“Smart Power!” Continues Down the Porcelain Receptacle as Israel Prepares for Third Intifada.

americanisraelilapelpinMerriam-Webster defines the word Intifada as

uprising, rebellion; specifically :  an armed uprising of Palestinians against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip

This is a word which the world has become familiar with twice before.

Now, with the bubbling cauldron of potentially-nuclear annihilation getting hotter every passing day in the Middle East, thanks to President Barack Hussein Obama’s failed Foreign Policy of “Smart Power!”, the third time we become acquainted with the word Intifada, will definitely not be a “charm”.

Foxnews.com reports that

The Obama administration is under pressure to help calm the growing violence in Israel which has some warning of a third intifada, as Israel’s military steps up its response to deadly Palestinian attacks by deploying hundreds of troops. 

Amid the unrest, Secretary of State John Kerry just announced plans to visit the region, and has spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. 

“We’re working on trying to calm things down,” he said Tuesday during an event at Harvard University. “And I will go there soon at some point appropriately and try to work to re-engage and see if we can’t move that away from this precipice.” 

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest also cited that visit Wednesday when asked what President Obama is doing to address the crisis, saying Kerry will travel “in the near future.” He said the visit underscores the “continuing deep concern” the U.S. has and urged both sides to take “affirmative steps” to calm tensions. 

Yet the State Department under both Hillary Clinton and now Kerry so far has been unable to push forward the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Relations between Obama and Netanyahu remain as chilly as ever — particularly after the Iran nuclear deal put them on opposite sides of the debate — and it’s unclear how much sway the administration still has in the volatile region. 

Retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a Fox News analyst, cited Netanyahu’s visit last month to Moscow to meet with Putin to discuss Syria. “He can see that Obama’s Middle East non-policy has failed utterly,” Peters said.  

Kerry may be hoping his personal touch can help bring both sides together as tensions reach a critical point. 

Tuesday was among the bloodiest days so far, as a pair of Palestinian stabbing and shooting attacks in Jerusalem killed three Israelis and another two attacks took place in the normally quiet Israeli city of Raanana. Three Palestinians, including two attackers, were also killed. 

On Capitol Hill, U.S. lawmakers urged a stronger response from the administration. 

“I stand behind Israel’s fundamental right to defend itself and its people from violence and terror,” Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., said in a statement. “Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his government have an obligation to stop these attacks, to cease the harsh rhetoric that incites them, and to negotiate in good faith for a peaceful resolution.” 

He added, “It is imperative that the United States continue to ensure that Israel has the resources [it] needs to enhance its security and meet these threats.” 

Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said “it is critical that the Obama administration and Congress press Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas … to act decisively to end the growing wave of Palestinian violence and return to bilateral peace negotiations with Israel.” 

State Department spokesman John Kirby on Tuesday put out a statement condemning “in the strongest terms today’s terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians.” 

He said the U.S. stresses the importance of “condemning violence and combating incitement” and is in “regular contact” with both governments. “We remain deeply concerned about escalating tensions and urge all sides to take affirmative steps to restore calm and prevent actions that would further escalate tensions,” he said. 

It’s unclear what the U.S. message involves beyond those appeals. 

That’s simple.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama and Secretary of State John F. Kerry still want Israel to give half of their country to the “Palestinians”, which would return their nation to basically a strip of land, as it was before the Six Day War.

Who exactly are “The Palestinians”?

According to disoverthenetworks.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?

In an  article, posted on June 2, 2011, on americanthinker.comWhy Does the Left Hate Israel?,  Richard Baehr attempted to answer that very question…

…I have been to several of the left wing Israel hate fests. They are scary. There is real passion in the air. There is something about Israel that gets the juices going. Anti—Semitism is a part of it. There are a lot of people who are envious of Jews, on the left as well as the right. Patrick Buchanan thinks Jews have hijacked the conservative movement. But on the left, particularly in the academy, and in journalism, I am certain there is professional envy of the many Jewish faces and what better way to get even, and get back for sometimes losing the competitive battle, than by picking on the Jewish state as a surrogate. Leftist Jews sometimes lead the assault against Israel in these venues, thereby giving the attacks, whatever their reason, greater moral authority. Few Jews will stand up for Israel in these environments, because of the great pressure on the left to conform to the group think in the institutions they control.

…The evidence I believe is clear today that Israel faces far greater threats from the left than the right. The left is reflexively anti—Israel and has established important beachheads in significant American institutions— academia, the media, and the old line Protestant ‘high’ churches, as well as in the very seats of government power in many Western European countries, and their intelligentsia. It is not surprising that Israel seems unable to get a fair shake from college professors, the BBC, Reuters, NPR, or liberal churches. Being anti—Israel has become part of their religion.

As a Christian American, I know who I support:  God’s Chosen People. 

You see, I’ve read The Book.  I know how all of this ends.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Obama Had Senator Kerry Secretly Contacting the Iranians in 2011

Schumer-Deal-NRD-600Just when you think that the details of United States President Barack Hussein Obama’s and Secretary of State John Kerry’s worse-than-Chamberlain Iran deal could not get any more unthinkable…

The plot sickens…

The Middle East Media Research Institute reports that

Iranian officials recently began to reveal details from the nuclear negotiations with the U.S. since their early stages. Their statements indicate that the U.S. initiated secret negotiations with Iran not after President Hassan Rohani, of the pragmatic camp, was elected in 2013, but rather in 2011-2012, in the era of radical president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.[1] The disclosures also indicate that, already at that time, Iran received from the U.S. administration a letter recognizing its right to enrich uranium on its own soil. Hossein Sheikh Al-Islam, an advisor to the Majlis speaker, specified that the letter had come from John Kerry, then a senator and head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Iranian vice president and top negotiator Ali Akbar Salehi said that Kerry, while still a senator, had been appointed by President Obama to handle the nuclear contacts with Iran.

Now, why would Obama have Kerry, who was not even Secretary of State, yet, have secret “nuclear contacts” with Ahmadinejad and the Mad Mullahs?

Simple. Family ties.

Courtesy of AllenB.West.com

You not might be aware that 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.

Of course you’re not aware of it.

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.

Gosh, I wonder why??

Gee, do you think Secretary Kerry should have recused himself from the negotiations with Iran at the very outset because of his long-standing relationship to his Iranian counter-part, Mohammad Javad Zarif? Let me explain.

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? Somehow the words “Iran” and “nuclear capability” just do not go with the word “polite”.

The 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, has 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.

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, after the announcement of 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 Khamenei, 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.

As I have written before, 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 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.

An American President who cared about the citizens of his country would not have done this.

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.

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”.

Obama knows this. That is why he kept Kerry’s secret “nuclear contacts” hidden from the American People.

As is being shown by the nationwide reaction to this idiotic deal, Americans are not buying 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.

And, if Congress does not stand up to him, America will reap the whirlwind.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

The Iran Deal: Obama Throws a 60 Minute Presidential Temper Tantrum

Iran-Cheat-600-LA“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are on my blog, http://www.nytimes.com/ontheground). He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” – Nicholas Kristof, “Obama: Man of the World”, the New York Times, 3/6/2007

Barack Hussein Obama is still a ” little Jakarta street kid”. And, yesterday, he threw a Presidential Temper Tantrum.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama vigorously defended Wednesday his nuclear agreement with Iran as one “the world unanimously supports,” reaching back to blame America’s invasion of Iraq — and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein — for emboldening Iran, while labeling Republican opposition as “knee-jerk partisanship,” and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s criticism as “wrong.” 

Speaking at American University in Washington, Obama described the congressional debate over the Iran deal as the “most consequential” since the Iraq invasion. The president called the agreement a “very good deal” that — despite critics’ claims to the contrary — forbids Iran from building a nuclear weapon. 

In anticipation of a barrage of advertising against the deal, Obama likened those arguments to the case for war in Iraq more than a decade ago. 

“Many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal,” Obama said. 

The stark comparison dovetails with the president’s central claim that the alternative to an Iran deal may be war — “maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now, but soon,” he said Wednesday. And his appeal to lawmakers comes as he tries to stem defections from his own party. 

He spoke after Democratic Rep. Steve Israel, of New York, told Newsday he will oppose the Iran plan. Spokeswoman Caitlin Girouard confirmed his opposition to Fox News. 

The defection was a blow to the president as he tries to shore up party support ahead of a vote in Congress expected next month. Israel is policy and communications chairman for House Democrats and the chamber’s highest-ranking Jewish Democrat. 

In his speech, Obama addressed head-on the Israeli government’s opposition to the deal, saying he doesn’t doubt Netanyahu’s sincerity but thinks he “is wrong.” 

Dan Gillerman, former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, afterward asked on Fox News: “What if [Obama] is wrong?” 

If he is, Gillerman said, it’ll be another speech that “doesn’t go so well” for Obama. But for Israel, he said, it’s “existential.” 

“Israel is the only country in the world who Iran threatens, time and time again … to wipe off the face of the earth,” he said. 

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner said Obama is relying on “partisan attacks, false claims, and fear.” 

The backdrop for Obama’s speech was meant to link the nuclear accord to a long tradition of American diplomacy, often conducted with unfriendly nations. He spoke at the same university where President John F. Kennedy made a famous call for Cold War diplomacy and nuclear disarmament. His address also coincides with the anniversary of the nuclear test ban treaty, the landmark 1963 agreement Kennedy and leaders from the Soviet Union and Britain finalized shortly after the president’s well-known speech. 

Ahead of the speech, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., pointed to “growing bipartisan concern” over the deal. 

“It’s widespread and it’s well-founded,” he said, citing recent defections. Republicans unveiled legislation on the House side Tuesday to oppose the deal. 

Obama’s address is part of an intense summer lobbying campaign by both supporters and opponents of the nuclear deal. Congressional lawmakers will vote next month on a resolution either approving or disapproving of the pact. 

Some key Democratic lawmakers announced their support this week, including Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Barbara Boxer of California and Bill Nelson of Florida. 

However, the administration lost the backing of three prominent Jewish Democrats — Nita Lowey and Florida Rep. Ted Deutch, in addition to Rep. Israel. 

“In my judgment, sufficient safeguards are not in place to address the risks associated with the agreement,” Lowey said in a statement. “… This agreement will leave the international community with limited options in 15 years to prevent nuclear breakout in Iran, which will be an internationally-recognized nuclear threshold state, capable of producing highly enriched uranium.” 

House Republicans already have announced they have the 218 votes lined up to oppose the deal. But, if the Senate also opposes the agreement, both chambers would need to muster a two-thirds majority to override an expected presidential veto. That’s where Democratic votes will be critical for both sides of the debate. 

Addressing concerns that the nuclear deal effectively legitimizes Iran’s nuclear program and puts it on a path to a bomb, Obama countered that a vote against the deal in Congress “would not only pave Iran’s pathway to a bomb, it would accelerate it.” 

On the sidelines of the speech, International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Yukiya Amano was meeting in Washington Wednesday with members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 

Obama has presented the choice before lawmakers as one of war and peace. During a private meeting Tuesday with American Jewish leaders, Obama said that if Congress blocks the deal, the only option he or the next president would have for stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is military action. 

Critics of the deal, including Netanyahu, say Obama is delegitimizing their concerns and instead painting them as eager for war. In a webcast Tuesday aimed at American Jews, Netanyahu called thatargument “utterly false” and said Israel wants peace, not war.

To Obama, Kennedy’s willingness to negotiate with the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War is a useful comparison for defending his engagement with Iran, a country long at odds with the U.S. and its allies, particularly Israel.

Even as they link Obama’s diplomacy to Kennedy’s, White House officials argue that the president’s Iran accord has a key advantage over the nuclear test ban treaty. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said that while Kennedy had to roll back components of the U.S. nuclear program to strike a deal, Obama made no concessions to Iran that weaken U.S. national security.

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 try to push their “wonderful, magnificent deal” with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, down America’s throat, there are 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.

So, why is the President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, trusting Iran, an enemy of freedom, to stand by its “Agreement” to refrain from nuking the United States of America and Israel?

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.

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,

Jeb Bush Attacks Huckabee’s Defense of Israel Over Iran Deal

Israel-Tied-600-LIIf the Republicans are going to act like Democrats. why do we need two political parties?

The New York Times reports that

ORLANDO, Fla. – Jeb Bush rebuked Mike Huckabee on Monday for invoking the Holocaust in criticizing President Obama over the nuclear agreement with Iran, arguing that Republicans needed “to tone down the rhetoric” if they hoped to recapture the White House next year.

“The use of that kind of language is just wrong,” Mr. Bush told reporters after a town-hall-style meeting here. “This is not the way we’re going to win elections and that’s not how we’re going to solve problems. So, unfortunate remark — not quite sure why he felt compelled to say it.”

Mr. Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, said over the weekend that Mr. Obama’s Iran policy would “take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven.”

His incendiary language prompted a strongly worded rejoinder from Mr. Obama at a news conference in Ethiopia on Monday.

“The particular comments of Mr. Huckabee are just part of a general pattern we’ve seen that would be considered ridiculous if it weren’t so sad,” Mr. Obama said, linking Mr. Huckabee’s comments to similarly inflammatory rhetoric of late from those he called the “leaders in the Republican Party.”

After an hour in a Hispanic megachurch fielding questions from a diverse audience of pastors, Mr. Bush found himself in an increasingly familiar role: grappling with how to separate himself from controversial language and figures in his party who could turn off a general election audience while not irritating the conservative primary voters he needs to win his party’s nomination.

While his criticism of Mr. Huckabee was unmistakable, Mr. Bush seemed to restrain himself when he drifted toward mocking Mr. Huckabee, who since his 2008 presidential bid has made something of a side business of taking Americans on tours of the Holy Land.

“Look, I’ve been to Israel, not as many times as Mike Huckabee,” Mr. Bush said, before quickly adding, “who I respect.”

He also sandwiched his critique of Mr. Huckabee around denunciations of the nuclear agreement itself, which he called “horrific” at the outset and “a bad deal” in conclusion.

Mr. Bush sought a similar balance on another charged issue: the arrest and death of Sandra Bland in Texas this month and other incidents of unarmed African-Americans dying in police custody.

He said he had not seen “the full video” of Ms. Bland’s traffic stop, but called her case and the recent deaths of other African-Americans after police encounters “disconcerting.”

But he declined to offer a diagnosis for what is behind “an outbreak of these cases.”

“I’m not a sociologist,” said Mr. Bush, adding: “Maybe this has been going on a long while, but now because we capture everything in the digital world perhaps that’s the reason. I don’t know if there’s been a larger number of these things.”

As for what can be done to stop such cases in the future, he also walked a careful line.

“I think there ought to be some consideration of, and states are looking at this, expanding cameras, certainly more training,” Mr. Bush said. “There’s also got to be a recognition that being a police officer is a dangerous job, and they get it right a lot of times, too.”

Mr. Bush said mandating that police officers wear body cameras should be done on the state level. Asked if he would sign such a bill if he was still Florida’s governor, Mr. Bush suggested he would defer to the views of law enforcement.

“If they thought it was important,” he said, “then I’d go to the legislature and fund it.”

Jeb is not as smart as his brother.

On May 15, 2008. United States President George W. Bush, spoke the following words to the Knesset, at the commemoration of the 60th Anniversary of the Founding of Israel:

The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle. On the one side are those who defend the ideals of justice and dignity with the power of reason and truth. On the other side are those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing murder, inciting fear, and spreading lies.This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the “elimination” of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant “Death to Israel, Death to America!” That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that “the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties.” And that is why the president of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel’s population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you.America stands with you in breaking up terrorist networks and denying the extremists sanctuary. America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world’s leading sponsor of terror to possess the world’s deadliest weapons would be an unforgivable betrayal for future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.

Yesterday, I wrote about the Vichy Republicans in Congress and their penchant for behaving just like Liberal Democrats.

Jeb Bush, erstwhile candidate for the Republican Presidential Nomination, is cut from the same cloth.

Bush is a “Moderate Republican”, like Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and John Boehner.

He is Pro-Amnesty, and evidently, Pro-Iran.

Mike Huckabee was exactly right in his statement.

The consequences of Obama and Kerry’s Chamberlain-esque Deal with Iran, have the potential to be apocalyptic, not only for God’s Chosen People, but, for the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, as well.

Evidently, Jeb Bush is running for the Presidential Candidate Nomination of the wrong political party.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Iran Deal: Pride Goeth Before a Nuclear Fallout

suicide-usa-nrd-600 (2)I 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)

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.

Reagan won the election, 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, has handed the 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 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 Khamenei, 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.

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 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.

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

Obama to Israel About Iran: “Who Are You Going to Believe? Me or Your Lying Eyes?”

 

americanisraelilapelpinYou know, I think I am the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office. For people to say that I am anti-Israel, or, even worse, anti-Semitic, it hurts. – President Barack Hussein Obama, speaking to David Axelrod

And, I’m a 22 year old Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader named Buffy.

Obama is presently attempting to convince the Israelis that his attempts to reach an “agreement” with Iran, concerning their quest to achieve nuclear capability, do not pave the way for their country’s annihilation.

According to theblaze.com,

President Barack Obama told Israel’s Channel 2 television that while he understands the “concerns” and “fears” of Israelis, he believes the best path to preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon is through a “verifiable, tough agreement.”

“I can, I think, demonstrate, not based on any hope but on facts and evidence and analysis, that the best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon is a verifiable, tough agreement,” Obama said in an excerpt of the interview with Channel 2’s news magazine “Uvda” that was broadcast Monday night.

“A military solution will not fix it. Even if the United States participates, it would temporarily slow down an Iranian nuclear program but it will not eliminate it,” Obama said.

President Barack Obama said about the Iranian nuclear challenge: “A military solution will not fix it.” (Image source: Channel 2)

Amid tensions between Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the framework agreement between Iran, the U.S. and five world powers – which the Israeli leader has called a “bad deal” – Obama and other administration officials have found ways to address the Israeli public directly to try to allay concerns that a negotiated agreement will thwart the efforts of a country that has vowed to annihilate Israel from obtaining a doomsday weapon.

Asked if he could imagine a scenario in which Netanyahu, after the signing of a permanent agreement with Iran, were to launch a military strike on nuclear facilities without first alerting him as U.S. president, Obama said, “I won’t speculate on that. What I can say is, to the Israeli people: I understand your concerns and I understand your fears.”

Channel 2 will broadcast the entire 40-minute interview Tuesday night.

The interviewer, Ilana Dayan, a well-known television news personality in Israel, reported that during 40-minute interview Obama expressed his deep commitment to Israel’s security but said that without an Israeli-Palestinian peace process underway it would be difficult for the U.S. to defend Israel in international organizations.

The U.S., Iran and the five powers are working to meet a self-imposed June 30 deadline to reach a final agreement over Iran’s nuclear program.

Netanyahu on Sunday called Iran’s effort to develop nuclear weapons “the greatest threat to Israel’s security, to the stability of the region and to the peace of the world.

One of the perks of having written over 1,900 blogs, is that , sometime over the last 5 years, chances are I have gathered some pertinent background information on the subject I am writing today’s Blog on. Once again, I hit the jackpot.

Per wnd.com, posted 11/11/2008:

Hamas held a meeting in the Gaza Strip several months ago with aides to President-elect Barack Obama, but the terror group was asked to keep the contacts secret until after last week’s elections, according to a senior Hamas official.

Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser in Gaza, told the leading Al-Hayat Arabic-language newspaper Hamas has maintained regular communication with Obama aides that even continued during the past week.

“We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama),” Yousuf told Al-Hayat.

Yousuf said Hamas’ contact with Obama’s advisers was ongoing, adding that relations were maintained after Obama’s electoral victory last Tuesday.

Then, on 6/25/10, ynet news.com reported:

A senior Hamas figure said Friday that official and unofficial US sources have asked the Islamist group to refrain from making any statements regarding contacts with Washington, this following reports that a senior American official is due to arrive in an Arab country in the coming days to relay a telegram from the Obama Administration.

The Hamas figure told the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper that the Americans fear discussing the talks publicly would “rouse the Jewish lobby and other pressure groups in the US and cause them to pressure the administration to suspend all talks with Hamas.”

The Hamas figure, who is close to Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister of the government in Gaza, added, “This is a sensitive subject. The Americans don’t want anyone to comment on it because this would catch the attention of pressure groups (in the US) and cause problems.”

He said Hamas’ exiled leadership in Damascus is overseeing the contacts behind closed doors.

The point of re-posting the last two stories is very simple: Obama never has liked Israel, as it currently stands.

Remember the recent National Elections in Israel?

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 in the process of 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 decided before the election that he had to rid himself of Netanyahu’s strong and forthright leadership.

Obama believed, and rightfully so, 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 with 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”.

Ever since he took office, whether through his ongoing embrace of Israel’s enemies, his support of giving away half of her land to the historically nomadic people, whom the British named, “Palestinians”, or his recent failed effort to have Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thrown out of office, President Barack Hussein Obama has proven to be anything but “a friend of Israel”.

With friends like Barack Hussein Obama, Israel does not need enemies.

God Protect America and His Chosen People.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s “Success” in Yemen Leading to WWIII?

 

Iran-Cheat-600-LA“But I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil. This counter-terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground. This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.” – President Barack Hussein Obama,  Foreign Policy Address to the Nation, September 10, 2014.

Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. – Proverbs 16:18

Fox News reports that

Intervention by the U.S. and Iran in Yemen is raising the prospect of a proxy war even as the Obama administration tries to reach a nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic – with Iran sending two ships to waters near Yemen, as the U.S. speeds up military aid to the Saudi-led coalition striking Tehran-backed rebels there. 

Iran’s English-language state broadcaster Press TV quoted Rear Adm. Habibollah Sayyari as saying the ships, dispatched for the Gulf of Aden, would be part of an anti-piracy campaign “safeguarding naval routes for vessels in the region.” 

But the move comes amid the Saudi-led air campaign against Yemeni rebels, known as Houthis, which Iran is accused of backing. 

While the Pentagon has not yet weighed in on the ship movements, spokesman Col. Steve Warren said Wednesday: “We know that Iranians are providing support to the Houthis.” 

The developments underscore the growing international tensions surrounding the chaotic fighting in Yemen, with the U.S. shoring up Saudi-led forces on one side and Iran allegedly backing the Houthis on the other – though Iran and the rebels deny any direct military assistance. 

The fighting and international involvement threaten to hang over ongoing nuclear talks, which yielded a deal framework last week in Switzerland. The U.S., Iran and five other world powers are trying to strike a final deal by June – though critics have pointed to Iran’s involvement in Yemen and elsewhere as a serious cause for concern. 

But administration officials argue a nuclear deal is still worth pursuing, claiming it would cut off pathways to a nuclear bomb for the regime and make the world safer. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said Wednesday that “of course” the U.S. would like Iran to stop supporting the Yemen rebels and Hezbollah and other groups. 

“In a perfect world, of course we would have an agreement that does all of these things, but we are living in the real world,” she said, adding they want to get “this one issue dealt with.” 

Warren said Wednesday he could not say whether “Iranian money or equipment” has been delivered to the Houthis, but “we know the Iranians are partnered with the Houthis and they are working together.” 

Speaking a day earlier in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken blamed the violence in Yemen on the Houthis, and forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, saying that the U.S. is committed to defending Saudi Arabia. 

“We have expedited weapons deliveries, we have increased our intelligence sharing, and we have established a joint coordination and planning cell in the Saudi operations center,” he said in a statement to reporters after meeting with Saudi royals and Yemen’s President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who fled his country amid rebel advances.

Warren said Wednesday that no additional munitions have been delivered yet. He would not specify the types of bombs involved. 

In 1974, at the very first Conservative Political Action Conference, the future President of the United States said the following:

Somehow America has bred a kindliness into our people unmatched anywhere, as has been pointed out in that best-selling record by a Canadian journalist. We are not a sick society. A sick society could not produce the men that set foot on the moon, or who are now circling the earth above us in the Skylab. A sick society bereft of morality and courage did not produce the men who went through those years of torture and captivity in Vietnam. Where did we find such men? They are typical of this land as the Founding Fathers were typical. We found them in our streets, in the offices, the shops and the working places of our country and on the farms.

We cannot escape our destiny, nor should we try to do so. The leadership of the free world was thrust upon us two centuries ago in that little hall of Philadelphia. In the days following World War II, when the economic strength and power of America was all that stood between the world and the return to the dark ages, Pope Pius XII said, “The American people have a great genius for splendid and unselfish actions. Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind.

We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth.

And when Reagan became president, he did everything within his power to uphold these lofty words.

I suppose that is why I hold Barack Hussein Obama in such disdain. As a young man just starting my new life in the business world, I was able to watch the economy start to turn around under the greatest president in our lifetime. There was a confidence in our strength as an American people that I had never seen before.

You could see it in people’s faces as you walked past them on the street… or at the gas station, as we all watched the price of a gallon of gas finally go down after the pain at the pump that we experienced during the Carter Presidency.

People who had been out of work and suffering along with their families were beginning to be hired again. And, young Americans who had no confidence in the previous commander in chief, were once again going to military recruiters asking to sign up to serve our country.

Yes, indeed. Once again, it was “Morning in America”.

However, the popularity of our president was not just limited to the boundaries of our nation. Reagan 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.

The Liberal Democrats lost their collective minds.

For you see, Liberal Democrats, 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 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 is looking like a fool 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.

It should not surprise anyone that he has no qualms in giving Iran a timeline for acquisition of a nuclear bomb.

…Nor that ISIS is still on the march.

After all…he considers Yemen a “success”.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The “Obama Doctrine”: Ignoring History

Non-Negotiable-600-LIThomas L Friedman, of the New York Times, was recently invited to the White House to interview President Barack Hussein Obama.

Here is an excerpt from his subsequent article:

…What struck me most was what I’d call an “Obama doctrine” embedded in the president’s remarks. It emerged when I asked if there was a common denominator to his decisions to break free from longstanding United States policies isolating Burma, Cuba and now Iran. Obama said his view was that “engagement,” combined with meeting core strategic needs, could serve American interests vis-à-vis these three countries far better than endless sanctions and isolation. He added that America, with its overwhelming power, needs to have the self-confidence to take some calculated risks to open important new possibilities — like trying to forge a diplomatic deal with Iran that, while permitting it to keep some of its nuclear infrastructure, forestalls its ability to build a nuclear bomb for at least a decade, if not longer.

“We are powerful enough to be able to test these propositions without putting ourselves at risk. And that’s the thing … people don’t seem to understand,” the president said. “You take a country like Cuba. For us to test the possibility that engagement leads to a better outcome for the Cuban people, there aren’t that many risks for us. It’s a tiny little country. It’s not one that threatens our core security interests, and so [there’s no reason not] to test the proposition. And if it turns out that it doesn’t lead to better outcomes, we can adjust our policies. The same is true with respect to Iran, a larger country, a dangerous country, one that has engaged in activities that resulted in the death of U.S. citizens, but the truth of the matter is: Iran’s defense budget is $30 billion. Our defense budget is closer to $600 billion. Iran understands that they cannot fight us. … You asked about an Obama doctrine. The doctrine is: We will engage, but we preserve all our capabilities.”

The notion that Iran is undeterrable — “it’s simply not the case,” he added. “And so for us to say, ‘Let’s try’ — understanding that we’re preserving all our options, that we’re not naïve — but if in fact we can resolve these issues diplomatically, we are more likely to be safe, more likely to be secure, in a better position to protect our allies, and who knows? Iran may change. If it doesn’t, our deterrence capabilities, our military superiority stays in place. … We’re not relinquishing our capacity to defend ourselves or our allies. In that situation, why wouldn’t we test it?”

Obviously, Israel is in a different situation, he added. “Now, what you might hear from Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu, which I respect, is the notion, ‘Look, Israel is more vulnerable. We don’t have the luxury of testing these propositions the way you do,’ and I completely understand that. And further, I completely understand Israel’s belief that given the tragic history of the Jewish people, they can’t be dependent solely on us for their own security. But what I would say to them is that not only am I absolutely committed to making sure that they maintain their qualitative military edge, and that they can deter any potential future attacks, but what I’m willing to do is to make the kinds of commitments that would give everybody in the neighborhood, including Iran, a clarity that if Israel were to be attacked by any state, that we would stand by them. And that, I think, should be … sufficient to take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see whether or not we can at least take the nuclear issue off the table.”

Alright, you students of history…does the message delivered by the president, during the above-referenced interview, seem familiar to any of you?

It should. 

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 from that historic speech:

…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.

In more recent times, United States President Jimmy Carter thought that he could negotiate from a position of weakness, also.

Remember the Iranian Hostage Crisis under President Jimmy Carter?

That’s what happens when you negotiate with barbarians.

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Netanyahu Wins Re-election…Despite Obama

 

americanisraelilapelpinAs the votes were being counted last night, both Israeli and American Politicians and Political Pundits had to admit the inevitable.

The Jerusalem Post reported that

After six years of testy relations, US President Barack Obama may have to resign himself to the likelihood that he has not seen the last of Benjamin Netanyahu.

A better-than-expected showing by the Israeli prime minister in Tuesday’s closely fought election raises the prospect that he could remain a thorn in Obama’s side, with the two men increasingly at odds over Iran diplomacy and Middle East peacemaking.

US officials responded cautiously as they waited to see whether Netanyahu or his center-left challenger, Isaac Herzog, would get the nod from Israel’s president to begin the long and messy coalition-building process.

Clearly the result that many of Obama’s supporters had hoped for – a repudiation by Israeli voters of Netanyahu’s hard-line approach – was not to be. Exit polls showed that his Likud party had erased its rival’s pre-election lead, putting the two sides in a dead heat.

“Looks like the White House will need to let the champagne chill a bit longer,” Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations, tweeted about the election outcome.

The election came just two weeks after Netanyahu defied Obama with a politically divisive speech to Congress attacking US-led nuclear talks with Iran. The final days of campaigning only served to deepen tensions between the right-wing leader and Washington.

Even as they insisted publicly on non-intervention in the Israeli campaign, Obama’s aides were taken aback by Netanyahu’s reversal of his previous declaration of support for creating a Palestinian state, a longstanding cornerstone of US policy.

Netanyahu also drew a rebuke from the US State Department for suggesting on election day that left-wingers were trying to get Arab-Israeli voters out “in droves” to sway the election against him.

“Netanyahu has managed an uphill climb in the last few days,” said David Makovsky, a former member of Obama’s team in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks that collapsed last year.

“The way he has survived was to cannibalize part of the right and also adopt policy positions that are bound to create further friction with Washington,” said Makovsky, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “He’s going to be in the next government one way or another.”

Netanyahu could have the easier path to forming a cabinet, which would put him on course to becoming Israel’s longest serving leader.

That prospect may not bode well for repairing US-Israeli ties after Netanyahu’s congressional speech, which he delivered at the invitation of Obama’s Republican opponents despite strong objections from the president and many of Obama’s fellow Democrats.

US officials had left little doubt of their hope for an election outcome that would create a new ruling coalition more in sync with – or at least less hostile to – Obama’s agenda, especially with an end-of-March deadline looming for a framework nuclear deal in negotiations between Tehran and world powers.

As a prime minister, Zionist Union leader Herzog would be expected to take an Obama-friendlier course less confrontational over Iran and more open to renewed peacemaking with the Palestinians.

It would also be a chance to get past six years of slights, mutual suspicion and even antipathy at the top of the US-Israeli relationship and return to traditional bipartisanship in Congress on the issue of Israeli security.

That will not be easy if Netanyahu remains in office – though some analysts suggest that tensions with Obama could be eased along with the threat of international isolation if the rivals decide to form a broad-based national unity government.

Efforts already were under way in Washington to lower the temperature.

“People say a lot of things during campaigns,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told CNN when asked about Netanyahu’s apparent reversal on Palestinian statehood.

“What we’re focused on is the Israelis moving forward, forming a government and we will work with whoever is prime minister to see if we can make progress in what is a very tough and difficult area to do so,” she said.

Nancy Pelosi, the House of Representatives Democratic minority leader, said that as someone who loves Israel, she was “near tears” during Netanyahu’s March 3 address, calling his remarks an “insult to the intelligence of the United States.”

But on Tuesday, she said the US-Israeli relationship would stay strong, whoever won, and declined to weigh in before the result on whether Netanyahu’s speech hurt him.

“It’s a very, very … intellectual relationship, security relationship and an emotional one as well,” she told reporters.

Underscoring the partisan divide over Netanyahu, Republican US Senator Ted Cruz said: “His electoral success is all the more impressive given the powerful forces that tried to undermine him, including, sadly, the full weight of the Obama political team.”

What may have have been a harbinger of the opposition party’s was actually a prophetic poll from January of 2014 which showed that most Israelis trusted “The Leader of the Free World” about as far as they could throw Moochelle.

According to new poll, a huge majority of Israelis do not trust President Obama with regard to Iran, and believe Obama will allow Iran to go nuclear. Only 22 percent of Israeli voters believed that Obama would “ensure that Iran does not achieve a nuclear weapon.”

Almost two-thirds of Israelis thought that statement was untrue, and 15 percent gave no answer. President Obama has just a 33 percent favorable rating in Israel, as opposed to a 50 percent disapproval rating. Even those who favor Obama are split evenly on whether or not he will prevent Iran from going nuclear.

After over a year of Petulant President Pantywaist pussy-footing around with the Mad Mullahs of Iran, it is a certainty that those numbers in that poll would be even more skewed today against Barack Hussein Obama.

And, rightfully so.

Barack Hussein Obama, despite his protestations to the contrary, is not a friend of Israel.

In fact, the entirety of Obama’s Foreign Policy Efforts, over both terms, have been nothing but a series of back-handed insults to God’s Chosen People.

From his meeting with Hamas before he was even elected, to his unwavering insistence that Israelis give up half of their country to the Middle Eastern Gypsies, know as Palestinians, “citizens” of a country that never existed, except as a vaguely-defined British Territory, eons ago, the first anti-American President has thumbed his nose at the country of Israel.

From his unwavering support of “Arab Spring” to his entertaining the barbaric Muslim Brotherhood repeatedly in OUR White House, Obama has embraced our sworn enemies and alienated our staunchest ally.

From their birth as a Nation in 1948, Israel and the United States of America have been united against the forces of Radical Islam.

…That is, until Barack Hussein Obama took office, and he and his Administration decided that Muslim Terrorist Acts were just “man-caused disasters”.

Obama has intentionally derided and snubbed Prime Minister Netanyahu over the years, once, even leaving a serious discussion with him, to go have dinner with Mooch and the girls, because Bibi was schooling him, as usually happened, every time they met.

And, of course, who can forget the hissy fit which Obama and all of his Liberal sycophants threw over Netanyahu speaking to Congress about the Iranian Situation, at the request of Speaker John Boehner.

And, now, with Congress beginning the process of investigating whether the president used OUR money in an attempt to have Prime Minister Netanyahu voted out of office, Bibi has once again made Obama look like the petulant dhimmi wuss that he is, by being re-elected.

Hey, Israel…we’ll trade ya!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Election Day in Israel: Has Obama Bought This Election?

NetanyahuToday is Election Day in the Holy Land, as Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu faces his most difficult challenge yet, from enemies, both within and outside, his country.

Fox News reports that

Faced with a tight race for his political life, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stepped up the nationalist rhetoric on the eve of parliamentary elections, vowing a Palestinian state will not be established on his watch if he’s re-elected.

In an interview published Monday in the nrg news website, Netahyahu said withdrawing from occupied areas to make way for a Palestinian state would only ensure that territory will be taken over by Islamic extremists. When asked if that means a Palestinian state will not be established if he is elected, Netanyahu said “indeed.”

It was the latest — and clearest — attempt by Netanyahu to disavow his earlier support for Palestinian independence, which he first laid out in a landmark 2009 speech.

“If we get this guarantee for demilitarization and necessary security arrangements for Israel, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, we will be willing in a real peace agreement to reach a solution of a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state,” he said in 2009.

Despite that pledge, two rounds of peace talks have failed and Netanyahu has continued to expand Jewish settlements.

In a further attempt to appeal to hard-line voters, the Israeli leader also vowed Monday to strengthen construction in east Jerusalem settlements.  Netanyahu tried to shore up support on several campaign stops after the latest polls showed his Likud party trailing behind the centrist Zionist party, the day before Tuesday’s Knesset elections.  

Netanyahu is in a close race against the Center-Left Zionist Union party led by Tzipi Livni and Isaac Herzog, who confidently predicted an “upheaval” was imminent.

In recent days, Netanyahu has been on a get-out-the-vote blitz, saying a dovish government would spell disaster for the country and complaining of an international conspiracy to oust him. But Monday’s comments will put him further at odds with the international community, boding poorly for already strained relations with the U.S. and other key allies if he wins a third consecutive term.

There was no immediate comment from U.S. officials.

The international community overwhelmingly supports the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, areas captured by Israel in 1967, and opposes settlement construction. Netanyahu’s tough new position is likely to worsen his already strained ties with his western allies if he is re-elected.

Netanyahu has portrayed himself as the only politician capable of confronting Israel’s numerous security challenges, while his opponents have focused on the country’s high cost of living and presented Netanyahu as imperious and out of touch with the common man.

Netanyahu has also complained of an international conspiracy to oust him, funded by wealthy foreigners who dislike him, and on Sunday night, he addressed an outdoor rally before tens of thousands of hard-line supporters in Tel Aviv.

An “International Conspiracy” led by the Obama White House.

Here is why Congress is investigating this situation:

Have you ever heard of One Voice?

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 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.

Obama believes, and rightfully so, that by replacing Netanyahu with a Liberal Politician in Israel, then the “Arab Spring”, which began under his presidency, will 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