[ETL]

Barack Obama, from Dreams from My Father, Three Rivers Press, New York, Revised Edition, 2004, ISBN 1-4000-8277-3, p. 76-7:
"But by the time I met Frank [Frank Marshall Davis] he must have been pushing eighty, with a big, dewlapped face and an ill-kempt gray Afro that made him look like an old, shaggy-maned lion. He would read us his poetry whenever we stopped by his house, sharing whiskey with Gramps out of an emptied jelly jar."

___________________________________________________________

From Accuracy In Media | AIM.ORG

Obama’s Red Mentor Praised Red Army
AIM Report | By Cliff Kincaid | April 30, 2008

Frank Marshall Davis

Barack Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Moscow-controlled Communist Party USA (CPUSA), wrote a poem dedicated to the Soviet Red Army. “Smash on, victory-eating Red Army,” he declared. He also wrote poems attacking traditional Christianity and the work of Christian missionaries.

The “Red Army” poem goes beyond hoping for the communists to beat the Nazis in World War II and hails the Soviet revolution. It says:

Show the marveling multitudes
Americans, British, all your allied brothers
How strong you are
How great you are
How your young tree of new unity
Planted twenty-five years ago
Bears today the golden fruit of victory!

http://www.aim.org/aim-report/obamas-red-mentor-praised-red-army/

[ETL]

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

February 29, 2008 :: News
MissileThreat.com

A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.

The full text from the video, as released, reads as follows:

Thanks so much for the Caucus4Priorities, for the great work you've been doing. As president, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.

First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.[i.e. not win it]

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.

I will not weaponize space.

I will slow our development of future combat systems.

And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

You know where I stand. I've fought for open, ethical and accountable government my entire public life. I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept. I don't posture on defense policy and I don't take money from federal lobbyists for powerful defense contractors. As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.

Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:
http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp

"MissileThreat.com is a project of The Claremont Institute devoted to understanding and promoting the requirements for the strategic defense of the United States."

[WaterBoard]

How can the US press still ignore the fact that Obama refuses to release his college transcripts/grades?

We have all of the president’s grades from Clinton through Bush even presidential candidates grades like Sen. Kerry and Algore.

Even for historic reasons, this is a missing link for the future Obama presidential library.

1) We know nothing about Obama’s previous life other than what he wrote about in two autobiographies.

2) We know of none of Obama’s college friends.

3) We know of none of Obama’s former girlfriends.

4) We know nothing about Obama’s foreign travel except for a reference to a trip to Pakistan when it was prohibited for US citizens to travel there.

5) We know nothing about Obama’s Selective Service registration when the press spent thousands of hours on Bush’s National Guard service.

The silence is deafening by the press and it is very telling that there is some skeletons in that Obama closet.

[Carley]

I suspect like other globalists, Madame Halfbright included, that he was against the US being the only super power as we weren’t to be trusted. They wanted the Soviets, now Russia, to have the bomb to balance our power.

[ETL]

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
_____________________________________________________________

[2009] Russia, China plan new joint military exercises

By MARTIN SIEFF, UPI Senior News Analyst
Published: March 26, 2009

WASHINGTON, March 26 (UPI) -- The continuing tensions over Russia's refusal to sell its state-of-the-art land warfare advanced weapons systems to China hasn't interrupted the rhythm of major joint military exercises between the two major land powers on the Eurasian landmass. The latest in the regular, biennial series of exercises between the two nations has been confirmed for this summer.

The next in the now well-established series of exercises called Peace Mission 2009 will be carried out in northeastern China, the Russian Defense Ministry announced March 18, according to a report carried by the RIA Novosti news agency.

The first bilateral Peace Mission maneuvers -- described at the time as counter-terrorism exercises -- were held in Russia and the eastern Chinese province of Shandong in August 2005. As we reported at that time, they were a lot bigger than mere counter-terrorism exercises. Warships, squadrons of combat aircraft and more than 10,000 troops were involved carrying out landings against hypothetically hostile shores. The maneuvers also involved large-scale paratroops drops. The scale and nature of those exercises suggested a trial run for a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan with Russian support. ..."

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industry/2009/03/26/Russia_China_plan_new_joint_military_exercises/UPI-25021238094858/
_____________________________________________________________

Russia, China flex muscles in joint war games
Reuters: Aug 17, 2007

CHEBARKUL, Russia (Reuters) - Russia and China staged their biggest joint exercises on Friday but denied this show of military prowess could lead to the formation of a counterweight to NATO.

"Today's exercises are another step towards strengthening the relations between our countries, a step towards strengthening international peace and security, and first and foremost, the security of our peoples," Putin said.

Fighter jets swooped overhead, commandos jumped from helicopters on to rooftops and the boom of artillery shells shook the firing range in Russia's Ural mountains as two of the largest armies in the world were put through their paces.

The exercises take place against a backdrop of mounting rivalry between the West, and Russia and China for influence over Central Asia, a strategic region that has huge oil, gas and mineral resources.

Russia's growing assertiveness is also causing jitters in the West. Putin announced at the firing range that Russia was resuming Soviet-era sorties by its strategic bomber aircraft near NATO airspace.
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29030120070817?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
_____________________________________________________________

War Games: Russia, China Grow Alliance
September 23, 2005

In foreign policy it’s critical to “know thine enemy.” So American policymakers should be aware that Russia and China are inching closer to identifying a common enemy — the United States.

The two would-be superpowers held unprecedented joint military exercises Aug. 18-25. Soothingly named “Peace Mission 2005,” the drills took place on the Shandong peninsula on the Yellow Sea, and included nearly 10,000 troops. Russian long-range bombers, the army, navy, air force, marine, airborne and logistics units from both countries were also involved.

Moscow and Beijing claim the maneuvers were aimed at combating terrorism, extremism and separatism (the last a veiled reference to Taiwan), but it’s clear they were an attempt to counter-balance American military might.

Joint war games are a logical outcome of the Sino-Russian Friendship and Cooperation Treaty signed in 2001, and reflect the shared worldview and growing economic ties between the two Eastern Hemisphere giants. As the Pravda.ru Web site announced, “the reconciliation between China and Russia has been driven in part by mutual unease at U.S. power and a fear of Islamic extremism in Central Asia.”
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed092605a.cfm

[DocH]

'He doesn’t remember the names of a lot of people in his life,' said Ben LaBolt, a campaign spokesman."

That's because it is all about HIM.

He could care less about anyone else.

Not his mother, father, grandmother.

Not his poor African relatives.

Not any worthwhile charities.

He CERTAINLY does not care about America and its people.

He doesn't REALLY care about ANYONE but himself.

He is an arrogant, self-centered, Narcissistic egotist who is power hungry and is willing to step on, and FORGET, anyone who can help him in the short-term, OR...

ANYONE that gets in his way or criticizes him.

He NEEDS to fall on his sword, or somehow prevented from destroying our country.

[Houghton M.]

This is a wild goose chase. Invest your time more prudently. The last time this came up, it became clear that he did not write an undergrad thesis because Columbia did not require one. He apparently wrote a term paper on this topic, but term papers are turned in only to the teacher of the class for which they are written and that professor didn’t keep a copy. So, unless Obama kept a copy himself, it’s probably impossible to locate. And even if located, it’s a damn term paper, not a BA thesis.

Universities don’t keep official copies of term papers.

I don’t doubt for a moment that he hung around with radicals during the period of his life. But you’re not going to shed any light on it via this phantom undergrad thesis.

So give it up already.

[Freedom Dignity n Honor]

bttt

[a fool in paradise]

"written at the height of The Cold War in 1983"

Apart from The Soviet Union almost launching a Mutally Assured Destruction missile launch at the US, I wouldn't say things were at the HEIGHT.

That is unless you hold to the Left's position that Ronald Reagan was a reckless cowboy who antagonized the Communists and almost brought on WWIII (truth of the matter is that the Cold War WAS WWIII). The Left believed that we could not and SHOULD NOT defeat the Communist Soviet Union. We should learn to accept Communism as a rational and legitimate political system (like Nazism?).

[Republic]

. During her decade-long tenure at Riverside, which became home to the National Council of Churches, Weiss regularly received Russian KGB agents, Sandinista friends, and Cuban intelligence agents. Weiss became infamous for her role in the psychological warfare conducted against U.S. prisoners of war held in the infamous "Hanoi Hilton" during the Vietnam War.

Wonder if the national council of churches is still located here...it was instrumental in forcing Elian back to Cuba during the clinton reign of terror and my church at the time, United Methodist, was a big contributor (member) of this sick council. I left the Methodist Church because of this affiliation.

[The Californian]

bttt

[Homer1]

Reagan used to be a Democrat. Nobody’s going to hold BHO accountable for something he wrote when he was 22

[ETL]

Obama to Seek Arms Control Treaty With Russia
NYT ^ | 3/31/09 | PETER BAKER and HELENE COOPER

Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:14:49 PM EDT by Nachum
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2219506/posts

[ETL]

New York Times...

U.S. and Russia to Consider Reductions of Nuclear Arsenals in Talks for New Treaty
By PETER BAKER and HELENE COOPER
April 1, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Obama plans to open negotiations on Wednesday to draft a new arms control treaty that could slash the American and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals by about a third and possibly lead to even deeper reductions, according to administration officials.

As Mr. Obama arrived in London on Tuesday for his first European trip as president, American and Russian officials have privately indicated that they could agree to reducing their stockpiles perhaps to about 1,500 warheads apiece, down from the 2,200 allowed under a treaty signed by President George W. Bush.

The two sides plan to draft the treaty quickly so it can be signed in time to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or Start, which expires in December after 15 years as the broadest legal foundation of Russian-American nuclear policy. Washington and Moscow hope quick success replacing a pact negotiated in the waning days of the cold war will help revive a strained relationship and set the stage for further arms cuts.

“Just setting a new limit would send a signal to the international community in general that the United States was getting serious about its disarmament commitments again,” said Peter Crail, an analyst at the Arms Control Association, a Washington advocacy organization.

Mr. Obama is to meet President Dmitri A. Medvedev for the first time on Wednesday in London on the sidelines of the Group of 20 economic summit meeting, and they plan to announce the beginning of the talks to replace Start. Obama administration officials also said they expected the two to advance cooperation on other thorny issues, including Afghanistan and Iran.

Mr. Medvedev, in an Op-Ed article published Tuesday in The Washington Post, said he was already seeing better relations since Mr. Obama’s inauguration.

“Neither Russia nor the United States can tolerate drift and indifference in our relations,” Mr. Medvedev wrote. He placed blame for the rift on Mr. Bush’s efforts to build a missile defense system and enlarge NATO in Moscow’s former sphere of influence, making no mention of Russia’s war with Georgia last year.

“Possible areas of cooperation abound,” Mr. Medvedev said. “For instance, I agree with President Obama that resuming the disarmament process should become our immediate priority. The wish to ensure absolute security in a unilateral way is a dangerous illusion. I am encouraged that our new partners in Washington realize this.”

American and Russian officials decided to tackle arms control in part because it seemed the least contentious of their issues. The Russians like talking about arms control because it is one area where they remain relatively on a par with the United States. Mr. Bush scorned arms control as the basis of relations, seeing it as anachronistic, and the treaty he signed was so general it came to fewer than 500 words.

Mr. Obama, by contrast, promised during the campaign to restart traditional arms control talks and take “steps down the long road toward eliminating nuclear weapons.”

“The Obama administration and the president see arms control as an important tool to advance American security,” said Steven Pifer, a former deputy assistant secretary of state under Mr. Bush. “That’s a big philosophical difference.”

Mr. Pifer, now at the Brookings Institution, said Mr. Obama’s initiative could finally bury the cold-war nuclear legacy. “It’s cleaning up some unfinished business that’s been put on hold for the last seven years,” he said.

Of course, opening meetings between American and Russian leaders often begin with hope, only to deteriorate later. In June 2001, when Mr. Bush first met with Vladimir V. Putin, then Russia’s president and now its prime minister, Mr. Bush famously said that “I looked the man in the eye” and “I was able to get a sense of his soul.”

But their cordial relationship degenerated into crisis by last year’s war in Georgia.

The treaty that expires on Dec. 5, Start I, was signed in 1991 before the collapse of the Soviet Union and went into effect in 1994, requiring both sides to reduce their arsenals to 6,000 warheads. Start II was never fully ratified, and a framework for a Start III never went anywhere.

The Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, signed by Mr. Bush in 2002, cut arsenals to the range of 1,700 to 2,200 by 2012, relying on the verification program set up by Start. But it allowed warheads to be stored rather than destroyed, and, unlike Start, it imposed no restrictions on delivery vehicles, like intercontinental ballistic missiles, heavy bombers or nuclear-armed submarines.

The process Mr. Obama and Mr. Medvedev begin Wednesday will essentially be a two-stage effort. Because Start I expires soon and Washington’s latest nuclear policy review is still under way, the first stage will focus on getting a replacement to preserve the inspection and verification system established under Start I, combined with a reduction to perhaps 1,500 warheads.

Then next year, the two sides envision a more ambitious agreement that could reduce warheads further, even to 1,000, as well as limit delivery vehicles and possibly tactical nuclear weapons. Start limited each side to 1,600 delivery vehicles but both have already cut below that. Mr. Pifer said a new treaty could bring each down to 600 or 700.

As they focus first on the Start replacement, the two sides appear relatively close on the overall ceiling, but they face other tough issues, most significantly the counting rules. American officials have signaled flexibility but insist that adopting rules that Moscow wants will require more transparency and intrusive inspections, according to people briefed on the unofficial, preliminary discussions.

Another potential complication is the planned American missile defense system in Eastern Europe to defend against a possible Iranian threat. Russian representatives told the Americans that with a 1,500-warhead ceiling, there might be no need to settle the missile defense issue to reach an initial treaty deal. If they want to go lower, to 1,200 or 1,000 warheads, then, the Russians said, they would insist on constraints on missile defense.

The Americans want to avoid having missile defense thrown into the mix, warning that it would make it hard to get a treaty done in time. At a confirmation hearing last Thursday, Rose Gottemoeller, nominated to serve as the assistant secretary of state for verification and compliance and the chief negotiator for the treaty, testified that she wanted to avoid extra issues.

“In my view, we will keep the agenda tight,” she said. “We will keep it focused.”

Senator Richard G. Lugar, an Indiana Republican, said the treaty would have to be signed by August for the Senate to ratify it by Dec. 5. If it cannot be done by then, the Obama administration has talked about possibly signing the pact before the deadline and extending Start until the replacement can be ratified.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/washington/01arms.html?_r=2&ref=world&pagewanted=print

[ETL]

From "45 Communist Goals":
Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963:

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

[GOPJ]

It's too bad the prima donnas of the New York Times were too busy impressing themselves and each other with their "oh so witty" writing to bother to look into something like this...

The NYT's is such a disappointment.

And Charlie Gibson of ABC News - this includes you and your "looking down your nose" and Sarah stuff. Get your head out of your butt and look for something you haven't already "found" a hundred times before...

[GOPJ]

By Jim Popkin, NBC News Senior Investigative Producer

Sorry about my reply above slamming the MSM - obviously ONE person in the MSM isn't drinking liberal group-think kool aid... Hats off to Jim Popkin.

[GOPJ]

I guess the boys at the New York Times aren’t covering any of this because it might be a “game changer” ...