Maximum Effort

Arlene from Israel

Prime Minister Netanyahu approached the podium at the UN this week with courage and determination. He spoke with impeccable logic and eloquence.

(If you would like to see a video of his talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCDcdnEjJHA)

Following his talk, he remained in the US an additional day in order to give numerous media interviews on the subject of the dangers of Iran and the necessity of fully dismantling its nuclear capability.

In other words, he is putting out that maximum effort to alert the world to a critical danger.


In many quarters here in Israel his words were received with high praise (all emphasis below added).

Wrote Boaz Bismuth in “The speech the world needed to hear”:

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not go the United Nations with a set of gimmicks. The prime minister chose a serious, tough and disillusioned speech; almost extraordinary during a time when the world seems to be more interested in fantasy…Netanyahu took it upon himself on Tuesday to do the unpleasant thing and show us the harsh reality that is the Iranian nuclear program.

“It was not the speech the world wanted to hear, but it was the speech it needed to hear. Netanyahu was not looking to make friends in his speech Tuesday. He was looking to give the world the truth — and the truth sometimes hurts. Clearly, the world would rather live in the Iranian bubble, which Netanyahu came to burst Tuesday.”



While it is the opinion of Dr. Haim Shine, in “Historical insight” that:

Netanyahu’s words are in no need of interpretation. His statements were clear and decisive. Their purpose was to make it clear to the Iranians that the State of Israel has the ability to deal with their nuclear program on its own, and will not hesitate to use the full extent of its power…

“In my view, Netanyahu is emerging as perhaps the only prime minister since the late Menachem Begin, who, in addition to pragmatism, has historical insight. He possesses a basic and fundamental understanding of the meaning of the return to Zion in the modern era.”



But it’s here in Israel that he’s been most highly praised. We understand where he is coming from. And even here there were pockets of criticism on the left – e.g., from Shelly Yachimovich, head of the Labor party.

Yes, there has been praise in other places. I was surprised to see that Alan Dershowitz had exceedingly good words for him — calling his speech one of the important ever delivered at the UN.



The NY Times – unsurprisingly, considering its recent positions on Netanyahu – referred to his “aggressive speech” replete with “combative words.”

“…it could be disastrous if Mr. Netanyahu and his supporters in Congress were so blinded by distrust of Iran that they exaggerate the threat, block President Obama from taking advantage of new diplomatic openings and sabotage the best chance to establish a new relationship since the 1979 Iranian revolution sent American-Iranian relations into the deep freeze.”


What disturbs me the most here is that the Times is often a mouthpiece for Obama.

The president himself is attempting to play it “cool” and not take a combative stance against Netanyahu’s position. Jay Carney, White House press secretary said on Tuesday:

Netanyahu’s skepticism of Rouhani was “entirely justified…This is a country whose leadership, until recently, was pledging to annihilate Israel.”


Sounds gracious, doesn’t it? But it isn’t. Implied here is that Iranian leadership, now with Rouhani in the president’s seat, is no longer threatening Israel. But, gee, it will take Netanyahu some time to catch on to this new state of affairs.

But there is no new state of affairs. Not in terms of attitudes demonstrated beneath Rouhani’s charming words. Just before Rouhani came to the UN to deliver his conciliatory words, in his country a military parade was held:

On the lead vehicle of a line of trucks transporting Shahab-3 missiles, there appeared a banner that reads: ‘Esraail baayad az beyn beravad’ – “Israel Should Cease to Exist”…



Darn right, Netanyahu’s skepticism is entirely justified. But there’s no way that Obama is on board for this realism.


Of great concern, in addition to this, is the position the European community seems to be taking. First EU foreign affairs head Catherine Ashton made a pathetic, appeasing statement about wanting to project a positive attitude in negotiations with Iran. Tough talk – carrying that big stick – simply is not politically correct in this new world order. Heaven help us.

And now Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius, who currently holds the rotating position of EU president, has announced that Western governments are thinking of reaching a deal with Tehran that would allow some enrichment of uranium to continue (ostensibly for peaceful purposes).


This is precisely what Netanyahu warned against, saying if the Iranians have access to some enriched uranium they will have the ability to parlay this into development of nuclear weaponry. And so it’s clear that many national leaders have no desire to heed our prime minister’s words. .

This is of a piece with Kerry’s position, that I last wrote about. Confronting Iran is just too tough, too uncomfortable – better to make believe.

It’s like blowing in the wind…


We cannot fix all of this. That repair lies with Heaven. But there are some things we can do, and I believe each of us must put out our own maximum effort at this time. This is especially so with readers in the US.

We delude ourselves if we imagine we can affect the Obama administration directly. The goal is to reach the public and elected representative in Congress.


Familiarize yourselves with Netanyahu’s major points. The full text of his speech is here:.


Keep it for your reference and to share as appropriate.


1) Let your elected representatives in Congress know that you are demanding a US position that requires full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear capacity – that you consider anything less to be foolish and dangerous.

For your Congresspersons:


For your Senators:



Additionally, represent this position wherever you can. Write letters to the editor. Do op-eds in local papers. Talk about this with associates. Do talkbacks on the Internet.

And share this posting broadly.


Very shortly I will be switching gears, because Prime Minister Netanyahu will be delivering his Bar Ilan talk on Sunday. This one addresses the situation with the Palestinian Arabs and not Iran. And the prospects have many people uneasy.

Violence on the part of the Arabs in this area (both Israel citizens and those coming out of PA-controlled areas) has already increased and the Arabs are predicting a third intifada if there is no agreement reached (which is going to be the case).

As I have already indicated, there is considerable talk about an “interim” agreement. But Tzipi Livni, negotiator for Israel, says she’s working towards a final agreement and has nothing regarding an interim understanding on the table.

In his UN talk, Netanyahu devoted about two minutes to this subject. He says he is prepared for concessions for true peace, but will not compromise Israel’s safety. If he is serious on this, there will be no compromises, because he knows very well that the Palestinian Arabs are not serious. Reports are that – much to the frustration of the PA – Israel is refusing to discuss borders and is focusing on security.

But just tonight I heard from someone who has contacts inside the government, that the prime minister does not want to appear too negative, too much of a naysayer, on this issue after how strong he was on Iran.

Which means? Stay tuned…


The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results – 10/04/13

The Watcher’s Council

Jon McNaughton – Stand Your Ground

Alea iacta est… the Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and we have the results for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

“Carthage delenda est” – Marcus Cato

“An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.” – Sir Winston Churchill

“No people in history have ever survived who thought they could protect their freedom by making themselves inoffensive to their enemies.” – Dean Acheson

This week’s winner, Joshuapundit’s Peace In Our Time, are my thoughts on Iranian president Hassan Rouhani’s ‘charm offensive’ and President Obama’s reaction to it. Here’s a slice:

President Obama’s latest diplomatic foray involves ‘engagement’ with Iran over its illegal nuclear program.

During his recent speech to the UN General Assembly, the president said unambiguously that the U.S. was not seeking regime change in Iran, and spoke about pursuing ‘the diplomatic path’. According to President Obama, he was basing this on Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani, who President Obama characterized as “having received from the Iranian people a mandate to pursue a more moderate course”, on Rouhani’s commitment not to build a nuclear weapon and on a fatwa against nuclear weapons issued by Iran’s Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei.

The press absolutely jumped on this. NBC News reported that this was “the first time leaders from the U.S. and Iran have directly communicated since the 1979 Iranian revolution.”

The always servile AP reported that Rouhani’s speech to the UN was ‘absent anti-Israel rhetoric’ ( it clearly wasn’t) , while CNN went so far overboard as to perform what appears to be a deliberate mistranslation of President Rohani’s remarks to make it appear that, unlike his predecessor, he condemned the Holocaust.

But all that aside, let’s look at the shiny , new diplomatic track President Obama, his media allies and his foreign policy team are so enthused about.

First of all, Hassan Rouhani isn’t Iran’s leader in any sense of the word. Iran is a villayat e’ fiqh, an Islamic theocratic dictatorship, just as the Ayatollah Khomeini envisioned. Iran’s dictator is Supreme Guide Ayatollah Khameneni, head of the Supreme Council of Guardians. It is Khamenei and the Guardians who vet all candidates for office and decide who gets to run for president and who doesn’t, as well as who ends up winning the ‘election’. Rouhani, like his predecessor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a carefully vetted regime loyalist who serves at Khamenei and the Council’s pleasure and follows their orders exactly. Otherwise he wouldn’t have been allowed to run for election, let alone be president.

Nor is Rouhani a ‘moderate’, whatever that means. Especially not when it come to Iran’s nuclear program. No, he pretty much endorses the Iranian mantra of no compromise on nukes. Or as Rouhani put it to EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton about two weeks before his speech at the UN, Iran “will not give up one iota” on nukes. AFP referred to that as ”echoing his hardline predecessor” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Of course, you didn’t read about that in the New York Times.

When you’re speaking to Rouhani, you’re really getting a PR version of Khameini’s views, with a helpful smile for the gullible western press and politicians.

Now, a meeting between President Obama and the Ayatollah Khamenei would be worth citing as a breakthrough of sorts..except that Khamenei has refused to do anything of the kind. On the other hand, the telephone conversation between President Obama and President Rouhani that the current occupant of the Oval Office is so excited about is the diplomatic equivalent of a noncommittal little chat with Khamenei’s personal assistant.

Even worse was the message President Obama sent to the Iranians with his speech at the UN.

The current Iranian regime is one of the most evil in human history. It has the blood of many of its own people on its hands as well as a being a major state supporter of terrorism world wide, even being implicated in the 9/11 bombing of the World Trade Center. All that aside, President Obama’s pledge not to seek regime change and to in effect recognize the Iranian regime’s legitimacy may have whizzed right by a number of American commentators, but I assure you it did not pass unnoticed by the Iranians. Nor did the president’s apology for U.S. help in ridding Iran of a Soviet collaborator, Mossedegh, who had ignored a call from his own parliament to resign and who would have put the Iranians under communist slavery as part of the Soviet empire if he hadn’t been stopped.

It’s vital to see this not through our western eyes, but through the Iranians.

In Muslim culture, apology is seen as weak and servile, something an inferior does to ingratiate himself with a stronger superior. That’s why the Iranians have never apologized for taking over our embassy and holding our diplomats hostage, allowing al-Qaeda fighters from Afghanistan to move through their territory after Tora Bora, their support for terrorist groups, targeting our troops in Iraq or gathering in howling mobs chanting ‘Death To America!’.

It’s why Rouhani made no pretense of making a concession by doing it in his speech at the UN.

So given all this, what our president referred to as ‘mutual mistrust on both sides’, how well is any attempt at negotiation likely to work? President Obama’s is basing his new diplomatic track on his feeling that the Iranians can be trusted with any agreement they make with America and the west on nuclear weapons, on Rouhani’s moderation, and on a religious fatwa against the use of nuclear weapons by the Ayatollah Khamenei.

Let’s examine these items in turn.

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Victor Davis Hanson with Obama: Transforming America submitted by Joshuapundit. It’s Professor Hanson’s superb catalog of exactly how the current occupant of the Oval Office has attempted to change America – for the worse.

Okay, here are this week’s full results. Only The Mellow Jihadi was unable to vote, but was not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week! Don’t forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week’s Watcher’s Forum, as the Council and their invited special guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day with short takes and weigh in… don’t you dare miss it. And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that!


Economically – That Ain’t The Way To Have Fun, Son…

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
Cross-Posted at Right Wing News

TheBlaze TV – David Buckner

Oh, how I can relate… Can you say Wiemar Republic?

Tripping through economic news this morning, I came upon a Financial Times piece entitled: Global economy in ‘epic scale’ change, says IMF’s Lagarde. Basically, it states that the whole global landscape is in upheaval, but not to worry… Since the US has decided not to taper the printing of its money, everything will be just fine. If you believe that, then we are done for:

The global economy is experiencing “transitions on an epic scale”, the International Monetary Fund managing director said on Thursday, warning that turbulence in emerging markets could knock 0.5 to 1 percentage point off their growth.

Christine Lagarde’s remarks show the damage done to emerging markets by a recent round of “taper talk”, over the possibility of the US Federal Reserve slowing the pace of its asset purchases and their vulnerability to future changes in the pattern of global capital flows.

“The immediate priority is to ride out the turbulence as smoothly as possible,” said Ms Lagarde. “Currencies should be allowed to depreciate. Liquidity provision can help deal with dysfunctional market behaviour. Looser monetary policy can also help.”

But she warned that countries with inflationary pressures – such as Brazil, India, Indonesia and Russia – have less scope to use monetary policy and that high debt and deficits mean many developing countries have little space for fiscal stimulus either.

“Overall, the global outlook remains subdued,” said Ms Lagarde, in her traditional speech ahead of the annual World Bank and IMF meetings in Washington next week. “In many of the advanced economies, however, we are finally seeing signs of hope. Growth is looking up, financial stability is returning, and fiscal accounts are looking healthier.”

The impact of a slowdown on US Federal Reserve asset purchases had been expected to dominate this year’s annual meetings but the Fed’s decision to hold off on tapering has removed that focus.

Instead, Legarde says we should fear the US government shutdown. She says that raising the debt ceiling is “mission critical” for the world economy. Really? Don’t you mean for the global elitists? What a bunch of crooks, liars and fools on a Progressive scale. If the US doesn’t stop the printing presses, we are toast. In fact, it may already be too late.

David Buckner, the founder and CEO of Bottom Line Training and Consulting, an adjunct professor at Columbia University, and the author of “Permission to Think,” explained on TheBlaze TV that hyperinflation may be right around the corner, within a year:

Buckner said that in discussing hyperinflation, people often refer to the Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe, and Bolivia, but say “it could never happen here” because a “certain kind of layering has to occur” that America hasn’t seen.

That layering, he said, or the “recipe” for hyperinflation, is:

1) Economic Implosion

2) Collapse in tax revenues

3) Raise taxes

4) Lenders unwilling

5) Austerity or print

In truth, all of these have already occurred. Some may squabble on the finer points, but if they faced the truth, we are there. If you haven’t read the excellent article at TheBlaze, I suggest you go there right now and read it.

“And everybody says, well you’re not seeing hyperinflation,” Buckner said, but that’s because, “the interest rates are so low, nobody’s putting that cash back into investments in the United States. But they are putting it into desperate countries in Europe. They’re putting it into other investments. And the money’s going out there, so the second Bernanke raises the interest rates, all of the sudden the money sucks back into the United States and we have hyperinflation.”

Beck asked Buckner if we need an “event” of some sort to trigger such a meltdown.

“We’ve had an event, but…we’ve become comfortably numb,” Buckner said. “So there’s been a lot of hidden stuff that’s going on. The treasuries continue to go out, and Bernanke continues to buy debt. [But] anytime he starts to back off the markets freak out, because they know. The markets know. But we don’t, the people don’t. People who are retired, pensioners, elderly, people who are holding money are going to be devastated.”

When Beck asked for a timeline, Buckner said that by January of 2015, if not by October in 2014, we are likely to see “an increase in interest rates which will start the domino.”

“When Bernanke announced that there would be a tapering, the markets just dropped because they knew that even if the interest rates changed one infinitesimal amount, it was the beginning of the domino,” he said.

“How fast do the dominoes go down?” Beck asked.

“Three months,” Buckner replied without hesitation. “You listen to many of the economists — within three months. And it’s going to be perception more than real price. You’re going to see hoarding, you’re going to see fear. It’s not the actuality. So if they can put a glaze over everybody…it’s may slow it down. That”s the problem, is we’re dealing with an illusion. It’s an illusion of what is real. We don’t have the money. So the interest rates go up, you’re going to see a domino.”

Indeed, the dominoes are falling and fast. Buckle up, folks. You’ve been warned. Ecomonically, that ain’t the way to have fun son. Wiemar, here we come. We can’t afford to be innocent and naive any more. We better cowboy up and face the enemies within and clean house. Progressives want nothing less than a total collapse to reshape America into their ideal Marxist state. America is calling the Tea Party and Constitutional Conservatives to the front lines – we better hold the line. Gut the Progressive GOP.