The Petulant President, the Iranian “Negotiations”, and the Forgotten American

 

AFBrancoTerroristAhoy252015I believe that America has a Petulant Presidential Priority Problem.

Back on December 30, 2014, Reuters News – Canada reported the following…

Iran could become a “very successful regional power” if Tehran agrees to a long-term deal to curb its nuclear program, President Barack Obama said in an interview with NPR News.

“They’ve got a chance to get right with the world,” Obama said in the interview, which was taped at the White House on Dec. 18 and is set to air this week.

More than a year ago, Iran agreed to an interim plan to halt higher-level uranium enrichment in exchange for a limited easing in financial sanctions pending negotiations on a long-term deal. Those talks have now been extended to next June.

Iran has said its nuclear program is for peaceful energy use, but the United States and five other powers want to make sure that Tehran cannot quickly develop nuclear weapons.

Obama told NPR that Iran should seize the chance of a deal that could lift crippling sanctions.

“Because if they do, there’s incredible talent and resources and sophistication inside of Iran and it would be a very successful regional power that was also abiding by international norms and international rules – and that would be good for everybody,” he said.

Obama insisted a nuclear deal was possible, although Vice President Joe Biden earlier this month said he thought there was a “less than even shot” of an agreement.

Obama said he recognized that Iran has “legitimate defense concerns” after it “suffered from a terrible war with Iraq” in the 1980s. But he criticized Tehran for its “adventurism, the support of organizations like Hizbollah, the threats they’ve directed at Israel.”

Asked whether he would use his last two years in office to help rebuild war-torn countries, Obama said it was up to countries like Libya, Syria and Iraq to take the lead.

“We can help, but we can’t do it for them,” Obama said. “I think the American people recognize that. There are times here in Washington where pundits don’t; they think you can just move chess pieces around the table.

“And whenever we have that kind of hubris, we tend to get burned,” he said.

Are you old enough to remember the Iranian 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.

As I write this blog post, on Saturday morning, March 14th, the Year of Our Lord 2015, an American sits in an Iranian Jail, while the man who is supposed to be his president, protector, and advocate, praises and plays “footsie” with his Radical Islamic captors.

Christianpost.com reports that

Naghmeh Abedini, wife of imprisoned Iranian-American Pastor Saeed Abedini, gives remarks at a vigil for her husband held at Lafayette Square near the White House, Washington, Thursday, September 25, 2014.

U.S. Pastor Saeed Abedini, who has now been in an Iranian jail for his Christian faith for nearly two-and-a-half years, is “shaken” as six of his fellow prisoners were executed around him this week, his wife, Naghmeh, says.

“Saeed was quite shaken as he had to witness 6 fellow prisoners being beaten and taken to be executed (hanged) that day,” Naghmeh was quoted as saying in a report by American Center for Law and Justice on Saturday.

“It was a hard and dark day having witnessed that and seeing life being taken. The prison visit was also very hard as the families of those who were executed were crying and wailing,” she added.

Naghmeh learned about this after Pastor Saeed’s family members in Iran were able to have a short visit with him at the prison.

“It was also an emotional visitation as it is getting closer to Jacob’s 7th birthday. Last time Saeed saw Jacob he was 4 years old,” she said, urging Christians to continue to pray for her husband “to have the strength to endure in that harsh prison and that Jesus would continue to meet him there and give him hope.”

“Please pray that this will be the year that Saeed is released,” she said.

Pastor Saeed remains in an incredibly dangerous situation, ACLJ says, explaining that summary executions, inmate violence and beatings are commonplace.

Saeed has also sustained prolonged internal injuries due to beatings in the prison.

“The Obama Administration must do all within its power to bring this wrongfully imprisoned U.S. citizen home to his family in America,” ACLJ says.

Obama raised the issue of the pastor’s detention during his first phone conversation with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in September 2013, but authorities in Iran have not responded.

Saeed grew up in Iran before converting to Christianity at the age of 20. He later traveled with his family back and forth between Iran and the U.S. to meet other members of his family and for Christian work.

During one such trip in 2009, Saeed was detained by Iranian officials and interrogated for his conversion. While he was released with a warning against engaging in underground church activities, he was once again arrested in 2012 while working on a non-sectarian orphanage project.

Saeed was sentenced for endangering “national security,” but the ACLJ believes the punishment has more to do with Saeed’s Christian faith.

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 acquiesce…err…negotiate with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, seeking an “agreement” in defiance of Article 6 of the United Stated Constitution, there is a Forgotten American Man of Faith, being held in the squalor of an Iranian Jail.

I have watched in bemused revulsion this past week, as the holier-than-thou Liberal sycophantic pundits in the Main Stream Media and on the Internet, called the 47 Congressman, led by American Veteran Tom Cotton, “treasonous”, for sending a letter to the Mad Mullahs in Iran, informing them that any “agreement” enacted by Obama and Kerry, would not be worth the paper it may or may not be written on, as the next United States President could declare it null and void, as it would not be a Formal Treaty.

For you see, boys and girls, in order for any agreement with any foreign country to be binding, it MUST be ratified by Congress.

Our Founding Fathers, in their brilliance, set up a System of Checks and Balances, so that American would not become an oppressive monarchy, such as the one they had just left, seeking to practice their Christian Faith, however they saw fit.

I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of a President who seeks to allow one of our mortal enemies the means by which to annihilate us, while this same enemy continues to hold captive an American, simply because he is a Christian Pastor?

They probably would not think very highly of him…at all.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Congress Defies Obama. Warns Iran.

 

image

 

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. The Constitution of the United States of America, Article VI

The preceding article gives the power to ratify treaties with other nations, to Congress.

As you know, President Barack Hussein Obama, has been ignoring Congress, in his zeal to broker a “Nuclear Arms Agreement” with the Radical Islamic Nation of Iran.

Yesterday, the Republican – led Congress made sure that both Obama and Iran knew that our government consists of 3 co-equal branches.

Fox News reports that

Forty-seven Republican senators warned Iran’s leaders on Monday that any nuclear deal needs congressional approval in order to last beyond President Obama’s term, in a stark letter aimed at re-asserting lawmakers’ role as talks near a key deadline. 

In an open letter to Iranian leaders, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and 46 other Republicans said they wanted to educate Iran about the U.S. Constitution. Namely, they pointed out that without congressional approval on a deal, all Tehran would be left with is a “mere executive agreement” between President Obama and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 

The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen,” they wrote, “and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.” 

They added: “We hope this letter enriches your knowledge of our constitutional system and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress.” 

Though the letter is addressed to leaders in Tehran, it seems as much aimed at delivering a message to Obama. 

Republicans and some Democrats want Congress to vote on any agreement, and are pushing a bill that would give Congress a say despite resistance from the White House. 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., though, has agreed to ease off a short-lived effort to fast-track that legislation, amid some Democratic concerns. 

Notably, the Republican co-sponsor of that bill, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., did not sign the most recent open letter to Iran’s leaders. No Democrats signed the letter, either. 

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday that a congressional vote is not what Obama envisions. 

“The fact is the president does not envision substantial sanctions relief for Iran right at the negotiating table,” Earnest said during the daily White House briefing. 

The nuclear pact negotiators are working on does not require congressional approval because it is not a treaty, which would require a two-thirds majority Senate vote to be ratified. However, as the 47 Republicans noted in their letter, approval from a congressional majority would give the deal the force of a “congressional-executive agreement.” 

The U.S. and other nations are seeking a pact that would let Western powers verify that Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon. 

The next negotiations are scheduled for March 15, and wide gaps remain between the two sides. The deadline for an outline of a U.S.-Iranian deal is at the end of March. 

Iran has said its nuclear program is peaceful and is aimed at producing energy. 

There was no immediate Iranian government reaction to the letter or any discussion of it in Iranian media. 

Cotton is a freshman senator who serves on the Senate’s Armed Service and Intelligence committees.

The BBC reports that Obama said in response, that

I think it’s somewhat ironic to see some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran. It’s an unusual coalition. 

In the “Irony” Department,

In his book “The Audacity of Hope,” President Barack Obama praised the Constitution and the federalism it enshrines, including the “three coequal” branches of government and checks on power that “prevent tyranny by either the few or the many.”“The outlines of Madison’s constitutional architecture are so familiar that even schoolchildren can recite them: not only rule of law and representative government, not just a bill of rights, but also the separation of the national government into three coequal branches, a bicameral Congress, and a concept of federalism that preserved authority in state governments, all of it designed to diffuse power, check factions, balance interests, and prevent tyranny by either the few or the many,” Obama, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School, said in the 2006 book.

In just 9 short years, Obama has forgotten everything he ever knew about US Civics.

On purpose.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Today’s the Day. Bibi’s ‘Bout to Burst Barry’s Bubble.

Shifty-600-LI (2)Today is a very historic day in the history of our nation.

The Prime Minister of one of America’s most steadfast allies will speak to a Joint Session of Congress…without the invitation or the blessings of The President of the United States of America…who is defending a Rogue Nation who continues its quest to build a nuclear bomb, which it plans to use to annihilate both the United States and Israel.

Grab your popcorn. This is gonna be good.

Reuters News on Yahoo.com reports that

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu clashed over Iran nuclear diplomacy on Monday on the eve of the Israeli prime minister’s hotly disputed address to Congress, underscoring the severity of U.S.-Israeli strains over the issue.

Even as the two leaders professed their commitment to a strong partnership and sought to play down the diplomatic row, they delivered dueling messages – Netanyahu in a speech to pro-Israeli supporters and Obama in an interview with Reuters – that hammered home their differences on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Neither gave any ground ahead of Netanyahu’s speech to Congress on Tuesday when he plans to detail his objections to ongoing talks between Iran and world powers that he says will inevitably allow Tehran to become a nuclear-armed state.

Netanyahu opened his high-profile visit to Washington on Monday with a stark warning to the Obama administration that the deal being negotiated with Tehran could threaten Israel’s survival, saying he had a “moral obligation” to sound the alarm about the dangers.

He insisted he meant no disrespect for Obama, with whom he has a history of testy encounters, and appreciated U.S. military and diplomatic support for Israel.

Just hours after Netanyahu’s speech to AIPAC, the largest U.S. pro-Israel lobby, Obama told Reuters that Iran should commit to a verifiable freeze of at least 10 years on its most sensitive nuclear activity for a landmark atomic deal to be reached. But with negotiators facing an end-of-March deadline for a framework accord, he said the odds were still against sealing a final agreement.

The Reuters interview gave Obama a chance to try to preemptively blunt the impact of Netanyahu’s closely watched address to Congress.

Previewing his coming appearance on Capitol Hill, Netanyahu told a cheering audience at the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC): “As prime minister of Israel, I have a moral obligation to speak up in the face of these dangers while there’s still time to avert them.”

At the same time, Netanyahu said the relationship between his country and the United States was “stronger than ever” and not in crisis.

EASING TENSIONS

Obama also sought to lower the temperature by describing Netanyahu’s planned speech to Congress as a distraction that would not be “permanently destructive” to U.S.-Israeli ties and by saying the rift was not personal.

Obama refused to meet Netanyahu during the visit, on the grounds that doing so could be seen as interference on the cusp of Israel’s March 17 elections when the prime minister is seeking re-election against a tough center-left challenger. On Monday, the president said he would be willing to meet Netanyahu if the Israeli leader wins re-election.

But he said Netanyahu’s U.S. visit gave the impression of “politicizing” the two countries’ normally close partnership and of going outside the normal channels of U.S. foreign policy in which the president holds greatest sway. Netanyahu’s planned speech has driven a wedge between Israel and congressional Democrats. Forty two of them plan to boycott the address, according to The Hill, a political newspaper.

Netanyahu, who was given rousing bipartisan welcomes in his two previous addresses to Congress, is expected to press U.S. lawmakers to block a deal with Iran that he contends would endanger Israel’s existence but which Obama’s aides believe could be a signature foreign policy achievement.

The invitation to Netanyahu was orchestrated by Republican congressional leaders with the Israeli ambassador without advance word to the White House, a breach of protocol that infuriated the Obama administration and the president’s fellow Democrats.

The partisan nature of this dispute has turned it into the worst rift in decades between the United States and Israel, which normally navigates carefully between Republicans and Democrats in Washington.

Netanyahu wants Iran to be completely barred from enriching uranium, which puts him at odds with Obama’s view that a deal should allow Tehran to engage in limited enrichment for peaceful purposes but under close international inspection.

Obama said a final deal must create a one-year “breakout period” for Iran, which means it would take at least a year for Tehran to get a nuclear weapon if it decides to develop one, thereby giving time for military action to prevent it.

Netanyahu has said such a deal would allow Iran to become a “threshold” nuclear weapons state, that it would inevitably cheat on any agreement and that the lifting of nuclear restrictions in as little of 10 years would be an untenable risk to Israel. He has hinted at the prospect for Israeli military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities as a last resort, though he made no such threat in his AIPAC speech on Monday.

So, today, the Prime Minister of Israel, who, unlike the present occupant of our White House, actually excelled on his own at Harvard University, addresses a Joint Session of Congress to speak about the plans of the current American Administration to allow Iran to, after a 10 year waiting period, develop a nuclear bomb.

By the way, how in the world does Obama believe that they can stop the Mad Mullahs of Iran from working on developing a nuclear bomb, while his flimsy proposed sanctions are in in place, anyway?

Obama is acting positively Chamberlain-esque in his naiveté, as regards the true intentions of the Religious Leaders of the Barbaric Muslim Rogue Nation of Iran.

Why have Obama and his minions been so relentless in their attack of Prime Minister Netanyahu?

It is well known, through his words and actions, that America’s current (P)resident Barack Hussein Obama, cares more for Israel’s enemies, than he does for God’s Chosen People. If it were up to Obama, Israel would be forced to give the nomadic people known as Palestinians, half of the land that the nation of Israel sits on. Not only that, but he and his talking horse, (at least he has the face of one) Secretary of State John F. Kerry,”are negotiating”, and I use the term loosely, an agreement with the Mullahs of Iran, to stop building a nuclear bomb, in exchange for allowing them to continue their Uranium Enrichment, an agreement which makes about as much sense as Pee Wee Herman starring in the title role in the next “Terminator” movie.

Obama is indeed making the same mistake that Neville Chamberlain made in dealing with Adolph Hitler’s Nazi-led German Occupation of Europe.

Obama believes that his superior intellect, combined with his acceptance of the word of blood-thirst Radical Islamists. will cement this ill-conceived agreement with Iran and his Presidential Legacy.

Today, Bibi is about to burst his bubble and tell the American people just how badly both of our nations are being screwed by “The Leader of the Free World”.

And, that is what ol’ Scooter is afraid of.

Until He Comes,

KJ