was the front runner for months

August 31, 2008 at 3:58 am ·
While the Obama supporters are fairly delusional in their thinking that Sarah Palin was a last minute desperation pick in response to their sensational convention, the reality isn’t even close. Sarah Palin has been under consideration for months to be John McCains’s running mate, and was even the front runner for most of that time.
Far from being a last-minute tactical move or a second choice when better known alternatives were eliminated, Palin was very much in McCain’s thinking from the beginning of the selection process, according to McCain’s advisers. The 44-year-old governor made every cut as the first list of candidates assembled last spring was slowly winnowed. The more McCain learned about her, the more attracted he was to her as someone who shared his maverick, anti-establishment instincts.
“He looked at her like a kindred spirit,” said one close adviser, who declined to be identified in order to speak more freely. “Someone who wasn’t afraid to take tough positions.”

And from Iraq, comes more news of victory and progress and stability and all the things the left said could not happen, would not happen, not no way, not no how, absolutely, positively uh uh.

September 01, 2008Agence France-Presse

Iraqi Forces Take Over in Anbar

Iraqi forces today took over control of Anbar, once the most explosive battlefields in Iraq, from the U.S. military, symbolising the growing security gains in the war-torn country.
The ceremony to transfer Anbar to local forces took place at the provincial governate building in Ramadi, the provincial capital. It marks the handover of the 11th of Iraq's 18 provinces and the first Sunni province to be returned to the control of the Iraqi government.
"I would like to announce that the (Anbar) transfer from the U.S. to Iraqi forces is done," said Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, Iraq's national security advisor at the handover ceremony.
"The province of Anbar which was one of the hottest regions in Iraq is today celebrating the receiving of the security file."
Police said tens of thousands of Iraqi and American troops were on alert across the vast desert province in western Iraq.
Majid al-Assafi, the provincial police chief, told AFP on Aug. 31 that his forces were ready to accept security responsibility in Anbar, the country's largest province and home to about two million people.
The U.S. military said the transfer of security was an "important milestone with regard to security" in the province. But the "transfering of security does not necessarily mean that the security situation is stable or better," the military statement said.
"It means the government and the provincial authorities are ready to take the responsibility for handling it."

Our News Media is failing us.

Did you hear about Paris Hilton? and Brittany Spears? And again, did you hear how Cheney is running the government? How about the new Idol?.....

Actually did you hear or read anything about this?
Where's the New York Times? Washington Post? ACLU? Congress? Anybody? (chirp, chirp)

Two weeks ago, the London Sunday Times broke an exclusive story about FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds.

According the Times article, the U.S. government sought to gag Edmonds from revealing that corrupt government officials — specifically, State Department official Marc Grossman — were directly involved in the stealing and selling of nuclear secrets to foreign agents. In her role as translator, Edmonds listened in on, or translated, hundreds of secretly intercepted conversations between State Department officials and foreign nationals from 1996 to 2002.

This hasn't even made Drudge yet.

Chilling analysis of Bin Laden tape

Is Bin Laden setting up a nuclear attack? Two sites with analysis of this tape(PDF transcript). There is too much to post. Go see it.

Freedom Fighters Journal

Astute Bloggers