Tag: Israel

On the Way Out the Door, Obama Gave $221 million of OUR Money to the Radical Islamist Thugs Known as the Palestinian Authority

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

untitled-124

Last Sunday night, as I was filling up a tire at a Walmart Gas Station, I saw a young girl in an SUV honk her horn at another car passing by in front of her. All of the sudden, I heard this young girl unleash a tirade of F Bombs aimed at the occupants of the vehicle that would make the late, great Richard Pryor blush.

She then flung open her car door, threw a man’s jacket on the gas station pavement and proceeded to stomp the mess out of it, while continuing her verbal barrage of expletives.

Jumping back into her  SUV, she took off “in high speed pursuit” (as Sheriff Buford T. Justice would say) after the other vehicle.

Just getting off of work, it took me a moment to realize that, in the car which she honked her horn at, was her now-ex-boyfriend and some other girl.

She had been betrayed by someone she thought had her back through thick and thin.

So have the Israeli and American People. Except, the majority of us never trusted the one who betrayed us very much, anyway.

TheWashingtonPost reports that

Officials say the Obama administration in its waning hours defied Republican opposition and quietly released $221 million to the Palestinian Authority that GOP members of Congress had been blocking. A State Department official and several congressional aides said the outgoing administration formally notified Congress it would spend the money Friday morning. The official said former Secretary of State John Kerry had informed some lawmakers of the move shortly before he left the State Department for the last time Thursday. The aides said written notification dated Jan. 20 was sent to Congress just hours before Donald Trump took the oath of office.

In addition to the $221 million for the Palestinians, the Obama administration also told Congress on Friday it was going ahead with the release of another $6 million in foreign affairs spending, including $4 million for climate change programs and $1.25 million for U.N. organizations, the congressional aides said. The aides and the State Department official weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter and demanded anonymity.

Congress had initially approved the Palestinian funding in budget years 2015 and 2016, but at least two GOP lawmakers — Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay Granger of Texas, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee — had placed holds on it over moves the Palestinian Authority had taken to seek membership in international organizations. Congressional holds are generally respected by the executive branch but are not legally binding after funds have been allocated.

The Obama administration had for some time been pressing for the release of the money for the Palestinian Authority, which comes from the U.S. Agency for International Development and is to be used for humanitarian aid in the West Bank and Gaza, to support political and security reforms as well as help prepare for good governance and the rule of law in a future Palestinian state, according to the notification sent to Congress. 
 
The $1.25 million for U.N. agencies is to be used as voluntary contributions to the U.N. Peacebuilding Fund; the U.N. Special Coordinator on improving the U.N. response to sexual exploitation and abuse; the Montreal Protocol Secretariat, which oversees the protection of the ozone layer; the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; and the U.N. System Staff College.

The $4 million for climate programs includes assistance for clean energy, sustainable landscapes, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and creating a climate technology center.

The last-minute allocation also contained $1.05 million in funding for the State Department’s Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan office and the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs.

The Palestinian funding is likely to draw anger from some in Congress as well as the Trump White House. Trump has vowed to be a strong supporter of Israel and has invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to visit Washington next month.

He has also pledged to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, although White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Monday a final decision on that had yet to be made. Despite speculation in Israel that an announcement of the move is imminent, Spicer said the decision-making process is only in its very early stages.

“If it was already a decision, then we wouldn’t be going through a process,” Spicer told reporters.

So, just who are the “Palestinians” and the “Palestinian Authority”?

Per discoverthenetworks.org,

According to Palestinian revisionism, the Palestinians lived from time immemorial in historic Palestine, which is portrayed as a veritable paradise of flourishing orchards and fertile vineyards, teeming with happy peasants. Then, according to the mythic narrative, the Zionists came and, with the support of the British, stole the Palestinians’ land, exiled the people, and initiated a reign of terror and ethnic cleansing that has not abated until this very day.

Since the Six Day War of 1967, the Arab world’s most powerful leaders — in Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Syria, and Iraq prior to Saddam Hussein’s demise — have waged a war of words against Israel. Having failed to defeat Israel by means of naked military aggression, these leaders and their advisors decided, sometime between the end of the war and the Khartoum Conference of August-September 1967, to bring about the destruction of Israel by means of a relentless terror war.

To justify to the world their ruthless murder of Israeli civilians and their undying hatred of the West, these leaders needed to invent a narrative depicting Israel as a racist, war-mongering, oppressive, apartheid state that was illegally occupying Arab land and carrying out the genocide of an indigenous people that had a stronger claim to the land of Israel than did Israel itself.

Thus the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), under the tutelage of the Soviet KGB, invented “The Palestinian People” who allegedly had been forced to wage a war of national liberation against imperialism.

To justify this notion, Yasser Arafat, shortly after taking over as leader of the PLO, sent his adjutant, Abu Jihad (later the leader of the PLO’s military operations), to North Vietnam to study the strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare in the hopes that the PLO could emulate Ho Chi Minh’s success with left-wing sympathizers in the United States and Europe. Ho’s chief strategist, General Giap, offered advice that changed the PLO’s identity and future:

“Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.”
Giap’s counsel was simple but profound: the PLO needed to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation. And the key to all this was creating an image that would help Arafat manipulate the American and Western news media.

Arafat developed the images of the “illegal occupation” and “Palestinian national self-determination,” both of which lent his terrorism the mantle of a legitimate peoples’ resistance. After the Six Day War, Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962), imparted to Arafat some wisdom that echoed the lessons he had learned in North Vietnam:

“Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by the Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression . . . that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the Arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.”
The term “Palestine” (Falastin in Arabic) was an ancient name for the general geographic region that is more or less today’s Israel. The name derives from the Philistines, who originated from the eastern Mediterranean, and invaded the region in the 11th and 12th centuries B.C.  The Philistines were apparently either from Greece, Crete, the Aegean Islands, and/or Ionia. They seem to be related to the Bronze Age Greeks, and they spoke a language akin to Mycenaean Greek. Their descendents, still living on the shores of the Mediterranean, greeted Roman invaders a thousand years later. The Romans corrupted the name to “Palestina,” and the area under the sovereignty of their city-states became known as “Philistia.” Six-hundred years later, the Arab invaders called the region “Falastin.”

Throughout subsequent history, the name remained only a vague geographical entity. There was never a nation of “Palestine,” never a people known as the “Palestinians,” nor any notion of “historic Palestine.” The region never enjoyed any sovereign autonomy, remaining instead under successive foreign sovereign domains from the Umayyads and Abbasids to the Fatimids, Ottomans, and British.

During the centuries of Ottoman rule, no Arabs under Turkish rule made any attempt to formulate an ideology of national identity, least of all the impoverished Arab peasantry in the region today known as Israel.

The term “Palestinian,” ironically, was used during the British Mandate period (1922-1948) to identify the Jews of British Mandatory Palestine. The Arabs of the area were known as “Arabs,” and their own designation of the region was balad esh-Sham (the province of Damascus). While some Arab nationalist writers, and coffee-shop intellectuals in Cairo or Beirut, developed the concept of Arab nationalism in large part as a response to Zionism, the terms “Palestine” and “Palestinian” were used in their traditional sense as geographic designations, not as national identities.

In early 1947, in fact, when the UN was exploring the possibility of the partition of British Mandatory Palestine into two states, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs, various Arab political and academic spokespersons spoke out vociferously against such a division because, they argued, the region was really a part of southern Syria, no such people or nation as “Palestinians” had ever existed, and it would be an injustice to Syria to create a state ex nihilo at the expense of Syrian sovereign territory.

During the 19 years from Israel’s victory in 1948 to Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War, all that remained of the UN’s partitioned territory to the “Arabs” of British Mandatory Palestine were the West Bank, under illegal Jordanian sovereignty, and the Gaza Strip, under Egyptian rule. Never during these 19 years did any Arab leader anywhere in the world argue for the right of national self-determination for the Arabs of these territories. A “Palestinian” nation and “Palestinian” people had not yet been invented.

Article 24 of the PLO’s original founding document, the PLO Covenant, states: “This Organization (the PLO) does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area.” For Arafat before the Six-Day War, Palestine was Israel. It was not the West Bank or the Gaza Strip — because the West Bank and the Gaza Strip belonged to other Arab states, and the inhabitants of these areas were not numbered among the Palestinians whose “homeland” Arafat sought to “liberate.” The only “homeland” for the PLO in 1964 was the State of Israel. However, in response to the Six Day War, the PLO revised its Covenant on July 17, 1968, to remove the operative language of Article 24, thereby newly asserting a “Palestinian” claim of sovereignty to the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

This ploy was revealed, perhaps inadvertently, to the West in a public interview with Zahir Muhse’in, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, in a March 31, 1977, interview with the Amsterdam-based newspaperTrouw:

“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”
Arafat himself said the same thing, on many occasions. In his authorized biography (Terrorist or Peace Maker, by Alan Hart), he is quoted saying: “[T]he Palestinian people have no national identity. I, Yasser Arafat, man of destiny, will give them that identity through conflict with Israel.”

But such admissions did not stem the enthusiasm with which these fictions were greeted by Western leaders. Within a few years, the USSR’s invention of the fictitious narrative of Palestinian national aspirations and rights of self-determination created the facade of morality and legitimacy that the terrorists needed in order to curry favor with the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

So, boys and girls, as Obama left office, his “final act of defiance”, was to “flip the bird” to Bibi Netanyahu and the People of Israel and to all of us here in the United States of America who support Israel’s right to exist and to thrive as a Sovereign Nation.

To spell it out for those of you who have not quite grasped the absolute lunacy of this, yet…Obama just gave $221,000,000 of American Taxpayers’ hard-earned money to a bunch of Radical Islamist Thugs, who hate both our closest ally and our guts.

President Barack Hussein Obama’s International “Street Cred” had been tarnished beyond repair anyway after the abysmal consequences, as regards the stability of the Middle East, of  his failed Foreign Policy of “Smart Power!”

The terrifying results of Obama’s attempt at “Community Organizing” the Muslim World, including the lost of life of both innocent civilians and of America’s Brightest and best, which has dwarfed the war casualties which occurred under his predecessor, President George W. Bush, now have begun to arrive at our own shores, with Korans and prayer rugs being found at our open Southern Border, honor killings and attacks by Radical Muslims, labelled as “work place violence” by the Obama Administration. and 10,000 “refugee” being transported to our cities by President Barack Hussein Obama, himself.

So now, it order to preserve his legacy among those Middle Eastern Nations whom he encouraged to turn from Moderate to Radical Islamic States during “Arab Spring” through his ambivalence and failed Foreign Policy, he stabs in the back our ally, Israel.

I guess “Scooter” remembered the words of the late Artist known as Prince’s song, “Little Red Corvette”, and thought to himself,

What have I got to lose?

Therefore, I believe that this action was not only deliberate, but a willful insult to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the 75% of Americans who proclaim ourselves to be Christians and who support “God’s Chosen People”.

Obama’s final days occupying the Most Powerful Office in the World resembled those of a Sixth Grader who was grounded and restricted to his room for “poor performance”.

Does anybody else find the fact that he once again betrayed our friends and spit in the eye of us Americans who support Israel, the act of a petulant dhimmi wuss who never should have been allowed to be the President of the United States of America in the first place?

…or is it just me?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Secretary of State “Schmuck” Tries to Defend the Indefensible UN Vote. Bibi Netanyahu (and Americans) Respond.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

15676429_10205832399928527_4369071957567163303_o

We cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect. They used to have a great friend in the U.S., but not anymore. The beginning of the end was the horrible Iran deal, and now this (U.N.)! Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching! – President-elect Donald J. Trump, 12/28/16

The New York Times reports that

Secretary of State John Kerry accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel on Wednesday of thwarting peace in the Middle East, speaking with a clarity and harshness almost never heard from American diplomats when discussing one of their closest and strongest allies.

With only 23 days left in his four-year turn as secretary of state, during which he made the search for peace in the Middle East one of his driving missions, Mr. Kerry said the Israeli government was undermining any hope of a two-state solution to its decades-long conflict with the Palestinians.

The American vote last week in the United Nations allowing the condemnation of Israel for settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, he added, was driven by a desire to save Israel from “the most extreme elements” in its own government.

“The status quo is leading toward one state and perpetual occupation,” Mr. Kerry said, his voice animated.

His speech was a powerful admonition after years of tension and frustration, with the Obama administration giving public voice to its long-held concern that Israel was headed off a cliff toward international isolation and was condemning itself to a future of low-level, perpetual warfare with the Palestinians.

Reaction was immediate and harsh, not only from Mr. Netanyahu, but also from Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York. President-elect Donald J. Trump did not even wait for Mr. Kerry to speak before condemning the secretary of state.

The United States and Israel are in the middle of a breach rarely seen since President Harry S. Truman recognized the fragile Israeli state in May 1948. In a direct response to Mr. Netanyahu’s barb over the weekend that “friends don’t take friends to the Security Council” — a reference to the Obama administration’s decision to abstain from the resolution condemning the building of new settlements in disputed territory — Mr. Kerry said the United States acted out of a deeper understanding of the meaning of its alliance.

“Some seem to believe that the U.S. friendship means the U.S. must accept any policy, regardless of our own interests, our own positions, our own words, our own principles — even after urging again and again that the policy must change,” he said. “Friends need to tell each other the hard truths, and friendships require mutual respect.”

Toward the end of his 70-minute remarks in the State Department’s auditorium, Mr. Kerry acknowledged that Mr. Trump may well abandon the major principles that the United States has used for decades of Middle East negotiations, including the two-state solution that both Republicans and Democrats support. Mr. Trump isnominating a new American ambassador, David M. Friedman, who has broken with even the pretense of supporting a two-state negotiated settlement and has helped fund some of the settlements Mr. Kerry denounced.

On vacation in Palm Beach, Fla., Mr. Trump posted two Twitter messages rejecting the speech before it was delivered. “We cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect,” he wrote on Wednesday morning. After assailing the nuclear deal in Iran and last week’s vote at the Security Council, he said, “Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching!”

He was soon praised — also on Twitter — by Mr. Netanyahu, who later released a video statement that was unsparingly direct and dismissive of Mr. Kerry.

“The entire Middle East is going up in flames, entire countries are toppling, terrorism is raging and for an entire hour the secretary of state attacks the only democracy in the Middle East,” Mr. Netanyahu said. “Maybe Kerry did not notice that Israel is the only place in the Middle East where Christmas can be celebrated in peace and security. Sadly, none of this interests the secretary of state.”

Now, anyone who has been paying attention knows about Obama’s love for all things Muslim and the disdain that he holds for Israel and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu.

But, besides doing Obama’s bidding, what is Secretary of State Schmuck…err…Kerry’s motivation for stabbing Israel in the back?

As noted on the website of Lt. Col. Allen B. West…

…in 2009, the daughter of Secretary of State John Kerry, Dr. Vanessa Bradford Kerry, John Kerry’s younger daughter by his first wife, married an Iranian-American physician named Dr. Brian (Behrooz) Vala Nahed.

…Brian (Behrooz) Nahed is son of Nooshin and Reza Vala Nahid of Los Angeles. Brian’s Persian birth name is “Behrooz Vala Nahid” but it is now shortened and Americanized in the media to “Brian Nahed.” At the time his engagement to Bradford Kerry, there was rarely any mention of Nahed’s Persian/Iranian ancestry, and even the official wedding announcement in the October 2009 issue of New York Times carefully avoids any reference to Dr. Nahed (Nahid)’s birthplace (which is uncommon in wedding announcements) and starts his biography from his college years.

…Zarif is the current minister of foreign affairs in the Rouhani administration and has held various significant diplomatic and cabinet posts since the 1990s. He was Kerry’s chief counterpart in the nuclear deal negotiations.

Secretary Kerry and Zarif first met over a decade ago at a dinner party hosted by George Soros at his Manhattan penthouse. What a surprise. I have to say, connecting the dots gets more and more frightening.

But it gets even worse. Guess who was the best man at the 2009 wedding between Kerry’s daughter Vanessa and Behrouz Vala Nahed? Javad Zarif’s son.

Does this bother anyone at all?

Apparently Kerry only revealed his daughter’s marriage to an Iranian-American once he had taken over as Secretary of State. But the subject never came up in his Senate confirmation hearing, either because Kerry never disclosed it, or because his former colleagues were “too polite” to bring it up.

Now, I’m no Pollyanna.

(Although my bride does accuse me of always seeing the best in everyone. but, I digress…)

I know that America has influenced other nations’ elections for years, covertly, usually through the influence of backdoor diplomatic channels and the CIA.

However, Petulant President Pantywaist, who was, and, still is, desperately sucking up to the Rogue, Muslim Terrorist Nation of Iran and the rest of the Muslim Nations in the Middle East, who would rather kill us infidels than look at us, blatantly worked overtly to kick out of office, Bibi Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of one of our closest allies.

Obama’s petulance knows no bounds.

Every time they have met, Netanyahu has schooled Obama, making him look like the petulant little lightweight that he is.

In order for Obama’s plan for a nuclear Iran to succeed, Netanyahu’s strong and forthright leadership of Israel must somehow be neutralized.

Evidently, Obama believed at the time of the election, and still does, that if he could get rid of Netanyahu, then the “Arab Spring”, which began under his presidency, would reach its apocalyptic zenith, with a nuclear Iran and an Israel cleaved in half, like Solomon almost did that baby, in order to make room for the fictional “country of Palestine”.

Who exactly are “The Palestinians”?

According to discoverthenetworks.org,

Since the Six Day War of 1967, the Arab world’s most powerful leaders — in Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Syria, and Iraq prior to Saddam Hussein’s demise — have waged a war of words against Israel. Having failed to defeat Israel by means of naked military aggression, these leaders and their advisors decided, sometime between the end of the war and the Khartoum Conference of August-September 1967, to bring about the destruction of Israel by means of a relentless terror war.

To justify to the world their ruthless murder of Israeli civilians and their undying hatred of the West, these leaders needed to invent a narrative depicting Israel as a racist, war-mongering, oppressive, apartheid state that was illegally occupying Arab land and carrying out the genocide of an indigenous people that had a stronger claim to the land of Israel than did Israel itself.

Thus the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), under the tutelage of the Soviet KGB, invented “The Palestinian People” who allegedly had been forced to wage a war of national liberation against imperialism.

To justify this notion, Yasser Arafat, shortly after taking over as leader of the PLO, sent his adjutant, Abu Jihad (later the leader of the PLO’s military operations), to North Vietnam to study the strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare in the hopes that the PLO could emulate Ho Chi Minh’s success with left-wing sympathizers in the United States and Europe. Ho’s chief strategist, General Giap, offered advice that changed the PLO’s identity and future:

“Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.”

Giap’s counsel was simple but profound: the PLO needed to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation. And the key to all this was creating an image that would help Arafat manipulate the American and Western news media.

Arafat developed the images of the “illegal occupation” and “Palestinian national self-determination,” both of which lent his terrorism the mantle of a legitimate peoples’ resistance. After the Six Day War, Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962), imparted to Arafat some wisdom that echoed the lessons he had learned in North Vietnam:

“Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by the Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression . . . that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the Arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.”

So, why would an American Administration and their fellow Liberals, including American Jews,  join with our nation’s sworn enemies in their Jihad against our staunchest ally, Israel?

As far as the Dhimmi-in-Chief is concerned, Obama views this creation of a Caliphate as his Foreign Policy Legacy.

There is a reason that I will always refer to him as “our first anti-American President”.

God Protect America and His Chosen People.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

From Israel to ISIS: Obama Leaving Office the Same Way He Came in…Alienating Our Friends and Empowering Our Enemies

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

 

AFBrancoObamaCarterAward1092014

“Israel and America may be thousands of miles apart, but we are philosophical neighbors sharing a strong commitment to democracy and the rule of law. What we hold in common are the bonds of trust and friendship, qualities that in our eyes make Israel a great nation. No people have fought longer, struggled harder, or sacrificed more than yours in order to survive, to grow, and to live in freedom” – President Ronald Reagan (Remarks at Welcoming Ceremony for PM Menachem Begin, September 9, 1981)

Yahoo News reports that

The UN Security Council demanded that Israel halt settlements in Palestinian territory, after the United States refrained from vetoing a resolution condemning its closest Middle East ally. In a rare and momentous step, the United States instead abstained, enabling the adoption of the first UN resolution since 1979 to condemn Israel over its settlement policy.

Applause broke out in the chamber after the text was passed with support from all remaining members of the 15-member council.

The landmark move by the Security Council came despite an effort led by Israel and backed by US President-elect Donald Trump to block the text.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately rejected the UN resolution and slammed the outgoing administration of President Barack Obama for refusing to veto it.

“Israel rejects this shameful anti-Israel resolution at the UN and will not abide by its terms,” a statement from Netanyahu’s office said.

“The Obama administration not only failed to protect Israel against this gang-up at the UN, it colluded with it behind the scenes,” it said.

“Israel looks forward to working with President-elect Trump and with all our friends in Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, to negate the harmful effects of this absurd resolution.”

Trump reacted after the vote by promising change at the world body after he takes office next month.

“As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th,” he tweeted.

– Saving two-state solution –

Ambassador Samantha Power said the US abstention stemmed from concerns that the expansion of the Jewish outposts was threatening the two-state solution aimed at achieving peace by creating a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

“We cannot stand in the way of this resolution as we seek to preserve a chance of attaining our longstanding objective of two states living side by side in peace and security,” she said.

“The settlement problem has gotten so much worse that it is now putting at risk the very viability of that two-state solution.”

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the passage of the resolution as “a significant step, demonstrating the Council’s much needed leadership and the international community’s collective efforts to reconfirm that the vision of two States is still achievable.”

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas’s office said the vote was “a big blow” to Israeli policy and a show of “strong support for the two-state solution.”

Israeli settlements are seen as a major stumbling block to peace efforts, as they are built on land the Palestinians consider part of their future state.

The United Nations maintains that settlements are illegal, but UN officials have reported a surge in construction over the past months.

Some 430,000 Israeli settlers currently live in the West Bank and a further 200,000 Israelis live in east Jerusalem, which Palestinians see as the capital of their future state.

The resolution demands that “Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.”

It states that Israeli settlements have “no legal validity” and are “dangerously imperiling the viability of the two-state solution.”

– A ‘no’ vote for negotiation –

Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon bluntly told the council that the resolution would not have the hoped-for impact of spurring peace efforts.

“By voting ‘yes’ in favor of this resolution, you have in fact voted ‘no’. You voted ‘no’ to negotiation, you voted ‘no’ to progress and a chance for better lives for Israelis and Palestinians, and you voted ‘no’ to the possibility of peace,” Danon told the council.

Palestinian ambassador Riyad Mansour said the resolution “may be too little, too late.”

Friday’s vote was scheduled at the request of four countries — New Zealand, Malaysia, Senegal and Venezuela — who stepped in to push for action a day after Egypt put the draft resolution on hold.

After the resolution passed, Israel announced its ambassadors to Senegal and New Zealand had been ordered to return for consultations. It has no diplomatic relations with Venezuela or Malaysia.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi backtracked on the move to condemn Israel’s settlement policy after receiving a phone call from President-elect Trump, who spoke out in favor of a US veto.

The United States vetoed a similar resolution in 2011, which was the sole veto cast by the Obama administration at the Security Council.

Washington has used its veto a total of 30 times to block council resolutions concerning Israel and the Palestinians, according to Security Council Report, a research organization.

It last abstained in 2009 on a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

The Middle East peace process has been comatose since a US initiative to re-launch peace talks collapsed in April 2014.

France has announced plans to host an international conference on January 15 to try to restart talks based on the two-state solution.

Trump campaigned on a promise to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and chose as ambassador to Israel the hardliner David Friedman, who has said Washington will not seek to curtail settlement building in the occupied West Bank.

Meanwhile, the CBS Local Affiliate in Philadelphia reports that

Federal authorities warned Friday that Islamic State of Iraq and Syria sympathizers “continue aspirational calls for attacks on holiday gatherings, including targeting churches.”

The bulletin was issued by the FBI and Department of Homeland Security and issued to law enforcement agencies and private security companies around the U.S.

There are no known specific, credible threats, U.S. law enforcement officials say. The bulletin was issued out of an abundance of caution given the public nature of the posted threats and the holiday season.

The bulletin was sent Friday to law enforcement after pro-ISIS websites had published a publicly-available list of churches in the United States.

The bulletin also describes the different signs of suspicious activity law enforcement should be aware of.
 
In the past, public threats by ISIS supporters have focused on military and law enforcement targets. The more recent threats have expanded to include the type of attacks we saw in Berlin, Nice, France, and Columbus, Ohio.

Do you remember when. during the Presidential Campaign, President-elect Donald J. Trump stated that President Barack Hussein Obama was the Founder of ISIS?

Do you know why the MSM and their Liberal Puppet Masters were so upset at those remarks?

Trump spoke the truth.

The President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, said the following about the Radical Islamic Terrorist Organization, ISIS, in a interview with The New Yorker Magazine, published on January 27th, 2014:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant. I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.

Then, on November 23, 2015, Catherine Herridge reported for foxnews.com that

Analysts at U.S. Central Command were pressured to ease off negative assessments about the Islamic State threat and were even told in an email to “cut it out,” Fox News has learned – as an investigation expands into whether intelligence reports were altered to present a more positive picture.  

Fox News is told by a source close to the CENTCOM analysts that the pressure on them included at least two emails saying they needed to “cut it out” and “toe the line.”

Separately, a former Pentagon official told Fox News there apparently was an attempt to destroy the communications. The Pentagon official said the email warnings were “not well received” by the analysts

As I write this post, ISIS is still thriving, “Muslim Refugees” are still invading Europe, and the Lame Duck President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is still welcoming them to our shores.

Why?

The fact is, Obama believes that everything can be handled through “Community Organizing”.

If you remember, Obama was the first American Presidential Candidate to campaign for our Presidency, outside of our nation. All of the Main Stream Media fawned over his European campaigning as a brilliant move, while Americans were bumfuzzled at the media spectacle, trying to figure out why he would give campaign speeches to people who could not even vote for him.

Then, after he became President, one  of the first things Obama did was to go on a World Apology Tour, culminating with an “Address to the Muslim World” at the University of Cairo, in which he lauded the contributions of Muslims to world civilization and to the history of the united States of America, even though the population of Muslims in America, was only around 1% at the time.

Yeah…our Revolutionary War Hero and First President of the United States of America, Mohammed Washington…that’s the ticket!

Since then, Obama has continued to “reach out” to the Muslim World in an attempt to “Community Organize” them, even to the detriment of the country and its citizenry, whom he is supposed to be protecting.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens remains unavailable for comment.

In his zeal to appease his American voting base, and those whom he has worked so hard to “organize”, Obama pulled our troops out of the unstable, Radical Muslim nation of Iraq, in a “premature evacuation”.

Proudly announcing that “al Qaeda was on the run”, Scooter (my pet name for Obama), turned his attention to giving campaign speeches and rallying his Liberal Base, even though he was a President presiding over a tanking economy, with over 92 million Americans already gone from our workforce.

Then, it happened.

ISIS/ISIL, a Radical Muslim Terrorist Organization, with over 32 thousand adherents, invaded Iraq, (a country which Obama had prematurely evacuated by pulling our troops out) killing innocent Muslims and Christians, and threatened to flood Baghdad, by blowing up an essential dam on the Euphrates River.

Obama sprang into “Community Organizing” mode once again. He sent “military advisors” to Iraq, and sent Secretary of State John “I served in Vietnam” Kerry on a European and Middle Tour to trying to get a consensus to support our actions, and to try to form a coalition to assist in the “prosecution” of ISIS/ISIL, in order for Obama to keep his promise to his Far Left Supporters that there would be “no boots on the ground” in Iraq.

Think of it as General Custer sending the Scouts first into Little Big Horn, while he sat on his horse, watching from a hill.

Yeah. The Europeans wanted no part of it, either.

However, some of the Middle Eastern Nations decided that they would join in, for their own self-protecting, mercenary reasons (Remember the Hessians in the Revolutionary War?).

President Barack Hussein Obama’s International “Street Cred” has been tarnished beyond repair after the abysmal consequences, as regards the stability of the Middle East, of  his failed Foreign Policy of “Smart Power!”

The terrifying results of Obama’s attempt at “Community Organizing” the Muslim World, including the lost of life of both innocent civilians and of America’s Brightest and best, which has dwarfed the war casualties which occurred under his predecessor, President George W. Bush, now have begun to arrive at our own shores, with Korans and prayer rugs being found at our open Southern Border, honor killings and attacks by Radical Muslims, labelled as “work place violence” by the Obama Administration. and 10,000 “refugee” being transported to our cities by President Barack Hussein Obama, himself.

So now, it order to preserve his legacy among those Middle Eastern Nations whom he encouraged to turn from Moderate to Radical Islamic States during “Arab Spring” through his ambivalence and failed Foreign Policy, he stabs in the back our ally, Israel.

I believe that this action was not only deliberate, but a willful insult to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the 75% of Americans who proclaim ourselves to be Christians and who support “God’s Chosen People”.

Obama’s final days occupying the Most Powerful Office in the World are resemble those of a Sixth Grader who has been grounded and restricted to his room for “poor performance”.

Does anybody else find the fact that he just betrayed our friends and is silent about the threats by our Radical Islamic Enemies to our Christian Places of Worship on this most Holy of Weekends to be a very revealing insight into the character of the outgoing (Thank God) President?

…or is it just me?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Not Even Sworn in yet, Trump Already Standing Up for Israel and a Strong Foreign Policy

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

too-cozy-600-li-2

It’s great to have an AMERICAN President, again.

The Washington Post reports that

Before lunchtime Thursday, President-elect Donald Trump said he would expand the U.S. nuclear arsenal, upending a reduction course set by presidents of both parties over the past four decades, and called for the United States to veto a pending U.N. resolution that criticized Israel’s settlements policy.

The policy prescriptions, communicated in morning tweets, followed calls since last month’s election to reconsider the arms-length U.S. relationship with Taiwan and to let China keep an underwater U.S. vessel seized by its navy. Trump declared within hours of this week’s Berlin terrorist attack that it was part of a global Islamic State campaign to “slaughter Christians” and later said it reaffirmed the wisdom of his plans to bar Muslim immigrants.

Late Thursday, Trump suggested in another tweet that the U.S. military’s years-in-the-making plans for a new stealth fighter, Lockheed Martin’s F-35, might be reconsidered, saying he had “asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!”

With weeks to go before he becomes president, Trump has not hesitated to voice his opinions on national security issues of the day and to publicly advise the current president on what to do about them.

Ultimately, the nuclear statement was tempered by a Trump spokesman. And the likely fallout from a tentative decision by the Obama administration to break years of precedent and abstain on the Israel resolution was avoided when Egypt, its sponsor, abruptly postponed it just hours before a scheduled Security Council vote.

But the president-elect’s pronouncements have privately riled a White House that has repeatedly insisted in public that the transition has been smooth sailing.

Asked last week whether he was trying to help Trump, a professed admirer of Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, understand Russia’s responsibility for the civil-war carnage in Aleppo, Syria, President Obama said he would “help President-elect Trump with any advice, counsel, information that we can provide so that he, once he’s sworn in, can make a decision.”

“Between now and then,” Obama said firmly, it was up to him to decide what to do. “These are decisions that I have to make based on the consultations that I have with our military and the people who have been working this every day.”

Even as the White House has held its tongue, however, others have not.

Trump provided no details in his tweet calling for the United States to “greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability.” But “if he means what he says,” said Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a Washington-based security foundation, “this could be the end of the arms-control process that reduced 80 percent of our Cold War arsenal.”

Former congressman John Tierney (D-Mass.), executive director of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, said in a statement, “It is dangerous for the President-elect to use just 140 characters and announce a major change in U.S. nuclear weapons policy, which is nuanced, complex, and affects every single person on this planet.”

Under New START, the treaty negotiated by Obama with Russia and ratified by the Senate in 2010, the United States and Russia by February 2018 must have no more than 1,550 strategic weapons deployed. While there is widespread agreement that the U.S. deterrent must be modernized, little enthusiasm has been expressed elsewhere for increasing the number of nuclear warheads.

Trump spokesman Jason Miller later said that was not precisely what Trump meant. Rather than calling for more nuclear weapons, Miller told Yahoo News, he was referring to “the threat of nuclear proliferation” and “the need to improve and modernize our deterrent capability.”

The president-elect’s U.N. tweet was more explicit and more immediate. “The resolution being considered . . . should be vetoed,” he said in a pre-dawn tweet referring to the Egyptian measure. The resolution condemned “the construction and expansion of settlements” in the West Bank and mostly Palestinian East Jerusalem, along with “the transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians.”

Saying the settlements have “no legal validity,” it demanded that Israel “immediately cease all settlement activities.”

Although consideration of such a measure has been circulated at the United Nations for weeks — and similar measures have for years brought a consistent U.S. veto — it was not until Wednesday night that word began to circulate that the United States might abstain and allow it to pass.

While successive administrations have considered the settlements an impediment to an Israeli-Palestinian peace process, the Obama administration has grown increasingly irate over what it feels is Israel’s flouting of its concerns.

Over the past six months, Israel has announced plans to add hundreds of units to existing settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. A July announcement that 770 new homes were to be built in the East Jerusalem settlement of Gilo drew particularly sharp U.S. criticism.

At the same time, right-wing voices in the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are pushing for legislation that would legalize settlements built on privately owned Palestinian land. The “legalization bill” stems from a court-ordered demolition of the Amona settlement, which sits on land owned by a Palestinian farmer.

Amona was meant to be demolished next week, but on Thursday it received an additional month of reprieve from the court. Residents brokered a deal with the government to move their homes to a nearby location, essentially creating a new settlement.

During the campaign, Trump frequently criticized what he described as the administration’s failure to fully support Israel. Last week, he named David Friedman — a New York bankruptcy lawyer who has given strong financial support and other backing to the Israeli settlement movement and has said Trump supports Israeli annexation of Palestinian territory — as his ambassador to Israel.

During the campaign, Trump also charged that Obama had helped promote terrorism by supporting “the ouster of a friendly regime in Egypt” — that of long-standing autocrat Hosni Mubarak — and more recently by failing to fully back the military government that overthrew Mubarak’s elected replacement.

In an interview last weekend with a Portuguese news agency, Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sissi said that Trump “has shown deep and great understanding of what is taking place in the region as a whole and Egypt in particular. I am looking forward and expecting more support and reinforcement of our bilateral relations.”

Once it became clear late Wednesday that the settlements vote was scheduled for Thursday afternoon, Trump officials said the transition gave the administration a “heads-up” that the president-elect was going to publicly call for a U.S. veto.

At the end of the day Thursday, it was not entirely clear what led Egypt to withdraw the resolution. At the State Department, spokesman John Kirby said that Egypt had pulled it back in order to have “discussions with its Arab League partners” over the wording of the text.

Secretary of State John F. Kerry, who supported an abstention and was clearly expecting to deliver a pre-vote speech announcing it, along with an outline of future prospects for Middle East peace, canceled his plans. Elsewhere within the administration, officials said Israel had twisted Egypt’s arm and threatened to work against its interests in Congress.

Several Arab officials said they were convinced that the United States had pressured Egypt to postpone the vote.

In Israel, where a late-night cabinet meeting was convened Wednesday to consider the possibility of a U.S. abstention, Netanyahu sent out a dead-of-night tweet calling for a U.S. veto. It was quickly followed by Trump’s own, near-identical tweet.

Deriding “the imposition of terms set by the United Nations,” Trump said in a later statement that passage of the resolution would put Israel “in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.”

After initial hesitation on whether Trump should weigh in, the statement was written late Wednesday by Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and an influential adviser to the president-elect, and Stephen K. Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, according to two people briefed on the deliberation who were not authorized to speak publicly. They said that Kushner and Bannon consulted with several allies in Israel and the United States but declined to name them.

The effort represented perhaps Kushner’s most significant foray to date into foreign policy and the Middle East, where Trump has said he would welcome his son-in-law’s involvement.

After the statement was issued Thursday, a transition official told the Reuters news agency, Trump spoke by telephone with Sissi.

As I have written before, a strong American President is essential to retaining the sovereignty of our country.

As a 22-year old College Senior, I was privileged to cast my first-ever vote in a National Election. That vote took place in November of 1980, and it was for the greatest American President in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

The popularity of President Reagan was not just limited to the boundaries of our nation. He was admired the world over. The things that he accomplished, along with his friends, Prime Minister of Britain Margaret Thatcher, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev, and Pope John Paul II, have caused the decade of the 1980s to be recorded as a seminal moment in world history.

I remember watching President Reagan speak at the Berlin Wall. When he said, “Mr Gorbachev tear down this wall!”, I was never prouder to be an American and of an American president, than at that moment.

Liberals, around the world, lost their collective minds.

For you see, Liberal Leaders, just as they do now, hate it when Marxism gives way to Freedom.

Nothing bothers them more than when a strong American President is at the forefront of a conquering moment, when a strong foreign policy is based on the reality that negotiating from a position of strength is always more effective than negotiating from a position of weakness.

Fast forward to the present, where an ineffective President Barack Hussein Obama was already looking like a fool, before Donald J. Trump was even elected as his successor, to a world who used to look to America as a bastion of strength and freedom, not weakness and political expediencies.

President Barack Hussein Obama has placed us in untenable position with his weak and vacillating Smart Power Foreign Policy.

Those who used to cringe in their desert tents, while calling us the Great Satan, now laugh in our faces as they walk across our southern borders with the rest of the illegal immigrants.

That is, if Obama simply does not invite them to the White House and meet with them, as he has the Muslim Brotherhood.

America must have a president who will man up and negotiate from a position of strength with both our friends and our enemies.

It appears that we have found him in President-elect Trump.

Unfortunately for our present safety as nation, Obama’s Fantasyland view of the world, which is not unlike the old Coca Cola Advertisement where everyone had a Coke and a smile, set him up to be a disastrous failure at Foreign Policy.

A failure, which finds our enemies in Iran still working on a nuclear bomb and Russian Leader Vladimir Putin beginning the process of annexing surrounding countries and rebuilding the old Soviet Union, which was dissolved, thanks to the efforts of a real leader and American President, Ronald Reagan.

The popular defense, currently being thrown against the wall to see if it sticks by Liberals on behalf of their fallen messiah’s failed Foreign Policy, is to attack those who are critical of it, by claiming that we are all of bunch of “Christianist Raaaciiist Hate Mongers”.

Obama’s Foreign Policy Failure explains the resistance of foreign leaders to the possible Presidency of Donald J. Trump before his election.

It also explains all of their donations to the Clinton Foundation.

But, I digress…

Ronald Reagan, when he was “out on the stump” for Republican Presidential Candidate Barry Goldwater, in October of 1964, delivered a powerful speech titled, “A Time for Choosing”. At one point in that now-classic speech, he spoke about America’s role in the world, stating that

We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, “Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we’re willing to make a deal with your slave masters.” Alexander Hamilton said, “A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.” Now let’s set the record straight. There’s no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there’s only one guaranteed way you can have peace — and you can have it in the next second — surrender.

…You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin — just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ’round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it’s a simple answer after all.

You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, “There is a price we will not pay.” “There is a point beyond which they must not advance.” And this — this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater’s “peace through strength.” Winston Churchill said, “The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we’re spirits — not animals.” And he said, “There’s something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.

Foreign Leaders, who like the advantage that they have gained, under the weak and vacillating Foreign Policy of Barack Hussein Obama, do not want the United States to regain our position as the Leader of the Free World.

And, they certainly do not want a President who will honor our friendship with our ally, Israel.

That is why they fear a Trump Presidency.

It was far more lucrative for them, when the United States “negotiated from a position of weakness”, when we had a vacillating dhimmi in the White House.

Now, they have to negotiate with an American President who has mastered “The Art of the Deal”.

…one who will place America and her best interests, first.

Isn’t that refreshing?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Used Taxpayers’ Money to Pay Former Staffers in Attempt to Oust Netanyahu

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

untitled (79)When Modern American Liberals speak about our Foreign Policy, they continuously repeat the mantra that America must get out of the practice of “Imperialism”.

Evidently, no one told President Barack Hussein Obama.

Foxnews.com reports that

The U.S. State Department sent nearly $350,000 to an advocacy group that worked to oust Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, according to a Senate report released Tuesday.

OneVoice Movement, a group that supported peace negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian factions, received grants from the State Department during a 14-month period ending in November 2014, according to the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report.

Shortly after the U.S. grants ended, OneVoice merged with an Israeli group Victory 15, which launched a political campaign in Israel with a goal to elect “anyone but Bibi,” a nickname for Netanyahu.

The chairman of the committee, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, claims that means that U.S. money was involved in foreign politics.

“The United States should not be engaged in that kind of activity with taxpayer dollars,” he said. “What it did probably was to make it even more difficult to come together after the election and continue to build on the relationship between Israel and the United States.”

According to the report, the State Department grants helped OneVoice build its political infrastructure, including voter contact lists and professionally trained organizers. It also included expanding social media platforms intended to support peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.

On March 17, 2015, I reported that Congress was investigating the situation.

I also posted the following information about OneVoice…

OneVoice is reportedly sponsored by scores of nonprofits and received two grants in the past year from the U.S. State Department.

The State Department is also listed as a partner of OneVoice on the group’s website.

OneVoice development and grants officer Christina Taler told the Washington Free Beacon that “no government funding” has gone toward the V15 voter mobilization effort.

However, V15’s complete takeover of OneVoice’s Tel Aviv offices may raise some questions not only about the grant usage but about the State Department’s current partnership with OneVoice.

Aside from the State Department, OneVoice is also openly partnered with Google, the U.K. Labour Party and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

The conservative blogosphere is largely focusing on the involvement of Bird in the V15 campaign.

A closer look at Bird’s consulting firm as well as its working relationship with the Israeli groups finds he is just one of scores of former senior Obama election campaign staffers now working on the anti-Netanyahu effort.

Besides Bird, the 270 Strategies team includes the following former Obama staffers:Mitch Steward, a 270 Strategies founding partner who helped the Obama campaign build what the U.K. Guardian called “a historic ground operation that will provide the model for political campaigns in America and around the world for years to come.”

Mark Beatty, a founding partner who served as deputy battleground states director for the Obama campaign. He had primary responsibility for Obama’s election plans for the battleground states.

Marlon Marshall, a founding partner at 270 Strategies who joins the team after holding several key positions in national Democratic politics, most recently as deputy national field director for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Betsy Hoover, a founding partner who served as director of digital organizing on the Obama campaign.

Meg Ansara, who served as national regional director for Obama for America where she was responsible for overseeing the 2012 programs in the Midwest and southern states.

Bridget Halligan, who served as the engagement program manager on the digital team of the 2012 Obama campaign.

Kate Catherall, who served as Florida deputy field director for Obama’s re-election campaign.

Alex Lofton, who most recently served as the GOTV director of Cleveland, Ohio, for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Martha Patzer, the firm’s vice president who served as deputy email director at Obama for America.

Jesse Boateng, who served as the Florida voter registration director for Obama’s re-election campaign.

Ashley Bryant, who served most recently as the Ohio digital director for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Max Clermont, who formerly served as a regional field director in Florida for Obama’s re-election campaign.

Max Wood, who served as a deputy data director in Florida for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Now, I’m no Pollyanna.

(Although my bride does accuse me of always seeing the best in everyone. but, I digress…)

I know that America has influenced other nations’ elections for years, covertly, usually through the influence of backdoor diplomatic channels and the CIA.

However, Petulant President Pantywaist, who iwas, and, still is, desperately sucking up to the Rogue, Muslim Terrorist Nation of Iran, who would rather kill us infidels than look at us, blatantly worked overtly to kick out of office, the Prime Minister of one of our closest allies.

Obama’s petulance knows no bounds.

Every time they have met, Netanyahu has schooled Obama, making him look like the petulant little lightweight that he is.

In order for Obama to succeed in his plan for a nuclear Iran, he must rid himself of Netanyahu’s strong and forthright leadership.

Evidently, Obama believed at the time of the election, and still does, that by replacing Netanyahu with a Liberal Politician in Israel, then the “Arab Spring”, which began under his presidency, would reach its apocalyptic zenith, with a nuclear Iran and an Israel cleaved in half, like Solomon almost did that baby, in order to make room for the fictional “country of Palestine”.

For some clearly insane reason, Obama views this creation of a Caliphate as his Foreign Policy Legacy.

There is a reason that I will always refer to him as “our first anti-American President”.

God Protect America and His Chosen People.

Until He Comes,

KJ

WH Press Secretary Josh Earnest Does Not Answer When Asked Repeatedly if Administration Lied About Iran Deal

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

ObamalyingI think it’s brilliant! What an idea! And I was there! He took the idea! He saw it ripe on the tree, he plucked it, and he put it in his pocket. It’s, it’s, dare I say… genius? Ah, no, no! But maybe, ooh! ah! maybe it is! Maybe I’m in the presence of greatness, maybe I just don’t know it. But I saw it… – Fire Chief C.D. Bales (Steve Martin), “Roxanne”, 1987

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction. – Barry McGuire, “Eve of Destruction” (1965)

CNSNews.com reports that

White House press secretary Josh Earnest twice on Monday did not give a direct, yes or no response to a reporter’s question about whether any senior administration official had ever lied publicly about the Iran nuclear deal. Each time he chose instead to answer in what he called “the affirmative,” saying the administration had made a “truthful” case about the agreement – an agreement which he also predicted would be “an important part of this president’s legacy.”

Wall Street Journal reporter Byron Tau asked Earnest, “Can you categorically state that no senior administration official in this administration has ever lied publicly about any aspect of the Iran nuclear deal?”

“Let me just state in the affirmative,” he replied, “which is that the administration has made a forceful and fact-based, accurate, truthful case about how the American people and the international community benefit from an international agreement to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

Earnest went on to tell Tau it would be a “much more worthy endeavor” to examine the claims of critics of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action who he said had been proven wrong in their criticism.

“I think it’s worthy of spending some time considering exactly whether or not those individuals were just misinformed or lying,” he said.

Tau tried again: “But you’re unwilling to categorically state that no public officials ever willfully misled on the Iran deal?”

“Byron, I can categorically say – ” Earnest began. “I’m going to say it in the affirmative.  Unless you want – you want to present some evidence, or just make a claim?”

“No, I mean, just there was some confusion over this on the question,” Tau said.

“What we said about the Iran deal and its benefits for the American people have come to pass. And that’s something that this administration is quite proud of, and I think it will be an important part of this president’s legacy.”

The question asked by Tau Monday had originally been asked by Fox News reporter Kevin Cooke at a White House briefing on May 9: “Can you state categorically that no senior official in this administration has ever lied publicly about any aspect of the Iran nuclear deal?”

On that occasion Earnest was heard to reply quietly, “No Kevin,” but ABC News reported at the weekend that the two words did not appear in the official transcript.

Tau prefaced his question to Earnest Monday by comparing the missing two words to the ongoing controversy over a State Department briefing video that was censored at the request of an official whose identity remains unknown.

In both cases, he noted, the comments related to the Iran nuclear deal.

Earnest took issue with the comparison, saying that in the White House case the words were omitted from the transcript as there had been some “cross-talk” in the briefing room at the time.

Wait a minute.

The Most Ethical Administration EVAH lied about a cockamamie deal which gives the World’s State Sponsor of Islamic Terrorism Nuclear Capability?

I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

Seriously…since the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America. Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Ronald Reagan won the Presidential Election of 1980, partly because of the failure of the Carter Administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

And, now, all these years later, the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, blatantly lied to the Nation which he is sworn to protect while handing that Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction of both the United States of America and  our staunch ally, Israel.

Schmuck.

Don’t believe me?

Allow me to introduce you to an actual Leader: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu.

Here is what he had, to say at the time about this “wonderful deal”:

The world is a much more dangerous place today than it was yesterday.

The leading international powers have bet our collective future on a deal with the foremost sponsor of international terrorism. They’ve gambled that in ten years’ time, Iran’s terrorist regime will change while removing any incentive for it to do so. In fact, the deal gives Iran every incentive not to change.

In the coming decade, the deal will reward Iran, the terrorist regime in Tehran, with hundreds of billions of dollars. This cash bonanza will fuel Iran’s terrorism worldwide, its aggression in the region and its efforts to destroy Israel, which are ongoing.

Amazingly, this bad deal does not require Iran to cease its aggressive behavior in any way. And just last Friday, that aggression was on display for all to see.

While the negotiators were closing the deal in Vienna, Iran’s supposedly moderate president chose to go to a rally in Tehran and at this rally, a frenzied mob burned American and Israeli flags and chanted ‘Death to America, Death to Israel!’

Now, this didn’t happen four years ago. It happened four days ago.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah Khaomeini, said on March 21 that the deal does not limit Iran’s aggression in any way. He said: ‘Negotiations with the United States are on the nuclear issue and on nothing else.’

And three days ago he made that clear again. ‘The United States’, he said, ’embodies global arrogance, and the battle against it will continue unabated even after the nuclear agreement is concluded.’

Here’s what Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Iran’s terrorist proxy Hezbollah, said about sanctions relief, which is a key component of the deal. He said: ‘A rich and strong Iran will be able to stand by its allies and friends in the region more than at any time in the past.’

Translation: Iran’s support for terrorism and subversion will actually increase after the deal.

In addition to filling Iran’s terror war chest, this deal repeats the mistakes made with North Korea.

There too we were assured that inspections and verifications would prevent a rogue regime from developing nuclear weapons.

And we all know how that ended.

The bottom line of this very bad deal is exactly what Iran’s President Rouhani said today: ‘The international community is removing the sanctions and Iran is keeping its nuclear program.’

By not dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, in a decade this deal will give an unreformed, unrepentant and far richer terrorist regime the capacity to produce many nuclear bombs, in fact an entire nuclear arsenal with the means to deliver it.

What a stunning historic mistake!

Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran and Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran because Iran continues to seek our destruction.

We will always defend ourselves.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir. How refreshing.

Of course, just a few months later, one of our Navy Vessels and its crew was taken captive by the Iranians, who took videos and stills of their interrogations, which were disseminated worldwide for propaganda purposes.

And, what did Obama and Kerry do about it?

They gave the barbarians money to let them go.

Yes, really.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies…and, more concerned about reaching out to Muslim Radicals than demanding the release of Christian American Pastor Saeed Abedina, who has been held captive by Iran since the summer of 2012, and his fellow prisoners.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal have shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” which has already started to blow up in their faces figuratively, and will also blow up literally “where alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears” and in the heart of the Holy Land, itself.

Obama’s concern is not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Obama, as he always has been, is concerned with himself and leaving a marvelous legacy as president.

Giving Iran the means to “kill the infidels” will definitely cement Obama’s Legacy…if there is anyone left to remember it.

And, as far as lying to us about placing America in danger, Obama could care less.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naiveté or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Obama has screwed both God’s Chosen People and the nation which he is sworn to protect…for the sake of his own ego’s contentment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Netanyahu Blasts Iran for Celebrating the Holocaust. Has Obama’s Iran Deal Set the Stage for a Future Nuclear One?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

untitled (60)When the Israeli government is opposed to something, people in the United States take notice; and they should. No one can blame Israelis for having a deep skepticism about any dealings with the government like Iran’s, which includes leaders who deny the Holocaust, embrace an ideology of anti-Semitism, facilitate the flow of rockets that are arrayed on Israel’s borders. (And) Are pointed at Tel Aviv.

In such a dangerous neighbor Israel has to be vigilant, and it rightly insists it cannot depend on any other country, even it’s great friend the United States, for its own security. – President Barack Hussein Obama, in his speech in support of the Iran Nuclear Deal, delivered at American University in Washington, DC, on August 5, 2015

Yeah. Especially when you were intentionally attempting to con both Israel and America, Mr. President.

The Associated Press reports that

Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out at Iran Sunday for staging a Holocaust-themed cartoon contest that mocked the Nazi genocide of six million Jews during World War II and said the Islamic Republic was busy planning for another one.

Iran has long backed armed groups committed to Israel’s destruction and its leaders have called for it to be wiped off the map. Israel fears that Iran’s nuclear program is designed to threaten its very existence. But Netanyahu said that it not just Iran’s belligerent policies that Israel opposed, but its values.

“It denies the Holocaust, it mocks the Holocaust and it is also preparing another Holocaust,” Netanyahu said at his weekly Cabinet meeting. “I think that every country in the world must stand up and fully condemn this.”

State Department spokesman Mark Toner, traveling with Secretary of State John Kerry in Saudi Arabia, said the United States was concerned the contest could “be used as a platform for Holocaust denial and revisionism and egregiously anti-Semitic speech, as it has in the past.”

“Such offensive speech should be condemned by the authorities and civil society leaders rather than encouraged. We denounce any Holocaust denial and trivialization as inflammatory and abhorrent. It is insulting to the memory of the millions of people who died in the Holocaust,” Toner said.

The denial or questioning of the genocide is widespread in the Middle East, where many regard it as a pretext Israel used for its creation and to excuse its actions toward the Palestinians.

“Holocaust means mass killing,” said contest organizer Masuod Shojai Tabatabaei. “We are witnessing the biggest killings by the Zionist regime in Gaza and Palestine.”

He said the purpose of the Tehran event was not to deny the Holocaust but rather to criticize alleged Western double standards regarding free expression – and particularly as a response to depictions of the Prophet Muhammad by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and others. The exhibit featured some 150 works from 50 countries, with many portraying Israel as using the Holocaust to distract from the suffering of the Palestinians. Others depicted Palestinian prisoners standing behind concentration camp-style barbed wire fences, Netanyahu likened to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and a Jerusalem mosque behind a gate bearing the motto “Arbeit Macht Frei” that appeared at the entrance to the Auschwitz death camp.

The contest was organized by non-governmental bodies with strong support from Iran’s hard-liners. A previous contest in 2006 got a boost from then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a hard-liner who referred to the Holocaust as a “myth” and repeatedly predicted Israel’s demise.

Let this sink into your heads, boys and girls:

These are the same Barbarian Butchers that President Barack Hussein Obama, in what has now been revealed to be a sham deal, has given nuclear capability to.

A little over a week ago, The New York Post reported that

In an astounding New York Times piece by David Samuels, senior White House officials gleefully confess they use friendly reporters and nonprofits as public relations tools in the selling of President Obama’s foreign policy — and can do it almost at will because these tools are ignorant, will believe what they’re told, will essentially take dictation and are happy to be used just to get the information necessary for a tweet or two.

Their greatest triumph, according to Samuels, was selling a misleading narrative about the nuclear deal with Iran — the parameters of which were set a year before the administration claimed and which had nothing to do with the fact that a supposedly more accommodating government had risen to power.

The mastermind of the Obama machine is Ben Rhodes, a New Yorker who joined the Obama campaign as a speechwriter in 2007 and has risen to become the most influential foreign-policy hand in the White House.

Rhodes drips with contempt for almost everyone but his boss. He consigns all those who do not share every particular of the Obama-Rhodes foreign-policy perspective to a gelatinous mass called “The Blob” — including, Samuels writes, Hillary Clinton.

He thinks as little of them as he does of the journalists he and his team must spoon-feed. “The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns,” Rhodes says. “They literally know nothing.”

Then there are others his assistant Ned Price refers to as “force multipliers,” more senior reporters and pundits who parrot what they’re told. “I’ll give them some color,” Price says, using the journalistic term for juicy bits of inside-baseball detail, “and the next thing I know, lots of these guys are in the dot-com publishing space, and have huge Twitter followings, and they’ll be putting this message out on their own.”

A foreign-policy reporter named Laura Rozen, the most credulous conveyor of pro-Iran-deal news last year, is given a specific shout-out by White House digital guru Tanya Somanader. “Laura Rozen was my RSS feed,” Somanader tells Samuels. “She would just find everything and retweet it.”

The Iran deal, you may recall, was wildly unpopular with the American people. To ensure senators didn’t cast a two-thirds vote against it and kill it, the White House set up a digital response “war room” whose purpose was relentlessly to make the case that a vote against the deal was a vote for war.

Given what State Department Spokesman Mark Toner said yesterday, if he hasn’t already, perhaps traitorous Secretary of Sate John F. (I served in Vietnam) Kerry will place a phone call today to his counter-part in Iran, Mohammed Javad Zarif.

You see, as far as Sec. Kerry is concerned, Zarif is FAMILY.

As noted on the website of Lt. Col. Allen B. West…

…in 2009, the daughter of Secretary of State John Kerry, Dr. Vanessa Bradford Kerry, John Kerry’s younger daughter by his first wife, married an Iranian-American physician named Dr. Brian (Behrooz) Vala Nahed.

…Brian (Behrooz) Nahed is son of Nooshin and Reza Vala Nahid of Los Angeles. Brian’s Persian birth name is “Behrooz Vala Nahid” but it is now shortened and Americanized in the media to “Brian Nahed.” At the time his engagement to Bradford Kerry, there was rarely any mention of Nahed’s Persian/Iranian ancestry, and even the official wedding announcement in the October 2009 issue of New York Times carefully avoids any reference to Dr. Nahed (Nahid)’s birthplace (which is uncommon in wedding announcements) and starts his biography from his college years.

…Zarif is the current minister of foreign affairs in the Rouhani administration and has held various significant diplomatic and cabinet posts since the 1990s. He was Kerry’s chief counterpart in the nuclear deal negotiations.

Secretary Kerry and Zarif first met over a decade ago at a dinner party hosted by George Soros at his Manhattan penthouse. What a surprise. I have to say, connecting the dots gets more and more frightening.

But it gets even worse. Guess who was the best man at the 2009 wedding between Kerry’s daughter Vanessa and Behrouz Vala Nahed? Javad Zarif’s son.

Does this bother anyone at all?

Apparently Kerry only revealed his daughter’s marriage to an Iranian-American once he had taken over as Secretary of State. But the subject never came up in his Senate confirmation hearing, either because Kerry never disclosed it, or because his former colleagues were “too polite” to bring it up.

Polite? As their “Holocaust Celebration clearly demonstrates, the words “Iran” and “nuclear capability” just do not go with the word “polite”.

They were anything but polite, when they recently kidnapped one of our Navy Vessels and the men on board, interviewing, photographing and making videos of, which they released for propaganda purposes, once Obama

In order to get those sailors back, along with 4 hostages that the Iranians had been holding for years, Obama gave Iran everything they wanted: their money, nuclear capability, and acquiescence by the Government of the United States of America.

At the time this all went down, I posed the following question:

What if a condition of the Iran Prisoner Swap Agreement and the closure of the “Iran Deal” was that we humble ourselves by allowing our Navy Personnel to be captured and used as propaganda?

Am I crazy for even asking that?

Perhaps. However…

As the recent New York Times Article revealed, the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, purposely and surreptitiously handed a Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction of both the United States of America and our staunch ally, Israel.

And, while the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Secretary of State John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry continued to praise their “wonderful, magnificent deal”, which was actually nothing but a con job, with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, Iran continued their quest for World Domination, as if it never happened.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies….and the American Citizens he has sworn to protect.

So, why does the President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, continue to claim to trust Iran, an enemy of freedom, to stand by its “Agreement”, “ratified” with a wad of cash, to refrain from nuking the United States of America and Israel, seeming oblivious to Iran’s continued Arms Build-up?

Iran remains our mortal enemy, who wants every single American Infidel beheaded, and, who, to this day, refers to this sacred land as “The Great Satan”.

It is well known, that a young Obama, after his mother wed a quite well-off fellow from Indonesia, attended a Madrassa, or Muslim School, in Jakarta.

I believe that the time he spent among “the religion of peace” in his youth, and the 20 years he spent under the “Reformed Muslim” (Liberation Theology) teachings of “ex”-American Muslim, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, molded and cemented his attitude toward Muslims.

Obama innately trusts Muslims…even radical ones.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is destined to not only blow up in their faces, but also “where alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears” and in the heart of the Holy Land, itself.

The irresponsible Foreign Policy of Obama and his two Secretaries of State, Clinton and Kerry, reminds me of a quote from an actual American President, Ronald Reagan, who said,

To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

This is why we must elect a strong American President this November…before the mad Mullahs of Iran decide that it’s time to celebrate another Holocaust…the Nuclear kind.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Spys on Israel (and Congress) While Iran Tests Rockets

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

untitled (4)This is Smart Power?

The Wall Street Journal reports that

President Barack Obama announced two years ago he would curtail eavesdropping on friendly heads of state after the world learned the reach of long-secret U.S. surveillance programs.

But behind the scenes, the White House decided to keep certain allies under close watch, current and former U.S. officials said. Topping the list was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The U.S., pursuing a nuclear arms agreement with Iran at the time, captured communications between Mr. Netanyahu and his aides that inflamed mistrust between the two countries and planted a political minefield at home when Mr. Netanyahu later took his campaign against the deal to Capitol Hill.

The National Security Agency’s targeting of Israeli leaders and officials also swept up the contents of some of their private conversations with U.S. lawmakers and American-Jewish groups. That raised fears—an “Oh-s— moment,” one senior U.S. official said—that the executive branch would be accused of spying on Congress.

White House officials believed the intercepted information could be valuable to counter Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign. They also recognized that asking for it was politically risky. So, wary of a paper trail stemming from a request, the White House let the NSA decide what to share and what to withhold, officials said. “We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’ ” a senior U.S. official said. “We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’ ”

Stepped-up NSA eavesdropping revealed to the White House how Mr. Netanyahu and his advisers had leaked details of the U.S.-Iran negotiations—learned through Israeli spying operations—to undermine the talks; coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts.

Before former NSA contractor Edward Snowden exposed much of the agency’s spying operations in 2013, there was little worry in the administration about the monitoring of friendly heads of state because it was such a closely held secret. After the revelations and a White House review, Mr. Obama announced in a January 2014 speech he would curb such eavesdropping.

In closed-door debate, the Obama administration weighed which allied leaders belonged on a so-called protected list, shielding them from NSA snooping. French President François Hollande, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders made the list, but the administration permitted the NSA to target the leaders’ top advisers, current and former U.S. officials said. Other allies were excluded from the protected list, including Recep Tayyip Erdogan, president of NATO ally Turkey, which allowed the NSA to spy on their communications at the discretion of top officials.

Privately, Mr. Obama maintained the monitoring of Mr. Netanyahu on the grounds that it served a “compelling national security purpose,” according to current and former U.S. officials. Mr. Obama mentioned the exception in his speech but kept secret the leaders it would apply to.

Israeli, German and French government officials declined to comment on NSA activities. Turkish officials didn’t respond to requests Tuesday for comment. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the NSA declined to comment on communications provided to the White House.

This account, stretching over two terms of the Obama administration, is based on interviews with more than two dozen current and former U.S. intelligence and administration officials and reveals for the first time the extent of American spying on the Israeli prime minister.

,,,The NSA has leeway to collect and disseminate intercepted communications involving U.S. lawmakers if, for example, foreign ambassadors send messages to their foreign ministries that recount their private meetings or phone calls with members of Congress, current and former officials said.

“Either way, we got the same information,” a former official said, citing detailed reports prepared by the Israelis after exchanges with lawmakers.

During Israel’s lobbying campaign in the months before the deal cleared Congress in September, the NSA removed the names of lawmakers from intelligence reports and weeded out personal information. The agency kept out “trash talk,” officials said, such as personal attacks on the executive branch.

Administration and intelligence officials said the White House didn’t ask the NSA to identify any lawmakers during this period.

“From what I can tell, we haven’t had a problem with how incidental collection has been handled concerning lawmakers,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat and the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He declined to comment on any specific communications between lawmakers and Israel.The NSA reports allowed administration officials to peer inside Israeli efforts to turn Congress against the deal. Mr. Dermer was described as coaching unnamed U.S. organizations—which officials could tell from the context were Jewish-American groups—on lines of argument to use with lawmakers, and Israeli officials were reported pressing lawmakers to oppose the deal.

“These allegations are total nonsense,” said a spokesman for the Embassy of Israel in Washington.

A U.S. intelligence official familiar with the intercepts said Israel’s pitch to undecided lawmakers often included such questions as: “How can we get your vote? What’s it going to take?”

NSA intelligence reports helped the White House figure out which Israeli government officials had leaked information from confidential U.S. briefings. When confronted by the U.S., Israel denied passing on the briefing materials.

The agency’s goal was “to give us an accurate illustrative picture of what [the Israelis] were doing,” a senior U.S. official said.

Just before Mr. Netanyahu’s address to Congress in March, the NSA swept up Israeli messages that raised alarms at the White House: Mr. Netanyahu’s office wanted details from Israeli intelligence officials about the latest U.S. positions in the Iran talks, U.S. officials said.

A day before the speech, Secretary of State John Kerry made an unusual disclosure. Speaking to reporters in Switzerland, Mr. Kerry said he was concerned Mr. Netanyahu would divulge “selective details of the ongoing negotiations.”

The State Department said Mr. Kerry was responding to Israeli media reports that Mr. Netanyahu wanted to use his speech to make sure U.S. lawmakers knew the terms of the Iran deal.

Intelligence officials said the media reports allowed the U.S. to put Mr. Netanyahu on notice without revealing they already knew his thinking. The prime minister mentioned no secrets during his speech to Congress.

In the final months of the campaign, NSA intercepts yielded few surprises. Officials said the information reaffirmed what they heard directly from lawmakers and Israeli officials opposed to Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign —that the prime minister was focused on building opposition among Democratic lawmakers.The NSA intercepts, however, revealed one surprise. Mr. Netanyahu and some of his allies voiced confidence they could win enough votes.

While the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Secretary of State John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry continue to celebrate their “wonderful, magnificent deal” with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, there a four American citizens, including a Forgotten American Man of Faith, being held in the squalor of Iranian Jails.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies…and, more concerned about reaching out to Muslim Radicals than demanding the release of Christian American Pastor Saeed Abedina, who has been held captive by Iran since the summer of 2012, and his fellow prisoners.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is destined to not only blow up in their faces, but also “where alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears” and in the heart of the Holy Land, itself.

It is a “deal” which Iran has no intention of keeping.

NBC News reports that

The U.S. aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman came about 1,500 yards from an Iranian rocket in the Strait of Hormuz last week, two U.S. military officials told NBC News on Tuesday.As the Truman was transiting the strait, which connects the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf, Iranian Revolutionary Guards conducted a live-fire exercise right near the U.S. carrier Saturday, officials said.

A U.S. military official said an Iranian navy fast and short attack craft began conducting a live-fire exercise at the same time the carrier was nearing the end of the strait, firing off several unguided rockets. A French frigate, the U.S. destroyer USS Buckley and other commercial traffic were also in the area.

Obama’s concern is not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Obama, as he always has been, is concerned with himself and leaving a marvelous legacy as president.

Giving Iran the means to “kill the infidels” will definitely cement Obama’s Legacy…if there is anyone left to remember it.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naiveté or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Obama has screwed both God’s Chosen People and the nation which he is sworn to protect…for the sake of his own ego’s contentment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Iran to Berth Warships at Ports in the Atlantic Ocean…Some “Deal”. Smart Power!

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Israel-Tied-600-LIAnd you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet. – Matthew 24:6 (ESV)

About that “Agreement of Iran” and how they are “co-operating”…

The Times of Israel reports that

Iran intends to dispatch “a fleet of warships” to the Atlantic Ocean shortly, the semi-state Fars news agency reported Thursday, quoting the regime’s navy chief.

“Our warships will soon berth at ports in the Atlantic Ocean,” Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari promised at a ceremony on Wednesday marking the return to port of Iranian warships that Fars said had taken part in joint drills with the Russian navy.

Sayyari said the Iranian vessels had been in the Caspian Sea and at the Russian port of Astrakhan. “The presence of Iranian warships in international ports shows the Iranian Navy’s prowess,” Fars quoted him saying.

Sayyari made a similar pledge to deploy warships in the Atlantic in early 2014. At the time, Iran promised to send its fleet close to American maritime borders as a counter to the US navy’s presence in the Gulf. But in April, the navy chief said the move had been canceled “due to a change in schedule.”

The US-Iran relationship remains tense and friction-filled, despite the US-led world powers’ deal with Iran, sealed in July, on curbing its nuclear program.

Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei has repeatedly rejected any future talks on other issues, and ruled out normalization with the United States.

The former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani was reported to have admitted this week that the country’s nuclear program was started with the intent of building a nuclear weapon, with the express consent and participation of Khamenei. “Our basic doctrine was peaceful usage of the nuclear technology although we never abandoned the idea that if one day we are threatened and it is imperative, we would have the capability for going the other path [to nuclear weapon] as well,” Rafsanjani reportedly said.

Regarding the “Agreement” which President Barack Hussein Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry reached with the Largest State Sponsor of Islamic terrorism in the World, Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty reported  on August 15th of this year that

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has said the Islamic republic’s opposition to the “arrogant” United States “will not change” despite a landmark nuclear agreement reached earlier this week with world powers.

The comments, broadcast live on state television on July 18, were greeted by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” at a ceremony at Tehran’s Mosala Mosque on the occasion of the Eid al-Fitr festival, which marks the end of Ramadan.

Meanwhile, U.S. President Barack Obama defended the accord amid skepticism from congressmen reviewing the deal.

Khamenei, who has the final say in all state affairs in Iran, said U.S. policy in the Middle East runs counter to Iran’s strategy and that Tehran will continue to support its allies in the region, including Lebanon’s Hizballah militant group and the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“Whether this [nuclear deal] is approved or disapproved, we won’t stop supporting our friends in the region,” he said. “The oppressed Palestinian nation, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, the honest resistance fighters in Lebanon and Palestine will enjoy our constant support.”

“Even after this deal our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change,” Khamenei added.

Khamenei maintained that Iran’s engagement with six world powers was solely to reach a nuclear deal that was in its national interest.

“We do not negotiate with the United States on various global, regional, or bilateral issues,” Khamenei said. “Sometimes — based on expedience — we have talked to them on exceptional matters, such as the nuclear issue, and it has not been only this one time.”

“U.S. policies in the region are 180 degrees in contrast to Iran’s policies,” he added.

Under the deal agreed in Vienna on July 14 after years of negotiations, sanctions against Tehran, which have hampered Iran’s economy, will be gradually removed in return for the Persian Gulf state accepting long-term curbs on its nuclear program. The talks involved Iran and the five veto-wielding Security Council members — the United States, Russia, China, Britain, and France — as well as Germany and the European Union.

Western countries accuse Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons, a claim that Tehran denies.

Khamenei reiterated that position on July 18, mentioning a fatwa, or religious edict, he himself issued against any action seeking the bomb.

“The Americans say they stopped Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,” he said. “They know it’s not true.”

There was another famous “bad deal” in history, made by a “World Leader”, who also sacrificed his country’s safety, in his purposeful obtuseness and naiveté.

The speech, “Peace in Our Time”, was delivered by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938, in defense of the Munich Agreement, which he made with those infamous barbarians, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party, or as the world came to call them, the Nazis, and Hitler’s good buddy, the Italian Fascist, Benito Mussolini.

The following is an excerpt:

…I would like to say a few words in respect of the various other participants, besides ourselves, in the Munich Agreement. After everything that has been said about the German Chancellor today and in the past, I do feel that the House ought to recognise the difficulty for a man in that position to take back such emphatic declarations as he had already made amidst the enthusiastic cheers of his supporters, and to recognise that in consenting, even though it were only at the last moment, to discuss with the representatives of other Powers those things which he had declared he had already decided once for all, was a real and a substantial contribution on his part. With regard to Signor Mussolini, . . . I think that Europe and the world have reason to be grateful to the head of the Italian government for his work in contributing to a peaceful solution.

In my view the strongest force of all, one which grew and took fresh shapes and forms every day war, the force not of any one individual, but was that unmistakable sense of unanimity among the peoples of the world that war must somehow be averted. The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. I know the House will want to hear what I am sure it does not doubt, that throughout these discussions the Dominions, the Governments of the Dominions, have been kept in the closest touch with the march of events by telegraph and by personal contact, and I would like to say how greatly I was encouraged on each of the journeys I made to Germany by the knowledge that I went with the good wishes of the Governments of the Dominions. They shared all our anxieties and all our hopes. They rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.

We all know what happened next:  World War II.

That’s what happens when you strike an “Gentlemen’s Agreement” with barbarians, liars, and madmen.

As I have written before, I believe that Obama’s zeal to leave some sort of enormous historical legacy has led to a purposeful naiveté and obtuseness on his part, not only to history, but also, to the present wishes and wellbeing of not only those who have be maimed, slaughtered, and who still live under these repressive regimes that he has dealt with, but, also, to the continued sovereignty and very existence of the United States of America.

The Mad Mullahs of Iran do not play by the Marquis of Queensbury Rules, like “civilized countries” do.

They only respect strength and resolve.

Unfortunately, Obama and Kerry showed them neither of those qualities, during their negotiations.

Hence, their continued rhetoric, the threatened dispatching of a fleet of warships.

…and, the faint sound of uncontrollable laughter.

God protect His Chosen People …and us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama’s Moral Equivalency: Israel’s Right to Defense = Palestinian Terrorism

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

AFBrancoObamaCarterAward1092014The New York Times reports that

UNITED NATIONS — Israel’s new ambassador to the United Nations plunged into his first public diplomatic engagement here on Friday, ruling out any international protection force for a disputed holy site in Jerusalem, as the Palestinians demand.

In an appearance outside the Security Council chambers, the new ambassador, Danny Danon, a former deputy defense minister in Israel known for hawkish views, also condemned the Palestinian leadership for what he called its instigation of violence against Jews.

Mr. Danon portrayed the series of stabbings and other attacks on Israelis in recent weeks, coupled with an arson attack at the holy site known as Joseph’s Tomb in the West Bank city of Nablus on Friday, as the direct result of what he described as hate-filled incitement of Palestinian children.

“I wish my first time speaking to you was on happier terms,” Mr. Danon, 44, told reporters as the Security Council convened a meeting on the latest Palestinian-Israeli violence.

An underlying cause of the mayhem has been tensions surrounding the holy site in Jerusalem known as the Temple Mount to Jews and the Noble Sanctuary to Muslims.

Palestinians have said they fear Israelis are planning to take over the site, which under a longstanding arrangement is administered by a religious council under Jordanian custodianship. Israel has repeatedly called such fears false, unfounded and inflammatory.

Mr. Danon dismissed a request by the Palestinian delegation for an international protection force to provide security at the site.

“We don’t think any intervention will help,” Mr. Danon told reporters. “Keeping the status quo is right thing to bring stability and to keep stability in the region.”

France said it intends to advance a draft statement calling for “restraint” and “maintaining the status quo.” The Security Council has not discussed any text. A statement is not legally binding and has little effect.

The Palestinian ambassador, Riyad H. Mansour, told the Council that the need for international protection at the site had become “more urgent than ever before.”

The United Nations legal office has prepared a confidential memorandum listing examples of how a protection force could be deployed. But to make it public and bring it up for discussion would require consensus among all 15 Security Council members. That has proved elusive.

Seven Israelis and more than 30 Palestinians have been killed in recent weeks, the United Nations assistant secretary-general, Tayé-Brook Zerihoun, told the Council.

He said the loss of hope in prospects for a Palestinian state had contributed to what he called the “anger and frustration” that fuels the violence. He welcomed Israel’s commitment to maintaining the status quo.

What has been the reaction of the Obama Administration to this outbreak of Palestinian violence within the borders of one of traditionally closest allies?

Amateurish moral equivalency and a lack of spine, all too common in this Administration, has put us on the outs with our friend, Israel.

The Jerusalem Post reports that

US Secretary of State John Kerry will meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Germany next week to discuss the recent spate of violence between Israel and Palestinians in which 39 people have been killed, the Israeli ambassador to Washington said on Friday.

Kerry, who has said he planned to go to the Middle East soon to try to calm the violence, was traveling to Europe on Friday. Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, confirmed the planned meeting in Germany during an interview with CNN.

“That discussion will be, ‘OK, how do we get back to where we were in order to calm things down’,” Dermer said.

A spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel said earlier on Friday that Netanyahu will travel to Germany on Wednesday for talks with Merkel on the security situation in Israel and the wider Middle East.

According to Israel’s Channel 10, the premier will seek an explicit statement from Washington supporting Israel’s position that it is preserving the status quo on Temple Mount and throughout Jerusalem’s Old City.

Thus far, the Obama administration has been reluctant to issue such a declaration.

Jerusalem reacted furiously on Thursday to State Department spokesman John Kirby’s statement that Israel is not maintaining the status quo on the Temple Mount and accusing it of using “disproportionate force” to stop the wave of stabbing attacks.

“The comments by the US State Department spokesman are so crazy, deceitful and baseless, that I expect President [Barack] Obama and Kerry to distance themselves from them, and to clarify the US position,” Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan said.

Kirby ignited a maelstrom of anger when, during the State Department’s daily press briefing on Wednesday, he was asked numerous questions about the situation in Israel.

Asked about the placement of roadblocks at the entrance to some east Jerusalem neighborhoods that day, Kirby said that Israel has a “right and responsibility to protect its citizens.”

Then he continued, “We’ve certainly seen some reports of what many would consider excessive use of force. Obviously we don’t like to see that,” adding shortly afterward, “We’re concerned about that.”

Erdan told Israel Radio that it was the “height of hypocrisy” for Kirby, who just last week needed to explain the US’s accidental bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan leading to the deaths of 22 people, to “preach” to Israel.

Erdan, in a Twitter message, wrote that “every reasonable person knows very well how the police in the United States would act if terrorists armed with axes and knives would come to kill citizens in New York and Washington.”

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said in an Israel Radio interview that Jerusalem heard in the last few days from the US and the UN that it was using disproportionate force. “If someone wields a knife and they kill him, is that excessive force? What are we talking about?” he asked.

And Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked referred to the remarks as well, telling Israel Radio that “if people with knives were roaming the streets of New York and started stabbing people, they would not be asked to present their IDs, and the NYPD would draw their weapons.”

The US administration “can say whatever it wants, and we will do what is needed,” Shaked said.

While Kirby did not walk back these comments, he did take to Twitter to clarify remarks he made at the press briefing that the status quo on the Temple Mount was not being maintained.

“Clarification from today’s briefing: I did not intend to suggest that status quo at Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif has been broken,” he posted in a message early on Thursday morning.

An hour later he added, “We welcome both Israel’s & Jordan’s commitment to continued maintenance of status quo at Temple Mount/Haram Al-Sharif.”

Asked during the press briefing whether the administration believes the status quo on the Temple Mount has been broken, he replied: “Well, certainly, the status quo has not been observed, which has led to a lot of the violence.”

That the status quo was not being observed, he asserted, is “indisputable. That’s not a belief; that’s a fact.”

Netanyahu has said repeatedly over the past few weeks that Israel has not changed the status quo on the Temple Mount, nor has it any intention of doing so, characterizing Arab charges to the contrary as “lies” and “deceit.”

Kirby’s comments came shortly after he tried to clarify comments Kerry made on Tuesday night that also irked Jerusalem, implying that Israel’s settlement construction caused the current outbreak of terrorism.

“What’s happening is that, unless we get going, a two-state solution could conceivably be stolen from everybody,” Kerry said during a speech at Harvard University. “And there’s been a massive increase in settlements over the course of the last years, and now you have this violence, because there’s a frustration that is growing.”

Kirby attempted to clarify the secretary’s comments.

“The secretary wasn’t saying, well now you have the settlement activity as the cause for the effect we’re seeing,” Kirby told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

“Is it a source of frustration for Palestinians? You bet it is, and the secretary observed that. But this isn’t about affixing blame on either side here for the violence. What we want to see is the violence cease.”

He said that the US position against Israel’s settlement construction is “crystal clear” and remains unchanged.

Even though Israel is now a basically secular nation, the Temple Mount remains of utmost importance to both the Jewish and Christian Faiths. While Jewish pressures for prayer on the Mount or the building of a Third Temple, represent a minority point of view,  practicing Jews around the world have considered the eventual building of a third temple an obligation, or at least something that would be accomplished when the Messiah comes.

Even though Israel is “secular”, on the Day of Atonement the majority of the people still fast the whole day and go to a synagogue. Other religious holidays are observed to an increasing degree. Interest in the Bible and its claims is increasing. Because of this, national Jewish consciousness and media attention concerning the Temple Mount is rising.

These events have caused fear in the minds of the Muslims and has led in recent years to poor treatment of both Jewish and Christian visitors to the Temple Mount and to arbitrary restrictions of access as well as several incidents of harassment by Arab guards. This situation has been exacerbated by Muslim Terrorist attempts to shoot up or blow up the Dome of the Rock and El-Aqsa.

Obama and his State Department’s amateurish “So what?” reaction to the Palestinian Terror Campaign has Americans and the rest of the world, who are paying attention and support Israel’s right to self-defense, flummoxed.

To equate the actions of a sovereign nation, in defense of their citizenry, with the barbaric destruction of Palestinian Terrorists is disingenuous at best and dangerously naïve, at worst.

As I have documented previously, with Obama’s ill-conceived “Iranian Agreement” and his disastrous Foreign Policy of “Smart Power” which led to the bonfire know as “Arab Spring”, Obama has set the Mid-East ablaze.

The question now is, can the next President fix this mess, or, are we seeing, slowly and execrably, Biblical Prophecy being played out before our very eyes?

Until He Comes,

KJ