===High School Graduation in Detroit (See 1 below.)
From a very dear and old friend and fellow memo reader. (See 2 below.)
===
I have never trusted Livni. You might say she is Israel's, Hillary! (See 3 below.)
===
Dershowitz may remind you of Woody Allen visually. He does me. That said, he is bright and presents a very cogent argument why The Settlement Issue is a ruse! http://prageruniversity.com/
Obama's constant reference to The Settlement Issue suggests to me he is not only ignorant but biased and simply uses it as a club to bash Israel over the head.
===
Another thought regarding Hezbollah's attack. (See 4 below.)
===
Is an American Renaissance in our future? Is an American Renaissance necessary to overcome the Obama years? (See 5 below.)
This op ed writer believes Obama is colluding with the enemy. (See 5a below)
Is Obama a cave man? (See 5b and 5c below.)
===
It pays to be a crabby wife! (See 6 below.)
===
Obama's budget is not meant to solve problems but rather to create a problem for Republicans and hammer them on the anvil of envy politics.
The idea of continuing an increasing indebtedness has no basis in reality other than to further his desire to weaken America so it will continue to withdraw off the world's stage.
By holding a military budget increase hostage to increasing transfers is designed not to rebuild our military but to make it politically challenging for Republicans.
Obama's budget seems to be saying taxpayers exist to serve government rather than government taxpayers.
With respect to Ukraine, Obama is beginning to move into his 'creep' mode now that he is thinking about helping them since the hour is late.
===
We just learned ISIS is not happy over the fact that they lost control over who delivers their sadistic messages.
There is always the possibility members of ISIS will wind up killing each other as is the usual pattern among Palestinians and Gazans. (See 7 below.)
===
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) A student played high school football in Detroit. He was a great running back, but a really poor student.At graduation, he didn't have enough credits.
But he was a great football star and the students held a rally and demanded the principal give him a diploma anyway. They were so insistent that the principal agreed if Darqueeze could answer one question correctly he would give him a diploma.was ready and the principal asked him the question.
The one question test was held in the auditorium and all the students packed the place. It was standing room only.The principal was on the stage and told him to come up. The principal had the diploma in his hand and said, "Darqueeze, if you. can answer this question correctly I'll give you your diploma." He said he
"Darqueeze," he said, "How much is three times seven?"
Then he held up his hand and the auditorium became silent.
He looked up at the ceiling and then down at his shoes, just pondering the question.
He said, "I think I know the answer. Three times seven is twenty-one."
A hush fell over the auditorium and all the other students began a chant.
"Give him another chance! Give him another chance!"
2) I know there are some of you that love president Obama, but this is for
Christians and Jews first, politics later. I do pray that it doesn't
offend anybody with the truth of the message, but it has to be sent. If
you love your Lord first and your politics later, then you will appreciate this
message.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If you don't, I'm sorry I judged you wrong.
When we get 100,000,000, that's one hundred million willing Christians
and Jews to BOND together, voice their concerns and vote, we can take
back America with God's help. Become one of the One hundred million...
Then let's get 200 million. It can be done just by sending this email to
your friends. Do the math. It only takes a single willing heart and a fed
up SOUL.
God Bless America and Shine your light on Her! Continue to
scroll..........
In 1952 President Truman Established one day a year as a "National Day of
Prayer."
In 1988 President Reagan Designated the first Thursday in May of each
year as The National Day of Prayer.
In June 2007 (then) Presidential Candidate Barack Obama Declared that the
USA "Was no longer a Christian and Jewish nation.
In 2009 President Obama Canceled the 21st annual National Day of Prayer
ceremony at the White House under the ruse of "not wanting to offend
anyone"
HOWEVER... On September 25, 2009 From 4 AM until 7 PM, A National Day of Prayer FOR THE MUSLIM RELIGION Was Held on Capitol Hill, inside the White House. There were over 50,000 Muslims In D.C. that day. PRESIDENT OBAMA PRAYS WITH THE MUSLIMS!
I guess it doesn't matter if "Christians and Jews" were offended by this
event - We obviously don't count as "anyone" anymore.
Now President Obama is encouraging schools to teach the Quran for extra
credit, while at the same time, they cannot even talk about the Bible,
God, pray, or salute the American Flag.
The direction this country is headed should strike fear in the heart of
every Christian and Jew, especially knowing that the Muslim religion
believes that if Christians and Jews cannot be converted, they should be
annihilated.
3) Tzipi Livni
Misinformed, Ill-advised and a Danger to the state of Israel
By Eli E. Hertz
Much controversy is being generated as to Minister Tzipi Livni's ability to lead Israel. She advocates honesty and accountability, but when it came to drafting Resolution 1701 those principles may have left the room.
The Government of Israel found itself making the wrong decisions based on faulty information.
Is it ignorance or blatant falsehood? You decide …
1. Livni: “Security Council Resolution 1701 is an Israeli achievement”
Fact: Adopting Resolution 1701 under Chapter VII was a clear goal of Israel that did not materialize!
Under international law, Resolution 1701 which was adopted under Chapter VI is at best a declarative statement that lacks the legal authority or enforcement power whatsoever. All the rest is wishful thinking and the results on the ground will attest to it.
Hesham Youssef, chief of the cabinet of the Arab League Secretary-General speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly simply stated: “The resolution is issued under Chapter VI rather than Chapter VII of the UN Charter … [This] is a diplomatic achievement” of the Arab League. In other words, the Arab League welcomes the weakness of the resolution which lacks enforcement power to “ensure implementation” of Resolution 1701.
Unable to have the resolution adopted under Chapter VII, Livni invents a new Chapter when she claims: We got “VII minus” a statement which is injudicious and fundamentally wrong. There is no room in international law for a loose interpretation of the Charter and “VII minus” is not a recognized provision in international law.
Livni and Olmert's claim that the cease-fire that brought the fighting to a halt, is somehow indicative of a success, either militarily or diplomatically, is erroneous. The Government of Israel failed to protect its citizens - unable to stop the daily barrage of Katyushas landing in northern and central Israel, with nearly a million Israelis displaced; Israel's urgent need for a cease-fire was obvious. If the war would have kept going at its pace, Israel would have suffered the greatest military humiliation in its history. As the Wall Street Journal noted: “Israel has nothing to show for its 1701 Resolution”
2. Livni: “A decision was reached by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense to approve the start of a military operation and just as it was starting to go into action late Friday [August 11, 2006] we began to strengthen the resolution and return it to the level at which we felt it should originally be.”
Fact: John Bolton, who was U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during the Second Lebanon War, rejected Livni and Olmert's version of the failed ground offensive during the war's final days: "The Israeli military operation did not play a role in the talks on drafting the UN Security Council Resolution 1701."
It appears that Prime Minster Olmert, Foreign Minister Livni, and Defense Minister Peretz - all in concert - failed to this day “to come clean” and with clarity, explain to the nation's families and soldiers what precisely was the "improvement" attained as a direct result of the IDF expansion into Lebanon on August 11, 2006 - a move that cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers!
3. Livni: “We wanted to ensure that this embargo would be enforceable and substantive, preventing the transfer of arms … to Hezbollah. … Now the embargo is part of the UN resolution and the terms and formulation of this article are acceptable to Israel and express our opinion - a proper embargo.”
Fact: Resolution 1701 never even mentions the word “embargo” and does not set-forth an enforcement mechanism or any enforcement power. It seems as though the Minister did not read the resolution.
4. Livni: Israel “Will be getting UNIFIL with a completely different mandate, which includes the right, the option and the authority to use force when required.”
Fact: UNIFIL - a Paper Tiger - is not authorized to use armed force or to impose in any forceful manner the implementation of the recommendations of UN Resolution 1701.
UNIFIL's right to use force is strictly limited to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Major-General Alain Pelligrini [France] then the Force Commander of UNIFIL made it clear: “The disarmament of Hezbollah is not the business of UNIFIL.”
Hesham Youssef, chief of the cabinet of the Arab League Secretary-General speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly simply stated: “The resolution is issued under Chapter VI rather than Chapter VII of the UN Charter … [This] is a diplomatic achievement” of the Arab League. In other words, the Arab League welcomes the weakness of the resolution which lacks enforcement power to “ensure implementation” of Resolution 1701.
Unable to have the resolution adopted under Chapter VII, Livni invents a new Chapter when she claims: We got “VII minus” a statement which is injudicious and fundamentally wrong. There is no room in international law for a loose interpretation of the Charter and “VII minus” is not a recognized provision in international law.
Livni and Olmert's claim that the cease-fire that brought the fighting to a halt, is somehow indicative of a success, either militarily or diplomatically, is erroneous. The Government of Israel failed to protect its citizens - unable to stop the daily barrage of Katyushas landing in northern and central Israel, with nearly a million Israelis displaced; Israel's urgent need for a cease-fire was obvious. If the war would have kept going at its pace, Israel would have suffered the greatest military humiliation in its history. As the Wall Street Journal noted: “Israel has nothing to show for its 1701 Resolution”
2. Livni: “A decision was reached by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense to approve the start of a military operation and just as it was starting to go into action late Friday [August 11, 2006] we began to strengthen the resolution and return it to the level at which we felt it should originally be.”
Fact: John Bolton, who was U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during the Second Lebanon War, rejected Livni and Olmert's version of the failed ground offensive during the war's final days: "The Israeli military operation did not play a role in the talks on drafting the UN Security Council Resolution 1701."
It appears that Prime Minster Olmert, Foreign Minister Livni, and Defense Minister Peretz - all in concert - failed to this day “to come clean” and with clarity, explain to the nation's families and soldiers what precisely was the "improvement" attained as a direct result of the IDF expansion into Lebanon on August 11, 2006 - a move that cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers!
3. Livni: “We wanted to ensure that this embargo would be enforceable and substantive, preventing the transfer of arms … to Hezbollah. … Now the embargo is part of the UN resolution and the terms and formulation of this article are acceptable to Israel and express our opinion - a proper embargo.”
Fact: Resolution 1701 never even mentions the word “embargo” and does not set-forth an enforcement mechanism or any enforcement power. It seems as though the Minister did not read the resolution.
4. Livni: Israel “Will be getting UNIFIL with a completely different mandate, which includes the right, the option and the authority to use force when required.”
Fact: UNIFIL - a Paper Tiger - is not authorized to use armed force or to impose in any forceful manner the implementation of the recommendations of UN Resolution 1701.
UNIFIL's right to use force is strictly limited to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Major-General Alain Pelligrini [France] then the Force Commander of UNIFIL made it clear: “The disarmament of Hezbollah is not the business of UNIFIL.”
Unless otherwise stated, Livni's statements are taken verbatim from her briefing to reporters following Israel's acceptance of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, 13 Aug 2006.
Unless otherwise stated, Livni's statements are taken verbatim from her briefing to reporters following Israel's acceptance of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, 13 Aug 2006.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A lethal anti-tank rocketattack on IDF forces last Wednesday on the Lebanon border by Hezbollah was originally intended to be the opening salvo of a far-larger operation against Israel in February and March, and was not “merely” a revenge attack for an earlier Israeli strike which killed over 10Hezbollah and Iranian military officials on Jan. 18thin Syria, Israel’s NRG Newsreported Sunday.
In conversation with an unnamed “European businessman,” said to hold close ties to both Hezbollah and Iranian officials, the article averred that the use of at least five highly advanced Kornet missiles by Hezbollah terrorists to hit a single patrol vehicle didn’t make sense tactically, and indicated that their presence in the area, in fact, meant a more serious operation against Israel was in the offing.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that Israel would exact a heavy price for Hezbollah’s attack which took place in the Mt. Dov area and killed two soldiers and wounded seven others. In his comments on the attack near the nexus of the Israeli, Lebanese, and Syrian borders, Netanyahu warned that “Israel was prepared to operate on all fronts.”
The morning of the Hezbollah attack, the European said he called friends at Hezbollah’s headquarters in southern Beirut’s Dahiyeh quarter, but the phone rang unanswered. Later, he caught them by cellphone and was briefly told by “Ali,” that “We were asked to leave the offices yesterday. We were told to keep our calls short because the Israeli army was listening.”
From Ali’s tone, the European concluded that Hezbollah felt they were “on the verge of war,” a feeling which “came as no surprise to any party,” the businessman noted.
“Last week, after the assassination of Jihad Mughniyeh, I spoke to Iranian friends in Beirut. They are well connected – both in Beirut and in Tehran. They felt Israel knew very well who was in the convoy, and that Israel was aware of the growing trickle of Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Quds Forces on the Golan, and realized that something was brewing. From the Iranian perspective, Israel’s air strike on the convoy was intended to ‘mark a line in the sand.’”
The Guards’ commander said after Israel’s strike that they should expect “ruinous thunderbolts” in response to the attack, which killed Gen. Mohammed Ali Allah Dadi, along with noted Hezbollah operative, Jihad Mughniyeh, and some 10 others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5)-A though provoking article on the great danger our nation faces from the current Obama administration, and how right minded Americans need to prepare win in 2016 if this nation has any chance of changing our failed direction.
An American Renaissance
The Obama years will be forever known as the Dark Ages of US history, a time
of political, cultural and economic deterioration. We have yet to see ifthey will lead to the fall of the American republic.
to enact damaging policies, but an institution of government; the Presidency
itself, a lie of monstrous proportions guarded by the complicit and the
willingly ignorant.
we have elections, there is no longer a government representing its
citizens, but an entity serving itself, operating outside of Constitutional
constraints and unaccountable to the American people for the benefit of the
few at the expense of the many.
devoted media helped create the intellectual darkness and vacant servitude
required to carry out the strategy of their leftist Messiah; a country
without any sense of its own history and traditions, where the
low-information voter would slouch towards Obama's imaginary utopia through
a combination of governmental coercion and the hedonist nihilism of a
painless, amusement-sodden, and stress-free America managed by a
nanny-state.
Dark Ages, a system dominated by wealthy special interests that inhibit the
upward mobility of the poor and the middle class.
Islamic hegemony and violence, the infiltration of the US government by the
Muslim Brotherhood and the promotion of Sharia law in our schools and
judicial system.
mankind's potential for growth; a return to the ideals upon which the United
States was founded, that is, a Constitution based on the Judeo-Christian
values of Western civilization. Concomitantly, we should remember the
sacrifices endured by our forebearers and reaffirm our commitment to
preserve our way life as Joseph Story wrote in his 1833 Commentaries on the
Constitution:
bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and
capacity, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to
their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful
enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence."
Constitution, in particular, 10th Amendment, which states:
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or
to the people."
to support and defend the Constitution. The solution, however, is not simply
trying to elect more "good" people, who eventually get coopted or crushed by
the system, but to create circumstances or incentives that oblige bad people
to do the right thing.
years either in the House of Representatives or in the Senate or a
combination thereof and abolishing all special benefits for members of
Congress and government officials beyond those available to ordinary
citizens.
services ever devised. Government is not. Federal taxation and regulations
must be reduced to an absolute minimum to unleash the creative forces of the
free market to power economic growth and increase jobs.
government by enacting, with the exception of defense, a yearly
across-the-board 5% reduction in federal funding with the immediate
elimination of the Departments of Homeland Security, Energy, Education and
the Environmental Protection Agency.
businesses would obviate the need for the Internal Revenue Service, removing
its use as a political weapon and severely limiting the corrupting influence
of lobbyists.
immigration laws; strictly applying Equal Opportunity against the
discriminatory practices of affirmative action and diversity policies;
declaring Sharia incompatible with the U.S. Constitution and making its
public implementation in any form illegal; declaring English the one and
only official language of the United States; rejecting political correctness
and multiculturalism as an infringement of the rights guaranteed under the
First Amendment and contrary to the American principle of E pluribus Unum.
country, speak the truth and recognize how far we have strayed from the
Constitution, representative government and fiscal sanity.
possible a fraudulent and destructive Obama Administration.
subversive anti-American agenda designed to undermine the Constitution and
the uniqueness and sacredness of the individual, where, through the exercise
of his or her reason, one can discern the means necessary to secure life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness, unmediated by mullahs or government
bureaucrats.
his background and true agenda, what forces made his unprecedented rise to
power possible and who has conspired to hide the truth, an American
Renaissance will not be forthcoming.
unequivocal; either we produce a Renaissance, that is, a rebirth of the
fundamental principles upon which America was founded or our republic dies.
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/fid_91-96/921_frankfurt.html
patriotism, its morality and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these
three areas, America will collapse from within" - Joseph Stalin.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -
Winston Churchill.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government
from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of
them." - Thomas Jefferson.
5a) Obama Is Openly Colluding with the Enemy
We are in the middle of a hot war in the Middle East, with constant terror attacks all over the world, including the United States, Europe, and Asia. The enemy is called violent Islam, or radical Islam, or fascist Islam, or reactionary Islam, or merely "orthodox Islam."
We constantly waste time quibbling about the name. But we know the enemy by now.
(And yes, there are plenty of Muslims who want peace, but who are too scared to speak out, with some brave exceptions I mention below. As long as the West colludes with violent Islam, peaceful Muslims will be too scared to speak out. As long as we fail to stand for freedom, we will be supporting the worst of the worst, who always terrorize their own populations first.
For fifty years, Muslims did not actively practice jihad against the West – until Jimmy Carter betrayed our ally the shah of Iran, and therefore empowered the first jihad-preaching Islamofascist regime in the world, the mullahcracy of Iran. Because Carter was the weak horse, millions of Muslims around the world sensed a change in the wind – and that is why jihad is now breaking out all over.)
The single most shocking fact today is that the U.S. government, under President Obama, is constantly colluding with the enemy.
Check out of the facts for yourself. Don't take anybody's word for it. Make your own informed decision. This is a question not of opinion, but of fact.
When a serving U.S. president has lost Foreign Policy magazine, the in-house trade union rag for the State Department, things have come to a bad pass. But here is Foreign Policy on Obama's "pivoting to Iran."
Iran is now going nuclear, courtesy of Barack Hussein Obama.
But wait! Our good friend Recip Erdoğan of Turkey, "Obama's best friend in the Middle East" is now supporting ISIS – the worst mass murdering would-be regime on the Sunni side of the street.
Turkey has openly established recruiting stations for ISIS, called "IS consulates," and Obama's next "best friend" Qatar is feeding billions of dollars to ISIS. Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama's biggest ideological ally, is also backing ISIS. Don't believe the cover story that ISIS just mushroomed up by a miraculous dispensation from on high.
You may not remember the name of Mohammed Elibiary, a top advisor to our Homeland Security folks. Mr. Elibiary is a big name among the Moobs (naturally). Patrick Poole has a nice summary of Mr. Elibiary's thoughts here. In a sane world, this man should be on our terrorist suspect list, but instead he is "advising" our Department of Homeland Security.
(And you remember Huma Abedin, another Moober loyalist, walking with Hillary with their heads devoutly covered over? Muslim Brotherhood money goes to the Clintons, the Carters, and the Obamas, and they all give real value for that money.)
The Moobers are a Muslim fascist cult going back to 1928, when the Mufti of Jerusalem was in an open alliance with Hitler, helping to send Arabs troops to fight for the Nazis.
In 1981 the Moobs assassinated Egypt's president, Anwar Sadat, for making peace with Israel.
In 2011 they were complicit in the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, who was also trying to keep the Egypt-Israel peace treaty alive.
And today, in collusion with Obama, the Moobers are in open rebellion against the government of President El Sisi, the biggest peace advocate in the Arab world. (See below.)
All the signs therefore point to Obama as a major backer of ISIS on the one side, and of the Khomeinist nuclear-going tyranny on the other.
If they're really unspeakably evil, you can expect Obama to support them.
Obama's half-brother Malik Obama is a big Muslim Brotherhood money man. The MBs have espoused jihad against the modern world since 1928, when their organization was founded. Malik "oversees Muslim Brotherhood investments worldwide," and that means buying up politicians, like you-know-who. Malik is also a funder of Hamas, which has an identical war theology to ISIS's.
The Muslim Brotherhood assassinated President Anwar Sadat of Egypt forty years ago for making peace with Israel. After Obama pressured Egypt's longest-lasting peace-keeping president, Hosni Mubarak, into leaving office, at the beginning of the completely fraudulent "Arab Spring," a Muslim Brotherhood thug was "elected" president and started to purge the judiciary and military in Egypt.
Egypt's political elites revolted, and with the help of Saudi Arabia, they overthrew the Islamic fascists in favor of General El Sisi.
This administration still hates El Sisi and is still plotting with the Muslim Brotherhood against El Sisi.
Every single time, Obama backs the worst criminals against more civilized forces. Just look at the facts.
Don't think the Egyptians don't know what Obama is doing. In the Middle East, in Moscow and Paris, everybody knows what Obama is doing. Only the victims of media propaganda are still in denial.
Obama's collusion with undeniable evil is especially hard for Americans to believe, because it's emotionally painful to see your own president colluding with the worst mass murderers since the Nazis. Just keep looking at the facts.
The White House just lied its head off again, this time about the Taliban, who now are "not really terrorists." The Taliban knowingly protected Osama bin Laden while he was planning the 9/11/01 attacks on New York City, but they are "not terrorists." The Taliban tried to assassinate Malala Yousafzai (now winner of a Nobel Peace Prize) for advocating education for girls and women in Afghanistan, but they are "not terrorists." To Obama it's only Republicans who are terrorists.
What Mr. Obama does not support is Muslims who want peace, and who are willing to risk their lives to say so.
The most prominent example of a pro-peace leader today is President El Sisi of Egypt, who just told his religious establishment at Al Azhar University in Cairo that Islam "needs a religious revolution."
Now the Iranian caliphate is on the march, just as surely as the Third Reich was on the march in Hitler's time.
Three high-ranking Iranian officers were just caught in a planning meeting with three Hezb'allah terrorist leaders, on the Syrian border just north of Israel. The Israelis caught wind of the meeting and bombed them to smithereens. Now the mullahcracy are boiling over with rage, but they are still afraid of Israel's nuclear arms and effective military. That is the role the United States should be playing: keeping a clear moral compass and destroying mass-murdering barbarians in a true alliance of civilized peoples. Millions of Muslims will rise up against their terror masters as soon as the United States signals a recovery of its moral center.
Israel defends itself like a pit bull. It will use nuclear weapons if it must. The Iranians know that, and in spite of all their glorification of martyrdom, they will not risk Israel's nuclear retaliation until they have overwhelming superiority.
Instead, they are going after Sunni apostates against the will of Allah, especially the Saudis and Egypt.
What is emerging today is a ferocious Shi'a-Sunni civil war, with Israel taking the side of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Obama is supporting truly evil forces, those who kill women and children for the fun of it, like Boko Haram, the Islamofascist monsters who are now trying to conquer Nigeria.
The Iranians now surround Israel on two of three sides, and ISIS is attacking in the Sinai Desert. But if you look at the map, you can see the real strategic targets of the Iranians, now with Obama's collusion. Iran's real target is the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Those were Ayatollah Khomeini's real target when he tried to stir up a rebellion against the Saudis during the Hajj, when Iranian pilgrims attacked the Saudis forty years ago. The Islamic "Republic" is a war theocracy, and its aims are always conquest of the infidels and the apostates. To Iran, Saudi Arabia is worse than Israel and the West, since the Sunni Muslims abandoned the true way of Allah.
(Naturally, ISIS and the Saudis say the same thing about the Iranians.)
So even Israel and America are only secondary targets. Each half of the Muslim world considers the other half to be betraying Allah. Once the Iranians control Mecca and Medina, they believe that all Muslims will fall under their control.
From the actions of this administration, Obama agrees with them.
5b) Will Obama Give In to Iran? He Already Has.
Almost all of the coverage about the ongoing controversy about plans for Prime Minister Netanyahu to address Congress next month about sanctions on Iran has focused on allegations regarding inappropriate behavior from an ally and breaches of protocol.
But an exchange of anonymous quotes from administration and Netanyahu government sources in the Israeli press this weekend should serve as a reminder of what is really at stake in the dispute.
Israeli sources said the problem was that the deal that President Obama was working to conclude with Iran would allow it to keep several thousand of its centrifuges and allow it to "breakout" to a nuclear weapon in a matter of months.
Anonymous American government sources replied that this was nonsense. But anyone who has been closely following informed coverage of the negotiations knows that far from being misleading, the Israelis are doing nothing but stating the obvious about an American willingness to let Iran become a nuclear threshold state.
Rather than discussing Netanyahu's chutzpah, Americans should be asking some of the same questions as the Israelis.
Though Netanyahu's fans in the United States and his supporters at home continue to engage in denial about the invitation from House Speaker John Boehner, the longer this debate continues, the more it has become obvious that the prime minister blundered.
With even reliably pro-Israel Democrats openly discussing boycotts of the speech and others backing away from support for sanctions, the speech has become a dangerous distraction that has served to rally members of the president's party to back his position even if many are dubious about its merits.
That's why it's vital that we stop talking about protocol and return to the core question at the heart of the debate: whether the president's efforts will redeem his campaign promise that any deal would result in the end of Iran's nuclear program.
The answer is, unfortunately, that they won't and that ought to put Netanyahu's worries in perspective.
We know that this is no longer the objective of American diplomacy because the terms of the interim nuclear deal agreed to by the United States in November 2013 made it clear that Iran was going to be able to keep its infrastructure.
That agreement tacitly recognized Iran's "right" to enrich uranium even though its terms slowed down their rate of progress. But as even administration defenders acknowledged, the restrictions on the Iranians' efforts could be easily reversed in any breakout scenario.
The subsequent negotiations for a final deal were supposed to last only six months, but are now in their third overtime with administration sources acting as if a fourth such extension would not be unthinkable if a deal isn't reached by July.
That's bad enough. But far worse are the terms currently under discussion.
What is the Western offer on the table that the Iranians are rejecting? If you want to know, don't take the word of official Israeli sources; try reading one of the most sympathetic forums for the administration, the AL Monitor website.
Back in November when the Iranians wouldn't accept President Obama's proposed deal forcing the U.S. to accept another breach of the deadline, here's what it reported:
The agreement allows Iran to continue researching its most advanced centrifuges. Israeli sources estimate that this research will be completed within two years. Then, within another six months, the Iranians will be able to install an enormous number of new enrichment centrifuges, which operate at six times the speed of the current batch. This capacity will seriously expedite the potential Iranian "breakout to a bomb."
Under such circumstances, the Israelis explained to their colleagues, the West will be convinced that it stopped Iran one year before it can build a bomb, when the true amount of time needed will be just two months.
Two months, the Israelis told anyone who was willing to listen, is not enough time for the world to respond and block Iran should it decide to proceed at full steam.
In other words, the agreement that everyone is talking about is one that would turn Iran into a nuclear threshold state in a very brief amount of time, and immediately enable it to make the quick leap forward to nuclear capabilities, before the world can even respond.
As much as the interim deal had been a far cry from the positions that the president had articulated when running for reelection, this potential deal was even worse in that it would allow the Iranians to keep everything they would need to make a bomb but rely on their promises and the West's shaky intelligence and restricted United Nations inspections to ensure that they wouldn't do so. But, AL Monitor noted, that wasn't the extent of the problem:
Iran is not obligated to dismantle its centrifuge infrastructure, but only to disable the centrifuges. Under those circumstances, in any situation in which the Iranians decide to withdraw from the agreement or violate it, they can get the centrifuge system that they "neutralized" working again within two weeks. All of this proves that Iran will continue to maintain expansive enrichment capabilities, which can easily be restored to previous capacity and even beyond that within just a few weeks.
Seen from that perspective, the Israeli allegations about the direction of U.S. diplomacy seem very much to the point. How do we explain the discrepancy between what Obama promised and the sort of agreement he seems to be aiming toward?
The first answer is that the Iranians are much tougher negotiators than the Western team that has been trying to get them to give the president a much-needed foreign-policy triumph. Whenever the Iranians have said no to a demand, the Americans have simply given up and moved on to other points.
Secretary of State Kerry even defended this practice after the interim deal by saying that it was better to give in and keep talking than to ask for the impossible. But in practice that has meant that years of talks have now taken the U.S. to a point where they are actually disputing how many hundreds of centrifuges the Iranians will be able to keep, a stance that merely reduces the issue to how long it will take for the Islamists to get their bomb.
But even more to the point is the fact that, as President Obama's comments about the negotiations have made clear, the goal is not so much to end the nuclear threat as it is to work toward a sort of reconciliation with Tehran without requiring it to halt their support for terrorist groups and cease working toward production of ballistic missiles, let alone give up their nuclear ambitions.
Though the president wants to help Iran "get right with the world," what his efforts are really doing is to advance their efforts toward regional hegemony. This position has influenced the U.S. to form an informal alliance with Iran in Iraq and Syria and frightened and alienated moderate Arab nations as well as the Israelis.
So far from being "nonsense," Netanyahu's concerns about the president's diplomatic goals are very much to the point in the debate about sanctions. With the president showing no sign that he will ever admit that the negotiations have failed, the need to toughen the American position has now become imperative. Democrats might be forgiven for rallying around their leader when they perceive he is under attack.But those who care about nuclear proliferation and a potentially genocidal Iranian threat to both Israel and the West need to forget about protocol and start asking tough questions about what kind of a deal the administration is trying to conclude.
Unless something drastic happens to change the American position, the problem isn't that Obama might adopt a position that will let Iran become a nuclear threshold state.
It's that he has already done so.
I wanted to add to Jonathan’s post on President Obama and Israel, but perhaps sharpen some points just a bit.
The Obama administration is unusually petty and sophomoric. Theattacks leveled against Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, are part of a troubling pattern in which officials in the Israeli government–including and especially Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu–are vilified.
No world leader has been treated by President Obama and his administration with the contempt they have shown Prime Minister Netanyahu–from this snub in 2010 to being called a “coward” and “chickens*** prime minister” by senior administration officials.
But the problem goes much deeper than a personality clash. President Obama is, quite simply, anti-Israel. In every conceivable situation and circumstance, the president and his aides give the benefit of the doubt not to Israel but to its enemies. This despite the fact that Israel is among America’s longest and best allies, democratic, lawful, takes exquisite steps to prevent civilian deaths in nations committed to destroying it, and has made extraordinary sacrifices for peace. No matter; the pressure that’s applied is always applied most against Israel–even when, as in last year’s conflict with Hamas, Israel was the victim of lethal attacks.
This is morally shameful. In a world filled with despotic leaders and sadistic and ruthless regimes–North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Eritrea, Sudan, Somalia, and on and on–which nation alone does Mr. Obama become “enraged” at? Which is the object of his disdain? Which provokes his white-hot anger?
Answer: Israel. Has it struck you, as it has struck me, that with every other nation, including the most repressive and anti-American on earth, Mr. Obama is careful never to give offense, to always extend the olive branch, and to treat their leaders with unusual deference and respect? Except for the Jewish State of Israel. It always seems to be in the Obama crosshair.
Because this attitude is so detached from objective circumstances and the actions of Israel and the actions of the adversaries of Israel, something else–and something rather disquieting–is going on here. Mr. Obama wouldn’t be the first world leader to have an irrational animus against Israel. He’s not even the first American president to have an irrational animus against Israel. (See: Jimmy Carter.) But it is fair to say, I think, that no American president has been this consistently hostile to Israel while in office or shown such palpable anger and scorn for it and for Israel’s leader.
Perhaps given President Obama’s history–including his intimate, 20-year relationship with the anti-Semitic minister Jeremiah Wright–this shouldn’t come as a surprise. But that doesn’t make it any less disturbing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We're sorry, Mr. Wilkens, but we have some information about your wife," said one of the troopers.
"Tell me! Did you find her?" Wilkens exclaimed.
The troopers looked at each other, and then one said, "We have some bad news, some good news and some really great news. Which would you like to hear first?"
Fearing the worst, Mr. Wilkens said, "Give me the bad news first."
The trooper said, "I'm sorry to tell you, sir, but this morning we found your wife's body in Kachemak Bay."
"Oh my God!," exclaimed Wilkens.
Swallowing hard, he asked, "What's the good news?"
The trooper continued, "When we pulled her up, she had 12 twenty-five-pound king crabs and 6 good-sized Dungeness crabs clinging to her, and we feel you are entitled to a share in the catch."
Stunned, Mr. Wilkens demanded, "If that's the good news, then what's the great news?"
The trooper replied, "We're gonna pull her up again tomorrow."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7) Why Is Hamas Smiling?
In 2007, Abbas lost the Gaza Strip to Hamas. Now he seems to be losing the Gaza Strip to his rivals in Fatah. Many of his former Fatah supporters have turned against him.
In 2007, Abbas lost the Gaza Strip to Hamas. Now he seems to be losing the Gaza Strip to his rivals in Fatah. Many of his former Fatah supporters have turned against him.
The last thing the Palestinians and the international community want is another Syria or Libya or Yemen in the Middle East.
This is not a fight about rebuilding Gaza, or reforms, democracy or building a better future for Palestinians. This is not a fight between good guys and bad guys. Rather, this is a fight between bad guys and bad guys -- and it is all over money, ego and power.
The Palestinian Fatah faction, whose leaders are supposed to be working toward preparing Palestinians for an independent Palestinian state, is currently embroiled in a bitter and violent power struggle between Palestinian Authority [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas and his major rival, Mohamed Dahlan.
This is a power struggle, however, that casts doubts on Fatah's preparedness to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem.
The Fatah infighting is not new, as Abbas and Dahlan, a former PA security commander in the Gaza Strip, have been waging war against each other for the past four years.
More than a war of words. PA President Mahmoud Abbas (left) and Mohamed Dahlan. (Image sources: U.S. State Dept., M. Dahlan Office)
|
Abbas believes that Dahlan, who is currently based in the United Arab Emirates, has long been plotting to replace him as president of the Palestinian Authority. Abbas has taken a number of measures to undermine Dahlan, including having him expelled from Fatah.
Abbas has also accused Dahlan of financial embezzlement and murder – charges that the latter has vehemently denied.
But this is the first time that the dispute between the two men has spilled over into violence. In the past few weeks, the streets of the Gaza Strip have become scenes of violent clashes between supporters of Abbas and Dahlan, much to the delight of Hamas.
The latest crisis began when Abbas decided to cut off the salaries of some 250 Fatah officials in the Gaza Strip who he suspects are affiliated with Dahlan.
In response, Dahlan's men went on a rampage, torching cars and institutions belonging to Abbas loyalists in the Gaza Strip. One of the institutions targeted by Dahlan's men is the Society for Families of Prisoners and Martyrs, which has been forced to close down after its offices were set on fire in Gaza City.
Dahlan's men also assaulted a number of senior Fatah officials closely associated with Abbas. One of them, Mohamed al-Nahhal, was moderately injured during an assault at a physician's conference, in a hotel in Gaza City.
The violence has forced Fatah to suspend all its activities in the Gaza Strip -- again, much to the delight of Hamas.
Some Abbas loyalists are convinced that Dahlan and his supporters are working in coordination with Hamas.
Osama Qawassmeh, a Fatah spokesman affiliated with Abbas, said that Hamas was working hard to "encourage" Dahlan's men to attack their rivals. He also claimed that Dahlan has improved his relations with Hamas by channeling funds to the Gaza Strip.
Following the recent spate of attacks, Abbas loyalists in the Gaza Strip have gone on the offensive by threatening to "eliminate" Dahlan and his "gangs."
A leaflet, issued by a hitherto unknown pro-Abbas group called Protectors of Legitimacy, threatened to kill 80 Dahlan supporters. The group published the names of the supporters, claiming they worked for Israel.
"Your threats will not intimidate us," the group said. "You are beginning to play with fire. But we are made of fire, which will burn you. The language of dialogue with you has ended and as of today we will start talking to you with the language of weapons and skull-breaking."
In 2007, Abbas lost the Gaza Strip to Hamas. Now, he seems to be losing the Gaza Strip to his rivals in Fatah.
The violent events of the past few weeks are yet another sign of Fatah's failure to get its act together, especially in the aftermath of its defeat to Hamas in the January 2006 parliamentary elections.
Over the past few years, Abbas has repeatedly declared that there will never be a Palestinian state without the Gaza Strip.
However, the internecine strife among the Fatah leadership, as well as the continued power struggle between Abbas and Hamas, mean that the chances of creating a Palestinian state while he is still in power are non-existent. If in the past Abbas was unable to visit the Gaza Strip because of Hamas, now he knows that many of his former Fatah supporters have also turned against him.
Under the current circumstances, there is not much that Abbas could do other than remain in the West Bank, where he feels safer, largely thanks to the presence of the Israel Defense Forces there.
It is time for the international community to wake up and realize that the whole idea of establishing an independent Palestinian state is nothing but a joke. The last thing the Palestinians and the international community want is another Syria or Libya or Yemen in the Middle East.
Instead of working to help each other and rebuild the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians are busy fighting and threatening each other. This is not a fight over reforms, democracy or building a better future for Palestinians. Nor is it a fight between good guys and bad guys. Rather, this is a fight between bad guys and bad guys -- and it is all over money, ego and power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment