Posted before I left for Louisville. (See 1 below.)
Netanyahu gave what I call a "corral' speech. He hemmed Obama and Kerry in by explaining why their deal was bad, explained what a better deal would be and agreed to accept his definition of a better deal should they have the guts to seek one. He then ended by saying that if they opted for a bad deal, Israel would act even if it had to stand alone. (See 1 and 1a below.)
As for the Democrats who did not show , for whatever reason they offered, I can only say they decided to portray themselves as blind mice. They missed a chance to stand tall and instead they chose to be intellectual midgets. They will carry this with them to their grave and I hope it gives them continual discomfort while they live. (See 1b below.)
This from a friend of a very dear friend and fellow memo reader. (See 1c below.)
This from a friend of a very dear friend and fellow memo reader. (See 1c below.)
===
As for Obama and members of his administration they look like the tragic figures they have become and it is a sad and disturbing blight on our nation's history that we are being led by their likes.
While I was away I composed these thoughts and have updated them as a result of "Whitewater 2." (See 1d below.)
===
Dennis Prager comments on the Bibi and Obama relationship. (See 2 below.)
Caroline Glick gives her opinion about Netanyahu and his address.. (See 2a below.)
While I was away I composed these thoughts and have updated them as a result of "Whitewater 2." (See 1d below.)
===
Dennis Prager comments on the Bibi and Obama relationship. (See 2 below.)
Caroline Glick gives her opinion about Netanyahu and his address.. (See 2a below.)
===
"The NHTSA [National Transportation Safety Board] scolded Harrison Ford for his emergency landing. Sure, he saved lives, but a golf course landing anywhere endangers Obama."
===
Guess Who? https://www.youtube.com/watch?
===
Since my memos are somewhat disturbing because I constantly have nothing favorable to say since Obama got elected and , worse, re-elected I believe a little humor is always in order:
"The NHTSA [National Transportation Safety Board] scolded Harrison Ford for his emergency landing. Sure, he saved lives, but a golf course landing anywhere endangers Obama."
===
Guess Who? https://www.youtube.com/watch?
===
Since my memos are somewhat disturbing because I constantly have nothing favorable to say since Obama got elected and , worse, re-elected I believe a little humor is always in order:
"THE READING OF THE WILL"
Note: Keep listening for lots of additional entertaining
===
This from a very old and dear friend and fellow memo reader: "Lets bring all ISIS fighters here and put them to work on the oil pipeline".
Bruce Jenner had never had an automobile accident until he became a woman driver.
===
This is for the young who are generally clueless these days when it comes to knowing history. (See 3 below.)
===
Have returned from an over 1400 mile road trip and will be leaving again Friday.
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)Today’s Top Stories
Prime Minister Netanyahu was due to begin his address to Congress after this roundup was published.
1. Iran rejected any temporary freeze on its nuclear activities.Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif was responding to President Obama’s Reuters interview (see summary or full transcript). The president confirmed the much-talked-about sunset clause.
2. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Yukiya Amano: Iran’s still dragging its feet on inspections. Reuters writes:
The Islamic Republic has yet to address two outstanding issues relating to alleged explosives tests and other measures that might have been used for nuclear bomb research which it should have explained away by last August.
1a) Columnist Charles Krauthammer:
"Israel has never once asked America to fight for it. Not in 1948 when 650,000 Jews faced 40 million Arabs.
Not in 1967 when Israel was being encircled and strangled by three Arab armies. Not in 1973 when Israel was on the brink of destruction.
Not in the three Gaza wars or the two Lebanon wars.
Compare that to a very partial list of nations for which America has fought and for which so many Americans have fallen: Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Vietnam, Korea, and every West European country beginning with France (twice).
Change the [Iran] deal, strengthen the sanctions, give Israel a free hand.
Netanyahu offered a different path in his clear, bold and often moving address, Churchillian in its appeal to resist appeasement. This was not Churchill of the 1940s, but Churchill of the 1930s, the wilderness prophet.
Which is why for all its sonorous strength, Netanyahu’s speech had a terrible poignancy. After all, Churchill was ignored."
1b)Here Is a List of 56 Democrats Who Are Not Attending Netanyahu’s Speech
Getty - SAUL LOEB
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is speaking to Congress today, but not everyone plans to attend.
Here is a list of Democrats who do not plan on attending this controversial speech: The Black Caucus members listed below (as well as Lois Capps) get some funding from CAIR (and, of course, so does Hamas)
- Senator Al Franken (MN) --- O’Reilly has always said he is a despicable human being
- Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA) ---- Keep this in mind
- Senator Tim Kaine (VA) --- He seemed at least rational; wonder how much money he got from Arab donors vs Jewish donors
- Senator Patrick Leahy (VT) --- Well, now we know
- Senator Bernie Sanders (VT) --- “Socialist societies become anti-Semitic” ~ Norman Podhoretz Why Are Jews Liberal?
- Senator Brian Schatz (HI)
- Senator Martin Heinrich (NM)
- Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) --- this could have been a OP seat IF the Tea Party hadn’t run a loser
- Rep. Karen Bass (CA)
- Rep. Early Blumenauer (OR)
- Rep. Corrine Brown (FL)
- Rep. G.K Butterfield (NC)
- Rep. Lois Capps (CA) ----- That’s my congresswoman !!! How much did you get from CAIR, Lois? Don’t be venal … you’re too stupid for that!
- Rep. Andre Carson (IND)
- Rep. Joaquin Castro (TX)
- Rep. Katherine Clark (MA)
- Rep. Lacy Clay (MO)
- Rep. James Clyburn (SC) --- Black Caucus
- Rep. Steve Cohen (TN) --- The very definition of Judenrat (Jewish rat)
- Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ)
- Rep. John Conyers (MI) --- Black Caucus
- Rep. Danny Davis (Ill)
- Rep. Peter DeFazio (OR) --- Oregon! Isn’t that where Liberalism is the State Religion?
- Rep. Diana DeGette (CO)
- Rep. Lloyd Doggett (TX)
- Rep. Donna Edwards (MD)
- Rep. Keith Ellison (MN) --- Muslim Member of Congress
- Rep. Chaka Fattah (PA) --- Wild guess: with a name like “Chaka”, probably a member of the Black Caucus
- Rep. Marcia Fudge (OH)
- Rep. Raul Grijalva (AZ) --- We better make some inroads into the Hispanic community, and fast!
- Rep. Luis Gutierrez (Ill) --- Mexican/American Member of Congress
- Rep. Denny Heck (WA)
- Rep. Ruben Hinojosa (TX) See what I mean
- Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX)
- Rep. Marcy Kaptur (OH)
- Rep. Rick Larsen (WA)
- Rep. Barbara Lee (CA) ---Black Caucus
- Rep. John Lewis (GA) --- Black Caucus Civil Rights Leader --- Hey John, who do you think marched with you (and died in Mississippi)
- Rep. Dave Loebsack (IA)
- Rep. Zoe Lofgren (CA)
- Rep. Betty McCollum (MN)
- Rep. Jim McDermott (WA)
- Rep. Jim McGovern (MA) --- I understand he is not related to George; however, he does share the same defeatist Liberalism and weakness, so somewhere in that DNA chain, there’s gotta be a link
- Rep. Jerry McNerney (CA)
- Rep. Gregory Meeks (NY)
- Rep. Gwen Moore (WI)
- Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC)
- Rep. Beto O’Rourke (TX)
- Rep. Chellie Pingree (ME)
- Rep. David Price (NC)
- Rep. Charles Rangel (NY) --- Black Caucus --- I simply don’t know all the members of the Black Caucus, so I don’t know how many of the others are members. Mia Love (R-CO) sure didn’t boycott Netanyahu
- Rep. Cedric Richmond (LA)
- Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill)
- Rep. Bennie Thompson (MS)
- Rep. Mike Thompson (CA)
- Rep. Kyle Yarmuth (KY) --- A real Judenrat
1c)From my friend D.. R......
Bibi destroys Obama and Iran with one speech....
Wasn't that refreshing? Don't you wish we had Benjamin Netanyahu as president instead of Obama? I took a sampling among my friends – all smart educated business owners. Men of substance. Every one of them said if they had a choice they'd choose Bibi over Obama for president of the United States.
The media will concentrate on the substance of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu's speech. But let's first look at the style. I am a business and motivational speaker who speaks all over the globe, often to audiences in the thousands. I understand communication, charisma, chutzpah and salesmanship. Bibi gets an A+ in all four categories. He delivered the speech of a lifetime.
Americans and the world just got a lesson in CHUTZPAH. That's the Jewish word for "balls." No one else in the world could have pulled off what Bibi just did. Talk about a masterful speech. He walked into a joint session of the US Congress as if he owned it. Like he was the President of the United States. He received 29 standing ovations. If you just dropped in from another planet, you might have assumed you were watching US President Netanyahu give his State of the Union.
Keep in mind Bibi is the leader of a tiny nation with the population of some anonymous, obscure African nation. Yet he held court over the US Congress for almost an hour like he was the most powerful man in the world. Like he was the leader of America, Russia, China, UK or Germany. That takes chutzpah.
Can you imagine the look on the faces of Obama, Michelle and Valerie Jarrett. I'd have paid a million dollars to be a fly on that wall!
Can you imagine the looks on the faces of the leaders of every Muslim nation on earth? The anger, shock, jealousy. Why Bibi? Why is he presiding over the US Congress? Why are they fawning over his every word? Oh to be a fly on the wall of the leaders of Iran or Qatar or Afghanistan.
How about the looks on the faces of the leaders of ISIS. Can't you picture them saying, "Israel's leader gets the attention of the world by addressing a joint session of Congress...we have to set fire to prisoners in cages to get anyone's attention!"
And that vibe. Bibi gave off the vibe that he alone holds the key to saving the world. And just maybe...he does.
Now to the substance of Bibi's speech. Bibi walked onto the biggest stage in America and embarrassed Obama. He schooled him. He took him to the woodshed. And here's the masterful part- he killed him with kindness! Bibi pulled off a speech ripping America's president to shreds, in front of the political leadership of America...in front of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi...in front of the American people...and he did like only a master of communication, chutzpah and salesmanship could- by first praising him. By thanking Obama. By showering him with compliments. Then he proceeded to strip him naked and pummel him into submission.
What was the main takeaway of the speech? That you can't reward bad behavior. That you must punish bad behavior. That you can't agree to deals with tyrants, terrorists, liars, thieves and murderers whose word cannot be trusted.
That the only deal worth doing punishes Iran and takes away their nuclear capabilities until they change their behavior...until they stop supporting and funding terrorism...until they stop vowing to annihilate their neighbor Israel and kill all the Jewish people...until they check their aggressive support of militant, radical Islam all over the world. That to allow any nuclear capability for a militant Muslim nation is suicide for the entire world.
Do you understand the chutzpah of Bibi. The leader of tiny Israel was giving Obama lessons in negotiation. This was more entertaining to conservatives like me than watching "American Sniper." I asked my family to pass the popcorn.
Bibi made three great points that emasculated Obama:
1. The art of negotiating. Bibi compared negotiating with Iran to negotiating at a Persian bazaar. Hilarious, and so true. "If they threaten to walk away, let them." Bibi said. "Because they'll be back." It takes an Israeli to understand the human nature of Persians. That threat of walking away is just part of a negotiation. Bibi understands that.
Can Obama be that stupid? Bibi sure made him seem that stupid. But I know Bibi knows what I know. He just can't say it in public. Obama is not stupid. He knows exactly what he's doing. He's not on Israel's side. So Bibi had to play a masterful game of chess with Obama. So he painted him as naïve and stupid. He embarrassed him in front of the world. He made it clear the deal Obama has negotiated is Neville Chamberlain all over again. It's a repeat of the worst deal ever agreed to- Chamberlain's deal with Hitler.
2. Secondly, Bibi made it clear that Iran is not a normal country. It shouldn't be treated like a normal country. It is a militant Islamic country. Obama can't even use those words. He thinks "Islamic" is some kind of compliment. Remember we're dealing with a man who claims Islam was a founding religion of America. Bibi understands who he is dealing with.
Bibi pointed out that Iran is a rogue terrorist state no different than ISIS. Iran is the enemy of ISIS, so Bibi had to make a very interesting point. Iran and ISIS are the same people. They want the same thing. They say it. They tweet it. Iran wrote it in their constitution. They are dedicated to killing, conquering, converting and enslaving first the entire region, then the world. Iran is only fighting ISIS to determine who gets to do it in the name of Allah. Bibi then drove the nail home, "The enemy of your enemy...is your enemy." Great line! I hope Obama was wearing a cup. If not, he may be down for a while.
3. Thirdly, Bibi made a simple clear point that the American people can understand. Forget intellectual arguments. Forget the fancy words of lawyers and Ivy Leaguers like Obama, meant to obscure, confuse, distract and deceive the people. Bibi spoke from the heart. He painted a picture of militant radical Muslims like ISIS and how they act- they cut off heads...they torture...they throw gays off buildings...they parade prisoners in cages...they set people on fire...they kill women and children...even babies are cut in half and mutilated at the hands of militant radical Muslims. And Obama wants to allow them to possess NUCLEAR WEAPONS? And he thinks that's okay? He thinks they'll change? He thinks they'll stop being angry and aggressive with a nuclear weapon now in their hands?
No wonder Obama didn't show up at the speech. At this point the whole world could see our emperor has no clothes.
No one watching can forget Bibi's lesson: No militant Islamic state can ever be allowed to possess nuclear weapons...or they will certainly use them. No one in the world will be ever again sleep soundly. No one's children will ever again be safe. Bibi made it clear Obama's deal with Iran allows them to possess nuclear weapons. It's only a matter of when. That cannot be allowed to pass.
I think I could hear Obama and Valerie Jarrett screaming at the TV set inside the White House "war room." Bibi embarrassed them. Thrashed them. Emasculated them. By the way, not only is it clear Obama does not like Israel...that Obama is a Muslim sympathizer...that Obama is trying to weaken Israel and put her people in danger...but the ruler of Obama's White House is Valerie Jarrett. Where was Valerie born? Iran.
Obama's actions and negotiations are no mistake...fluke...coincidence.
Bibi had to kill Obama with kindness. He could not win over the American people by ripping our president in our own home stadium. So he never once named Obama as the bad guy. He never once blamed Obama for a bad deal, or bad negotiations. He never said out loud "Your president is trying to hurt Israel." But he didn't have to. We all know.
Bravo Bibi. You just showed us all what a real leader looks like- someone who stands up to evil, instead of negotiating and compromising in the face of another Hitler. Bibi made his point subtly...as subtly as a jackhammer and blowtorch. Congrats Bibi, you made a lot of smart Americans wish you were our president instead of Obama.
And the bonus is...we all got a 2 for the price of 1. Bibi's speech destroyed both Iran and Obama. A 2 for 1 sale on the floor of the US Congress? It's kind of like a Persian bazaar.
1d) What Obama has proven in less than 6 years is how fragile even a great democracy is and how it can be brought down by one man bent on it's destruction or, at the very least, it's dramatic change..
With the passing of each day it should be evident, even to the blindest of liberals, that Obama is not a friend of America but rather prefers to bed down with or trust the most dangerous of radicals. He has even appointed them to sensitive positions in our government, he has aided them in their conquest of Innocent and defenseless Christians, he has weakened our military, made porous our borders, sided with the worst Attorney General in our nation's history, and we have had many, has added untold debt, increased racial discord, pitted citizen against citizen and embraced the politics of greed and envy.
These accusations are not overboard. They are backed by events in which he has had a hand or totally orchestrated . What he has done to antagonize and insult our allies while siding with our adversaries has been documented in his own words caught on tape.
There are those who continue to consider him brilliant but deny his actions are purposeful. This argument does not hold water. You cannot ignore the consequences of one's behavior and disconnect them from awareness.
Giuliani was right when he said Obama is not a friend of America. I am not simply in disagreement with his policies. I submit his acts are intentionally designed to diminish America, to lay the foundation for our withdrawal from the world all for the purpose of making us a declining power with diminished influence. Bret Stephens has written a book outlining no less than I have just enumerated and characterized.
My disagreement is not based on the fact that Obama is a Democrat though I would argue there are some ideas so stupid only a liberal could embrace them.
Hillary's election would close the lock Obama has placed on our nation and our ability to recover could be beyond our grasp because Iran will have become nuclear, our influence throughout the world has been shredded,our financial ability to rebuild our military could be beyond our grasp. because our citizenry would have become overwhelming dependent upon a bloated government in control of vast chunks of our economic engine, and therefore, funding would not be available.
Why? Because those on the dole would not relinquish their position of dependency just as politicians seldom vote against their vested interests. These are the ugly facts of a society that has lost it's way because it has been poorly led and rather than being motivated by patriotism is more comfortable following the basest of instincts - greed , self-preservation and distrust. President Kennedy's Inaugural challenge ring hollow!
In a few days Ms. Clinton is going to explain why she used a non-secure and personal e mail system to conduct sensitive State Department business. This is, at the very least,the kind of judgement that, as president, should be considered dangerous if, as president, swearing to protect and defend the nation has meaning. But Hillary's questionable behaviour does not stop there. You have to add the equally questionable funding of the Clinton's Foundation by foreign governments and various corporations co-incident in her role as Sec.of State.
Bill believes because The Clinton Foundation does good how they raise their funding is of no consequence, bless his heart.
Obama , for the umpteenth time, learned all of Hillary's shenanigans from the news just as he did not listen to Netanyahu's address and then proceeded to rebut every point. The man just can't tell the truth, bless his heart
But why should any thinking person be surprised that we are witnessing White Water Two? This family continues to leave a stain on the fabric of this country. After eight years of Obama do we really want to go through the pain of four or more years of a Hillary president?
If Hillary played golf she would hook every shot to the left because she cannot even drive straight but then what different does it make when you are going to be anointed by the press and news folks and her personal lackeys, who carry her clubs, bless her heart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Why Obama So Dislikes Netanyahu
by
There is no question about whether President Obama — along with Secretary of State John Kerry and the editorial pages of many newspapers — has a particular dislike of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
But there is another question: Why?
And the answer is due to an important rule of life that too few people are aware of:
Those who do not confront evil resent those who do.
Take the case at hand. The prime minister of Israel is at the forefront of the greatest battle against evil in our time — the battle against violent Muslims. No country other than Israel is threatened with extinction, and it is Iran and the many Islamic terror organizations that pose that threat.
It only makes sense, then, that no other country feels the need to warn the world about Iran and Islamic terror as much as Israel. That’s why when Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the United Nations about the threat Iran poses to his country’s survival and about the metastasizing cancer of Islamist violence, he, unfortunately, stands alone.
Virtually everyone listening knows he is telling the truth. And most dislike him for it.
Appeasers hate those who confront evil.
Given that this president is the least likely of any president in American history to confront evil — or even identify it — while Benjamin Netanyahu is particularly vocal and eloquent about both identifying and confronting evil, it is inevitable that the former will resent the latter.
The negotiations with Iran over its nuclear weapons program are today’s quintessential example. Those who will not confront a tyranny engaged in terror from Argentina to the Middle East, and which is committed to annihilating another country, will deeply resent Israel and its leader.
For those who doubt the truth of this rule of life, there are plenty of other examples.
Take the Cold War.
Those who lived through it well recall that those who refused to confront communism vilified those who did. Indeed, they vilified anyone who merely labeled communism evil.
When President Ronald Reagan declared the Soviet Union an “evil empire,” he was excoriated by those who refused to do so. Yet, if the words “evil” and “empire” have any meaning, they perfectly applied to the Soviet Union.
But to those who opposed Reagan, these words could not be applied to the Soviet Union.
New York Times columnists lambasted the president for using such language. The newspaper’s most prestigious columnist at the time, James Reston, condemned Reagan for his “violent criticism of Russians as an evil society.”
Anthony Lewis accused Reagan of using “simplistic theology.” Reagan was using “a black and white standard to something that is much more complex.”
Tom Wicker wrote that “the greater danger” than the spread of communism “lies in Mr. Reagan’s vision of the superpower relationship as Good versus Evil.”
Columnist Russell Baker added his contempt for Reagan’s characterization of the Soviet Union. And, in a long Times article under the headline, “Reagan’s Gaffe,” an unnamed “strategist” for former Vice-President Walter Mondale told the newspaper that “Mr. Reagan had undercut diplomatic efforts of recent months” — exactly as the Times and the Obama administration now describe Benjamin Netanyahu doing to the negotiations with Iran.
(For a detailed description of the reactions to Ronald Reagan’s anti-communism, see Ann Coulter’s book, “Treason.”)
Some 20 years later, when President George W. Bush characterized the regimes of North Korea, Iraq and Iran as an “Axis of Evil,” he was likewise lampooned — as if those mass murderous tyrannies were not evil.
In short, those who refused to characterize the Soviet Union as evil loathed Ronald Reagan and other anti-communists for doing so; and those who objected to the “Axis of Evil” label placed on North Korea, Iran, and Iraq loathed George W. Bush and his supporters. The loathing of Benjamin Netanyahu is simply the latest example of the rule that those who will not confront evil will instead confront those who do. (It’s much safer, after all.)
Since the end of World War II, there has been a name for the people who refuse to confront evil and who resent those who do: leftists.
It is hard to get your arms around the stubborn determination of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today.
For most of the nine years he has served as Israel’s leader, first from 1996 to 1999 and now since 2009, Netanyahu shied away from confrontations or buckled under pressure. He signed deals with the Palestinians he knew the Palestinians would never uphold in the hopes of winning the support of hostile US administrations and a fair shake from the pathologically hateful Israeli media.
In recent years he released terrorist murderers from prison. He abrogated Jewish property rights in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria. He agreed to support the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River. He agreed to keep giving the Palestinians of Gaza free electricity while they waged war against Israel. He did all of these things in a bid to accommodate US President Barack Obama and win over the media, while keeping the leftist parties in his coalitions happy.
For his part, for the past six years Obama has undermined Israel’s national security. He has publicly humiliated Netanyahu repeatedly.
He has delegitimized Israel’s very existence, embracing the jihadist lie that Israel’s existence is the product of post-Holocaust European guilt rather than 4,000 years of Jewish history.
He and his representatives have given a backwind to the forces that seek to wage economic warfare against Israel, repeatedly indicating that the application of economic sanctions against Israel – illegal under the World Trade Organization treaties – are a natural response to Israel’s unwillingness to bow to every Palestinian demand. The same goes for the movement to deny the legitimacy of Israel’s very existence. Senior administration officials have threatened that Israel will become illegitimate if it refuses to surrender to Palestinian demands.
Last summer, Obama openly colluded with Hamas’s terrorist war against Israel. He tried to coerce Israel into accepting ceasefire terms that would have amounted to an unconditional surrender to Hamas’s demands for open borders and the free flow of funds to the terrorist group. He enacted a partial arms embargo on Israel in the midst of war. He cut off air traffic to Ben-Gurion International Airport under specious and grossly prejudicial terms in an open act of economic warfare against Israel.
And yet, despite Obama’s scandalous treatment of Israel, Netanyahu has continued to paper over differences in public and thank Obama for the little his has done on Israel’s behalf. He always makes a point of thanking Obama for agreeing to Congress’s demand to continue funding the Iron Dome missile defense system (although Obama has sought repeatedly to slash funding for the project).
Obama’s policies that are hostile to Israel are not limited to his unconditional support for the Palestinians in their campaign against Israel. Obama shocked the entire Israeli defense community when he supported the overthrow of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, despite Mubarak’s dependability as a US ally in the war on Islamist terrorism, and as the guardian of both Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel and the safety and freedom of maritime traffic in the Suez Canal.
Obama supported Mubarak’s overthrow despite the fact that the only political force in Egypt capable of replacing him was the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks the destruction of Israel and is the ideological home and spawning ground of jihadist terrorist groups, including al-Qaida and Hamas. Obama then supported the Muslim Brotherhood’s regime even as then-president Mohamed Morsi took concrete steps to transform Egypt into an Islamist, jihadist state and end Egypt’s peace with Israel.
Israelis were united in our opposition to Obama’s behavior. But Netanyahu said nothing publicly in criticism of Obama’s destructive, dangerous policy. He held his tongue in the hopes of winning Obama over through quiet diplomacy.
He held his tongue, because he believed that the damage Obama was causing Israel was not irreversible in most cases. And it was better to maintain the guise of good relations, in the hopes of actually achieving them, than to expose the fractures in US-Israel ties caused by Obama’s enormous hostility toward Israel and by his strategic myopia that endangered both Israel and the US’s other regional allies.
And yet, today Netanyahu, the serial accommodator, is putting everything on the line. He will not accommodate. He will not be bullied. He will not be threatened, even as all the powers that have grown used to bringing him to his knees – the Obama administration, the American Jewish Left, the Israeli media, and the Labor party grow ever more shrill and threatening in their attacks against him.
As he has made clear in daily statements, Netanyahu is convinced that we have reached a juncture in our relations with the Obama administration where accommodation is no longer possible.
Obama’s one policy that Netanyahu has never acquiesced to either publicly or privately is his policy of accommodating Iran.
Since Obama’s earliest days in office, Netanyahu has warned openly and behind closed doors that Obama’s plan to forge a nuclear deal with Iran is dangerous. And as the years have passed, and the lengths Obama is willing to go to appease Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been left their marks on the region, Netanyahu’s warnings have grown stronger and more urgent.
Netanyahu has been clear since his first tenure in office in the 1990s, that Iran’s nuclear program – as well as its ballistic missile program – constitutes a threat to Israel’s very existence. He has never wavered from his position that Israel cannot accept an Iran armed with nuclear weapons.
Until Obama entered office, and to an ever escalating degree until his reelection in 2012, preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has been such an obvious imperative among both Israelis and Americans that Netanyahu’s forthright rejection of any nuclear deal in which Iran would be permitted to maintain the components of its nuclear program was uncontroversial. In some Israeli circles, his trenchant opposition to Iran’s acquisition of nuclear capabilities was the object of derision, with critics insisting that he was standing strong on something uncontroversial while buckling on issues like negotiations with the Palestinians, where he should have stood strong.
But now we are seeing that far from being an opportunist, Netanyahu is a leader of historical dimensions. For the past two years, in the interest of reaching a deal, Obama has enabled Iran to take over Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. For the first time since 1974, due to Obama’s policies, the Golan Heights is an active front in the war against Israel, with Iranian military personnel commanding Syrian and Hezbollah forces along the border.
Iran’s single-minded dedication to its goal of becoming a regional hegemon and its commitment to its ultimate goal of destroying the US is being enabled by Obama’s policies of accommodation. An Iran in possession of a nuclear arsenal is an Iran that can not only destroy Israel with just one or two warheads. It can make it impossible for Israel to respond to conventional aggression carried out by terrorist forces and others operating under an Iranian nuclear umbrella.
Whereas Israel can survive Obama on the Palestinian front by stalling, waiting him out and placating him where possible, and can even survive his support for Hamas by making common cause with the Egyptian military and the government of President Abdel Fattah al-Sissi, the damage Obama’s intended deal with Iran will cause Israel will be irreversible. The moment that Obama grants Iran a path to a nuclear arsenal – and the terms of the agreement that Obama has offered Iran grant Iran an unimpeded path to nuclear power – a future US administration will be hard-pressed to put the genie back in the bottle.
For his efforts to prevent irreparable harm to Israel Netanyahu is being subjected to the most brutal and vicious attacks any Israeli leader has ever been subjected to by an American administration and its political allies. They are being assisted in their efforts by a shameless Israeli opposition that is willing to endanger the future of the country in order to seize political power.
Every day brings another serving of abuse. Wednesday National Security Adviser Susan Rice accused Netanyahu of destroying US relations with Israel. Secretary of State John Kerry effectively called him a serial alarmist, liar, and warmonger.
For its part, the Congressional Black Caucus reportedly intends to sabotage Netanyahu’s address before the joint houses of Congress by walking out in the middle, thus symbolically accusing of racism the leader of the Middle East’s only liberal democracy, and the leader of the most persecuted people in human history.
Radical leftist representatives who happen to be Jewish, like Jan Schakowsky of suburban Chicago and Steve Cohen of Memphis, are joining Netanyahu’s boycotters in order to give the patina of Jewish legitimacy to an administration whose central foreign policy threatens the viability of the Jewish state.
As for Netanyahu’s domestic opponents, their behavior is simply inexcusable. In Israel’s hour of peril, just weeks before Obama intends to conclude his nuclear deal with the mullahs that will endanger Israel’s existence, Labor leader Yitzhak Herzog insists that his primary duty is to defeat Netanyahu.
And as far as Iran is concerned, he acts as a free loader ad a spoiler. Either he believes that Netanyahu will succeed in his mission to derail the deal with or without his support, or he doesn’t care. But Herzog’s rejection of Netanyahu’s entreaties that he join him in Washington next week, and his persistent attacks on Netanyahu for refusing accommodate that which cannot be accommodated shows that he is both an opportunist and utterly unworthy of a leadership role in this country.
Netanyahu is not coming to Washington next Tuesday to warn Congress against Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, because he seeks a fight with Obama. Netanyahu has devoted the last six years to avoiding a fight with Obama, often at great cost to Israel’s national security and to his own political position.
Netanyahu is coming to Washington next week because Obama has left him no choice. And all decent people of good will should support him, and those who do not, and those who are silent, should be called out for their treachery and cowardice.
Do we really mean ‘never again’?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3) History Lesson on Your Social Security Card
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn't know this.
It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your family
and friends. They need a little history lesson on what's what and it doesn't matter
whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are Facts.
and friends. They need a little history lesson on what's what and it doesn't matter
whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are Facts.
Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and
card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the
United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the
message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.
An old Social Security card with the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message.
Our Social Security
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,
No longer Voluntary
2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,
Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000
3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,
No longer tax deductible
4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,
Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.
Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?
AND MY FAVORITE:
A: That's right!
Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------
Then, after violating the original contract (FICA),
the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want
to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment