Updated Day Of Infamy White House Address

[From article]
I would caution others not to rush to any judgment. We should not jump to any conclusions about this alleged criminal act. Above all, I want to be perfectly clear that it is important that we not demonize these folks – that’s just not who we are!
[. . .]
We must never jump to conclusions. As we are a nation of laws, it is important that we wait patiently for Justice Department lawyers to decide what happened on December 7.
[. . .]
I have sent a shout-out to the Sheriff’s Department of Oahu County, as well as the chief of the Hawaiian Fishing and Game Commission, to investigate these alleged crimes and for their teams to have their reports on my desk in time for the next late Friday afternoon news dump.
[. . .]
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger as long as we misunderstand others and fail to address legitimate grievances.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/12/fdrs_pearl_harbor_infamy_speech_as_obama_would_deliver_it_today.html

December 7, 2015
FDR's Pearl Harbor Infamy speech, as Obama would deliver it today
By Jim Little

White House Repeats History Obstructing Speech By Netanyahu

[From article]
The idea of Jews marching on the capitol made many nervous. Some Jewish Congressmen "did all they could to dissuade the Rabbis from making their bearded appearances in Washington" and some Jewish leaders worked feverishly against the march.
Yet the rabbis marched through Washington D.C. to the gates of the White House, where they had expected a small delegation would be granted a meeting with President Roosevelt. The president was unavailable even thought his schedule that day was open. His calendar listed nothing between a 1:00 lunch with the Secretary of State and a 4:00 ceremony.
Why did the president sneak out the back door of the White House rather than hear the rabbis' urgent request? The rabbis’ pleas conflicted with his policy towards European Jewry. President Roosevelt had been almost silent about the s laughter of Jews in Europe.
[. . .]
From that date in 1943 until the end of the war, 182 of my family members were murdered by the Nazis.
[. . .]
The Israeli prime minister is sounding the alarm about a nuclear Iran, which would transform the Middle East and the world.
Once again, it is a message that some may not want to hear because it conflicts with a goal of making a deal, any deal, with Iran. As those rabbis were reprimanded, Netanyahu is being chided for not following protocol or diplomatic niceties,

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/two_pleas_two_dates_two_refusals.html

February 20, 2015
Two Pleas, Two Dates, Two Refusals
By Peggy Shapiro

Recognizing USSR as Ally, Opened Door to Infiltration Which Continues Today

[From article]
FDR normalized relations with the Red monster-regime early in his first term. In exchange, the U.S. received Soviet pledges, including that the USSR would not support organizations or groups aimed at the overthrow of "the political or social order of the United States." In other words, the Soviet Union pledged not to wage a secret intelligence war against us.
But such a war was already underway. Post-recognition, this Soviet war on America, spearheaded by traitors directed by Moscow, would intensify. A veritable army of Stalin's secret agents, agents of influence, fellow travelers and dupes entered the U.S. government and related institutions. They would fight an unceasing stealth war against this country, even -- I should say, especially -- during World War II. Much to the executive branch's consternation, the House and Senate would do much to expose this stealth Soviet war in the House Un-American Activities Committee and other committees.
[. . .]
In other words, ignoring, or even tolerating, the millions of people Stalin killed became a prerequisite to recognition -- the "unprincipled deal with totalitarianism," as Solzhenitsyn would call it in 1975. "In 1933 and 1941 your leaders and the whole Western world made an unprincipled deal with totalitarianism. We will have to pay for this; someday it will come back to haunt us. For thirty years we have been paying for it," the sage and courageous author of "The Gulag Archipelago" said. "And we're going to pay for it in an even worse way in the future."
It's time we try to understand what he meant.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1113/west111513.php3#.UoabLt00jDp

Jewish World Review
Nov. 15, 2013/ 12 Kislev, 5774
A day that should live in infamy
By Diana West

Socialists and The Marches On Washington

[From article]
Of the many reasons why socialism never became a major political tendency in the United States, as it did in Europe, is that working people—more precisely, white working men—gained the franchise here during the Jacksonian era, well before socialism had developed into a mass movement in Europe or America or anyplace else. In Europe, by contrast, it was chiefly the agitation of socialist parties in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that led to the creation of universal manhood, and in some places womanhood, suffrage. Socialists brought ordinary Europeans the vote, which powerfully legitimated socialism for tens of millions of Europeans.
No equivalent legitimation happened in America. While there had been socialist movements and sects throughout the 19th century, the American Socialist Party wasn’t founded until 1901.
http://prospect.org/article/socialists-who-made-march-washington

The Socialists Who Made the March on Washington
HAROLD MEYERSON
AUGUST 23, 2013

Democrats No Friends Of Jews, Book Review

[From Book Review]
 no president ever found himself positioned, at a key juncture in
history, to do more on behalf of the Jewish people—and did less. This,
too, is well known to those who’ve cared to look, historians and
presidential confidantes alike. Indeed, FDR’s betrayal of the
Jews—there is no other word for it—is even the basis of a superb
novel, City Journal contributing editor Stefan Kanfer’s Fear Itself.
[. . .]
Hoover bravely took up the cause of Europe’s Jews.
[. . .]
along with such other leading Republicans as Wendell Willkie and Clare
Boothe Luce, [Hoover] embraced the cause of Jewish statehood,
resulting in a pro-Zionist plank in the 1944 Republican platform.
[. . .]
in 1944, 90 percent of Jewish voters went for FDR.
[. . .]
Harry S. Truman was also strongly anti-Semitic, and in fact expressed
himself on Jews in even coarser terms than his predecessor. He
referred to New York as “kike town,” for instance, and reacted to
pressure from American Jews as he wrestled with whether to recognize
the soon-to-be-born Jewish state by snapping: “Jesus Christ couldn’t
please them when he was here on earth, so how could anyone expect me
to have any luck?”

http://www.city-journal.org/2012/bc1023hs.html

HARRY STEIN
The Democrats’ Jewish Problem
A new book revisits an uncomfortable—and ongoing—history.
23 October 2012
Herbert Hoover and the Jews: The Origins of the “Jewish Vote” and
Bipartisan Support for Israel, by Sonja Schoepf Wentling and Rafael
Medoff (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 238 pp., $15)

Takes One To Know One

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will081112.php3

Jewish World Review
Aug 11, 2012/ 23 Menachem-Av, 5772
Obama in context
By George Will

Ed Koch: War On Jews Continues

Ed Koch Commentary
March 21, 2011

The War Against the Jews Goes On

The latest Palestinian violence against Israelis, and the continuing abandonment of Israel by most of the international community, inevitably bring to mind the abandonment of the Jews during the Holocaust. Just this past week, a document emerged which raises disturbing new questions about President Franklin Roosevelt’s response to the Nazi mass murder of Europe’s Jews.

The document was brought to my attention by Dr. Rafael Medoff, a Holocaust scholar and director of The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, in Washington, DC. Several years ago, Dr. Medoff collaborated with me on my book “The Koch Papers: My Fight Against Anti-Semitism.” It was based on my writings and speeches about the Holocaust and anti-Semitism, during the course of my nine years in Congress and twelve as mayor of New York City.

The document which Dr. Medoff sent me last week, concerning FDR and the Holocaust, was frankly shocking. It had to do with the Allies’ occupation of North Africa, which they liberated from the Nazis in November 1942. At the time, President Roosevelt publicly pledged the Allies would do away with the anti-Jewish laws that had been in force in the region. But when FDR met in Casablanca with local government leaders in January 1943, he took a very different line. The transcript of those discussions, which Dr. Medoff cites, reveals what FDR said about the status of the 330,000 Jews living in Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia: “The number of Jews engaged in the practice of the professions (law, medicine, etc) should be definitely limited to the percentage that the Jewish population in North Africa bears to the whole of the North African population...The President stated that his plan would further eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore toward the Jews in Germany, namely, that while they represented a small part of the population, over fifty percent of the lawyers, doctors, school teachers, college professors, etc., in Germany, were Jews.”

Hard to believe a president would say such a thing? Maybe, but the source is unimpeachable: the transcript appears in Foreign Relations of the United States, a multivolume series of historical documents published by the U.S. government itself. The Casablanca volume was published in 1968, but did not attract much notice at the time. Dr. Medoff has done a public service by bringing it to our attention again.

Fortunately, U.S. policy in occupied North Africa in the end did not follow FDR’s line. When it became clear that the administration was stalling on getting rid of the old anti-Jewish laws, American Jewish leaders loudly protested. (If only they had been so vocal throughout the Holocaust years!) One of the most memorable critiques came from Benzion Netanyahu --father of Israel’s current prime minister-- who in those days headed up the American wing of the Revisionist Zionist movement: “The spirit of the Swastika hovers over the Stars and Stripes,” he wrote. The protests eventually forced the White House to back down. North African Jews were gradually released from forced-labor camps and the anti-Jewish quotas and other laws were rescinded.

The American Jewish community reveres the memory of FDR. He will always be remembered and rightly so for leading us through the Great Depression and is responsible for this country not ending up in the column of fascist nations, as did Germany and Italy.

We had 25 percent unemployment in a nation of 132 million. We had Father Coughlin and Charles Lindbergh beating the drums of fascism and support of Adolf Hitler and his ideas, particularly those blaming the Jews of the world for the ills of the world. We had the German-American Bund led by Fritz Kuhn in Yorkville with signs stating “No Jews Allowed.” I saw such signs as a small boy on the beaches of Coney Island.

And, of course, FDR led us to victory in World War II. So the feelings of support for him held by much of the country’s Jewish citizens was highest then and still among the highest for his memory. To this day, Jews overwhelmingly support the Democratic Party. The Jewish community gave President Barack Obama 78 percent of its vote in the presidential election in 2008.

I appreciate FDR’s contributions to the survival of our country. At the same time, I have never forgiven him for his refusal to grant haven to the 937 Jewish passengers on the SS St. Louis, who after fleeing Nazi Germany had been turned away from Cuba and hovered off the coast of Florida. The passengers were returned to Europe, and many were ultimately murdered in the Nazi concentration camps before World War II ended. I have said that I believe he is not in heaven, but in purgatory, being punished for his abandonment of the Jews. The concept of purgatory is Catholic. I am a secular Jew, but I am a believer in God and the hereafter, and I like this Catholic concept. The Casablanca document reinforces my conviction that President Roosevelt was, at heart, not particularly sympathetic to the plight of the Jews.

Today, the war against the Jews continues. While Palestinian terrorists murder Israeli children in their beds and fire rockets into Israeli towns, the international community rages against Israel. To his credit, President Barack Obama vetoed the recent United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Israel--yet in the same breath, the administration spokeswoman and U.N. ambassador emphasized the U.S. agreed with the substance of that one-sided resolution. That’s no way to treat an ally.

Why can’t Jews live on the West Bank? More than one million Arabs live in Israel now, about 20 percent of its population. When Israel and the Palestinian Authority settle their differences, shouldn’t Jews be able to choose to live in the new Palestinian state as citizens, or at least resident aliens? I don’t see why not.

Of course, Israel has made mistakes in its dealings with the Palestinians. The Israelis are no less human in that respect than other nations, including ours. But the intransigence, unwillingness to compromise, is far greater on the part of the Palestinian leaders, who fear for their lives threatened by the Arab radicals, fundamentalists and terrorists. Where are the Arab voices of moderation? I don’t hear them. But I do hear the voices of those threatening the destruction of Israel, of those seeking to delegitimatize Israel at the United Nations.

Yes, the war against the Jews is still going on, 66 years after World War II. But, thank God, there is now a Jewish state that will not be cowed and will do what is necessary to protect the Jewish people.

FDR Would Oppose WI Union Protest

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/02/18/fdr-vs-wisconsin-teachers-union/

FDR vs. Wisconsin Teachers Union
by Publius
BigGovernment.com
February 18, 2011

Political Use of FBI, IRS

[From article]
"President [Franklin] Roosevelt's strong suit was politics, not economics. He played the political game both cleverly and ruthlessly, including using both the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service to harass and intimidate his critics and opponents."

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell110210.php3

Jewish World Review
Nov 2, 2010 / 25 Mar-Cheshvan, 5771
Guess Who?
By Thomas Sowell

Social Security Over the Years
[Received from GLF]


Now don't be mad at old people, (or me) just remember who did this......

Franklin Delano. Roosevelt
32nd. President, Democrat
Terms of Office March 4, 1933, to April 12, 1945

Our Social Security

Franklin Delano. Roosevelt (Terms of Office March 4, 1933, to April 12, 1945), a Democrat, introduced Social Security (FICA) Program. He Promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put Into the Program would be deductible from Their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would Only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to 'Put Away' -- you may be interested in the following:

---THEN---

Dwight David Eisenhower
34th. President, Republican,
Term Of Office: January 20, 1953 to January 20, 1961

If I recall correctly, 1958 is the first year that Congress, not President Eisenhower, voted to remove funds from Social Security and put it into the General Fund for Congress to spend.

If I recall correctly, it was a Democratically controlledCongress.

From what I understand, Congress' logic at that time was that there was so much money in Social Security Fund that it would never run out / be used up for the purpose it was intended / set aside for.

---WORSE STILL---

Lyndon Baines Johnson 36th. President,Democrat
Term Of Office: November 22, 1963 to January 20, 1969

Question: Which Political Party took Social Security from the Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into theGeneral Fund so that Congress could spend it?

Answer: It was Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat, Term of Office: November 22,1963 to January 20, 1969) and the Democratically controlled House and Senate.

Question: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
Answer: The Democratic Party.

William Jefferson Clinton
(Bill Clinton)
42nd. President
Democrat Term of Office: January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001

Albert Arnold Gore, Jr.
(Al Gore)
45th. Vice President
Democrat Term of Office: January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001

Question: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

Answer: The Democratic Party, with Albert Arnold Gore, Jr. (Al Gore) [Vice President Term of Office: January 10, 1993 to January 20, 2001] casting the 'tie- breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the USA ........

---THE STRAW THAT BROKE THE CAMEL'S BACK!!---

James Earl Carter, Jr
(Jimmy Carter)
39th President, Democrat
Term of Office: January 20, 1977 to January 20, 1981

Question: Which Political Party decided to start giving Annuitypayments to immigrants?

AND MY FAVORITE ANSWER:

That's right! JAMES EARL CARTER, JR. JIMMY CARTER) (DEMOCRAT, TERM OF OFFICE: JANUARY 20, 1977 TO JANUARY 20, 1981 AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

IMMIGRANTS MOVED INTO THIS COUNTRY AND AT AGE 65, BEGAN TO RECEIVE SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENTS:

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTYGAVE THESE PAYMENTS TO THEM…..EVEN THOUGH THEY NEVER PAID A DIME INTO IT!

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens believe it!