Monthly Archives: May 2013

The Trayvon Martin Case; Update 29: The Self-Destroying Narrative

Stately McDaniel Manor

With a motions hearing set for May 28 and trial still set for June 10, last minute motions are flying in all directions.  As I’ve previously noted, unlike in most cases, the content of motions in this case is revealing not only of fact, but strategy.  As I’ve also noted, everything is backwards.  The defense is doing its best to present the evidence and the facts, relying in large part on the investigation conducted by the police.  This is particularly important if George Zimmerman is to be kept from testifying, which Mark O’Mara and Don West would almost certainly see as desirable.  There are so many problems with the state’s case, that’s the smart play.  Let it self-destruct; when your adversary is destroying himself, don’t interrupt him.

On the other hand, the prosecution is desperate to keep any information relating to Trayvon Martin’s activities and habits off the record, including…

View original post 5,043 more words

The White House Strategy – blame Petreus

Finally, we know why the gang of journolisters were invited to the White House recently. The meeting must have been to provide the talking points that are going to give the White House a get out of jail card free, but in fact will cause the White House Administration to dig deeper into the mire. Why else would writers at the Washington Post write such rubbish as the attempt to blame Petreus for what is of their own making? Perhaps we should see this as a preemptive strike, because that is the way that I am seeing this at the present time (in other words, I will change my opinion when more information becomes available).

The issue is not who told the troops to stand down, but once again the issue here is the talking points used by the idiotic and useless Susan Rice who went on television with false talking points. Susan Rice contradicted the Libyan President Mogahreif who subsequently lost face in Libya as well as perceptively elsewhere (on the other hand, I always believed the Libyan President because he is not a fool). The contradiction was a very big deal but the White House Administration has failed to understand why this is such an issue.

First of all, it must be pointed out that when David Petreus first testified before Congress (I am not sure if he was under oath) he went with the White House line about the video. After that testimony or around the same time he resigned as head of the CIA. This is the point that we learned that David Petreus and Paula Broadwell had an affair. That information was probably being kept for a rainy day and my opinion is that when David Petreus refused to continue to play ball, Obama told him that he would be outed over the affair, leading to the resignation and David Petreus being the one who gave the information. (I think that this is very much a smoking gun).

However, let’s get back to what happened in Benghazi and what the CIA knew. From the beginning the CIA chain of command knew that this was an attack by AQ and affiilate Ansar al-Sharia. (my view is that AQ people were responsible for the plot and they dragged in members of Ansar al Sharia who are always wanting to find ways of enslaving people). The CIA had informed Mogahrief that it was an Al-Qaeda attack, just as they informed Washington.

I have my own theories about time lines etc. and I have a suspicion that Obama lied about stating that he told them to do everything possible. At some point there was a discussion with his security staff including Tom Donilan. He also had a conversation with Nethanyu on the phone as the attack was raging. I find this weird that he even went ahead with that phone call (but that is just my opinion). Then it seems there was a period of time that Obama was missing altogether. It seems to me that he showed no interest in the attack or in doing anything to help those who were under attack.

We do know for certain that there had been a protest in Egypt perhaps relating to a 3rd rate documentary, but perhaps the people demonstrating had another motive. If it was the other motive, then that could have been a set up that was supposed to lead to the release of the Blind Sheik, except that the US consulate in Benghazi came under attack. The 3rd rate documentary became the scapegoat for the attack, but there has never been any firm evidence that this documentary did in fact influence what took place. I will add here that it certainly was the cause for the attack upon the US embassy in Tunisia.

Someone other than Victoria Nuland was not happy with the CIA talking points, but it was Victoria Nuland who wanted them changed. The memo signed off by David Petreus had differed significantly from the meme coming from Susan Rice and the White House. Who above Victoria Nuland had been making a fuss about those talking points? Well I point the finger at Hillary Clinton and Patrick Kennedy. Who is above Hillary Clinton? Barack Obama.

I get the impression that the closed doors testimony by David Petreus (the later testimony) was a lot more detailed and that he gave information that pointed the finger at the White House. Otherwise the attack on David Petreus that is coming from writers at the Washington Post would not be happening.

No matter how I look at this issue, I keep coming back to White House Administration staff, and even the Oval Office. No one other than the President could have ordered the stand down of those who were wanting to rescue the emabassy staff. There are many unanswered questions and all that is happening so far is the run around.

The Australian illegal immigration problem

Australia is an island nation/continent and by rights that should make illegal immigration difficult. However that has not been the case. The first of the illegal immigrants began arriving in Australia during the 1970s. These were the Vietnamese refugees. They were followed by Chinese, and then came the Iranians, Iraqi, Pakistanis, Sri Lankans etc. Whilst the Vietnamese and the Chinese who were allowed to stay managed to integrate into the Australian way of life, the same cannot be said about this other Middle Eastern group.

Australia has reached crisis point with boats arriving in Australian waters almost every day. They are arriving by the thousands every month. During the Howard Government years we got this issue under control, but when KRUDD became Prime Minister he walked back what was in place and from 2007 onwards Australia has been inundated by some very unsavoury types.

These are not refugees because they are not fleeing from war torn countries with the exception of Afghanistan. There is no war in Iran or Pakistan and even in Sri Lanka there is not even a civil war, yet these Tamils keep getting on a boat and give a bullshit story to authorities who are all too willing to grant them a bridging visa. Most of them are thugs, criminals and the like. Very few of them are in any way affected by war. I note that they have one thing in common and that includes forcing the women to wear bags over their heads.

This morning I saw this report which has prompted me to write this post. I will not bother detailing the report but will take some points from it to emphasize what is totally wrong with the way in which this problem of illegal immigrants is being handled by the current Australian government.

1. the smuggling industry is worth up to $400 million (I assume that is per year).

2. Of the 71 illegal immigrants who had their visas revoked, 10 of them have been arrested and charged with criminal offences (including one who entered the apartment of a female university student and attempted to rape her – this happened at McQuarrie University in North Ryde. Eight of these illegal immigrants were found to be a threat to security by ASIO (what were they planning?).  A further 12 absconded (meaning they continue to be a threat to our society).

3. The people smuggler debt collectors have turned up in Nauru pushing for payment of money owed to the smugglers. The price of being smuggled is $3,000 – $10,000 per individual and up to $20,000 per family.  Do your own calculations for the 42,000 who have arrived in Australia since the ALP was elected to government. This figure is staggering enough.

4. More than 1,000 people have died at sea. Do not feel sorry for them because they often deliberately sink their own boats.

5. Worst of all is that the Australian government has been rewarding bad behaviour. It seems they are saying, if you riot we will grant you protection.

These people are thugs, criminals and unsavoury characters. They need to be removed from Australia and sent back to their country of origin.

I add here that perhaps the most genuine of the “refugees” are the ones who have actually applied for entry into Australia and have been denied entry. This has happened to some of the people in Indonesia (a group of women). It seems that the government will not grant them legal entry and that forces them to try other ways to enter into the country.

The Australian government has the power to stop this bullshit and they have the power to ensure that the people smugglers are not being rewarded for their enterprise. A starting point would be to have government officials interview the “immigrants” whilst they are staying in Indonesia, and whilst they still have their official papers, and from there they could agree to grant entry into Australia based upon the information that they have acquired…. if any of them are eligible. Personally, I would rather see the Australian government allowing the Christians among them entry into Australia… but a word of warning, and that is not all Christians from Middle Eastern countries are as pure as the driven snow. I refer of course to the Druse who support Assad as an example of people who would not make good Australian citizens.

Et Tu NYT?

Instapundit has up a post that I find interesting, amusing and chilling all at the same time. It turns out that the New York Times is not above the rest of the media outlets when it comes to the DoJ doing secret investigations. New York Times reporter David Sanger was investigated over his report relating to the Stuxnet virus.

David Sanger reported on what we had already guessed that the US had helped to develop the Stuxnet virus and used it to attack Iran where it hurt the most (their uranium centrifuges).

The difference in how the DoJ went about this investigation, is that they did not seek to seize the reporter’s emails and other records, but they did it at the government end, seeking any communications between government employees and the reporters.

This particular leak is probably more important than the other alleged leaks. The material relating to North Korea for example in my mind was the least dangerous because it was the kind of stuff any one could have second-guessed where North Korean leadership is concerned.  However, I see this stuxnet virus leak in a different light. It was far more damaging. On the other hand, we already knew about the existence of the virus from other sources that were reporting on it, and most of us had guessed that either Israel or the USA were responsible for its development.

The issue is, however, that the DoJ is doing everything possible to chill our right to free speech, including our right to know what is going on behind the scenes.

Some background history worth reading

This article by Kimberley Strassel is worth reading because it highlights what I consider to be extreme behaviour that came from the Obama campaign specifically Bob Bauer.

The article also gives a timeline to the targeting of Conservatives and it explains in detail the efforts of thugs.

If anyone thinks that the IRS scandal does not reach the White House, then that person/s are extremely naive.

Is late-term abortion necessary?

I am a mother, and I have three sons. Each pregnancy had similarities such as I was nauseous the whole way, right up until the day that they were born, as well as other more icky things that happened. I continue to laugh over some of those things because they are the things that stuck in my mind due to certain circumstances. Needless to say my best line has always been “not everyone takes a train to go and give birth”!!

Even though there were similarities, there were differences and it was my first pregnancy that was probably the most risky for me because I ended up with high blood pressure and probably on the verge of pre-eclampsia towards the end of the pregnancy. My son was born on or around his due date. Despite the high blood pressure issue I was not placed in the hospital but was told to rest. I will not bore you with the details of his birth, besides they had me sedated most of the time.

As you are aware my son’s partner gave birth to a little girl at the end of April. She was born at 38 weeks gestation following a caesarean operation. Claire Elizabeth was a sumo wrestler and her birth weight was more than 11 lbs. However, what I did not tell you was the rest of the story and the fretting that was going on because Ilana went into pre-eclampsia. This drama started during the period that we were in Melbourne. Ilana had a false alarm and she went to hospital. She was sent home again because things settled down. After that, Ilana went into pre-eclampsia mode with a very high blood pressure reading. We were informed that the doctors were preparing to do the caesarean because of her high blood pressure, but that was called off when she reached the labour ward because her blood pressure and other signs had settled down. Ilana has diabetes 1.  We then experienced anxiety for several more weeks because the doctors were not ready to do the caesarean because the vital signs had settled down.

I am giving you this history because I think that it highlights one of the reasons that are falsely given about late-term abortion, and that is that the pregnancy is dangerous for the mother. As you can see from the above Ilana was in that category of risk. The plan had been a caesarean that was to be done when the baby was due to be born if she did not come any earlier.  On top of that I gave you some of my history. I should mention that as a result of my own high blood pressure I had to do a 24 hour urine specimen (oh happy days) and it seems that everything remained fine.

Hot Air has an item about the testimony of an ex-abortionist who describes what takes place in a mid-term abortion. It is totally gruesome reading and I despair for the babies whose lives were lost in that way. I cannot see justification for the procedure at all.

It seems to me that when a woman is pre-eclampsia the doctors should be working to settle the mother down, rather than jumping in and performing an abortion. The alternative is of course to perform a caesarean rather than the procedure that tears the baby limb from limb per the description that has been given by the doctor who is an ex-abortionist.

As a mother I totally abhor the practice of both mid-term and late-term abortion. These abortions are totally unnecessary and they are so brutal that the practice needs to be firmly condemned and outlawed. It is far better to bring on the birth and if the premature infant dies because it does not have the ability to survive then so be it, but abortion that is performed in the manner described should be outlawed.

The wheels of the bus are turning for Holder?

It is not news that Eric Holder has been lying because we already know that he lied about Fast and Furious and that he has been stonewalling on that matter as well as other matters.  What is news is that this time Eric Holder has been caught out in the lie with a subordinate stating what we already knew:

Eric Holder signed off on the James Rosen search warrant request.

This time the Congress knows for sure that Holder was lying and what is worse is that he lied under OATH. This time it is PERJURY.

The wheels of the bus go round and round, and they are coming for Eric Holder.

The Org chart tells the story

From Breitbart News comes a copy of the IRS organization chart. At the top of the tree is Sarah Hall Ingram and her Deputy Commissioner Joseph Grant. Underneath those two is Lois Lerner, and underneath Lois Lerner is Cindy Thomas, the woman who signed off on giving private information to ProPublica.

There is not much that can be added, because eventually one has to go to the White House as well as Congress to find those who are culpable over this affair.

What did Shulman know?

It looks like a finger needs to be pointed directly at Shulman over the IRS scandal. Hot Air has a very good article on the subject of how this man handled questions in front of Congress this week.

Some interesting facts about Mr. Shulman need to be considered here: this is a man who had a lot of briefings with Obama in the White House during his tenure in the IRS job. If this is true, then it is highly likely that the targeting and how it would be done was discussed during those meetings.

Shulman denies that there was anything wrong in what happened, and this is of course different to the tack that was taken by Lois Lerner as well as Miller. It seems odd that Obama announced that Miller had been fired, even though Miller was only in the post on a temporary basis. I am convinced that Miller knew more than he was willing to admit, and likewise I am convinced that Lois Lerner is covering up the truth. However, Shulman is a different kettle of fish because he lied to Congress in the past when he claimed that the targeting of conservative groups was happening.  At least Lerner sort of came clean about what took place…. and “sort of” is the operative phrase here.

There needs to be a Special Prosecutor. This should not be handled by the DoJ. As it is the IG has not been entirely honest about the report and its contents. In fact the IG was remiss because he did not keep Congress informed about the investigation, and he failed to inform Congress last September of his findings. The report had been under wraps since September 2012, which is more or less hinting that the failure to release the findings was politically motivated as well.


I just listened to Trey Gowdy’s questioning of Shulman. Wow, Gowdy is great!!  He was hard nosed with his questions, and Shulman proceeded to dodge the questions with his incoherent answers. He was not deviating in his attempts to shift blame away from himself.  Shulman knew about the practice, and Shulman did nothing about what was happening. He refused to answer the question “what did you do to ensure that it was stopped” and Shulman did not give a straight answer AT ALL.

If it is true that Shulman was in constant contact with Obama then there is no doubt in my mind that this whole thing was being directed by Obama behind the scenes but in a way that would ensure that the underlings take a hit.

This would mean that Lois Lerner was taking a hit for the team. Also she knew about it, despite what she claims because her name appears on more than a dozen letters that have been produced with the request for more information.

The targeting came as a directive from top down. This scandal has legs, and it is getting worse by the day.

At the same time we need to keep any eye on Benghazi and if that drops off the radar then we need to ensure that it remains on the radar until the truth comes out.

Who is Jane Madison?


Please watch and listen. Chalk it up as another fail for the great leader who is supposed to be so intelligent yet he thinks that the USA has 57 States and that Jane Madison wrote all those things about the Constitution etc.