Monday, May 7, 2012

Israeli spy flick reimagines Dubai killing


In this May 1, 2012 photo, Israeli model Bar Refaeli plays a seductress with actor Tomer Sisley on a film set in Eilat, southern Israel. The brazen 2010 assassination of a Hamas operative in Dubai remains shrouded in mystery, but an upcoming film is offering its own comedic interpretation of the movie-like events, complete with a gang of small-time crooks and a sly seductress played by Refaeli.

(05-07) 11:09 PDT EILAT, Israel (AP) --
The brazen 2010 assassination of a Hamas operative in Dubai, in which Israel's spy agency was accused, unfurled like a spy movie thriller — and in fact much of it was caught on camera. Now an Israeli movie plays it as a spy caper, complete with a sly seductress played by Israeli supermodel Bar Refaeli.
In this May 1, 2012 photo, Israeli model Bar Refaeli play... Dan Balilty / APThe movie "Kidon", or Spear, gives the plot a twist by having a small-time gang of criminals murder Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in an attempt to frame Israel's Mossad spy agency.
Dubai police accused the Mossad of carrying out the actual hit in a five-star hotel, and released surveillance camera footage of the assassination team tracking al-Mabhouh. A number of countries also cast suspicion on Israel, angrily accusing its intelligence agency of forging passports under their citizens' names for the killers to use. Israel and the Mossad, as is their policy, never confirmed or denied involvement.
"The movie is not a documentary and it's not a history movie. It's my take on the al-Mabhouh story," said Emmanuel Nakash, the movie's French-Israeli director. Kidon is the supposed name of the Mossad's assassination unit.
Refaeli plays Einav Schwartz, an Israeli temptress whose role is to lure al-Mabhouh into the assassins' trap.
For the film, a French-Israeli production, a glitzy hotel in the Israeli resort city of Eilat served as the Dubai hotel. The characters are all fictional, except for al-Mabhouh, a Hamas leader in exile who helped smuggle weapons to militants in the Gaza Strip and who was wanted for capturing and killing two Israeli soldiers in the late 1980s.
In one scene, Refaeli, decked out in a revealing leopard-print dress and flipping her blonde hair, catches al-Mabhouh's eye by the hotel bar. He takes the bait, orders a drink, they have a chat and then slink out together, the hotel surveillance cameras filming them as they go.
In this May 1, 2012 photo, Israeli model Bar Refaeli prep... Dan Balilty / APRefaeli, best known for gracing the cover of Sports Illustrated's swimsuit edition and being the former longtime girlfriend of Leonardo DiCaprio, has made the crossover from modeling to acting before. She starred in the 2011 thriller "Session" and appeared in the Israeli TV series "Pick Up."
But she said "Kidon" is giving her a taste of a job she really wants: working as an agent for Israel's notorious spy agency.
"I would love to be in the Mossad and maybe I am. Who knows? I think that being a famous model is the best cover," Refaeli told reporters.
In the Dubai killing, the hit team — including two women — entered the Persian Gulf city undetected on foreign passports, pulled off the highly complex operation, then escaped the country unscathed.
There was no indication of a bar room seduction. Using the hotel camera footage, Dubai police outlined a 19-hour operation, where the agents, wearing disguises such as fake beards, wigs and tennis attire, kept close watch on al-Mabhouh, prowling the elevator and hallways before slipping into his room and killing him.
Forensic tests indicated he was first injected in the thigh with a fast-acting, hard-to-detect muscle relaxant. Then he was suffocated with a pillow, Dubai police said.
The photos on the assassins' doctored passports were released by Dubai police and published worldwide, as were their 26 aliases. More than half of the names turned out to belong to real-life dual nationals living in Israel, some of whom claimed their identities had been stolen.
Several of Israel's important allies, including BritainIreland and Australia, threw out Israeli diplomats in protest over the use of their nations' passports. But the diplomatic fallout was largely contained.
On the set at the Eilat hotel, extras wearing traditional Arab garb strolled around the lobby speaking in Hebrew as others dressed as heavily made-up cocktail waitresses looked bored between takes.
The $5.2 million film is expected to hit theaters in France and Israel next year.
The hotel footage of the real operation was a boon for actor Shredy Jabarin, who studied it meticulously for his portrayal of al-Mabhouh.
"I saw a sharpness, a lot of caution, like an animal with many instincts. If you watch the video, he gets out of the elevator, looks right, looks left, checks the area, like a robot," said Jabarin.
Refaeli said Israelis are used to hearing about covert operations blamed on the Mossad, but the al-Mabhouh killing was the most sensational, making it perfect fodder for a film.
"This specific one sounded like a movie scene," Refaeli told The Associated Press on the sidelines of the set. "It was just like reading a script."
Follow Tia Goldenberg at

Read more:

Physicians Group Asks Food Nazi Michelle Obama To Stop Being Photographed Eating Junk Food…

But she’s so good at being a hypocrite.
(Baltimore Sun) — First Lady Michelle Obama is on a mission to get our kids to eat healthy, but every now and then she is known to indulge on a cheeseburger or other food that is not so good for the body.
A few years ago she made a lunch run with staff to a Five Guys in Washington, D.C.
Well, a physicians group said this is a no-no and wants Michelle Obama and the rest of the first family not to be photographed eating unhealthy foods.
The Physicans Committee for Responsible Medicine said that President Obama has posed in a number of staged photos eating unhealthy foods, including hot dogs at a basketball game with British Prime Minister David Cameron. He and Vice President Joe Biden were spotted making a stop at Ray’s Hell Burger in Virginia and eating cheeseburgers with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.
The group said Obama’s staff would never schedule a photo opp of the president smoking a cigarette, so why eating a piece of pizza?
The group plans to file a petition later this week asking the White House to issue an executive order banning staged photos of the president, his family the vice president and members of the president’s cabinet eating unhealthy foods.
Posted by ZIP on Monday, May 7, 2012, at 1:46 pm - WEASEL ZIPPERS 

 Bee's Note:
"Zip" always has little "gems" that demonstrate the hypocrisy of this administration, and the "Let them eat cake" Barack Hussein Obama family.  When Obama pokes fun and ridicules Romney's wealth, I just sit back and laugh at Obama's pretense of having a more virtuous character then Romney.  And, on the subject of Michelle, as Zip posted today, her trips to the schools to "educate" our children on eating their vegetables (forgetting that they have parents), while she continually eats foods that would kill a horse! 

Obama Could Finally Acquire Elusive Internet “Kill Switch

MAY 7, 2012 BY  

Barack Obama 8 SC 300x199 Obama Could Finally Acquire Elusive Internet “Kill Switch”For three years Barack Hussein Obama and his handlers have labored to create a functioning dictatorship in the midst of a constitutional republic. It was shamefully easy at first. With unassailable majorities in House and Senate, even a Republican leadership unafraid to contest the excesses of the first black president would have been powerless to slow the implementation of his agenda.
The left passed ObamaCare, giving itself the means of executing a calculated program of attrition against millions of reliably Republican seniors. At the same time, a corrupt Department of Justice worked to undermine the 2nd Amendment, interfered with the effort of states to legislate against voter fraud and facilitated the entry of millions of illegals by refusing to enforce immigration law.
Even a disastrous midterm election has not slowed Obama’s acquisition of power as 190 House Republicans helped vote into law the infamous National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), providing the Commander and Chief unlimited authority to detain and imprison without due process any American he considers a threat to national security.
But one vitally important power has eluded the usurper in the White House, that being the legal means to control the world-wide web. Countless attempts have been made to provide Obama that longed for internet “kill switch,” many of them originating with Senator Joe Lieberman. Yet from Net Neutrality to the 2010 “Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act,” all have met with such an outcry from left and right alike that they have died in Congress.
All, that is, until now. A week ago the House of Representatives passed the latest Congressional attempt to nullify the last remaining exercise of American freedom, the “cyber-security” bill called CISPA—the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act.
According to lawmakers, the purpose of CISPA is to make it easier for companies and the federal government to share information about methods of thwarting hackers. Until now, such information sharing about individual web users could have provided the grounds for a law suit. CISPA, however, “… would allow companies to freely share “cyber-threat information” without consequence.” (1)
Critics of the bill point to the fact that, in the form passed by the House, “…any web-related service provider may share ‘cyber threat information with any other entity,’ including the military and National Security Agency NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW…” In short, once enacted the terms of CISPA would take precedence over any existing state or federal law. Privacy laws would be a thing of the past. (1)
Though Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security has “monitored” the mood of the public for some time, the enactment of CISPA would transform the now shadowy Department methods of spying on the enemies of Barack into a full-time, executive branch operation. (2) As civil liberties groups have claimed, the bill is so broadly written that it “would allow companies to share private consumer information with the government under the guise of sharing information about potential hacker threats.” (3)
For a would-be despot of Barack Obama’s ilk, the possibilities for abuse inherent in such a law are staggering. He would have the authority to flagrantly spy on any group or individual under the pretense of concern for national security. And as he may, under the powers afforded him by the NDAA, declare such groups or individuals a threat to the United States, the chilling effect upon any declared opposition to his nefarious schemes would be enormous. What better way to kill the internet than to clear it of all dissent!
Some claim that CISPA will have a difficult time in the US Senate. We must hope that will be the case.
By Doug Book, Coach Is Right
To read more use these links:

It’s Come to This: Farting Dinosaurs May Have Caused So-Called ‘Climate Change’

Bee's Note:   Perhaps many of you are aware of "Jammie Wearing Fools" blog, but I just came across it and thought it might be one you would enjoy and might like to save to your "favorites".  Enjoy!

Posted by  on May 07, 2012 at 8:21 am

Look at the upside to this silliness. At least humans are no longer to blame so this mythical climate change.
Like huge cows, the mighty sauropods would have generated enormous quantities of methane.
Sauropods, recognisable by their long necks and tails, were widespread around 150 million years ago.
They included some of the largest animals to walk the Earth, such as Diplodocus, which measured 150 feet and weighed up to 45 tonnes.
Scientists believe that, just as in cows, methane-producing bacteria aided the digestion of sauropods by fermenting their plant food.
”A simple mathematical model suggests that the microbes living in sauropod dinosaurs may have produced enough methane to have an important effect on the Mesozoic climate,” said study leader Dr Dave Wilkinson, from Liverpool John Moores University.
”Indeed, our calculations suggest that these dinosaurs could have produced more methane than all modern sources – both natural and man-made – put together.”
The research is published today in the journal Current Biology.
I guess they’ll now declare global warming killed off the dinosaurs.

A Hoarse of a Different Color- By Michelle's Mirror


 Sunday, May 6, 2012

A Hoarse of a Different Color

Today’s four words: One. Big. Ass. Moon.
Saturday was a killer: we campaigned to the point of hoarseness. That’s hoarse - with an “a.”
bo hoarseA horse is hoarse, of course, of course
I know - it was derby day, so it’s easy to get your horse’s asses confused: they all look the same from the rear. Butt let the record reflect: I’ll Have Another won, and My Adonis was scratched. I wouldn’t read anything into it though, because frankly, nobody really needs Another. And everyone knows these horse races are rigged.
Which reminds me, I see that, in addition to the War on Women, the R-words have now launched a War on our Lapdogs too. What next – a demand to show a photo ID to vote?
Bo_Briefing_Lap_DogsLittle Bo, briefing our Lapdogs
Anyway, the R-words launched this war a long time ago:
It became more important and fashionable for a majority in the media to protect their lifestyles against the right-wing horde descending upon them, and to assuage their guilt, rather than comprehend what was happening around them or the controlling agenda they unwittingly supported.
Thus, the coverage of news stories concerning conservative issues or politicians became notable for vitriol and deliberate slanting or omission of facts. Polls, commissioned by the media and easily manipulated, were substituted for news and real reporting…(snip)
This 45-year evolution of the mainstream media culminated in the election of Barack Obama, who on the surface fulfilled all the requirements of an ideal presidential candidate for the chattering class. He was one of them --  Ivy League-educated, well-spoken, attractive, and capable of saying all the right things designed to appeal to the myopic worldview of the New York-Washington media axis. But above all, he was African-American, an opportunity to wash away the collective guilt so embedded in the psyche of the press.[ed. and, as it turned out, a good deal of the rest of the nation as well]

Butt since today is National Lemonade Day (really), let’s give the lapdogs the benefit of the doubt and just say they’re trying to make lemonade out of all the lemons they’ve been sucking on for a couple of years. Cripes! We haven’t had a really good jobs report in what – 39 months? So they have to do the best with what we give them:

Winning the War - by Sultan Knish

Sunday, May 06, 2012

The last President to have taken part in actual combat left office nearly twenty years ago. It's a little-remarked milestone buried amid a great deal of posturing by leaders who want to talk the talk without having walked the walk. Since then, we have gone from a draft dodger to a man who never had to bother dodging, a commentary on a generational shift from a period when military service was not alien to the Yale and Harvard campuses. Meanwhile, the country remains in a conflict without end.

Obama will complete his pullouts on a campaign schedule, but that will not end the war. You cannot end a war that you did not begin. The sustained conflict we are in did not begin when we entered Afghanistan or Iraq, it will not end just because we leave. 

The Afghanistan victory lap is as much about disguising the 'cut and run' phase; as it is about reminding the folks in Virginia and Iowa that the man on television parachuted in, cut the throats of all of Osama's guards, shot him in the face and then made a topical quip. Waving around Bin Laden's head is a good way to distract them from the fact that the United States has lost the war in Afghanistan, that Obama's own strategy there failed badly and cost numerous American and British lives, and that we are turning the country over to the Taliban.

Afghanistan and Iraq were part of a strategy for containing and draining the fever swamps of terrorism. That strategy failed for a variety of reasons, not the least of them being that we failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam. The Obama Administration alone managed to roll out a "hearts and minds" strategy and a brief push to intimidate the other side into coming to the negotiating table for a face-saving withdrawal. It's almost a pity that Obama wasn't old enough to have to dodged the draft. At least that way he might have actually known something about the Vietnam War.

Instead we have come away with thousands of casualties, living and dead, often left with poor medical care, at rates that this administration is determined to hike up. We have generals who don't know how to win wars but know how to behave in mosques and female cadets from West Point are being dressed up in hijabs and taken to Jersey City so that they might learn how to relate to Muslim culture. And most of all the war isn't over.

The enemy was never a few peasants in Afghanistan, beating their wives, growing their drug cash crops and murdering their daughters over a slight. They are bastards and they generally hate us, to the extent that they are aware of us, much as they hate their neighbors from a different ethnic group. But, left to their own devices, they would only be a threat to their own female relations. They are our enemies, but they are not the enemy.

Bin Laden didn't come out of Afghanistan. He came out of Saudi Arabia, and he found refuge in Pakistan. And those are two countries that we would never think to touch, because the former owns us, and the latter has sizable numbers and nuclear weapons. Instead we went after the low hanging fruit, the Taliban with their burkas and hatred of women, and a vicious tyrant stewing in his isolation. Both of them needed putting down, but doing so brought us no closer to winning the war. 

Rather than dealing with the sources of terror, we focused our attention on stabilizing zones of instability on the theory that it was easier to bring order to those zones than to go directly to the source of the problem. And we were wrong. Policing Iraq and Afghanistan proved to be very expensive and put us to the task of trying to hold together broken societies. There is a reason that unstable places are unstable. There is also a reason why Saddam and the Taliban were in power.

The real lesson of Korea and Vietnam was that getting stuck fighting a proxy war was a losing proposition. Both wars were expensive, bloody and damaging to morale. The Soviet Union did not have to bleed much to inflict a great deal of damage on us. That was a lesson that we taught it in Afghanistan, but that just put us into another proxy war, except this time we were the ones giving away the weapons to the enemy of our enemy.

The dead and wounded of those wars were fallout from a guiding strategy that believed that war with the Soviet Union was unthinkable and saw the conflict in terms of stabilizing potential trouble spots before the Communists could take them over and making common cause with anyone on the ground to keep them out. 

That first clause got us into Vietnam, the second clause got us into Afghanistan. Now the second clause has gotten us to back the "moderate" Taliban and the "moderate" Muslim Brotherhood and every other monstrous nightmare that we can append the word "moderate" to. And if we go on this way, our only real hope is that Islam, like Communism, self-destructs before we can self-destruct.

For now we are self-destructing. The elementary purpose of war is to destroy the other side's ability and will to make war upon you. Destroying our ability to make war is still beyond them, but they have done a fine job of destroying our will, aided and abetted by their paid public relations firms, by the ACLU, the New York Times, the Democratic Party and yes, the Republican Party.

Past the initial devastation that we visited on the Taliban and the Republican Guard, nothing that we did in those places was going to destroy the other side's ability and will to make war on us. Not that the notion was ever on the table since we had never defined the other side, except loosely in terms of "extremists" who misunderstand their religion and think that it tells them to make war on us, when it actually tells them to give us a big hug and buy us flowers for Infidel's Day.

But if we are going to think about how to win the war, rather than just grit our teeth and submit to another round of bombings and TSA inspections, while the domestic Muslim population continues to grow and grow, then we are going to have to think in terms of destroying their ability and will to make war on us. And that's not as tall an order as it seems.

We don't need to win their hearts and minds, and unless we clone Mohammed and put him through an intensive course in loving America, we don't have a shot at doing that. Islam is a religion which believes that order and justice come about when Muslims dominate non-Muslims. That's not a misunderstanding, it's their religion. It's also not our problem so long as we keep that religion and its attempts to impose their order and justice as far away from us as possible.

Forget convincing them that they shouldn't want to kill us, that's not our job. Our job is to convince them that trying is futile. That the consequences of trying to do it will hurt them more than it hurts us. In our own clumsy fumbling way we have unintentionally made some progress in that direction. Muslims now understand that a large scale terrorist attack may result in an invasion followed by years of reconstruction in which the infidels will have power over them while militias roam the hills and streets fighting it out with the infidels and making life unlivable.

Iraq and Afghanistan may be lost, but they are still object lessons. The militias will claim victory, but few Muslims want the same mess to happen to their own country. Al-Qaeda is unpopular because together with us it made a big mess and made life unlivable. Rather than bringing Islamic justice and order, it ushered in a state of chaos and violence. The opposite of the stability that Islam is supposed to bring. Al-Qaeda has more range than ever, but its depth is an inch thick.

The message that we sent is that attacking us is going to be inconvenient for them, when the message that we should have sent was that it was futile. That was the message we could have sent if all they had seen of us were smoke plumes and sudden death. Instead of allowing them to see soldiers traipsing around, choppers evacuating our wounded and realizing that we bleed just as easily as they do.

And even that is largely beside the point. Military resources have to be employed where they will do the most good. Where they will win the war. And that means going after the heart, rather than a finger. It means fighting the enemy, rather than the enemy's pawns and indirectly funded militias.

If we are going to destroy the ability and will of the enemy, then we have to do go the source of the money and ideas, and for that matter much of the manpower, in this conflict. It would mean looking at how the money we have poured into the Gulf has allowed the tribal monarchies to buy up power here and to spread their influence and fund Islamic militancy around the world. And then we would have to do something about it.

There are plenty more Bin Ladens out there. To defeat them, we have to deal with the financial and ideological infrastructure that fuels the Jihad, which runs out of the desert across the region, and then to Asia, Africa and even America. Taking on Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates; would be a genuinely gutsy call, not because they're militarily formidable, but because it would force us to break out of the box that we've been living in. The box that says there are no large scale conflicts, only police actions that keep the peace and prevent the enemy from spreading too far.

War with the Soviet Union was ruled out because it was too big and had nuclear weapons. War at the heart of the Muslim world is ruled out because there are just too many Muslims and besides those countries are our allies, our best hope of defeating... well them. And so the war remains unwinnable because it remains unthinkable.

It's much easier to drop bombs on some tribesmen in Yemen or Afghanistan than paying a call to the  Saudi King, It's much easier to send soldiers out to win hearts and minds in some hopeless part of the world, than to bring the war home to glittering cities closely interlinked with Western business interests like Riyadh, Doha and Dubai. It's easy to put down a lunatic like Gaddafi or an old fashioned Arabist tyrant like Saddam or Assad, but who would contemplate doing the same thing to the House of Saud or the Al-Thanis?

We can cut off the head of the snake or we can shake a stick at it, or learning to wear heavy boots. So far we've shaken our sticks loudly and impotently and we wear heavy boots and take them off at the airport. That's the game we're playing and it's a loser's game.

To defeat the enemy, we have to defeat the enemy. And that means destroying his wealth, his backers, his intellectual leaders and the energy source that provides the momentum for the conflict. The Muslim world is not a single indivisible whole, but there are men with great wealth and power, operating out of the historical stomping grounds of Mohammed, who are trying to make it one. They are the enemy and if we do not destroy them, they may destroy us. 

Update: A Bee's Note

Dear Friends (all my readers and few that admit they follow Americans Stand with Israel)

The other day I posted a brief note explaining that somehow I became ill and would be away from the computer for a few days.  There is an article on new clues to "disappearing honey bees"  reported in 2009, by Science, MSNBC.  
Aha!  So happy to report that I am not among the missing!
However, this is me over the weekend ... (photo of bee - right)
I look like I'm ready to fall off that blade of grass!  That is not normal for me!  I am normally very busy buzzing around, smelling the flowers and taking care of important matters.  For instance,
did you know that
Most people are not aware that bees are responsible for helping create 1/3 the food human beings eat!!! That's between $7-10 billion worth of food production a year and aside from asking for no compensation, they create honey for us as a result of their work. There's an old saying repeated by many times throughout history that if there is trouble with Honey Bees, trouble with man is not far behind. There even seems to be some essential connections being discovered now between the development of certain flowers and the presence of honey bees. read more
 I am feeling a little better, but not well enough to sit for any length of time reporting news that reveals the dangers of Obama's administration's agenda for America.  And while my focus is on the Middle East,  I recognize the urgency to reveal Obama's methods to his madness is (or should be) every American citizens priority, as the clock is ticking and November's elections to "Move out Obama!" is just around the corner.
And, with that in mind, I just thought it appropriate to let all of you know that while I plan on posting daily, I may be a little slow in the amount of postings until I am buzzing around the Internet once again, full time.

Thank you for your patience and I hope you plan on visiting often.  

Obama delcares 'almost victory' over al-Qaeda

Bee's Note:
Carl in Jerusalem sums up Obama's latest ridiculous remarks (below) quite nicely.  Keep in mind that Obama never hesitates to congratulate himself for what he considers "a job well done".  It is nice to see that one of his comments mentions a time "to focus on nation building" and "economic issues" - here in America!  
Would someone please explain to America what the heck he's been doing since elected, if not focusing on the economic issues in America?!  What was that Stimulus bill for, if not to help America's economy? The loans and trillions of dollars deeper in debt to China?  Sure, there were MILLIONS  of  DOLLARS wasted on world-wide vacations and golf trips by the Obama family; the lavish shopping trips by Michele, where in one trip alone she spent over $50,000 just on underwear (OMG! You would think she would have one of her servants staff members use a washing machine instead of throwing clothes out after one use!); and all the other wasted monies spent to keep the Obama family "happy" while running this country into the ground.
I have a medal I'd like to pin on Obama - it would say, "Worse President", but that is the kindest medal I can think of, because there are other slogans I will refrain from saying here, just to keep my blog from disappearing suddenly.  The Gateway Pundit has an article you might enjoy: 
Worst. President. Ever


Monday, May 07, 2012

Good grief!
President Barack Obama said his goal of defeating al-Qaeda is within reach and that it's time to turn the country's attention to domestic concerns.

Just four days after his trip to Afghanistan, Obama said that money saved from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan should help pay down the national debt and go to health care, education and infrastructure.

"After more than a decade of war, it is time to focus on nation-building here at home," he said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday.

The president took note of the agreement he signed with Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday that shifts security to the Afghan people. He reminded the American public, once again, of the military raid that killed Osama bin Laden a year ago.

But he said the nation now should concentrate on economic issues such as tax disparities and government spending. Without mentioning Republicans, he cast the rival party's view as one that promotes more tax cuts for millionaires while cutting the spending "that built a strong middle class."

"That's why I've called on Congress to take the money we're no longer spending at war, use half of it to pay down our debt and use the other half to rebuild America,"
he said.
If only he had won the war.... What could go wrong?

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 1:52 AM

From the cradle to the grave, Obama says the government should control your life.

The Obama campaign rallies on Saturday in Ohio and Virginia--with President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle--featured the first use of what for now is the main 2012 slogan: "Forward." On the back of the "Forward" signs: the words "Not Back." The "O" on "Forward" contains the classic Obama logo from 2008. "Hope" and "change" have not been sidelined. Said Obama, as he whipped up a crowd at the Virginia Commonwealth University Stuart C. Siegel Center, "You tell them it's still about hope. You tell them it's still about change." (photo by Lynn Sweet)

Bee's Note: Over the weekend, I found it necessary to press the TV's mute button frequently, as Obama's speech to the opening of his 2012 campaign was repeated excessively (in case you missed it the first 100 times!), but the silent screen scanned his audience to show young folks holding up his "new" slogan "Forward".  (Please read the Noisy Room's commentary - posted below - for a clearer understanding why Americans need to use that mute button on the remote throughout the 2012 campaign).

Oh, if only the world could become a better place simply by holding up signs of political deceivers, spouting off one word slogans and promises, such as, "Hope", "Change", and/or "Forward".  If only the Deceiver's followers recognized that what follows false promises and deception is a large pit marked "Poverty, suffering, hardships too horrible to imagine,and great sorrow", with no consolation for the suffering.
Is this not exactly what Americans are experiencing today?  No one man or political party can be blamed for the insurmountable, disturbing circumstances many Americans face daily, but as these conditions continue to accumulate among American households, surely if we've learned anything these past 3 plus years is that the leopard in the White House has not changed his spots.  His actions and policies have gone unchecked and the gullible youth continue to seek "hope, change and a march "forward" without a clear understanding of what Obama's message of "forward" actually means, nor when the history behind his latest slogan "Forward" originated.
Almost gone from the American scene is our flag, as Obama's egotistical nature decided long ago that his logo was more representative of the America he dreams about - a dream being fulfilled daily and marked with his latest slogan - "Forward"
Barack Hussein Obama wrote an autobiography while he was unknown to the general population, because no body was as important to Obama than Obama, himself.  Nothing has changed since he became president.  His concerns are his "only", so please let's stop pretending that one day he will wake up and give a darn about America, its citizens, history, flag, Constitution, or the liberty and freedoms obtained by our founding fathers.  Obama is ruthless and has no conscience - a dangerous combination for the President of the United States.
A person with no conscience can stand before a crowd of college students, with honey pouring from his lips, give a speech to officially open his 2012 campaign, while the poisonous destruction of America is embedded in his heart.
Any hope for America must come from Americans, as they vote in November for the change that can only come from changing who shall lead America. Then hope will be restored, as we change the direction Obama and his administration are leading America and until then, may the Lord have mercy on us all.

By: Old Ironsides
Conscience of a Conservative
Well, Obama’s mask is finally beginning to slip off his face. A few days ago the 2012 Obama campaign released its offical slogan, FORWARD, and immediately the origins of this favorite action word became known thanks to Obama’s greatest adversary, the conservative bloggers. From now until November the Democrats will be marching FORWARD to victory. Just as their fellow communists have done in the past. Most of those communist posters from past history were not written in English so they’re not as obvious, see the blog written by Hack Wilson, But, even though Obama’s Democrats left out the revolutionary soldier carrying the red flag in their poster, at least one of those communist posters from modern history is in English. And it is most convincing in its true meaning when the Leading Light Communist Organization uses it.

So now the Obama Democrats have taken the next step in convincing everyone of their true purpose, spreading the philosophy of Karl Marx. Only the Obama Democrats are being a bit cautious because they are revealing their plan in little pieces. Such as their new web site propaganda piece “The Life of Julia” wherein the Democrats show their love and compassion for everyone from the cradle to the grave. The part they left out is what they expect from you in return.
No, it isn’t Socialism, it isn’t Communism, it isn’t Marxism, its just our good old Democrat pretender Barack Hussein Obama telling America that life is better when you depend on the government to give you everything you need. Is the word “depend” the right one to use? Maybe the sentence should read: Life is better when you allow the government to control your life, because control is what the Democrats want. Too bad the wisdom of a true American patriot, Thomas Jefferson, has been forgotten by so many Democrats today. Back in the days when our Founding Fathers were creating our Republic, Jefferson argued thatA government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.” Maybe that’s why so many liberal teachers are rewriting American History today because they don’t want tomorrow’s voters to think about these things.
I know where I’ve heard that Democrat slogan before. It was first written by Karl Marx when he said: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” And Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were the authors of The Communist Manifesto. The Obama Democrats have presented the later part of the Marxist statement, the part that appeals to greed, but they conveniently left off the first part, the part that dictates what the government wants in return. Wikipedia reveals the complete origin, along with the full text in which it appeared.
The complete paragraph containing Marx’s statement of the creed in the ‘Critique of the Gotha Program’ is as follows:
In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!
Then another search of Wikipedia reveals more on the application of this basic communist philosophy.
“Claiming themselves to be at a “lower stage of communism (i.e., “socialism”, in line with Marx’s terminology), the Soviet Union adapted the formula as: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his work (labour investment)”. ”
Proletarians and Communists
The second section, “Proletarians and Communists”, starts by stating the relationship of conscious communists to the rest of the working class, declaring that they will not form a separate party that opposes other working-class parties, will express the interests and general will of the proletariat as a whole, and will distinguish themselves from other working-class parties by always expressing the common interest of the entire proletariat independently of allnationalities and representing the interests of the movement as a whole.
The section goes on to defend communism from various objections, such as the claim that communists advocate “free love“, and the claim that people will not perform labor in a communist society because they have no incentive to work.The section ends by outlining a set of short-term demands:
The implementation of these policies would, as believed by Marx and Engels, be a precursor to the stateless and classless society. In a controversial passage they suggested that the “proletariat” might in competition with the bourgeoisie be compelled to organize as a class, form a revolution, make itself a ruling class, sweep away the old conditions of production, and in that step have abolished its own supremacy as a class. This account of the transition from socialism to communism was criticized particularly during and after the Soviet era.
My name is Nelson Abdullah and I am Old Ironsides.