Archive for the ‘Terrorists’ Category

Kim Jung Uno

Monday, January 2nd, 2012

I am really concerned about North Korea’s appointment of the “dear leader”, Kim Jung Ill’s youngest son to be the new leader of North Korea– a nuclear power! After all, Kim Jung Un (pronounced Kim’s young-un?) had NO military experience whatsoever before daddy made him a four-star general in the military.  This is a snot-nose twerp who has never accomplished anything in his life that that would even come close to military leadership: he hasn’t even so much as led a cub scout troop, let alone coached a sports team or commanded a military platoon.   So, setting that aside, next they make him the “beloved leader” of the country.  Terrific!!! 

Oh, crap!  I’m sorry.  I just remembered that we did the same thing here,  We took a community organizer who has never worn a uniform and made him Commander-in-Chief; a guy who has never led anything more than an ACORN demonstration and made him the leader of this country. Never mind.

Ground Zero Tolerance? Sure, Why Not?

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

I am shocked, absolutely shocked, that so many Americans are standing up in opposition to the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero in New York. We are a nation of tolerance - We should allow it, right?

In keeping with that theme, and in order to promote tolerance, I propose the following:

A gay nightclub should be opened next door to the mosque to promote tolerance amongst its members. We could call it “The Turban Cowboy” or “You Mecca Me Hot”.

Next door on the other side, we should have a butcher shop that specializes in pork. One that makes a nice lunchtime pulled pork sandwich.

Then across the street, a very daring lingerie store, called ” Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret”.

And of course, what area wouldn’t be complete without a “three girl nudie” car wash called “The Three Mosqueteers”.

And what neighborhood would be complete without skin headed white supremacists, renting a store front tattoo parlor just above the butcher shop?

And don’t forget the Armed Forces Recruiting Office, which would be just a step or two from the VA administration office.

To make the neighborhood and street complete I also propose that we build the largest Southern Baptist Church in the country that could share its parking lot with the mosque, which would have to allow use of their parking lot for old fashion tent revivals.

You know….just to promote that whole “tolerance thing”!

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, the Hell’s Angels are looking for a new location for a NY clubhouse. Are you thinking what I’m thinking? Yep, I know the perfect area.

I am certain that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf would relish this opportunity to demonstrate and promote tolerance in the good ole U.S. of A. He and his muslim buddies should embrace these suggestions with the greatest of enthusiasm!

If you agree, pass this along!

*This message was made in America without harming any cats, or dogs, or fish, or horses, or cows, or chickens, or ferrets.

PS. Did I mention that the women from P.E.T.A. would be standing naked on the adjacent street corners to raise awareness regarding the evils of wearing fur?

God I love this country… I wish everybody did.

Obama and the Muslim “Contribution”

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010

Barack OBAMA, during his Cairo speech, said: “I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America ’s story.”

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN’S RESPONSE:

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed? Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution?

Declaration of Independence ?

Bill of Rights?

Didn’t think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England ? No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America ? No, they did not. In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery. Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.” Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present.

There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era? Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture. So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

Where were Muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East … No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day. Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who’s asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo , Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

Oh, and don’t forget the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslim.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 - the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan .

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich heritage” that Muslims have contributed to America.

Ft. Hood Tragedy - Call it what it is

Monday, November 16th, 2009

The following is a statement released by Retired Lt. Col. Allen West:

Allen West

This past Thursday 13 American Soldiers were killed and another 30 wounded at a horrific mass shooting at US Army installation, Ft Hood Texas. As I watched in horror and then anger I recalled my two years of final service in the Army as a Battalion Commander at Ft Hood, 2002-2004. 

My wife and two daughters were stunned at the incident having lived on the post in family housing.

A military installation, whether it is Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine, or Coast Guard, is supposed to be a safe sanctuary for our Warriors and their families. It is intended to provide a home whereby our “Band of Brothers and Sisters” can find solace and bond beyond just the foxhole but as family units. 

A military installation is supposed to be a place where our Warriors train for war, to serve and protect our Nation. 

On Thursday, 5 November 2009 Ft Hood became a part of the battlefield in the war against Islamic totalitarianism and state sponsored terrorism. 

There may be those who feel threatened by my words and would even recommend they not be uttered. To those individuals I say step aside because now is not the time for cowardice. Our Country has become so paralyzed by political correctness that we have allowed a vile and determined enemy to breach what should be the safest place in America, an Army post. 

We have become so politically correct that our media is more concerned about the stress of the shooter, Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The misplaced benevolence intending to portray him as a victim is despicable. The fact that there are some who have now created an entire new classification called; “pre-virtual vicarious Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)” is unconscionable. 

This is not a “man caused disaster”. It is what it is, an Islamic jihadist attack. 

We have seen this before in 2003 when a SGT Hasan of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) threw hand grenades and opened fire into his Commanding Officer’s tent in Kuwait. We have seen the foiled attempt of Albanian Muslims who sought to attack Ft Dix, NJ. Recently we saw a young convert to Islam named Carlos Bledsoe travel to Yemen, receive terrorist training, and return to gun down two US Soldiers at a Little Rock, Arkansas Army recruiting station. We thwarted another Islamic terrorist plot in North Carolina which had US Marine Corps Base, Quantico as a target. 

What have we done with all these prevalent trends? Nothing. 

What we see are recalcitrant leaders who are refusing to confront the issue, Islamic terrorist infiltration into America, and possibly further into our Armed Services. Instead we have a multiculturalism and diversity syndrome on steroids. 

Major Hasan should have never been transferred to Ft Hood, matter of fact he should have been Chaptered from the Army. His previous statements, poor evaluation reports, and the fact that the FBI had him under investigation for jihadist website posting should have been proof positive. 

However, what we have is a typical liberal approach to find a victim, not the 13 and 30 Soldiers and Civilian, but rather the poor shooter. A shooter who we are told was a great American, who loved the Army and serving his Nation and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) stating that his actions had nothing to do with religious belief. 

We know that Major Hasan deliberately planned this episode; he did give away his possessions. He stood atop a table in the confined space of the Soldier Readiness Center shouting “Allahu Akhbar”, same chant as the 9-11 terrorists and those we fight against overseas in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operation. 

No one in leadership seems willing to sound the alarm for the American people; they are therefore complicit in any future attacks. Our Congress should suspend the insidious action to vote on a preposterous and unconstitutional healthcare bill and resolve the issue of “protecting the American people”. 

The recent incidents in Dearborn Michigan, Boston Massachusetts, Dallas Texas, and Chicago Illinois should bear witness to the fact that we have an Islamic terrorism issue in America. And don’t have CAIR call me and try to issue a vanilla press statement; they are an illegitimate terrorist associated organization which should be disbanded. 

We have Saudi Arabia funding close to 80% of the mosques in the United States, one right here in South Florida, Pompano Beach. Are we building churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia? Are “Kaffirs” and “Infidels” allowed travel to Mecca? 

So much for peaceful coexistence. 

Saudi Arabia is sponsoring radical Imams who enter into our prisons and convert young men into a virulent Wahabbist ideology….one resulting in four individuals wanting to destroy synagogues in New York with plastic explosives. Thank God the explosives were dummy. They are sponsoring textbooks which present Islamic centric revisionist history in our schools. 

We must recognize that there is an urgent need to separate the theo-political radical Islamic ideology out of our American society. We must begin to demand surveillance of suspected Imams and mosques that are spreading hate and preaching the overthrow of our Constitutional Republic……that speech is not protected under First Amendment, it is sedition and if done by an American treason. 

There should not be some 30 Islamic terrorist training camps in America that has nothing to do with First Amendment, Freedom of Religion. The Saudis are not our friends and any American political figure who believes such is delusional. 

When tolerance becomes a one way street it certainly leads to cultural suicide. We are on that street. Liberals cannot be trusted to defend our Republic, because their sympathies obviously lie with their perceived victim, Major Nidal Malik Hasan. 

I make no apologies for these words, and anyone angered by them, please, go to Ft Hood and look into the eyes of the real victims. The tragedy at Ft Hood Texas did not have to happen. Consider now the feelings of those there and on every military installation in the world. Consider the feelings of the Warriors deployed into combat zones who now are concerned that their loved ones at home are in a combat zone. 

Ft Hood suffered an Islamic jihadist attack, stop the denial, and realize a simple point. 

The reality of your enemy must become your own. 

Steadfast and Loyal,

Lieutenant Colonel Allen B West (US Army, Ret) 

For more information on the attack go here.

For more information on the Jihad Connection go here.

More on the overlooked red flags.

Has Obama Turned on Israel?

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

Has Obama Turned on Israel?

Settlements, rockets and Iran. 

 

By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ

 Many American supporters of Israel who voted for Barack Obama now suspect they may have been victims of a bait and switch. Jewish Americans voted overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama over John McCain in part because the Obama campaign went to great lengths to assure these voters that a President Obama would be supportive of Israel. This despite his friendships with rabidly anti-Israel characters like Rev. Jeremiah Wright and historian Rashid Khalidi. 

 

At the suggestion of Mr. Obama’s Jewish supporters — including me — the candidate visited the beleaguered town of Sderot, which had borne the brunt of thousands of rocket attacks by Hamas. Standing in front of the rocket shells, Mr. Obama declared: “If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.” This heartfelt statement sealed the deal for many supporters of Israel.

Now, some of them apparently have voters’ remorse. According to Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, “President Obama’s strongest supporters among Jewish leaders are deeply troubled by his recent Middle East initiatives, and some are questioning what he really believes.” I hear the same thing from rank-and-file supporters of Israel who voted for Mr. Obama.

Are these fears justified? Rhetorically, the Obama team has definitely taken a harsher approach toward Israel compared to its tone during the campaign. But has there been a change in substance about Israel’s security? In answering this question, it is essential to distinguish between several aspects of American policy.

 First there are the settlements. The Bush administration was against expansion of West Bank settlements, but it was willing to accept a “natural growth” exception that implicitly permitted Israel to expand existing settlements in order to accommodate family growth. The Obama administration has so far shut the door on this exception.

 I believe there is a logical compromise on settlement growth that has been proposed by Yousef Munayyer, a leader of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination League. “Obama should make it clear to the Israelis that settlers should feel free to grow their families as long as their settlements grow vertically, and not horizontally,” he wrote last month in the Boston Globe. In other words, build “up” rather than “out.” This seems fair to both sides, since it would preserve the status quo for future negotiations that could lead to a demilitarized Palestinian state and Arab recognition of Israel as a Jewish one — results sought by both the Obama administration and Israel.

A majority of American-Jewish supporters of Israel, as well as Israelis, do not favor settlement expansion. Thus the Obama position on settlement expansion, whether one agrees with it or not, is not at all inconsistent with support for Israel. It may be a different position from that of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is not a difference that should matter to most Jewish voters who support both Mr. Obama and Israel.

 The differences that would matter are those — if they exist — that directly impact Israel’s security. And in terms of Israel’s security, nothing presents a greater threat than Iran.

The Obama administration consistently says that Iran should not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. But prior to the current unrest in the Islamic Republic, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel frightened many supporters of Israel in May by appearing to link American efforts to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons to Israeli actions with regard to the settlements.

 This is a disturbing linkage that should be disavowed by the Obama administration. Opposition to a nuclear Iran — which would endanger the entire world — should not be dependent in any way on the issue of settlement expansion.

 The current turmoil in Iran may strengthen the Obama administration as it seeks to use diplomacy, sanctions and other nonmilitary means to prevent the development of nuclear weapons. But if these tactics fail, the military option, undesirable and dangerous as it is, must not be taken off the table. If the Obama administration were to shift toward learning to live with a nuclear Iran and attempt to deny Israel the painful option of attacking its nuclear targets as a last resort, that would be troubling indeed. Thankfully, the Obama administration’s point man on this issue, Dennis Ross, shows no signs of weakening American opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran.

 A related threat to Israeli security comes from Iran’s proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. For years, these terrorist groups have disrupted life in Israel by firing rockets at civilians. The range of their weapons now extends to Israel’s heartland, including Tel Aviv. The Israeli Defense Forces must retain the ability to prevent and deter rocket fire, even if it comes from behind human shields as it did in southern Lebanon and Gaza. There is no evidence of any weakening of American support for Israel’s right to defend its children from the kind of rocket attacks candidate Obama commented on during his visit to Sderot.

 There may be coming changes in the Obama administration’s policies that do weaken the security of the Jewish state. Successful presidential candidates often soften their support for Israel once they are elected. So with Iran’s burgeoning nuclear threat, it’s important to be vigilant for any signs of weakening support for Israel’s security — and to criticize forcefully any such change. But getting tough on settlement expansion should not be confused with undercutting Israel’s security.

 Mr. Dershowitz is a law professor at Harvard. His latest book is “The Case for Moral Clarity” (Camera, 2009).

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A13

The Barbary Wars redux: Muslim terrorists at sea

Friday, April 17th, 2009

The Barbary Wars redux: Muslim terrorists at sea

13 April 2009: The mainstream media will not tell you that the recent attack against the U.S. merchant ship off the coast of Somalia was an act of Islamic terrorism, but it was, and it’s not new. Quite simply, the majority of Americans have forgotten U.S. history despite the presence of a large monument in front of the U.S. Naval Academy to remind us. That is the Tripoli Monument, the oldest military monument in the U.S., honoring the heroes of the First Barbary War.

Following the Revolutionary War, American commerce ships sailing in the open waters of the Mediterranean were being attacked and destroyed by Muslim pirates, led by the “Dey of Algiers,” the Islamic warlord ruler of Algiers. The Muslim pirates were vicious, taking the mostly Christian crews as hostages. At that time, America had no navy to protect the ships and was virtually powerless to fight against the savage attacks. In 1784, the Continental Congress negotiated with the four Barbary States of North Africa (Morocco, Tripoli, Algiers and Tunis) in an effort to stop the piracy. At first, America paid protection money - $18,000 a year - to allow our ships to proceed unmolested by the pirates of Barbary.

As demonstrated in this case, succumbing to the demands of extortion never works out very well. Those who extort always want more, and payment of protection money is always a sign of weakness.  Like today, the leaders of America in the late 1700’s tried to settle the piracy issue through diplomacy. As such, two American diplomats, Thomas Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and John Adams, the American ambassador to Britain, were dispatched to London in 1786 in an attempt to resolve the piracy issue. They met with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the “Dey of Algiers” ambassador to Britain. It was during that meeting in London when Jefferson asked the Muslim ambassador why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation they had virtually no contact with at that time.

The answer is as relevant today as it was in 1786 - perhaps even more so. Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja stated:

“Islam was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Muslim who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Sound familiar? In 1786, diplomacy could not resolve piracy on the high seas due to the religious motivation of the pirates. America paid the leaders of the Muslim pirates millions of dollars as protection money through 1801, until America, with Thomas Jefferson as President said “enough.” Not long after he was elected, he sent a group of American frigates to defeat the pirates. under the motto “Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute!” Our navy did so, and after winning numerous battles in North Africa through the heroic efforts of our men in uniform, the piracy against our ships stopped.

The tribute to the bravery of the men who fought in the battle of the first Barbary War standing in front of the U.S. Naval Academy should serve as a reminder to all Americans how to deal with Islamic piracy against U.S. ships.  Do our leaders have the same resolve, the same fortitude to deal with this problem as our forefathers did? They certainly showed us how, now all we have to do is follow their lead. The rest can be, as they say, history.

Justice Department to SFPD: “Back off” on Ayers probe

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

Administration muzzles police officers who want to reopen murder case


Posted: March 23, 2009
10:29 pm EasternBy Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

See full size image
William Ayers

The Obama Justice Department instructed San Francisco police officials not to comment after top law enforcement officers there signed a letter accusing Weathermen radical Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, of being directly behind the 1970 bombing of San Francisco’s police station that killed one sergeant and wounded nine others.

At a press conference March 12 directed by activist Cliff Kincaid of America’s Survival Inc, the leaders of the San Francisco Police Officers’ Association made public a letter pointing a finger at Ayers and Dohrn that demands those responsible for the bombing be brought to justice.

“There are irrefutable and compelling reasons to believe that Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn are largely responsible for the bombing of Park Police Station,” the officers stated in the letter.

The letter called for the U.S. to bring “those responsible for the murder of Sgt. Brian McDonnell and the injuries to other officers to the justice they have so long eluded.”

Now the San Francisco Chronicle is reporting the police group members who signed the letter received calls from the Justice Department and a local police chief telling them to remain silent.

Police Officers’ Association President Gary Delagnes confirmed to the Chronicle his union was contacted by federal investigators telling them they had an “active investigation and should not be commenting on the case.”

Delagnes told the newspaper his group’s letter was meant only to show support for the family of the slain officer and to help them “bring closure to the case.”

No one has ever been charged in the bombing. Ayers has denied involvement. In a November interview with the New Yorker, Ayers said, “We killed no one and hurt no one.”

But a former FBI informant who reportedly infiltrated the Weathermen in the 1970s says Ayers described to him at length how Dohrn personally placed a pipe bomb outside the San Francisco police department Feb. 16, 1970.

The former informant, Larry Grathwohl, was present at Kincaid’s press conference earlier this month.

In his book, “Bringing Down America – An FBI Informer with the Weathermen,” Grathwohl describes a meeting in which Ayers allegedly revealed Dohrn’s role in the bombing. Granthwohl also testified to that effect to the Senate in the 1980s.

Grathwohl quotes Ayers telling him, “Too many of you are relying on your leaders to do everything.”

He said Ayers then mentioned the San Francisco bombing.

“It was a success,” Granthwolhl wrote, quoting Ayers. “But it’s a shame when someone like Bernardine has to make all the plans, make the bomb and then place it herself. She should have to do only the planning.”

Aside from the officer killed in the blast, Robert Fogarty, another officer, was severely wounded in his face and legs and was partially blinded. Eight other officers were wounded.

Speaking at Kincaid’s press conference, Jim Pera, an officer who was first to arrive after the bombing, described the scene of the attack:

“The window to the business office and an interior window, where prisoners were processed for booking were blown out. The walls and furniture were pockmarked by shrapnel. Barbed-wire fence post staples, from the bomb, were scattered throughout the ground floor of the station. Blood was all over the floor, desks and walls and was heaviest where Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell suffered mortal wounds to his neck, eyes, face and brain.”

Although no one was charged, the case is still open. Last year, it was confirmed the Justice Department in Washington, D.C., was asked to analyze fingerprint evidence from the scene of attack. The department has so far refused numerous requests to release the evidence in the case.

Ayers was the object of much attention during last year’s presidential race after it was revealed he had an extensive relationship with Obama.

On the American Thinker website, writer James Simpson commented, “Given … Bill Ayers’ perceived status as President Obama’s friend and mentor, the Justice Department may be reluctant to provide all of the evidence in the Park Station bombing case unless they are forced to do so.”

Obama Signs Presidential Determination Allowing Palestinians Loyal to Hamas to Resettle In US

Wednesday, February 18th, 2009

Obama Signs Presidential Determination Allowing Palestinians Loyal to Hamas to Resettle In US <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2181149/posts>
Feb 17,2009 | Kim Priestap

President Barack Obama has signed an executive order presidential determination allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to resettle in the United States. Sure, what can go wrong when we allow hundreds of thousands of people who have been, as Mark Steyn memorably described, “marinated” in a “sick death cult,” who voted for Hamas, and 55% of whom support suicide bombings live here and at the American taxpayers’ expense:

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in migration assistance to the Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.

The “presidential determination” which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.

President Obama’s decision, according to the Register, was necessitated by “the urgent refugee and migration needs” of the “victims.”

Few on Capitol Hill took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

Let’s review some of Barack Obama’s most recent actions since he was inaugurated a little more than three weeks ago:


* His first call to any head of state as president was to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory.

* His first one on one interview with any news organization was with Al Arabia television.

* He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees halted.

* He ordered all overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.

* He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole and 9/11.


*  Today we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees to move to and live in the US at American taxpayer expense.


Anyone else seeing a pattern here?

We may be broke and we may be headed for a depression, but we can always spare an extra $20.3 million for our sand brothers. Don¢t bother heading for Snopes. http://www.whitehouse..gov/the_press_office/Unexpected_Urgent_Refugee_Migration_Needs_Gaza/  will show you what is below. Believe it. - -


Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs Related to Gaza

MEMORANDUM                  FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
 
SUBJECT:      Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs Related to Gaza
 
By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (the “Act”), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the Act, that it is important to the national interest to furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs, including by contributions to international, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and payment of administrative expenses of the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.
 
You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
 
BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 27, 2009