Ankara (Turkey) Mayor calls Marie Harf a dumb blonde
This is what happens, dear West, when your mind is so multi-culti open that your brains fall out. This is the result of years of coddling Islam. Now, Islam is biting you back. The Mayor of Ankara, Turkey, who answers to Barack Hussein Obama's Best Friend Forever Recep Tayyip Erdogan, says that State Department spokescritter Marie Harf is a
dumb blonde (Hat Tip:
Joshua I).
The mayor of Turkey’s capital has challenged a U.S. State Department
spokesperson by referring to a pro-government media report that slammed
her as “stupid blonde.”
“Come on blonde, answer now,” Ankara
Mayor Melih Gökçek said in a tweet early April 29. The tweet also
included an image from the recent riots in Baltimore, as well as the
photo of Marie Harf and a caption that reads: “Where are you stupid
blonde, who accused Turkish police of using disproportionate force?”
Gökçek
was referring to a report on Ensonhaber.com, a staunchly pro-government
online news website. “U.S. police displayed a harsh attitude against
the activists in Baltimore. But U.S. State Department spokesperson Marie
Harf, who had been repeatedly criticizing Turkey during the Gezi
incidents, is now silent,” it said.
Many national and
international organizations had criticized Turkish police officers for
using disproportionate force during the massive Gezi Park protests in
2013.
I can't say I disagree with his
assessment of Harf. Still, any of Obama's predecessors (with the exception of Jimmy Carter) would have called in the Turkish ambassador over this.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Marie Harf, multi-culturalism, political correctness, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey
US must respond to Iranian ship hijacking?
In the aftermath of Tuesday's
Iranian hijacking of a Danish (corrected) ship bearing the flag of the Marshall Islands in the Strait of Hormuz, Eli Lake and Josh Rogin report the Marshall Islands has a
defense treaty with the United States that bars it from taking action on its own.
When asked if his country would request that the U.S. rescue the
cargo ship from Iran, Junior Aini, the charge d'affairs for the Marshall
Islands Embassy in Washington, told us he was still awaiting guidance
from his foreign ministry. But he also suggested that his country had no
other recourse than to hope the U.S. responds.
"The United States has the full security responsibility over the
islands and for the defense of the islands, this is what our treaty
says," he told us. Aini was referring to a 1986 accord between the U.S.
and the island nation that set the terms for independence. The Marshall
Islands has no standing army. News that Iran had boarded the Maersk
Tigris surprised Aini. He said he initially learned about the
incidentfrom watching Fox News.
Aini also said his nation is barred by the 1986 agreement from doing
anything that would challenge America's role in this regard. "We cannot
take any action that will impact the U.S. responsibility," he said.
Under a 1983 Compact of Free Association, the U.S. has “full authority
and responsibility for security and defense of the Marshall Islands,” according to a State Department fact sheet.
...
By taking a non-U.S. ship under questionable circumstances at a moment
of high tension in the region, Iran has again put Washington in a tough
spot. Given that the U.S. Senate is simultaneously debating its bill on
oversight of Obama's nuclear deal with Iran, the repercussions are going
to spread far beyond the Strait of Hormuz.
The Israel Project's Omri Ceren reports by email that the Obama administration is already trying to avoid taking action.
The first wave was about how the security arrangement between the U.S. and the Marshall Islands affects Washington: is the Obama administration now affirmatively bound to confront the Iranians over the capture? The short answer is that it's not clear. Some analysts have defended potential White House inaction by saying there’s a legal loophole, under which a vessel so flagged would not count as part of the Marshall Islands conducting its foreign affairs.
Ceren argues that trying to avoid taking action would be a disaster, further expanding on Lake's and Rogin's last paragraph above.
American inaction under this scenario would be a one-two punch to Washington's credibility: the Americans locked up the Marshall Islanders' freedom of action by promising to take care of defense for them, and then when the time came the Obama administration refused to act. It would be a nightmare scenario: the U.S. would be using security assurances not to shield allies from Iran but to shield Iran from allies.
Gulf leaders, who will be in Washington next month to discuss how the U.S. can protect them in the aftermath of a bad Iran deal, would not miss the signal. There’s already a healthy about of regional grumbling about the U.S. using its leverage over the Israelis and the Saudis – leverage that it has as a protector – to hold them back on Hezbollah and Yemen.
The State Department briefing this afternoon was inconclusive:
Reporter: What do you consider the Iranian act? Is it a -- an act of piracy, act of violence?
Rathke: Again, I'm -- this I think is underway. I'm not going to apply an adjective to it right now. We are following the situation very carefully, but I'm not going to...
Reporter: But do you condemn it?
Rathke: Well, again, we're gathering more information. I don't have further reaction at this point. Yes, Brad? (http://www.c-span.org/video/?325639-1/state-department-briefing at 13:57)
Keep in mind something else here: 40% of the World's oil supply
passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Will the US allow Iran to choke that supply off? If it does, US credibility will be zero, but how exactly will other countries react?
What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Iranian navy, Iranian nuclear threat, Marshall Islands, Strait of Hormuz, US State Department
Who's helping Nepal?
Who's helping Nepal? Israel, that's who (Hat Tip:
Leah P).
Labels: earthquake, IDF, Nepal
While Kerry cuddles with Zarif, Iran goes to work in the Strait of Hormuz
US Secretary of State John Kerry and chief 'negotiator' Wendy Sherman became
the first US officials to set foot on Iranian soil since 1979 on Monday, when they popped into the Iranian Ambassador to the UN's New York office for a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.
Iran's response? Lots of 'goodwill.' And the
seizure of a Marshall Islands-flagged ship in the Strait of Hormuz.
The Pentagon said at least five Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
Navy patrol vessels approached the Marshall Islands-flagged Maersk
Tigris cargo ship at 4 a.m. eastern time as it was transiting the
Straight of Hormuz and directed the ship to proceed further into Iranian
waters.
When the ship’s master declined, the Iranian ship fired
shots across the bridge of the cargo vessel, Pentagon spokesman Col.
Steve Warren said. After shots were fired, the ship proceeded into
Iranian waters near the vicinity of Larak Island. It was boarded by
members of the Iranian coast guard and is now being held in Iranian
waters with about 30 people aboard.
...
The Maersk Tigris issued a distress call, prompting U.S. Naval Forces
Central Command to send the U.S. destroyer Farragut to the site as well
as aircraft to observe the interaction, Col. Warren said. The destroyer
is currently on the way, with no clear timetable of when it will arrive
on the scene.
The U.S. assets are being sent to “monitor the
situation,” Col. Warren said. Naval Forces Central Command have been
communicating with representatives from the shipping company, he said.
The
shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz is in Iranian territorial
waters, but ships typically pass through with no issues under rules of
innocent passage, which allow ships to pass through as long as they
follow international law.
There are no Americans aboard the cargo
ship and currently no injuries reported among the crew, Col. Warren
said. It is unclear what sort of cargo the ship is carrying.
It should be an interesting briefing at the State Department today.... What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, diplomatic relations, Iran, Iranian navy, Iranian nuclear threat, John Kerry, Mohammad Javad Zarif, Strait of Hormuz, US Navy, Wendy Sherman
Boehner: Congress doesn't have the votes to stop Iran deal
Despite polls showing that the American people overwhelmingly favor Congressional oversight (more on those in a minute), House Speaker John Boehner (R-In) reports that
Congress does not have the votes to stop President Hussein Obama from allowing Iran to become a nuclear power. This is from Eli Lake.
Speaking at an off-the-record event Saturday at the Republican Jewish
Coalition's meeting in Las Vegas, House Speaker John Boehner told the
audience that he didn't expect that more than two-thirds of Congress
would vote to overturn a veto from Obama if Congress voted against
a nuclear deal, according to four people who were inside the room for
the private talk.
The resolution of disapproval is provided for in legislation before
the Senate this week, known as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review
Act. The deadline for reaching a final nuclear accord between Iran, the
U.S. and five other world powers is June 30.
Proponents of the legislation, such as Republican co-author Senator
Bob Corker, say the bill gives Congress a chance to review an Iran
agreement and could stop Obama from lifting sanctions during the review
process. Critics, however, want to strengthen the bill's mechanisms and
lower the threshold necessary for Congress to disapprove the deal. Their
hope is to be able to ultimately stop Obama from at least lifting those
sanctions created by Congress, as opposed to the ones created through
executive order or the United Nations Security Council. Boehner's
comments this weekend confirm their suspicions that Corker's bill is too
weak to stop Obama from implementing a bad Iran deal.
Michael Steel, a spokesman for Boehner, confirmed that the speaker
said he did not expect Congress to have the votes to overturn a veto of a
resolution to disapprove the Iran deal. "Obviously, it takes only a
fraction of the House and Senate Democrats to sustain a veto," Steel
told me. "But it is impossible to say whether they will or not until we
know what the final 'deal' looks like."
But here's the weird part: Lake goes on to report on several Republican Senators who plan to offer amendments to toughen the bill so that Obama can't win the game by having a veto sustained. Look who's opposed to that.
Corker and Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who has
hinted he may also run for president, are expected to oppose all those
amendments. As Josh Rogin and I reported last week, the amendments are also opposed by Washington's largest pro-Israel lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Debate on the Corker bill starts on Tuesday.
In the meantime, The Israel Project's Omri Ceren reports via email that most Americans want Congressional oversight over any deal with Iran.
Now the poll...
Iran questions - Note though how the debate has shifted. Just two weeks the conversation was between passing or voting down Corker-Menendez. Now the debate is "pass it without amendments" vs. "strengthen it" The White House's original position against oversight is not even in the discussion. There's a reason for that:
60. Would you support or oppose legislation that would make any Iran agreement subject to congressional approval?
AGE IN YRS.......
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom 18-34 35-54 55+
Support 65% 88% 49% 66% 70% 61% 63% 64% 69%
Oppose 24 6 40 25 23 25 25 29 20
DK/NA 10 7 11 9 6 14 13 7 11
It mostly gets worse from there for the administration. A majority of voters disapprove of President Obama's overall handling of Iran (37 approve / 52 disapprove) and an even larger majority doesn't think the agreement announced at Lausanne will prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons (35 confident / 62 not confident).
The one dim bright spot for the White House is that a majority of voters say they approve of the announced framework (58/33), even though a majority also doesn't think it will work. That's what you'll hear from supporters of the administration's diplomacy, though it might be half-hearted. They know just like everyone else does, that support craters when voters are asked about the specifics of a deal: sunset clause, no shuttering facilities, no Iran coming clear, etc. Polling converges on this point, but if you need something recent McLaughlin just wrapped up a survey (http://mclaughlinonline.com/2015/04/17/san-national-survey-results-american-attitudes-towards-obamairan-nuclear-negotiations/).
I guess when you're in the 'fourth quarter' you don't worry about what the people want. I wish Obama were constitutionally allowed to run for a third term. It might keep him honest and avoid a dictatorship for the next 20 months.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bob Corker, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, P 5+1, polls, United States Senate
Iran's nuclear map - much more than you knew about
There's a great map of Iran's nuclear facilities that's been posted
here.
It's by Olli Heinonen, a senior fellow with the Belfer Center at Harvard
University's Kennedy School and a former deputy director-general for
safeguards at the IAEA, and by Simon Henderson is the Baker fellow and director of the Gulf and Energy
Policy Program at The Washington Institute, specializing in energy
matters and the conservative Arab states of the Persian Gulf.
If you click the link, you can even download a pdf version (which I did). I had no idea that there were this many facilities and I suspect that most of you didn't know either (I thought there were four or five facilities). Most of these facilities will remain intact if President Obama's agreement with Iran goes through and is implemented.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Arak heavy water production plant, Barack Hussein Obama, Bushehr, Fordow nuclear plant, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Natanz, P 5+1, plutonium, uranium, uranium enrichment
Finally: Bush lets loose on Obama
I've been waiting for this for a long time, and I'm sure many of you have as well: Former President George W. Bush - the man who is blamed for everything seven years after he left office -
finally let loose on Barack Hussein Obama (Hat Tip:
Zvi S).
One attendee at the Republican Jewish Coalition session, held at the
Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas with owner Sheldon Adelson in attendance,
transcribed large portions of Bush’s remarks. The former president, who
rarely ever criticizes Obama in public, at first remarked that the idea
of re-entering the political arena was something he didn’t want to do.
He then proceeded to explain why Obama, in his view, was placing the
U.S. in "retreat" around the world. He also said Obama was misreading
Iran’s intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily.
According to the attendee's transcription, Bush noted that Iran has a
new president, Hassan Rouhani. “He's smooth," Bush said. "And you’ve
got to ask yourself, is there a new policy or did they just change the
spokesman?”
Bush said that Obama’s plan to lift sanctions on Iran with a promise
that they could snap back in place at any time was not plausible. He
also said the deal would be bad for American national security in the
long term: “You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it
looks like for our grandchildren. That’s how Americans should view the
deal.”
...
Obama promised to degrade and destroy Islamic State's forces but then
didn’t develop a strategy to complete the mission, Bush said. He said
that if you have a military goal and you mean it, “you call in your
military and say ‘What’s your plan?’ ” He indirectly touted his own
decision to surge troops to Iraq in 2007, by saying, “When the plan
wasn’t working in Iraq, we changed.”
“In order to be an effective president ... when you say something you have to mean it,” he said. “You gotta kill em.”
...
Regarding Hillary Clinton, Bush said it will be crucial how she plays
her relationship with the president. She will eventually have to choose
between running on the Obama administration’s policies or running
against them. If she defends them, she's admitting failure, he said, but
if she doesn't she's blaming the president.
For George W. Bush, the remarks in Vegas showed he has little respect
for how the current president is running the world. He also revealed
that he takes little responsibility for the policies that he put in
place that contributed to the current state of affairs.
I disagree with the last sentence. It isn't that Bush takes little responsibility for the policies he put in place, but rather that he takes no responsibility for the way Obama has implemented them. Americans aren't using to hearing that since 2009.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, Iranian nuclear threat, Islamic State, Middle East, US presidential campaign 2016
Report: Israeli strike in Syria meant to avoid being dragged into war
A report in a Kuwaiti newspaper - sourced to a Western diplomat - indicates that an IAF strike against a Syrian missile base on Friday night thwarted a plan to launch long-range missiles against Israeli targets in the Golan Heights in a bid to
draw Israel into a war.
The Western diplomatic source was quoted by Al-Jarida as saying
that the alleged Israeli raid targeted two brigades of the Syrian Army,
which housed long-range strategic weapons to be transferred to
Hezbollah.
The Western diplomatic source confirmed to Al Jarida
on Sunday that IDF fighter jets were behind the attack in the Qalamun
Mountain region near the Syria-Lebanon border. The IDF has refused to
address the claims, saying that its policy is not to respond to foreign
reports.
The source told Al Jarida that the "the raid
was a preemptive strike to prevent a plan to hit strategic targets in
the Golan, which would draw Israel into a war with Syria, and shuffle
the cards."
Hmmm.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Free Syrian Army, Golan Heights, Hezbullah, IAF, Lebanon, Syria
Israel sends search and rescue team, field hospital to Nepal, ramping up to do more
Israel has
sent a search and rescue team and a field hospital to Nepal, just as you might
recall the
Jewish state
sending one to
Haiti five years
ago.
But first, here's video of the moment of impact of Saturday's horrific earthquake in Nepal. Let's go to the videotape.
Israel is
preparing to do more.
The Israeli army was preparing to send a rescue mission to Nepal
Sunday that includes 260 people who will fly to Katmandu and set up a
field hospital there.
The military delegation from the Home Front command
has three tasks: to search for survivors of the earthquake and to
operate a rescue team; to set up a field hospital to provide medical
assistance to the injured; and to establish contact with the Israelis
who have been incommunicado.
Forty doctors and about 80 members of a medical
team will operate the military field hospital, which will include
operating rooms, X-rays, an emergency room, a room for expectant mothers
and more. Three rescue teams, each of them with 20 rescuers, will also
be included in the military delegation, as well as three dogs from the
Oketz canine special forces unit and their handlers.
The delegation will bring with it 95 tons of
equipment for 14 full days of operation. It will take off this evening
from Ben Gurion International Airport for Kathmandu in two El Al Boeing
planes. One will be a transport plane and the other a passenger plane
that will also carry equipment.
"We plan to take off at 10:30 P.M., due to the
travel time and the weather in the Kathmandu area," said the delegation
commander, Col. Yoram Laredo.
The Foreign Ministry says it estimates around 600
Israelis are in Nepal, and has secured contact with 400, most of them
sheltering at the embassy in Kathmandu.
These include 25 couples in Nepal to bring home babies born to surrogates.
Of the nearly two dozen countries whose citizens were in Nepal at the
time of the earthquake, Israel has the third highest number of citizens
there after India and South Korea.
Nepal is a very popular post-army destination for Israelis....
Israeli-based humanitarian organization IsraAID is also responding
to the crisis in Nepal, coordinating with government officials, UN
agencies and other international groups to provide assistance to the
Himalayan country that is still reeling from aftershocks.
IsraAID is dispatching a disaster team to Nepal on
Sunday to provide relief supplies and medical services, the group said
in a statement. It also plans to set up "child-friendly" spaces and send
psychologists to the disaster-stricken area.
"We already have an emergency team in place and
hopefully we'll put them on a plane later," the group's Founding
Director Shachar Zahavi told Israel National News on Sunday. "Just like
in Haiti and in other places we have worked, it has medical aspects,
opening up field hospitals parallel to those of the IDF. Of course, like
in Haiti, we'll do anything in our power to coordinate our efforts with
the IDF and the Israeli government."
There are other countries that are sending assistance, but I haven't seen any details on what they're sending.
Labels: earthquake, Haiti, IDF, Nepal
Not just one raid on Syria-Lebanon border
I have now resolved at least some of the confusion regarding reported IAF raids on Syrian missile facilities over the past few days. There wasn't just one raid. There were
at least two.
The first set of strikes (which also remains the least confirmed)
targeted a Hezbollah weapons convoy traveling in the border area on
April 22, hitting at least three trucks and killing at least one
commander. The second set of strikes occurred during the overnight hours
of April 24-25, and are believed to have hit at least three targets in
heavily militarized areas of eastern Qalamoun, north of Damascus, which
host some of the Assad regime’s most loyal and well-equipped units. The
units hit include the 155th Scud missile brigade which has bases near
the Damascus suburb al-Qutayfa, and the 65th Armored Brigade in areas
around the Qalamoun town of Yabroud. In total, claims by Syrian rebels
and foreign media outlets suggest that this set of strikes included at
least three targets throughout the Qalamoun region, killing a number of
Syrian and Hezbollah troops.
...
In the past, these strikes have targeted anti-aircraft missiles,
advanced Yakhont anti-ship missiles, and long range surface-to-surface
missiles, with last night’s attacks likely aimed at targeting Scud B or
Scud D missiles from being transferred to Hezbollah.
That said, these strikes are the first of their kind to occur after
several key local and regional developments, mainly the launching of
Saudi-led intervention against Iranian proxies in Yemen, significant
losses by the Assad regime in northern and southern Syria, and
Hezbollah’s January 2015 announcement that the “rules of the game” with
Israel had changed. Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah made that
announcement after Hezbollah attacked an Israeli military convoy in
broad daylight, from Lebanese territory, in which Israel refrained from
retaliating. Nasrallah claimed that the attack was an ‘eye-for-an-eye’
styled response to an Israeli attack on a Hezbollah-Iranian command
convoy in the Golan Heights on January 18th. Israel’s hesitancy to
respond was hailed by the group as a testament to its regional stature,
and had left many wondering how Hezbollah would respond to future
Israeli attacks against its interests in Syria.
Israel’s alleged airstrikes this week pose a major challenge to the
regional deterrence of the Iranian axis, particularly as an emboldened
Saudi Arabia increasingly hints at intervening in Syria. Unlike past
attacks, Hezbollah and the Assad regime have refrained from making
public threats or even confirming that the strikes took place. On the
one hand, this silence may signal that Nasrallah and Assad seek to
refrain from committing to retaliation against Israel and risking an
escalation. However, it is more likely that they do seek to retaliate
against Israel in some way, shape, or form, reserving the right to claim
responsibility at a time which suites them, and reduces the risk of a
massive Israeli response.
And this may only be the beginning.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Free Syrian Army, Hezbullah, IAF, Syria
More on Israeli raid on Syrian missile position
In an earlier post, I blogged a cryptic report on an
Israeli raid on a Syrian missile storage site along that country's border with Lebanon.
Here are a few more details.
Hmmm.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Free Syrian Army, Hezbullah, IAF, Syria
Obama makes one joke using Netanyahu's name, Haaretz turns it into 'starring role'
I just watched President Obama's entire 22-minute response to the White House correspondents' dinner on Saturday night. I watched it because Haaretz tweeted out a headline that claimed that Prime Minister Netanyahu had a '
starring role.' The one and only joke at Netanyahu's expense was just past the 3-minute mark, and it was really more at House Speaker John Boehner's expense and not Netanyahu's.
"I am determined to make the most of every moment I have left,"
Obama said Saturday at the annual dinner that raises funds for
scholarships for budding journalists. "After the midterm elections, my
advisors asked me 'Mr. President, do you have a bucket list?' And I
said, 'Well, I have something that rhymes with bucket list.'"
Obama said that he still has tasks on hand,
including issuing veto threats and negotiating with Iran. "All while
finding time to pray five times a day," he quipped, "Which is
strenuous."
"And it is no wonder that that people keep pointing
out how the presidency has aged me," Obama continued. "I look so old
John Boehner’s already invited Benjamin Netanyahu to speak at my
funeral."
The good news is that Obama has finally found some
decent joke writers. I'm not going to embed a 22-minute video so you can see one joke in the first three minutes, but if you have nothing better to do on a Sunday (unfortunately, I do), click through the first link above and you will find the video embedded.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, Haaretz, humor, John Boehner, White House press corps
Issam Fares: Supporter of Hezbullah and Hillary Clinton
A large donor to the Clinton Foundation is also a large donor to Hezbullah and a former Deputy Prime Minister of Lebanon. His name is
Issam Fares.
One of the contributors to the Clinton Foundation, according to an
analysis of known donors by Joseph Schoffstall of the Washington Free
Beacon, is Issam Fares, a Lebanese billionaire and philanthropist who
has donated between $1 million and $5 million.
Some would question
the sincerity of his philanthropy, since he is very selective about
which of his fellow human beings he wishes to benefit and which he wants
to see wiped off the face of the earth.
His connections to the
Iranian terrorist sock-puppet Hezbollah and his animus towards our ally
Israel speak volumes about his true intentions.
Fares
was deputy prime minister of Lebanon and part of the pro-Syrian
government of Prime Minister Omar Karami from 2001 to 2005. He was also a
close associate of Maj. Gen. Ghazi Kanaan of Syrian intelligence during
the time the Syrian army occupied Lebanon.
Two weeks after the
assassination of former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri on Feb. 14, 2005,
the Karami government resigned. Hariri's assassination at the hands of
Syrian supporters and operatives inspired the Cedar Revolution,
spontaneous protests that forced the withdrawal of Syrian forces and led
to a brief period of calm before Hezbollah rushed in to fill the void
left by Syria.
Fares is a longtime friend and supporter of
Hezbollah, which before Sept. 11, 2001, had been responsible for more
American deaths than any terrorist group on the planet. Hezbollah was
responsible for the bombing in Beirut on Oct. 24, 1983, which killed 220
U.S. Marines and 21 other service personnel.
Fares has denied any
Hezbollah connection to that event and calls Hezbollah the "National
Resistance Movement" to Israel and "a resistance party fighting the
Israeli occupation" of Arab lands.
To be fair, Fares has used his
business and "philanthropy" to gain influence on both sides of the
aisle, but one gets the impression that he is not about to curry favor
with any of the pro-Israel 2016 GOP candidates anytime soon, having been
busy donating to the Clinton Foundation.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Hezbullah, Hillary Clinton, US presidential campaign 2016
Report: Israeli raid hits Syrian missile site on Syria-Lebanon border
Something doesn't quite smell right about this (an article dated Saturday describing a report from Thursday and I had not seen it on Twitter until about two minutes ago), but take it for what it's worth. The report claims an
IAF strike on a Syrian missile facility along the Syrian-Lebanese border.
An overnight Israeli raid has hit a missile depot in the strategic
western Syrian region of al-Qalamoun, Al Arabiya News’ sister channel Al
Hadath reported Thursday.
Qalamoun is located near the region bordering Lebanon.
Sources
also told Al Hadath that two Israeli raids had on Wednesday targeted a
convoy carrying arms belonging to Lebanese Shiite militant group
Hezbollah.
This is apparently the same area in which
Hezbullah has an airstrip on the Lebanese side of the border. Hmmm.
Labels: IAF, Lebanon, Syria
More 'Palestinian' terrorism: Molotov cocktail thrown at bus on main Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway - UPDATED X2
Not sure whether this is Route 1 or Route 443. The latter seems more likely.
UPDATE 11:09 PM
In a tweeted response to me @LTCPeterLerner says that the bus was plying Route 443.
You might recall that Route 443 was closed to 'Palestinian' traffic during the intifada and
reopened at the insistence of the 'Supreme Court' in 2010.
UPDATED 11:24 PM
The bus was near the Dor-Alon gas station, which means it was probably on the long uphill heading towards Jerusalem.
Labels: Jerusalem, Palestinian terrorism, Tel Aviv
Breaking: Terror attack in 'east' Jerusalem - UPDATED x3
Developing....
UPDATE 11:13 PM
There are now three police officers hurt. Here are
more details.
According to Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld, one of the officers is in
moderate-to-serious condition, while the other two are in
light-to-moderate condition. All three were treated at the scene by
Magon David Adom paramedics before being rushed to an area hospital, he
said.
As of 11 p.m. he said the suspect has not been apprehended.
"Police have blocked off roadways in A-Tur and are actively searching for the suspect," he said.
Last
week an Palestinian from east Jerusalem was arrested for for running
over and killing Shalom Yohai Cherki, 25, and seriously injuring a young
woman in the capital.
Under investigation the suspect told police that he was intent on “seeking out Jews to murder.”
The driver apparently fled the scene. The JPost article has a picture of the car.
UPDATE 11:29 PM
But give them a 'state' and they'll stop behaving like this.
UPDATE 11:37 PM
20-year old woman moderately wounded, two other people lightly wounded.
Labels: East Jerusalem, Palestinian terrorism
The US is sending a million dollars. Here's what Israel is sending
Shavua tov, a good week to everyone.
There was a
catastrophic earthquake in Nepal over the Sabbath (Hat Tip:
Memeorandum). The United States is sending
a million dollars in emergency assistance. Here's what Israel is sending.
Midnight is less than two hours from now and about four hours after the Sabbath ended.
Which do you think will save more lives?
Labels: earthquake, IDF, Nepal
Hezbullah's drone airstrip in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley
Jane's Defence News reports that Hezbullah has constructed an
airstrip for drones in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley.
Located in a remote and sparsely populated area 10 km south of the
town of Hermel and 18 km west of the Syrian border, the airstrip was
built sometime between 27 February 2013 and 19 June 2014, according to
imagery that recently became publicly available on Google Earth.
It consists of a single unpaved strip with a length of 670 m and
width of 20 m. Material has been excavated from a nearby quarry to build
up the northern end of the strip so that it is level. It is built over a
shorter strip that had been in existence since at least 2010.
The short length of the runway suggests the facility is not intended
to smuggle in weapons shipments from Syria or Iran as it is too short
for nearly all the transport aircraft used by the air forces of those
countries. One exception could be the Islamic Revolutionary Guards
Corps' (IRGC's) An-74T-200 short take-off transports, but landing one
with a useful load on a 670 m strip in the mountains would be considered
dangerous by most operators.
An alternative explanation is that the runway was built for
Iranian-made UAVs, including the Ababil-3, which has been employed over
Syria by forces allied to the Syrian regime, and possibly the newer and
larger Shahed-129.
Hizbullah sources have confirmed to IHS Jane's that the
organisation is using UAVs to support operations against rebel forces in
Syria, particularly over the mountainous Qalamoun region on Lebanon's
eastern border.
...
Hizbullah has operated UAVs from Lebanese airspace since at least
November 2004, when it dispatched one that it identified as a Mirsad-1
for a brief reconnaissance mission over northern Israel. It then flew
attempted to fly at least three UAVs into Israel during the July-August
2006 war.
Hizbullah said it was responsible for the UAV that was shot down over
southern Israel on 6 October 2012. It said it used an Iranian-made
aircraft that it had designated as the Ayoub for the incursion.
...
The Saudi Al-Watan newspaper claimed in March 2014 that Hizbullah
had built a "military airport" for its UAVs in the Bekaa Valley.
Lebanese media reports erroneously claimed the location was at Iaat in
the central Bekaa Valley, apparently mistaking a long-abandoned Second
World War-era Royal Air Force airfield for the Hizbullah facility.
What could go wrong?
Shabbat Shalom everyone.
Labels: Bekaa Valley, Hezbullah, Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Syria
Surprise: Gazans preparing for war
What a surprise. The Financial Times of London reports that Gaza is once again
preparing for war.
International donors, analysts, and political figures in Gaza say
warning signs of a new conflict have appeared less than a year after
last summer’s war, the bloodiest of three Israel and Hamas have fought
since 2009. Dubbed Operation Protective Edge by
the Israelis, it killed more than 2,200 people, mostly Palestinians,
and ended without a long-term truce between the two sides.
On Thursday evening sirens sounded in southern Israel after a rocket
was fired from inside Gaza, Israel’s military said, underscoring the
tension at the border.
“Since
the end of the recent aggression of the Israelis in Gaza, we have begun
preparations for the next war,” a PFLP leader who calls himself Abu
Jamal says at a café in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza. “We expect at any
time that there might be an aggression on Gaza, especially in light of
the changes in the Middle East and the result of Israeli elections where
the extreme right wing gained popularity.”
Six
months after the international community pledged $3.5bn to rebuild
Gaza, barely a quarter of the funds have been released and “further
conflict is inevitable”, a group of 46 aid agencies warned last week.
Donor fatigue with the conflict, and misgivings about a frozen
reconciliation process between Hamas and Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah, have stalled the rebuilding process.
According to Basil Nasser, acting head of the UN development
programme’s Gaza office, only Qatar and Kuwait have begun paying in
money to rebuild some of the more than 10,000 houses destroyed or
severely damaged during the war.
“If something dramatic doesn’t happen in the Gaza Strip with regard
to the reconstruction process, the probability of another violent round
is higher,” says Kobi Michael, an analyst with the Institute for
National Security Studies in Tel Aviv.
In addition to its training exercises at the northern border, Hamas
has been rebuilding its arsenal and firing test rockets into the sea.
I'm shocked - just totally shocked.
By the way, when was the last time you heard about a terrorist leader sitting in a cafe in Iraq or Afghanistan? Must be those cruel Jews' fault for letting him out of his hole.
Labels: Gaza, Hamas, Hamas rockets, Operation Protective Edge, Palestinian terrorism
Israel denies visa to S. African communist seeking to visit 'Palestinian Authority'
Israel has denied a visa to South African Higher Education Minister
Blade Nzimande, who wanted to visit the 'Palestinian Authority.' The denial has caused a
row between the South African Communist party and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. This is from the first link.
A senior official in Jerusalem said that the reason that the
minister's visa request was turned down was because he intended to pass
through Ben-Gurion International Airport for the purposes of visiting
the Palestinian Authority, rather than visiting Israel.
Another reason, the official said, was Nzimande's radically anti-Israel stance.
Nzimande is a communist who serves in the South
African parliament as a member of the ANC coalition. In the past he has
supported an academic boycott against Israel and on one occasion he
demanded the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador to Pretoria.
Nzimande was invited to Ramallah by his Palestinian
counterpart to promote research collaboration between the University of
Johannesburg and Palestinian institutions in Palestine. He was due to
be there from April 25 – 29.
The minister responded harshly to the decision not
to give him a visa. "The Israeli government is trying to use all the
means at its disposal to hide its atrocities against the Palestinians
and to ensure that only the smallest number of people see what is really
happening in the land under its control," he told the South African
media.
Nzimande added that he would call on all higher
education institutions in his country to immediately freeze their
contacts with Israeli universities.
At this stage, Nzimande has not received the
support of South African President Jacob Zuma or that country's foreign
ministry. Until now, no government minister has come to his defense.
But the South African Communist party came to Nzimande's defense and that drew a strong reaction from Israel's Foreign Minister,
Avigdor Lieberman.
“The wild attacks by the South African Community Party against Israel
following our refusal to allow the higher education minister to pass
through Israel en route to the Palestinian Authority is hypocrisy,”
Liberman said.
“It was only a few days ago that a violent, racist
attack was perpetrated against foreigners in Johannesburg,” the foreign
minister said. “There was also vandalism and destruction of property.
The end result was many deaths and wounded.”
“As part of the
rioting, South African police fired rubber-coated bullets and stun
grenades at other migrants from neighboring African countries,” Liberman
said. “These events and others prove once again that South Africa
remains a country with serious problems of racism and violence.”
“That’s
why it would behoove the South African government and the Communist
Party to stop preaching morality and attacking Israel, which is a great
democracy that is exceptionally coping with threats and terrorist
elements while making maximal effort to preserve human rights and
international norms of behavior.”
If South Africa was forced to
contend with Israel’s security predicament, “blood would be awash in the
streets there,” Liberman said.
“In this light, it’s no surprise
that the Communist Party prefers the Palestinians over Israel,” he
said. “It is a case of like attracting like.”
I can think of some other politicians who think the same way as Nzimande. One of them is the President of the United States. But as I have said many times, no country is obligated to allow unfettered access to its borders. Certainly not Israel.
Labels: borders and security, communist party, Palestinian Authority, South Africa
A Jew murdered in Aghanistan... by Barack Obama
Barack Hussein Obama admitted on Thursday that contractor Warren Weinstein, an American Jew who was kidnapped because he was Jewish and was being held by al-Qaeda for ransom, was
killed in a January by a US drone strike. Sadly, the US had
no clue where Weinstein was. This is from the first link and was written by former Congressman Allen West (R-Fl).
As reported by USA Today,
“President Obama expressed “grief and condolences” Thursday for a
January drone strike against suspected terrorists in Pakistan that
accidentally killed two hostages, including an American aid worker.
Obama said he took full responsibility for the operation and apologized
to the families of the hostages. “I profoundly regret what happened,” he
said. The two Western hostages — one American, one Italian — were
killed during a drone strike that targeted members of al-Qaida, the
White House said. They were Warren Weinstein, 73, an aid worker from
Maryland who was a contractor for the U.S. Agency for International
Development, and Giovanni Lo Porto, 39, an Italian citizen working for a
German aid agency. Both were kidnapped by al-Qaida in Pakistan —
Weinstein in 2011 and Lo Porto in 2012. The White House said the
counterterrorism operation, and another this year in the same region,
also killed two other Americans believed to be working with al-Qaida. In
an extraordinary eight-minute statement to reporters, a solemn Obama
halted at points during his brief remarks, looking down at notes. “I
cannot begin to imagine the anguish that the Weinstein and Lo Porto
families are enduring today,” he said.”
The first issue has to be, why is the family just now finding
out about this fratricide by drone strike, which occurred in January? I thought this was supposed to be the most transparent administration in American history.
...
I understand Clausewitz’s “Fog of War” but I also realize
that something went terribly wrong in the decision-making authorizing
this strike.
“The site of the attack had been under surveillance for hundreds of
hours, and that surveillance was “near-continuous” in the days just
before the attack, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said. The
spying used a variety of methods, including drone imagery, and
discovered a known al-Qaida operative driving into the compound, said
U.S. officials speaking on condition of anonymity. Based on that
intelligence, Earnest said, intelligence analysts concluded with “near
certainty” that al-Qaida leaders were present and that civilians were
not.”
What is apparent is that HUMINT intelligence assets were not used to
validate imagery. Then again, why would anyone want to support U.S.
intelligence gathering in Pakistan after how this administration has
treated Dr. Shakil Afridi who assisted in the identification of Osama
bin Laden’s hideout?
The preeminent question must be, who granted approval? If we
are restricting drone usage to the U.S. military, it is fairly easy to
ascertain the chain of command in the decision-making for this
engagement. But, if this was not within the military operational command
chain emanating out of Afghanistan — then we have a bureaucratic,
administration issue.
And based on the lack of transparency and length of
time before this was revealed, — it leads me to believe this decision
came from the latter, not the former. And that ladies and gents, is the
reason why the president of the United States took the podium.
Josh Rogin reports that the US had
no clue Weinstein was there. That's because - as West noted as well - the US has no intelligence assets on the ground in the area.
One of the biggest questions following President Barack Obama’s
startling revelation Thursday that a U.S. drone strike had
killed Weinstein (and Italian hostage Giovanni Lo Porto) is how the
intelligence community could have been unaware that he was at the
al-Qaeda site where he became collateral damage in the effort to fight
terrorism. A lack of human resources on the ground and a total lack of
intelligence on Weinstein’s location contributed to the accident that
now has the administration and Congress rethinking how the
U.S. will conduct its secret war.
“We put a high priority in tracking and finding him and seeing what
we could do to rescue him,” Dan Benjamin, the State Department’s
ambassador for counterterrorism from 2009 to 2012, told me Thursday.
“The trail went cold quickly and we didn’t know where he was.”
...
Several officials told me that Weinstein, who worked as a business
development contractor for United States Agency for International
Development in Lahore, was nervous about his security just before his
capture. He had built a safe room in his house and told friends he was
hoping to leave Pakistan soon.
In 2012 and 2013, al-Qaeda release several hostage videos
of Weinstein begging the Obama administration to do more to retrieve
him. Several officials told me that although U.S. authorities
repeatedly raised his case with their Pakistani counterparts, there was
no direct interaction with al-Qaeda about any ransom or trade and no
real information on where the terrorist group was holding him for the
three years he was in captivity.
“I don’t think there was any attempt to rescue him because I don’t
think we had the slightest idea where he was,” said Rand Corporation’s
James Dobbins, who was the State Department’s special representative for
Afghanistan and Pakistan from 2013 to 2014. “I don’t believe there were
any real leads.”
Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter said Thursday
that Weinstein’s death was the result of a broken interagency process
in which a Pentagon official, Jason Amerine, developed a plan for a
trade that would have included the return of Weinstein along with Army
Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl. Bergdahl was released by the Taliban in 2014 in
exchange for five Taliban commanders being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
“Warren Weinstein did not have to die," Hunter said in a statement.
"His death is further evidence of the failures in communication and
coordination between government agencies tasked with recovering
Americans in captivity — and the fact that he’s dead, as a result, is
absolutely tragic.”
But several officials told me today that a trade that included
Weinstein was never seriously entertained by the interagency team tasked
with retrieving him, which was led by the FBI and included the CIA,
State Department and Pentagon.
“It never struck us as a plausible option,” Dobbins said, noting that
Bergdahl was being held by the Taliban while Weinstein was being held
by al-Qaeda. The U.S. had extensive negotiations with the Taliban over
the years, but not with al-Qaeda, he pointed out.
This is why you can't lead from behind, and you can't pretend you're not fighting a war when your options are fight or surrender.
Labels: Afghanistan, al-Qaeda, Barack Hussein Obama, drone, Pakistan, Taliban, Warren Weinstein
Brady skips White House ceremony
Israel's Football Team (I'm sure he didn't know they were called that) went to visit President Hussein Obama at the White House on Thursday. Obama's joke about Deflategate fell flat. But most important, star quarterback Tom Brady (in the sunglasses behind owner Bob Kraft and an IDF soldier from the Boston area a few years ago)
didn't show up.
"I usually tell jokes at these events, but I was worried 11 of 12 of
them would fall flat,” Obama joked during a ceremony honoring the
Patriots' Super Bowl title on the South Lawn.
The crowd let out an audible groan at the president's jab.
The president conceded that the "whole story got blown a little out of proportion."
The
Patriots' championship run was clouded by allegations that a team
employee deflated 11 out its 12 footballs during the AFC Championship
game.
Team owner Robert Kraft, head coach Bill Belichick, and
starting quarterback Tom Brady, who was not in attendance at the White
House ceremony, have denied any wrongdoing.
In February, an NFL.com report found that only one football was severely deflated.
Good for Brady. Reminds me of another
Boston sports hero who didn't show up at the White House during Obama's term.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Boston Bruins, Israel's football team, New England Patriots, Tim Thomas, Tom Brady
An Independence Day blast
As Independence Day came to a conclusion here in Israel, 'Palestinian' terrorists in Gaza fired two rockets between Sderot and Netivot, east of Beit Hanoun. In response, the IDF hit what Hamas claims is an empty building and the IDF says is '
part of the terrorist infrastructure.'
The IDF on Thursday night, shortly before midnight, launched an
airstrike which targeted a “terrorist infrastructure” in northern Gaza,
the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit said in a statement.
According to the statement, the airstrike was in retaliation for an earlier rocket attack by Gaza terrorists on southern Israel.
In addition, said the IDF, the entry of worshipers from Gaza into Israel will be prevented on Friday.
“The IDF will not permit any attempt to harm the security of the citizens of Israel,” the statement said.
The IDF confirmed earlier that at least one terrorist rocket had been fired from Gaza at southern Israel.
There were no reports of physical injuries or damage. The remains of
one rocket were located in an open area in the Sha'ar Hanegev region.
The last time a Color Red siren was heard in the Gaza Belt region was in late December – four months ago.
It starts again?
Labels: Gaza, Hamas, Hamas rockets, Palestinian terrorism
'Never has the threat been so high'
French Prime Minister Manuel Walls says that
five Islamist attacks have been foiled in France since January's attacks on the Charlie Hebdo office and on a Paris Kosher supermarket.
French police
have thwarted five attacks, including a suspected plan to target
church-goers foiled in recent days, since the Islamist killings at a
satirical weekly and Jewish food shop in January, Prime Minster Manuel
Valls said on Thursday.
"Never has the threat been so
high," Valls told France Inter radio, noting the fact that hundreds of
French nationals were now in Syria where they risked being radicalized.
Valls
was speaking a day after authorities said they had arrested a
24-year-old Algerian national in Paris suspected of the murder of a
woman at the weekend and an aborted plan to launch an armed attack on at
least one church.
These people don't seem to get that first they come for the Jews, but it never ends there.
Labels: Charlie Hebdo, French anti-Semitism, Islamic terrorism, Paris
Obama tells Jewish leaders Netanyahu not invited until Iran talks conclude
Talk about a closed mind. President Hussein Obama told Jewish leaders last week that Prime Minister Netanyahu will not be invited to the White House until after negotiations with Iran conclude, because...
he doesn't want to hear Netanyahu's concerns about the impending deal.
He
told the group that a face-to-face meeting at the White House would
probably end with Mr. Netanyahu publicly venting his complaints about
the president’s policies, particularly his efforts to forge a nuclear
agreement with Iran, according to people familiar with the private meeting who would provide details about it only on the condition of anonymity.
So
for now, the president said, he would speak with the prime minister
over the telephone, and an Oval Office invitation would wait until after
the June 30 deadline for negotiating the details of the Iran deal.
...
Instead, the White House is engaged in an aggressive effort to assuage
the concerns of American Jewish groups and pro-Israel members of
Congress over the nuclear agreement with Iran, and to limit the
potential political fallout for Democrats of what has become a bitter
rift in the American and Israeli relationship.
Haaretz
adds:
Obama spent an hour with leaders of various major Jewish
organizations during the day's first meeting, described by the
Washington Post as "positive" and "very moving."
Among the attendes were representatives from civil
defense groups like the American Jewish Committee and the
Anti-Defamation League, umbrella groups like the Conference of
Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and the Jewish
Federations of North America, pro-Israel groups like the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee and J Street, and the major religious streams.
One of the meeting's attendees told the Post that the president was "heartfelt about his connection to Israel."
Another said that “the president talked about how
deeply he feels about Israel and the Jewish people and anti-Semitism. It
was not just about Iran. It was much, much deeper in terms of the
president sharing with us how he felt."
The New York Times article, the Haaretz article and the Washington Post article cited by Haaretz strike me as White House spin of
this meeting, part of which is an attempt to make it sound less bad than it was by mixing it up with
this meeting.
Please don't fall for the spin.
Labels: American Jewish leadership, Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, Iranian nuclear threat
The parallels are striking: China estimates N. Korea will have 40 nukes by 2016 and 75 by the end of the decade
The parallels are striking.
In 1994, the Clinton administration signed a deal that it claimed would stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. The deal was negotiated by Wendy Sherman, the same
Democratic party hack who is now in charge of the Iran file. North Korea abrogated the agreement when it felt able to do so, and has gone on to
test nuclear weapons. Iran has
participated in North Korea's nuclear tests.
Now, the Wall Street Journal reports that China, which is not known for being alarmist, says that North Korea will have 40 nuclear weapons -
double the number it has now - by 2016 and 75 by the end of the decade.
China’s top nuclear experts have increased their
estimates of North Korea’s nuclear weapons production well beyond most previous
U.S. figures, suggesting Pyongyang can make enough warheads to threaten regional
security for the U.S. and its allies.
The latest Chinese estimates, relayed in a
closed-door meeting with U.S. nuclear specialists, showed that North Korea may
already have 20 warheads, as well as the capability of producing enough
weapons-grade uranium to double its arsenal by next year, according to people
briefed on the matter.
A well-stocked nuclear armory in North Korea
ramps up security fears in Japan and South Korea, neighboring U.S. allies that
could seek their own nuclear weapons in defense. Washington has mutual defense
treaties with Seoul and Tokyo, which mean an attack on South Korea or Japan is
regarded as an attack on the U.S.
“I’m concerned that by 20, they actually have a
nuclear arsenal,” said Siegfried Hecker, a Stanford University professor and
former head of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, who attended the closed-door
meeting in February. “The more they believe they have a fully functional nuclear
arsenal and deterrent, the more difficult it’s going to be to walk them back
from that.”
Chinese experts now believe North Korea has a
greater domestic capacity to enrich uranium than previously thought, Mr. Hecker
said.
The Chinese estimates reflect growing concern in
Beijing over North Korea’s weapons program and what they see as U.S. inaction
while President Barack Obama
focuses on a nuclear deal with Iran.
In Washington, some Republican lawmakers said
the pending White House deal with Iran could mirror the 1994 nuclear agreement
the Clinton administration made with North Korea. The deal was intended to halt
Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons capabilities, but instead, they allege, provided
diplomatic cover to expand them. North Korea tested its first nuclear device in
2006.
“We saw how North Korea was able to game this
whole process,” U.S. Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign
Affairs Committee, said in an interview. “I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran had
its hands on the same playbook.”
The pace of North Korea’s nuclear arms growth
depends on its warhead designs and its uranium-enrichment capacity, Mr. Royce
said: “We know they have one factory; we don’t know if they have another one.”
China, which
is North Korea’s largest investor, aid donor and trade partner, has for most of
the past decade underestimated Pyongyang’s nuclear capabilities, nuclear experts
said, including its capacity to produce fissile
material.
Estimates of North Korea’s capabilities by
Chinese experts began to align with those in the U.S. after 2010, and moved
beyond after 2013, according to people familiar with exchanges on the matter
between China and the U.S.
Until recently, the Chinese “had a pretty low
opinion of what the North Koreans could do,” said David Albright, an expert on
North Korea’s nuclear weapons and head of the Institute for Science and
International Security in Washington. “I think they’re worried now.”
China’s foreign and defense ministries didn’t
respond to requests for comment. Diplomats at North Korea’s mission to the
United Nations didn’t respond to attempts to seek comment. The White House,
State Department and Pentagon declined to provide U.S. estimates of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal.
“We have been and remain concerned about North Korea’s nuclear program and believe China should continue to use its influence
to curtail North Korea’s provocative actions,” said Patrick Ventrell, a
spokesman for the U.S. National Security Council.
He said the U.S. was working with other
countries to implement U.N. sanctions designed to press North Korea “to return
to credible and authentic denuclearization talks and to take concrete steps to
denuclearize.”
After all, that's worked so well until now. /sarc
In an email, the Israel Project's Omri Ceren breaks it down into politics and policy implications.
Politics -- why it will matter: The parallels write themselves. The Agreed Framework was negotiated by Wendy Sherman and the Iran deal is being negotiated by Wendy Sherman. The Agreed framework lasted a decade and the Iran deal is slated to last a decade. The Agreed Framework relied on IAEA verification and the Iran deal relies on IAEA verification. And now the North Koreans have a full-blown nuclear arsenal, which the Americans don't even know about ("U.S. officials didn’t attend the meeting but some expressed surprise when they were later briefed on the details"). It's a disaster on any number of levels.
Policy -- why it should matter even more: the Iran deal will flood the Islamic Republic with hundreds of billions of dollars, potentially including the $50 billion signing bonus. But in every meaningful sense, the North Korean nuclear program is an Iranian nuclear program, albeit beyond Iran's territorial borders. The Iranians pay for the program. The Iranians receive knowledge and technology from the program. The Iranians are on hand to observe every major nuclear and missile test. Etc. Seen in this light, the nuclear deal with Iran will become a multi-billion dollar jobs program for North Korean nuclear engineers, who will use the money to create and miniaturize more nuclear warheads, which they will then give back to Tehran. The deal doesn't stop Iran's nuclear weapons program. It finances the program.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Iranian nuclear threat, North Korea, nuclear weapons, Wendy Sherman
It's come to this: ROTC cadets forced to walk around campus in red high heels
How much has the American military been degraded by Barack Hussein Obama?
This much.
Via the Washington Times:
Army ROTC
cadets are complaining on message boards that they were pressured to
walk in high heels on Monday for an Arizona State University campus
event designed to raise awareness of sexual violence against women.
The Army openly
encouraged participating in April’s “Walk A Mile in Her Shoes” events
in 2014, but now it appears as though ROTC candidates at ASU were faced
with a volunteer event that became mandatory.
“Attendance is mandatory and if we miss it we get a negative
counseling and a ‘does not support the battalion sharp/EO mission’ on
our CDT OER for getting the branch we want. So I just spent $16 on a
pair of high heels that I have to spray paint red later on only to throw
them in the trash after about 300 of us embarrass the U.S. Army
tomorrow,” one anonymous cadet wrote on the social media sharing website
Imgr, IJReview reported Monday.
Disgraceful.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, degrading US military capabilities
Definitely NOT pro-Israel
Is J Street really pro-Israel?
Consider this:
Definitely not pro-Israel.
Labels: J Street, pro-Israel pro-peace
