Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (656148)	5/22/2012 10:53:59 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 1577562

Obama acts as agent for the muslim brotherhood Two Obama Administration Scandals on Syria? May 17, 2012 - by Barry Rubin http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/05/17/two-obama-administration-scandals-on-syria/?singlepage=true%3C/a%3E[/url] When a delegation of Syrian Kurdish rebels recently visited Washington, D.C., the State Department met them to ask for a favor. What was it? The Obama administration urged them to join the Syrian National Council (SNC), the organization created by the U.S. government through Turkey to lead the opposition movement and receive Western aid for all Syrian opposition groups. But the Turkish Islamist regime, which Obama put in charge of forming the SNC, put the Muslim Brotherhood in control, a fact I pointed out within hours of the announcement of the SNC leadership’s names. Now that several SNC leaders have resigned complaining about Brotherhood domination, followed by some Arab journalists pointing out the obvious Brotherhood domination at the SNC’s last meeting, that reality is clear. But the implications of such an incredibly foolish policy—America putting an anti-American, antisemitic group into the “official” leadership of Syria’s rebels — have never been properly examined as a case study for Obama’s disastrous Middle East policy. The Kurds had walked out of the talks that formed the SNC last year when they saw how Islamists would be in control. Not only do they oppose Islamism itself but they also see the Brotherhood as an Arabizing and centralizing group that would impose a regime oppressing the non-Arab Kurds. The new U.S. effort so backfired that, with the Obama administration ignoring their concerns, the enraged Kurds in the delegation spoke for the first time of breaking up Syria altogether! To sum up, Obama policy has strengthened the Islamist forces in the opposition and fragmented the rebels, thus helping preserve a radical anti-American Syrian regime that is an ally of Iran or helping make any revolution more likely to produce a radical anti-American Syrian Islamist regime that will be an ally of an Islamist Egypt. Now comes a very peculiar story in the Washington Post with the headline, “Syrian rebels get influx of arms with Gulf Neighbors’ Money, U.S. coordination.” Let’s break this down logically: –The Saudis and Qataris have been providing arms already. –They know how to buy weapons, how to get them to the Syrian border, and how to give them to Syrian rebels. What do they need American “coordination” for? What does the word “coordination” mean? I presume it means that the Obama administration, absolutely clueless about what to do regarding Syria, simply wants to take credit for others’ actions. It is part of the pre-election spin about what a great job Obama is doing. Yet there is another problem here, a potentially devastating one. Who is getting the weapons? There are different people and groups in the Syrian opposition. Some are Salafists who feel comfortable with al-Qaida; some are Brotherhood men; some are ex-Syrian army officers, professionals and relatively apolitical; and some are liberals who really want democracy. Whoever gets these weapons will be tremendously empowered. So what’s to say that the arms being “coordinated” by the United States aren’t going to revolutionary Islamists? While this is a complex subject, there is information that these arms supplies up until now have not been sufficiently discriminatory toward moderates and away from Islamist radicals. We will know more in the weeks to come if we can see and identify which opposition groups in what parts of Syria have become better armed. And if it comes out that the U.S. government is “coordinating” the arming of such people with weapons — as it is already helping their political counterparts in the SNC — wouldn’t that be a tremendous scandal? Let’s be clear here: A proper U.S. policy would help moderate Syrians overthrow the Assad dictatorship and make sure weapons went to the best elements in the Free Syrian Army’s decentralized forces. Such a policy would make sure to deny money, weapons, and power to the Islamists and Salafists, who are proportionately far weaker in Syria than in Egypt. Obama policy follows the worst possible course. It minimizes U.S. help to the revolution while at the same time ensuring that a disproportionately large amount goes to Islamists.

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (656148)	5/22/2012 11:02:39 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577562

TWY, You are one INCREDIBLY naive puppy. Google the Islamization of Europe. You could spend weeks learning the consequences of it. Is that the fault of immigration, or the fault of Islam and Europe's proximity to fundamentalist Muslim regions? Yeah, let's just build a fence and a sign saying "No Vacancy." After all, they shouldn't be OUR problems, should they? Isolationism never works. History has taught us that over and over again. Doesn't mean we should nation-build, but it does mean we should address some of the problems in the world with true principles. Tenchusatsu

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (656148)	5/22/2012 11:28:35 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 1577562

The Vote Fraud Deniers Election integrity falls off the map under Eric Holder. PJMedia Thomas R. Spencer May 21, 2012 - Excerpt: On October 9, 2011, a New York Times headline read: “The Myth of Vote Fraud.” According to the editorial board, the wave of new laws passed in 19 states, designed to fight fraud at the ballot box, was merely another Republican retro-stunt to keep minorities from voting. Immediately, Democrats adopted the headline as a great election tactic. So it was no coincidence that in preparation for the 2012 election the NAACP announced that there is no vote fraud in America. It petitioned the United Nations Human Rights Council — composed of many of America’s detractors — to intervene in our election process. According to the NAACP, laws passed in response to a clear and present danger to the integrity of the ballot box are Republican “Jim Crow” laws. Why? Because, according to Ben Jealous, president of the NAACP, requiring a photo ID to vote is such an egregious assault focused only on minorities that the attorney general of the United States should intervene. And he did! In tandem with his long-time friend, Eric Holder launched a massive DOJ campaign to stop what he calls “vote suppression” laws — like requiring photo IDs at polling places. He has threatened to prosecute anyone — including democratic American states — who would dare require photo ID of minorities. Launching lawsuits against various states, Holder claims that laws which ramp up ballot security are a danger to our democracy. He contends that minorities (read “Democrats”) disproportionately do not have, and cannot procure, photo IDs. Of course, no evidence has ever been presented for this whopper, nor has it been explained how this same group manages to receive and process disproportionate welfare help — even when the government requires serious photo proof of identification for each recipient. Remember, this was the same attorney general who dismissed a slam-dunk prosecution of the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation. (Think scary guys with billy clubs at a Philly precinct.) The Democratic Party has promulgated talking points — fed to its sympathetic media machine buds — attacking any organization which a) alleges a vote fraud problem, or b ) proposes even the most benign of ballot security measures, or c) demands a scrubbing of voting rolls. Even non-partisan organizations like “True the Vote”– dedicated to combating vote-theft – have been viciously attacked as subversive, back-of–the-bus carpetbaggers. Every day, the media is dragged, kicking and screaming, to another story about serious vote fraud in America. Illegal voting by felons; imposters voting as the long-dead; vote rolls stuffed with ineligible names; phony registrations; non-citizens casting ballots; fraudulent absentee ballots. Indeed, in Indiana, the president was illegally placed on the ballot with hundreds of forged signatures. But like the cub reporters they become in Democrat scandals, our media reluctantly pushes out a meager online paragraph, usually kicked to the last page. Many Democrats believe that anyone present in the United States, citizen or not, is “an American” and should be entitled to vote, one way or the other. That is, if they vote Democrat. snip Full Commentary