Powered by WebAds

Monday, August 03, 2015

Breaking: Terror in Jerusalem

Two people were injured within the last hour when a car driving near the 'east' Jerusalem neighborhood of Beit Hanina was hit by a Molotov cocktail thrown by terrorists.
Two people were injured on Monday night in a firebomb attack near the Beit Hanina intersection in Jerusalem.

The incident occurred when a molotov cocktail was thrown as a moving vehicle. Inside the car was a woman, 27 who was evacuated to Hadassah Ein Keren Medical Center in stable condition with burns to her body.

Her husband, who was also in the vehicle, was unharmed, although the car was completely burnt.

The damaged vehicle hit a pedestrian, who suffered light injuries.

Police are investigating the surrounding incident.
Something tells me that no Leftists will be visiting that 27-year old woman in the hospital.... 

Labels: , , ,

The smartest thing I ever did - UPDATED with new picture

Today, the 18th day of the Jewish month of Av, marks 34 years since I married Mrs. Carl (you didn't think I'd put her real name on the blog, did you?). It amazes me how from just the two of us coming together have come eight children (three married) and seven grandchildren bli ayin hara kein yarbu (warding off evil eyes, and there should be many more).

On the last trip to the States, I tried to have a family picture printed on canvas to bring back with me. Unfortunately, the smallest size that would fit the entire family would not fit in a suitcase (anyone with suggestions where this can be done in Israel, please pipe up).

So Happy Anniversary to the love of my life and the most amazing woman in the world. Here's looking forward to many more years of happiness together!



PS The picture that is currently in this post is a little old. Someone is supposed to send me a newer picture, and when he does, I will update the post. 


Here's a newer picture.


Two thirds of Americans oppose Iranian nuclear sellout

A new Quinnipiac poll shows that two thirds of the American people oppose the Obama-Kerry sellout to a nuclear Iran.
“American voters oppose 57 – 28 percent, with only lukewarm support from Democrats and overwhelming opposition for Republicans and independent voters, the nuclear pact negotiated with Iran,” the release from Quinnipiac states. Republicans overwhelmingly oppose the deal by an 86% to 3% margin, and only a slim majority of Democrats support it. The poll of 1,644 registered voters has a margin of error of 2.4%.
Opposition to the Iran deal has widened as Congress has probed the details of the agreement in televised hearings on Capitol Hill. One major issue is the existence of secret side deals between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Iran governing nuclear inspections, which the administration has not read or provided to Congress, in violation of the Iran Nuclear Review Agreement Act (the Corker bill).
Congress is starting to get it.
At least 218 Republican lawmakers have signed on to support a resolution expressing “firm disapproval” of the nuclear deal, which would provide Iran with billions of dollars in sanctions relief while enabling it to continue work on ballistic missiles and other nuclear research.
The measure, which is being led by Rep. Peter Roskam (R., Ill) and was first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, comes as Congress takes 60 days to review the deal before voting on it.
Many lawmakers, including a growing number of Democrats, have come out against the deal, citing concerns it does not do enough to limit Iran’s nuclear program.
Critics remain most concerned about portions of the deal that will ban U.S. inspectors from Iran’s nuclear sites and remove restrictions on the Islamic Republic’s ballistic missile program.
At least three members of the House leadership, as well as 18 of 22 House committee chairmen and 23 of the 25 GOP members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, have already signed on to back the resolution, according to figures provided by congressional sources.
House Freedom Caucus Chair Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) and Republican Study Committee Chair Bill Flores (R., Texas) also back the measure.
I'm not so impressed by this. Aren't the Republicans the majority party in Congress? Don't they chair all the committees? Who are the four chairmen who have not come out against the deal? Who are the two GOP members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who have not come out against the deal? These people need to be named and shamed.
A senior congressional aide familiar with the effort said the administration is failing to convince lawmakers to back the deal.
“It appears the administration’s sales pitch for this deal is falling on deaf ears. Closed-door briefings and public hearings have apparently left Members with more questions than answers, and the administration’s decision to circumvent Congress by first bringing the deal to the UN infuriated key Democrats who are otherwise loyal to the president,” the source said.
“This level of opposition so early in the review period indicates that Congress really has a chance of killing the agreement. What Congressman Roskam has done—securing 218 commitments from Members vote against the deal in just two weeks—is a rather remarkable feat. He still has more work to do, but this is an impressive start,” the source added.
Remarkable? Look, I love Roskam - he's one of Israel's strongest supporters. But he shouldn't have to work this hard to defeat a deal that is so obviously and blatantly a disaster.

I also don't get why Congress has not claimed the Senate's power to advise and consent to treaties - if not by classifying this agreement as a treaty (which is what it really is) then at least by classifying it as an amendment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which would require a two thirds affirmative vote in the Senate which will never happen.

Labels: , , , , , ,

'Settler' goes along on Leftist condolence visit to Arab village

A revenant in his 20's named Yonadav Tapuchi went along on a Leftist-sponsored visit to the site of the two arson attacks in the village of Duma last week. (You can see a post about a similar visit here). Tapuchi said that he went along on the trip to show that not everyone on the Right agrees with last week's actions (which are still presumed to have been carried out by a Jew from the Right), and that although he is a supporter of Jewish settlement of the entire land in Israel, some actions are simply beyond the pale.

For those of you who read Hebrew, you can find his original thoughts here (it's accessible). For those who do not, Hillel Fendel has translated most of them into English.
"I had difficult feelings after my trip," Yonadav wrote, "which can be divided into three groups. First, there is no doubt that this was a shocking crime. It is simply terrible to wake up in the middle of the night to find your house and family going up in flames, to escape by the skin of your teeth, and then to find that you have lost a son. ...My condolences to the family; may they know no more pain."
"The second area concerns the anthropological experience I had on the bus filled with veteran left-wing activists from Tel Aviv – a horrific scene of hatred-filled talk: hatred of settlers, hatred of the religious, and especially of haredim; hatred of the State of Israel; and explanations why it was a moral imperative to leave and move to another country.
"When we arrived at the village, we were surrounded by Arab photographers. We were informed that the original plan had been changed, and that before visiting the actual mourning family, we would first see the burnt houses. Thus, a bunch of Jews with their heads held low were photographed near and in the burnt houses and the Hebrew graffiti there. A representative of the family and the village then gave a short speech ('the settlers should expect the worst!,' he warned). We were then told that actually, the village is quite up in arms, and that it would not be convenient for us to actually comfort the mourning family, and that we had better leave fast.
"I and others felt that this whole thing was a media trick to get the 'Yahud' [Arabic for 'the Jews' – ed.] to take part in humiliating set of photos near the buildings, and that they had never planned to allow us to come in actual contact with the family."
The third set of impressions that Yonadav Tapuchi came away with concerned the suspicious nature of the alleged arson. He did not mention that there have been reports of an ongoing, 18-year feud between two clans in Duma that might be related to the murderous arson. In addition, one of the two graffiti messages – the single word nekamah, meaning "revenge" – has calligraphic elements that raise the suspicion that it was actually sprayed by an Arab.
There was actually a report up in Hebrew on rotter.net yesterday that claimed that suspects had been arrested in connection with the arson, and that they were Arabs. But when I clicked on the link from Twitter, the post had been removed. It is not unheard of in this country for a report like that to be censored by the military censor for some period of time. In other words, the report could still be true.

And that's not the only thing that's suspicious.
"According to the Duma version, the attackers burnt one house, then saw that it was empty, and so they went to set fire to the next house. The second house is enclosed by a fence, and the windows are covered by a dense lattice; a firebomb cannot be hurled through the windows, and in any event it is very hard to reach the windows behind the fence. The arsonists had to go around the house, enter the yard, and place the firebombs through the lattice. According to the Duma version, the attackers entered the house, stood over the parents and did not let them leave until the flames engulfed the house. Only then did the arsonists run away from the village.
"I can only say that when the arsonists are ultimately caught, we will get to hear a fascinating story of why they chose to navigate their way all the way into the middle of the village, and how they had time to set a house on fire, wait to find that it was empty, then walk around and enter another house and set it on fire, wait with the parents, spray graffiti in two places – including with a little design of a crown! – and then run away through the middle of the village with all the townspeople surely already up and on their feet seeing the flames and hearing the family's cries. Something here is very fishy…"

Labels: , , ,

Schumer to vote AGAINST Iran deal?

Could Chuck Schumer have been for the Iran deal before he was against it? That's what a Politico report suggests.
Chuck Schumer is getting an earful from opponents of the Iran nuclear deal.
More than 10,000 phone calls have flooded his office line the past two weeks, organized by a group looking to kill the deal. Another group has dropped seven figures on TV in New York City to pressure Schumer and other lawmakers to vote against the plan. The powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee has put its muscle behind an effort to lobby the New Yorker against it.
And Dov Hikind, a state assemblyman from Brooklyn, was arrested for disorderly conduct while protesting the deal outside Schumer’s office.
People who have spoken with the senior New York senator believe the pressure campaign is having an effect: They say there is a growing sense inside and outside the Capitol that Schumer will vote against the deal when the Senate considers it in September. The bigger question many have now is this: How hard will he push against it?
And Schumer isn't the only Senator who is wilting under pressure from deal opponents.
Sen. Chris Coons, who was personally lobbied by President Barack Obama and national security adviser Susan Rice to back the deal during a trip to Africa in July, said the view of the accord was about evenly split in his home state of Delaware in the first few days after the announcement. But the Democrat now says telephone calls against the deal outnumber those in favor by 10-to-1 in his state, an avalanche of opposition he has no choice but to listen to.
The New York and New Jersey delegations have been the top focus of groups trying to kill the agreement, and there’s evidence they are making headway. In New Jersey, Sen. Robert Menendez sounds like a “no” vote, while Sen. Cory Booker is undecided. In New York City, the group Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran spent $1.6 million on broadcast television and $119,500 on cable between July 16-July 30 advertising on the issue, according to a media tracking source. Secure America Now, a hawkish group trying to kill the deal, has organized the call-in campaign to Schumer.
What a concept: Senators (and Representatives) who listen to their constituents! If only we had that in Israel!

Then why does Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily continue to editorialize against the pressure that is turning the tide? 10-1 is a lot more than 'more than half but less than two thirds.' Maybe because Haaretz doesn't listen to Israelis because they don't stand for elections?

In the meantime, it sounds like Schumer will not try to persuade anyone else how to vote. In fact, he may not even be able to.
If Schumer wanted to persuade members to side with him, “Chuck would have let his intentions known a long time ago, and everybody would have known,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). Winning over members now, Manchin added, “would be much more difficult.”
The Iran vote could reverberate for Democratic senators facing tough reelection races in the coming years, especially if they back the accord and it fails to rein in Iran. Only one of them, Colorado’s Michael Bennet, is up in 2016; several others will be on the ballot in 2018.
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a moderate who faces voters in three years, said she’s still carefully weighing the agreement.
“Schumer is not going to move anybody on this,” she said.
“I think he’s conflicted,” McCaskill added. “Many of us are. It’s hard.”
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), another moderate up for reelection in 2018, said Schumer would have “none, zero, nada” sway over his vote.
“Don’t tell Chuck that,” Tester joked.
So far, just one member of the Senate Democratic leadership team has voiced his position on the matter — Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who supports the plan. That’s far different than the House, where Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced her backing almost immediately after the deal was announced. In the Senate, the other members of the leadership team, including Reid, Schumer and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), are playing coy.
Will it really come down to what the American people want? Wouldn't that be something!

Labels: , , , , ,

This will destroy your stereotypes of Haredim

Translation: And if you've had enough of stereotypes: Haredi youths came to the memorial service for Shira Banki z"l (of blessed memory) and distributed popsicles to the participants. Lovely! Photography: Elimelech Zilberschlag.


Did President Rivlin visit the Biton family?

Columnist Ben Caspit writes on Facebook this morning regarding the report yesterday that President Rivlin never visited the family of Baby Adele Biton HY"D (May God Avenger her blood), who passed away a couple of months ago two years after being the victim of a terror attack.
The full Facebook post is at that link and its quite short. Here's a much better translation than Facebook will give you.
Since this morning, I see a fabricated report on President Rivlin that claims that he did not visit the parents of Adele Biton "so as not to anger the Arabs." This is a cheap and transparent fabrication at an imaginary site from a reporter who does not exist, which does not stop many Right wing degenerates from spreading it and accusing Rivlin of treason. To permit [taking the life] of the country's President, the Right wing ideologue, the picture of beauty and morality.

It is apparent that the idiots never end, they just change identities. Rivlin visited the Biton family and said powerful emotional words in the family's home. But the lowlifes of limited intelligence do their own thing. We have learned nothing, and apparently we will not learn anything. This is how it is when there are no brains. 
The story I saw - on Arutz Sheva's website - and on which I based my post, was based on an interview with Adele's mother, and said nothing about him 'deserving to die' (God Forbid) or anything similar. 

If you read the Arutz Sheva story carefully, you will see that Mrs. Biton criticized the President for not visiting in the hospital. It is true that he paid a shiva (condolence) call when they were sitting shiva for Baby Adele five months ago.

What Caspit is actually referring to is this story - which describes threats that Rivlin has received since speaking out against the firebombing of the Arab home in Duma and the stabbing of a participant at the gay pride parade in Jerusalem - both on Thursday. The death threats are disgusting and deserve condemnation. But Adele Biton's mother is not their source, and the story only mentions Adele among several terror victims named by Rivlin. Adele's mother deserves to be left in peace at least as much as the President does. It's unfair of Caspit to blame her.

I've met President Rivlin and admire him greatly even if I don't always agree with him. Ironically, if you go to the last link, you will see Rivlin wearing a kaffiyeh with curses written in Hebrew in the top right corner of the picture. In the background are Jewish holy books.... When I met him, he was speaker of the Knesset, and I was taken to his office by a client to meet him. His Knesset office was also filled with Jewish holy books. The man deserves better.

Labels: , , ,

The other shoe drops: Egypt sponsoring IAEA resolution to monitor Israel's nuclear capability

The other shoe may be about to drop on Israel. Egypt is introducing a resolution at an IAEA meeting in September, which will call on the international regulator to monitor Israel's nuclear program. Iran is likely to join the resolution. And while the resolution would not be binding like a Security Council resolution, it would certainly cause diplomatic embarrassment to Israel.
A senior Foreign Ministry official said he feared the recent nuclear deal between Iran and the six powers will make it hard for Israel to defeat the resolution.

The resolution, titled “Israeli nuclear capabilities,” has been repeatedly proposed by Egypt in recent years. It condemns Israel, demands that it open its reported nuclear facilities to IAEA inspection, and calls for an international conference on making the Middle East a nuclear-weapons-free zone.

Though Egypt is the IAEA resolution’s chief sponsor, Iran seems likely to join the move. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif indicated as much by publishing an article in The Guardian titled, “Iran has signed a historic nuclear deal – now it’s Israel’s turn.”

Zarif wrote that Israel must be pressured to join the NPT and advance an international conference on a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East. Israel, he wrote, has “an undeclared nuclear arsenal and a declared disdain towards non-proliferation, notwithstanding its absurd and alarmist campaign against the Iranian nuclear deal.”

For the last three years, Israel has succeeding in mustering a majority against Egypt’s IAEA resolution, thanks partly to proposals for a direct regional security dialogue with Arab states under UN auspices. Egypt and various other countries rejected these proposals, but they earned Israel considerable international credit.

The campaign to thwart the latest resolution began two weeks ago, when the Foreign Ministry sent a cable to all Israeli embassies and consulates instructing them to urge their host governments to oppose it.

“The resolution is fundamentally biased and mistaken, aimed at diverting global attention from the real dangers of nuclear proliferation in this region,” the cable’s talking points said. “This move will further politicize the IAEA and undermine the trust necessary for any regional dialogue on this issue.”

Israel has also sent personal envoys to several countries it considers key to winning the vote. For instance, former Foreign Ministry director general Nissim Ben Shitrit went to Argentina about 10 days ago, on the assumption that if Argentina doesn’t back the Arab proposal, other Latin American countries would likely follow suit.

Senior Israeli officials are divided over how the Iranian deal will impact the IAEA debate. Some argue that following the Iran agreement, America and other leading countries won’t want to raise the pressure on Israel even further. But others fear that with the Iran deal done, the international focus will shift to Israel’s nuclear program. They also fear Israel will enjoy less American support than in the past, due to the severe tensions with Washington over the Iran deal.
I hope that the 78% of American Jews who voted for this administration are pleased. Surely they will still have those smirks on their ugly faces when - God Forbid - as Mike Huckabee said last week, Israelis are led to the ovens.

Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, August 02, 2015

In memory of Shira Banki a"h (Peace be upon her)

As many of you may have heard, someone dressed as an ultra-Orthodox Jew stabbed six people at a gay pride parade in Jerusalem on Thursday. The 'man,' Yishai Schlissel, did the same thing ten years ago, and was recently released from prison for that crime. Unfortunately, this time, he managed to murder someone. 16-year old Shira Banki (pictured above) passed away today.

The letter below was written by Rabbi Ron Yitzchak Eisenman of Passaic, New Jersey, who studied with me in yeshiva 35 years ago. I think it sums up pretty well how we ought to look at and feel about this incident (Hat Tip: Mrs. Carl).
The Short VortGood Morning!Today is Sunday the 17th of Menachem-Av 5775 and August 2, 2015In Memory of Shira Banki...
Posted by Ron Yitzchock Eisenman on Sunday, August 2, 2015

Labels: , , ,

French diplomat pressured to retract statement on Iran, but Representatives back original story

The US Embassy to France and the French Embassy to the United States have been running a full-court press claiming that French diplomat Jacques Audibert never said it would be helpful if Congress rejected the Iran nuclear sellout. But Representatives who were present at the meeting insist that Audibert said what was originally reported.
Reps. Paul Cook (R., Calif.) and Tom Marino (R., Pa.) released a joint statement on Friday confirming Audibert’s comments as described by Sanchez.
“We participated in the meeting and can confirm that Congresswoman Sanchez’s account of the meeting is accurate. We disagree with recent claims that seek to refute her account,” the lawmakers said in a statement provided to the Free Beacon.
The French Embassy continues to deny the report and worked furiously in conjunction with White House officials Thursday to downplay Audibert’s comments, sources said.
The French Embassy’s Twitter account issued a statement by Audibert, who also distanced himself from the report.
“During the meeting with the members of the US Congress on the 17th of July, I never said or suggested that a no vote from the Congress on the JCPOA might be helpful or lead to a better deal,” Audibert said in the statement. “I insisted repeatedly on the fact that the deal itself was the best possible.”
However, Audibert walked back his initial rejection of the report on Friday in an interview with French-language press.
When asked by European officials what would happen if Congress were to reject the deal, Audibert “told them that in my opinion, no European company would take the risk of going to do business in Iran, since it risks being subjected to US sanctions, as was recently the case of a large French bank. It’s obvious,” French press reported.
Audibert’s apparent support for a congressional no vote on the deal is said to have swayed some lawmakers to oppose the agreement.
You don't think the White House and the State Department would lie and pressure another country's diplomat to get the deal passed, do you? 

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Baby Adele HY"D's mother - 'Rivlin and Netanyahu never visited my daughter'

Adva Biton, the mother of terror victim Adele Biton HY"D, has blasted President Rivlin and Prime Minister Netanyahu for the different treatment accorded to the Arab family that was the victim of a terror attack in Duma than was accorded to her family.
“I don't recall President Rivlin, whom I have great respect for, visiting my daughter in the hospital after she was struck by a rock. I don't recall him calling for a public protest when Adelle was attacked. Something is wrong here.” Neither, she said, did Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu visit her in the hospital.
Three year old Adelle Biton was killed last March when an terrorists threw a rock at the car she was riding in as they drove along a road in Samaria. Five Arab teens were arrested in the case, and confessed to throwing large rocks at the Biton family vehicle. A large stone struck Adelle in the head, and she was comatose for nearly two months before waking with permanent, severe disabilities, passing away two years later due to medical complications.
On Friday, Rivlin spoke out against the arson attack last week in the village of Duma, in which an infant was burned to death, and four family members were severely burned. On Saturday night, Rivlin appeared at a rally in Tel Aviv denouncing the attack, which appeared to have been carried out by Jewish extremists.
But while Rivlin and other politicians were quick to speak out against attacks on the Arab population, attacks on Jews – especially religious ones – did not get top priority.

Labels: , ,

How BDS costs 'Palestinian' jobs

Here's SodaStream CEO Daniel Birnbaum explaining to the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,how his company's Arab employees lost out because of BDS.

Let's go to the videotape.

More here.

Labels: ,

Iran prepares for hell

It's kind of hot here in Jerusalem today, but nowhere near as hot as in Iran (it's dry heat here in Jerusalem), where it's hot enough to prepare for hell.
Due to extreme heat and humidity, Bandar Mahshahr registered an apparent temperature of 154 F (68 C) on Thursday. "That was one of the most incredible temperature observations I have ever seen and it is one of the most extreme readings ever in the world," stated AccuWeather Meteorologist Anthony Sagliani.
However, such an exceptional apparent temperature outdid itself on Friday.
The combination of an actual temperature of 115 F (46 C) and a dew point temperature of 90 F (32 C) pushed the apparent temperature to 163 F (73 C) Friday afternoon local time. This reading would have been even higher if a breeze was not blowing, a factor in the calculation of the apparent temperature.
"A strong ridge of high pressure has persisted over the Middle East through much of July, resulting in the extreme heat wave in what many would consider one of the hottest places in the world," stated Sagliani.
Amid this heat wave, Baghdad experienced its all-time record high on Thursday when temperatures soared to 124 F (51 C).
"Around the Persian Gulf, where water temperatures are in the lower to middle 90s (30s C), the extreme heat combines with incredibly high humidity to produce astounding apparent temperatures," Sagliani continued in regards to the exceptional feeling heat around Bandar Mahshahr.
There's no relief expected anytime soon.
Hell indeed.

Labels: ,

Khameni publishes instruction manual for how to destroy Israel

Lest anyone think he's moderated, Amir Taheri reports that Ayatollah Ali Khameni has published a book (so far only in Persian but soon available in Arabic) of instructions how to destroy Israel.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has published a new book called “Palestine,” a 416-page screed against the Jewish state. A blurb on the back cover credits Khamenei as “The flagbearer of Jihad to liberate Jerusalem.”
A friend sent me a copy from Iran, the only place the book is currently available, though an Arabic translation is promised soon.
Obama administration officials likely hope that no American even hears about it.
Khamenei makes his position clear from the start: Israel has no right to exist as a state.
He uses three words. One is “nabudi” which means “annihilation.” The other is “imha” which means “fading out,” and, finally, there is “zaval” meaning “effacement.”
Khamenei claims that his strategy for the destruction of Israel is not based on anti-Semitism, which he describes as a European phenomenon. His position is instead based on “well-established Islamic principles.”
One such principle is that a land that falls under Muslim rule, even briefly, can never again be ceded to non-Muslims. What matters in Islam is ownership of a land’s government, even if the majority of inhabitants are non-Muslims.
The Obama administration will be relieved to hear that Khameni doesn't suggest incinerating the Jews with a nuclear weapon.
Khamenei insists that he is not recommending “classical wars” to wipe Israel off the map. Nor does he want to “massacre the Jews.” What he recommends is a long period of low-intensity warfare designed to make life unpleasant if not impossible for a majority of Israeli Jews so that they leave the country.
His calculation is based on the assumption that large numbers of Israelis have double-nationality and would prefer emigration to the United States and Europe to daily threats of death.
Khamenei makes no reference to Iran’s nuclear program. But the subtext is that a nuclear-armed Iran would make Israel think twice before trying to counter Khamenei’s strategy by taking military action against the Islamic Republic.
In Khamenei’s analysis, once the cost of staying in Israel has become too high for many Jews, Western powers, notably the US, which have supported the Jewish state for decades, might decide that the cost of doing so is higher than possible benefits.
Aren't you glad he's getting another $150-700 billion to spend promoting this stuff?  What could go wrong?

Read the whole thing

Labels: , , , , , ,

Report: Khameni to contribute to Obama campaign to approve nuke deal

Hat Tip: MFS-The Other News

Hmmm. The entire AIPAC budget to fight the deal is supposedly around $40 million.
Aipac expects to spend some $40m on an ad campaign in about 40 states, focusing on vulnerable Democrats, turning up the pressure on them in their home states over the summer recess. Its liberal, pro-deal counterpart, J Street, can only hope to spend up to $5m.
But with Iran allowed to contribute, who needs J Street's money. Khameni can just take $1 billion or so of his 'sanctions relief' and use it to make sure all goes 'smoothly.'

What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Obama's other Iran coverup: The Iran-al-Qaeda connection to 9/11 and other al-Qaeda terror

I'd like to show you a report that was played on Fox News back in May of this year.

Let's go to the videotape.

Hayes and William Kristol are demanding the release of those documents before the Congressional vote on the Iranian deal.
The bin Laden documents have long been the subject of a behind-the-scenes battle between the White House and elements of the intelligence community. After an initial scrub of the documents in the months after the May 2011 raid in Abbottabad, the Obama administration let them sit untouched for as long as a year. When officials at the DIA and Central Command requested access to the collection to extract intelligence and provide it to war fighters, they were initially denied. And soon after the team from DIA and CENTCOM was given limited access to the documents, they were ordered to stop their exploitation. What they did see was illuminating.
Among the most significant were documents that shed new light on the complicated relationship between Iran and al Qaeda. Even the Obama administration has acknowledged the relationship. In 2011, the administration designated six al Qaeda operatives who were responsible for what officials described as al Qaeda’s lifeline. The network was based in Iran.
“This network serves as the core pipeline through which al Qaeda moves money, facilitators, and operatives,” according to the Treasury Department’s designation. In an interview with The Weekly Standard at the time, a senior Obama administration official involved in the designation said, “Without this network, al Qaeda’s ability to recruit and collect funds would be severely damaged.”
David Cohen, then undersecretary of the Treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence and currently the deputy director of the CIA, told The Weekly Standard the intelligence on Iran’s support for al Qaeda was incontrovertible. “There is an agreement between the Iranian government and al Qaeda to allow this network to operate,” Cohen said. “There’s no dispute in the intelligence community on this.” Those conclusions were based, at least in part, on the bin Laden documents.
Contacted about the status of al Qaeda’s Iran network earlier this spring, two intelligence officials confirmed that it was still functioning and still critical to al Qaeda operations. That’s not all.
We are told that one document fills in the picture of possible Iranian foreknowledge and complicity in the 9/11 attacks first raised in the 9/11 Commission report, published in 2004. According to the report, al Qaeda detainees in U.S. custody
described the willingness of Iranian officials to facilitate the travel of al Qaeda members through Iran, on their way to and from Afghanistan. For example, Iranian border inspectors would be told not to place telltale stamps in the passports of these travelers. Such arrangements were particularly beneficial to Saudi members of al Qaeda. Our knowledge of the international travels of the al Qaeda operatives selected for the 9/11 operation remains fragmentary. But we now have evidence suggesting that 8 to 10 of the 14 Saudi “muscle” operatives traveled into or out of Iran between October 2000 and February 2001.
The 9/11 Commission detailed much of that travel and reported:
There is strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of al Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers. There also is circumstantial evidence that senior Hezbollah operatives were closely tracking the travel of some of these future muscle hijackers into Iran in November 2000.
The commission concluded: “We believe this topic requires further investigation by the U.S. government.”

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

IAEA's Amano to testify at closed Senate session

IAEA Chairman Yukiya Amano will appear at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting on Wednesday to privately brief members of the committee on the nuclear sellout to Iran.
The director general’s visit to Washington comes amid questions from many in Congress over separate agreements between Iran and the Vienna-based IAEA that are linked to the overall nuclear deal negotiated between Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers.
Critics of the talks with the longtime U.S. nemesis have cast the agreements as “secret side deals” and have demanded that their contents be revealed.
The State Department has described the documents as “technical arrangements with the IAEA [that] are as a matter of standard practice not released publicly or to other states” but added that U.S. officials have been briefed on them.
Some lawmakers also have questioned whether the U.S. should have a more direct role in inspecting Iran’s nuclear facilities, even though the Islamist-led government in Tehran doesn’t want American inspectors on its soil.
I would love to be a fly on the wall for that session. Maybe I should call the Mossad.... 

Labels: , , , , , ,

John Kerry's Nobel Peace Prize

Hat Tip: Jack W.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, August 01, 2015

It's come to this: Iran demands Senate not be given access to its agreement with IAEA, 'just like the Obama administration'

Iran is demanding that the United States Senate be denied access to its agreement with the IAEA... just like the Obama administration.
Iran's Envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency Reza Najafi objected to the US Senate's demand for being briefed about the contents of the recently signed roadmap of cooperation between Tehran and the IAEA, warning the UN nuclear watchdog to avoid disclosing its secret agreements with Tehran.
"The agreements signed between a member country and the IAEA are definitely secret and cannot be presented to any other country at all," Najafi said in an interview with the Iranian students news agency on Saturday.
Referring to the discussions at the US Congress during which the US officials elaborated on the nuclear agreement between Iran and the Group 5+1 (the US, Russia, China, Britain and France plus Germany), he said, "The discussions revealed that the secret texts between Iran and the Agency have not even been provided to the US administration."
"For the very same reason, they cannot be presented to the Senate members either," Najafi added.
Elsewhere in an interview with another Iranian news agency, the envoy said Tehran has already warned the IAEA chief against the repercussions of a disclosure of its agreement with the UN nuclear watchdog agency.
"Iran has clarified it to Amano that the text of its understanding with the IAEA cannot be presented to the Senate," Najafi reiterated.
He further warned that "the Agency knows what it means to disclose a secret document".
This is worse than Obamacare. The Congress was told it could read about Obamacare once they signed the bill. This time, they cannot even do that.

What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Would that be this Hillary Clinton email?

The New York Post reports that some more of Hillary Clinton's emails were dumped by the State Department on Friday afternoon (Hat Tip: Shy Guy via Jihad Watch). One of them is described as blacking out the following information:
The latest State Department e-mail dump reveals 37 times that e-mails sent on Hillary Clinton’s private server were subsequently deemed too sensitive to release.
Among Friday’s revelations:
One e-mail that got blacked out shows former Clinton administration National Security Adviser Sandy Berger coaching Clinton on how to pressure Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in negotiations with the Palestinians.
Would that be this email?
Let raise an idea about how you could present the arrangement on settlements that you are seeking with Israel as I understand it, i.e. a moratorium coupled with allowances to complete a number of housing units. There are two ways:
1. To describe it as an agreement, explaining why the US has accepted an Israeli completion of a handful of units whose construction already has begun. This raises some concerns. It would represent U.S. legitimization of some (however small) Israeli activity in the West Bank and it would trigger Arab and Palestinian complaints that we had compromised, sowing doubts about our effectiveness.
2. The alternative would be for the administration to say:
a. We have come a very long way, as Israel has made unprecedented commitments to the U.S. in terms of a settlements freeze. This is a very welcome development.
b. We did not achieve all that we had hoped as Israel intends to complete a number of housing units. We have differences with the Israeli government on this matter which we have expressed to them..
c. That said, we are convinced that substantial progress has been made that warrants an immediate resumption of peace talks as well as Arab steps toward Israel that will help promote a two-state solution.
This latter option retains our credibility, does not compromise our oft-stated position and allows us to move forward.
Israel  gives a 'settlement freeze' for which Hillary Clinton and Sandy 'I stuffed the top secret material in my socks' Berger make sure it gets no credit.

Better than Obama? What difference does it make?

Or is there an even worse email we haven't seen yet? 

Labels: , ,

Yes, the Iran sellout requires the US to defend Iranian nukes against cyberattacks by Israel

Shavua tov, a good week to everyone.

Since I had to post the tweet above a short while ago, I wanted to make sure that everyone is aware that the Obama administration sellout to Iran includes the obligation to protect Iran's nuclear program against cyberattacks by Israel. Here it is again:
Dempsey also acknowledged that he advised the president not to agree to the lifting of sanctions pertaining to Iran’s ballistic missile program and other arms. “Yes, and I used the phrase ‘as long as possible’ and then that was the point at which the negotiation continued — but yes, that was my military advice,” he told Senator Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.). In the event the new deal goes into effect, the arms embargoes will expire over the next several years.   
Citing chapter and verse of the deal, Ayotte pointed out that the “plain language” of the bargain requires the United States “to help strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against sabotage of its nuclear program” — even to the point of warning Iran if Israel tries to launch cyberattacks against the program.
From page 142 of the 159-page pdf version of the JCPOA (here):
E3/EU+3 parties, and possibly other states, as appropriate, are prepared to cooperate with Iran on the implementation of nuclear security guidelines and best practices. Co - operation in the following areas can be envisaged: 
Co - operation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage, as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems.

Please get this out. 

Labels: , , ,

Friday, July 31, 2015

Actually, it's not the problem - it's the solution

Obama's inability to ram his sellout to a nuclear Iran through Capitol Hill is one of the great hopes of the West.

Shabbat Shalom everyone.

Labels: , , , ,

Obama to ignore Congress if Iran deal is rejected?

Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman (Calif) fears that if Congress rejects the Iranian nuclear sellout, President Hussein Obama will attempt to implement it anyway.
The quotations from Sherman come from this article in the Hill:
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), who has been one of the more skeptical Democrats on the agreement, said that Obama appeared ready to ignore Congress, even if lawmakers vote to kill the deal and then marshal the two-thirds majorities to override a White House veto.
“The main meat of what he said is, ‘If Congress overrides my veto, you do not get a U.S. foreign policy that reflects that vote. What you get is you pass this law and I, as president, will do everything possible to go in the other direction,’” Sherman told reporters off the House floor after the meeting.
“He’s with the deal — he’s not with Congress,” Sherman added. “At least to the fullest extent allowed by law, and possibly beyond what’s allowed by law.”
Sherman suggested that Obama could refuse to enforce the law and could actively seek to undermine congressional action in other countries, if Capitol Hill insists on stymieing the plan.  
He always wanted to be a dictator. What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , ,

At least Neville Chamberlain got a copy of what he signed

Ezra Levant talks about the deal with Iran that's too secret to show the American people.

Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: Gershon D).

Labels: , , , ,

Senator Tom Cotton is the American people's lawyer

Senator Tom Cotton demolishes US Secretary of State John Kerry in the cross-examination below. It lasts about seven minutes - we can only imagine what he would have done with more time.

Let's go to the videotape. Summary here (Hat Tip: Elihu S).

You don't think they're trying to hide anything, do you?

Labels: , , , , , , ,

'Every Israeli a legitimate target'

For those who have been hiding in a cave all day, thus far unidentified assailants burned down a home in the Arab village of Duma next to Nablus (Shchem) during the night. A baby died and his parents and brother were injured. I am going to post the reactions I posted on Twitter this morning, and then an update.
Ostensibly in response, Hamas is now saying that every Israeli is a legitimate target for a terror attack.
Hamas said Friday that every Israeli is now a legitimate target following the deadly terror attack in the village of Duma in which a Palestinian toddler was killed, Israel Radio reported. In an official message to the public, Hamas also called for a "day of rage" to protest the deadly terror attack and "in order to protect al-Aksa mosque."

Palestinian toddler Ali Dawabsha was killed and three members of his family injured after a molotov cocktail was thrown at their home by suspected far-right extremists, in the village of Duma, in the northern area of the West Bank, outside the city of Nablus.

Israeli and Palestinian security forces in Jerusalem and the West Bank were placed on high alert following the attack.
As noted above, the difference between Israel and the 'Palestinians' is that the condemnation of this attack is across the board. Of course, it could still turn out that the attack was not carried out by Jews. But it should be condemned in any case.

There have been terror incidents in Judea and Samaria all afternoon, culminating in an Israeli driver coming under fire - and responding - near Kochav HaShachar, which is just a few minutes from the Hizme crossing (the crossing between Jerusalem and Samaria). 
A suspected Palestinian terrorist carried out a drive-by shooting attack on an Israeli vehicle on Friday in the Binyamin region of the West Bank near Kochav Hashahar. The Israeli driver in the vehicle told the army he fired back at the gunman. There were no injuries in the incident. The army found three bullet holes in the Israeli vehicle that came under fire.

A couple of hours later, Palestinian rioters clashed with IDF soldiers in Hebron. The incident occurred near the al-Rasoul Mosque, when Palestinians on a march hurled rocks and burning tires at security forces in the area.

Soldiers responded with riot dispersal means, and fired Roger low intensity rounds at the legs of a suspect, an army spokeswoman said. He sustained a light injury, the spokeswoman added.
There's enough terrorism in this country without vigilantism. Whoever murdered that child should be sent to jail for a long, long time.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, July 30, 2015

French National Security official: 'Congressional 'no' vote might be helpful'

A French national security official has contradicted the Obama-Kerry line that rejection of the Iranian nuclear sellout would bring about an apocalypse. Josh Rogin reports that the official, Jacques Audibert, says that a Congressional 'no' vote might be helpful.
The French official, Jacques Audibert, is now the senior diplomatic adviser to President Francois Hollande. Before that, as the director general for political affairs in the Foreign Ministry from 2009 to 2014, he led the French diplomatic team in the discussions with Iran and the P5+1 group. Earlier this month, he met with Democrat Loretta Sanchez and Republican Mike Turner, both top members of the House Armed Services Committee, to discuss the Iran deal. The U.S. ambassador to France, Jane Hartley, was also in the room.
According to both lawmakers, Audibert expressed support for the deal overall, but also directly disputed Kerry’s claim that a Congressional rejection of the Iran deal would result in the worst of all worlds, the collapse of sanctions and Iran racing to the bomb without restrictions.
“He basically said, if Congress votes this down, there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again that would be to our advantage,” Sanchez told me in an interview. “He thought if the Congress voted it down, that we could get a better deal.”
Audibert is also not anxious to see US sanctions on Iran lifted.
Audibert disagrees with that analysis, too, according to the two lawmakers. He told them that if U.S. sanctions were kept in place, it would effectively prevent the West from doing extensive business in Iran. “I asked him specifically what the Europeans would do, and his comment was that the way the U.S. sanctions are set in, he didn’t see an entity or a country going against them, that the risk was too high,” Sanchez said.
And Audibert has some objections to the deal. 
Audibert also wasn’t happy with some of the terms of the deal itself, according to Sanchez and Turner. He said he though it should have been negotiated to last forever, not start to expire in as few as 10 years. He also said he didn’t understand why Iran needed more than 5,000 centrifuges for a peaceful nuclear program. He also expressed concerns about the robustness of the inspections and verification regime under the deal, according to the lawmakers.
Ya think?

Kerry was asked about Audibert in a classified House briefing with more than 300 members on July 22. He apparently didn't have any answers.


Read the whole thing

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Obama and Kerry finally listen to Netanyahu

US President Hussein Obama and US Secretary of State John Kerry are finally listening to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Prime Minister Netanyahu told Israeli Army Radio on Tuesday that there is no reason for Kerry to come to Israel now, and so Kerry will skip Israel on a trip to the region this coming week that is meant to reassure skeptical allies about the Iran nuclear sellout.
Netanyahu, a fierce critic of the nuclear accord, said that the Iran deal “has nothing to do with us, and has no influence” on Israeli policy, before adding, “We’re not at the table, we are one of the courses on the menu itself.”
Netanyahu was on an official visit to Cyprus on Tuesday, where he spoke about the international terrorist network supplied by Iran and its proxy Hezbollah. Netanyahu said that the sophisticated network “covers over 30 countries on five continents, including just about every country in Europe.”
In defending his alleged snub to the Jewish state, Kerry said, “I think I’ve had more meetings with an Israeli prime minister and more visits than any secretary of state in history. And I consider Bibi a friend, and we talk still and we disagree on this, obviously, and I’ve told him my feelings.”
I can't wait until Netanyahu's book comes out to hear what 'Bibi' thinks of their 'friendship.'

Meanwhile, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter got some rather rough treatment during a trip here earlier this week. 
Ash Carter was in Israel hoping to begin a dialogue on how the U.S. and Israel can mitigate risks of the international accord intended to limit Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and to lift many economic sanctions. But Carter didn’t even get to begin that beginning. Netanyahu is said to have insisted on talking only about how the Israeli government would work against the deal while Congress is reviewing the accord for 60 days, a period mandated by recent legislation.
An Israeli official familiar with the conversations told us this week that Israel is for now trying to thwart the deal. But that could change on Day 61, the official said.
Carter confirmed on Wednesday that in the meeting, Netanyahu "was very clear as he has been publicly in his opposition to the deal." And a U.S. defense official told us that in the meeting, Netanyahu didn’t explicitly rebuke the defense secretary. In fact, at other meetings in the trip, Carter discussed expanded security cooperation with Israel, and the official said Carter left optimistic despite tension on Iran.
"The decision makers in Israel believe we don't start the dialogue now because it will be used to make it seem like we acquiesce on the deal,” said Michael Herzog, a former senior Israeli defense official and the brother of the leader of Israel's Labor Party. All of Israel’s major political parties have come out against the deal.
The Israeli campaign for now is focused on Democrats in Congress. Israel's ambassador to Washington, Ron Dermer, has had dozens of meetings with lawmakers, urging them to vote against the deal after the review period ends in September, according to Senate and House lawmakers and staff members.
While Dermer and allies like AIPAC are working Capitol Hill, Netanyahu will have lots of opportunities to make his case directly to lawmakers as well. Dozens of U.S. lawmakers will travel to Israel during the August recess. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, a key and as yet uncommitted vote on the Iran deal, will lead a group of freshman Democratic members of Congress to Israel next month.
Meanwhile, as soon as the vote in Congress is over, the Obama administration is likely to allow a resolution that will be aimed at mandating 'Palestinian statehood' to pass the United Nations Security Council, and Obama may give us bunker busters, which he will of course prevent us from ever using.

What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Bad news: Sign that Schumer will back Iran deal (WITH THE VIDEO)

The New York Post is reporting on signs that Senator Chuck Schumer - a key to the Senate vote - will back President Obama's Iranian nuclear sellout.
That’s the implication of a little-noticed YouTube video on which he was last month captured talking with a delegation of Orthodox Jews in Washington.
The video has been given little coverage, even as Schumer emerges as a pivotal figure in the debate in the Senate. The meeting was with a delegation of one of the most distinguished Jewish groups, the Orthodox Union. It was apparently filmed on a cellphone by a member of the audience and was uploaded onto YouTube in June.
Schumer was aware of that possibility, because he started out by saying he’d “wanted to talk a lot of tachlis about Iran” — meaning, roughly, get down to business. But, he said, “I’m not going to do this because you’re recording it.”
Then he proceeded to talk tachlis anyhow, characterizing the question as “which is better — no agreement or an agreement that is not close to the ideal.” It would, though, be inaccurate to suggest that Schumer simply endorsed what the administration is doing.
Schumer was nuanced and thoughtful. He gets that an Iranian bomb would be an existential threat to Israel. But he mocked those who advocate a military strike against Iran’s bomb-making facilities, calling it “the next-worst solution.”
Then, toward the end of his remarks, he asked that the door be closed.
“This is the tachlis part,” the senator said. He spoke of how the failure to reach an agreement would leave sanctions in place but only if everyone else stays in. “It so bothers me to have the Jewish fate in European hands,” Schumer said.
“We’ve been through this before, we Jewish people,” Schumer said. He then spoke of what a difficult decision he was facing. Noting that he’d been an elected official for 41 years, he said he would not let political pressure interfere.
Yet maybe Schumer will remember Mordechai’s injunction to Esther: “If you remain silent at this time, relief and rescue will arise for the Jews from elsewhere, and you and your father’s household will perish.”
Let's go to the videotape.

Labels: , , ,

Joint Chiefs Chair Martin Dempsey: 'We told him, he ignored us'

A couple of stunning admissions on the Iranian nuclear sellout in the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday from Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
President Obama’s claim that Congress must either back his deal with Iran or plan for war does not square with the advice he has received from his top general, Senate lawmakers learned on Wednesday. 
Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, never presented Obama with such a binary choice. “At no time did that come up in our conversation nor did I make that comment,” Dempsey told Senator Joni Ernst (R., Iowa) during a Senate hearing on the Iran deal. “I can tell you that we have a range of options and I always present them.”

Dempsey also acknowledged that he advised the president not to agree to the lifting of sanctions pertaining to Iran’s ballistic missile program and other arms. “Yes, and I used the phrase ‘as long as possible’ and then that was the point at which the negotiation continued — but yes, that was my military advice,” he told Senator Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.). In the event the new deal goes into effect, the arms embargoes will expire over the next several years. 
Citing chapter and verse of the deal, Ayotte pointed out that the “plain language” of the bargain requires the United States “to help strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against sabotage of its nuclear program” — even to the point of warning Iran if Israel tries to launch cyberattacks against the program.

Dempsey seemed caught off guard when asked about that provision. “I hadn’t thought about that, senator, and I would like to have the opportunity to do so,” he told Ayotte. 
That exchange came shortly after Dempsey and other administration officials acknowledged a concern that Iran could launch cyberattacks against the United States and even the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is tasked with key oversight of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program under terms of the deal.
What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , ,

'Israel or Iran' is not a zero sum game

In an effort to defend Prime Minister Netanyahu from charges of destroying the US-Israel alliance due to his 'prickly' relationship with President Obama, Jonathan Tobin almost turns relations between the US and Israel and the moderate Arab states, on the one hand, and the US and Iran, on the other hand, into a zero sum game.
But the U.S.-Israel crackup isn’t a tabloid romance gone sour. The differences between the two countries are rooted in the administration’s reckless pursuit of an entente with Iran at the cost of its friendships with both Israel and moderate Arab states. That pursuit began in Obama’s first months in office, and nothing Netanyahu could have done or said would have deterred the president from this course of action. His success was achieved by a series of American concessions on key nuclear issues and not by pique about Israel’s stands on the peace process with the Palestinians or perceived rudeness on the part of Netanyahu.
Despite the attempt to portray Netanyahu’s interventions in the debate about Iran as a partisan move or an insult to Obama, keeping silent would not have advanced Israel’s interests or made more U.S. surrenders to Iran less likely. At this point, Israel has no choice but to remind U.S. lawmakers of the terrible blow to American credibility and regional stability from the Iran deal. It is the White House that has turned the Iranian nuclear threat — which was once the subject of a bipartisan consensus — into a choice between loyalty to the Democratic Party and its leader and friendship for Israel.
It is almost a given that the next president — no matter who he or she might turn out to be — will be friendlier to Israel than Obama. But the president’s legacy may not only be the strengthening of a terror state in Tehran. It has also chipped away at the U.S.-Israel alliance in a way that will make it that much harder to maintain the across-the-board pro-Israel consensus in Congress in the coming years. Given the growing dangers that the deal poses to Israel this is something that should have both Republicans and Democrats deeply worried.
Coming into office, Obama had two independent foreign policy goals in the Middle East: To weaken or destroy the United States' relations with  what he sees as 'neo-colonialist' Israel, and to bring Iran back into the fold of nations. Each goal has been pursued independently. The goal of weakening the alliance with Israel has been pursued through the Obama administration changing the terms of the 'peace process' as much as it has been played by making Iran a strong enough power to check Israel. The goal of bringing Iran back into the fold of nations has been pursued through the nuclear sellout. There is nothing Netanyahu or any other Israeli leader could have done to stop Obama on either front.

The moderate Arab states are collateral damage. For different reasons than Israel, they oppose a nuclear Iran and they oppose (although they cannot say so), the creation of a 'Palestinian' terror state in the Middle East. The fact that the two goals coincide on many levels doesn't mean that an alliance with Israel was traded for one with Iran. Each goal was pursued separately.

And none of this has anything to do with Obama's personal relationship with Netanyahu. Shimon Peres could have been Prime Minister and Moshe Dayan could have been Foreign or Defense Minister and they still would have clashed with Obama. Like the 'Palestinians,' Obama sees all of Israel as 'occupied,' and not just the territories liberated in 1967.

Labels: , , , , , ,

They didn't get fleeced - they got exactly what they wanted

Hat Tip: Jack W.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Mike Huckabee's 'ovens' remark

(Image from here - Hat Tip: Jack W).

There's been a lot of commentary in the media - most of it negative - over Mike Huckabee's accusation that the Iran nuclear sellout has led Israelis to 'the doors of the ovens.' Mike French argues that imagery notwithstanding, Huckabee is spot-on when it comes to substance.
What matters is substance, and on the substance, Huckabee is exactly right in his assessment of Iranian motives and Israel’s potential vulnerability.  
How many times do Iranian officials and Iranian allies have to express genocidal intentions before we believe them? While there’s long been argument as to whether former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actually said Israel “must be wiped off the map,” there is an enormous amount of evidence that this sentiment has been repeated (even stated in English) and amplified by Iranian officials and allies on multiple occasions. For example, the inscription below (on a missile, no less) has been translated as saying “Israel must be uprooted and wiped off [the pages of] history.”
And in the banner below, the Iranians helpfully provided their own translation:

Mark Langfan argues that President Hussein Obama is very clear on Iran's intentions:
(Image from here via Jack W).
Perhaps Obama wants to wait until Iran nukes Israel for it to be politically correct to call Iran’s wiping Israel off the map a “Holocaust.”  But, make no mistake, Obama knows full well that Iran intends to wipe Israel off the map with its Obama-blessed Nukes.

Come on, does anyone (except the American left-wing cool-aid drinking Jews) really believe that Iran will abide by their “voluntary” protocols under the Vienna announcement?  Of course not!  Are Obama or any of the European Union leaders so rank stupid and naïve that they think Iran won’t build a bomb just like North Korea?  Does anyone not know that one of Iran’s first targets will be to annihilate Israel?  
Of course Obama knows Iran will seek to annihilate Israel, so that must be what Obama wants.   
Obviously, Obama doesn’t care if he enables the murder of another 6 million Jews through a Palestinian State’s chemical Sarin-tipped Katyusha rockets, or an Iranian Nuke.  It’s simple: Obama wants Israel and its Jews offed.  What is so difficult to understand about that?  Every move Obama has made from the very first moment of his presidency has been to irreparably harm Israel and Saudi Arabia, and irrevocably empower Iran.  It doesn’t matter what Obama’s specific motivation is.  Obama may believe in Farrakhan’s and Rev. Wright’s virulent Chicago anti-Semitism; Obama may be merely steeped in anti-British anti-Colonialism; or both.  All that matters is Obama is acting in ways that will allow others to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. 
If Obama walks like a Jew-hater, arms Iran like a Jew-hater, and creates a PA "West Bank" State like a Jew-hater, he’s a Jew-hater.

But, now here come the American Leftist Jewish “Holocaust” speech-police like Debbie Wasserman-Schulz who say one isn’t allowed to invoke the “Holocaust” or “Auschwitz” into a political debate when it is Iran’s highest leaders who have repeatedly, openly, and notoriously injected into the political debate that they intend to wipe Israel off the map.  And, in plain sight, Obama is crowning Iran, the greatest openly Holocaust-threatening, terror-state in the world, the nuclear hegemon-state of the Middle East because Iran is “stable.” I guess Obama forgot he helped quash a popular uprising there  as his first foreign policy debacle. 

Labels: , , , , , , , ,