Iran Israel

Navigating Choppy Waters

Arlene from Israel

It has become apparent to me that some of my readers, living outside of Israel but totally devoted to Israel, have an inflated sense of her potency.  And I want to start by addressing this.

That we should stand strong, for example, against the violence of Arabs, absolutely!  And I will have more to say about this below.

But this does not mean that Israel need not worry about international repercussions and that she is immune to all actions that might be taken against her in various spheres. Efforts to delegitimize Israel can cause considerable damage.  Sometimes prudent judgment is called for along with muscle flexing.  About this whole issue of the need for prudent judgment, as well, I will have more to say below.

These are the choppy waters.


Since yesterday, there have been more terror attacks.  Good that announcements have been made about measures to be taken, but we need them in place like yesterday.  Some plans, such as installing cameras, will take time. But the troops – empowered to act as they need to – must be out in force.

One of the trouble spots with regard to rock throwing and similar terrorist actions has been in the vicinity of the Jewish community of Tekoa, in the Judean Desert.

Credit: Jewish Agency

Terrorists are fond of throwing rocks at the cars driving on the road from Tekoa to Jerusalem (a new road, not represented on this map, that goes to the Har Homa neighborhood of Jerusalem).  Of late there has been considerable difficulty in this region, with cars frequently pelted by rocks.

This morning terrorists went one step further: Tekoa resident Rivi Lev Ohayon was on her way to her job in Jerusalem, when she encountered some twenty young adult Arabs holding rocks and forming a human barrier across the road.  A man with a large rock came towards her, and then some 10 Arabs jumped on the car and broke her windshield.  One attempted to open the door of the car, but she succeeded in pulling away, in reverse, and calling police.  Deeply traumatized, she considers herself lucky that she was not lynched.

Ohayun after the attack (Photo: Tekoa Security)

Credit: Security

Seven other cars were stoned on the same road at that time.

None of this should happen.  Not ever.


Then, a bit later this morning, another attack in the Old City of Jerusalem, near the Lion’s Gate.  A young Arab woman knifed a man, stabbing him in his upper body.  He was carrying a gun, however, and shot her.  She is in serious condition.

Lion’s Gate is the location where the horrendous attack occurred that took two lives on Saturday night.  And in this location, too, there must be sufficient security presence – police, soldiers – to guard against such incidents.


A third attack took place in Kiryat Gat today, perpetrated by an Arab from Yatta – an Arab village in Area A, near Susiya – who was in Israel illegally. After alighting from a bus, he stabbed a soldier and grabbed his gun, then ran into an apartment building.  When he tried to force his way into an apartment, the resident fled, screaming.  Police were alerted and when they arrived the terrorist began shooting at them.  Returning fire, they killed him.


I want to look at the most recent game playing of that slippery manipulator, Mahmoud Abbas.

Credit: ibtimes

I doubt there is anyone reading this who does not know how much responsibility he bears for the current violence.  Just days ago, at the UN, he not only spewed incitement, he suggested that he was about to walk away from the Oslo Accords.

But yesterday, he was singing a different song.  And this was obviously because Netanyahu had announced sterner security measures.   A clear indication that the announced intention to enforce such measures had an impact.

Suddenly, Abbas was a man of peace. Sort of. What he said was:

“We want to reach a political solution peacefully, and no other solution.  We want to minimize the risks of destruction and loss that will sprout on all sides in the current situation.”


This was for public consumption.  He then qualified his remarks with more of his UN theme, putting the onus on Israel:

“We say to the Israelis: Stop building in the settlements and come to the negotiating table.  We will be willing to return to negotiations and discuss the agreements that have been violated and neglected by Israel since Oslo and until now.

“We are committed to these agreements, but it is unreasonable for us to be the only ones who are committed to them. If Israel does not want these agreements, we do not want to implement them.”

This is the old Abbas “play both sides against the middle” technique, riddled with misrepresentations and distortions.


As to his statement that, “All our instructions to our agencies, our factions and our youth have been that we do not want escalation,” there is one main question to be asked:  Is this a blatant lie, did he not give such instructions?  Or do the Palestinian Arab factions and youth simply not care what he says?

I do not have answer, but we see the evidence, in today’s three incidents, that the violence has not abated.


It has been revealed by media sources that during the Security Cabinet meeting Prime Minister Netanyahu held Monday night, after the close of Simchat Torah, the issue of threats by Obama was raised.  Some of the right wing/nationalist members of the Cabinet (some within the Likud itself) were urging that part of the response to terrorism be increased building in Judea and Samaria.

This is not going to happen, Netanyahu informed them. For Obama has said that if there is building in Judea and Samaria, he will not veto a French resolution that is to be brought to the UN Security Council, a resolution that reportedly would declare “Palestine” a state and would declare the settlements “illegal.”

“We will not jeopardize international support for a declaration of building,” a senior source in the Netanyahu administration reportedly said,  While the prime minister himself called for “a sober political maneuver.”


“We are in a long struggle,” said Netanyahu, “and it does not need militancy, but rather it needs a lot of strength, a resolute attitude, much composure and thoroughness, and that is what we are doing.”



The question I want to explore, then, is whether Netanyahu simply “caved” to the US, as Arutz Sheva suggests, and as is his pattern, or whether he has valid reason to be cautious here.

My gut impulse is to say, damn them all, go ahead and build.  Now is the time for us to stand up for what is ours by right.  But I know that my gut impulse is not necessarily the wisest course of action.

In exploring precisely what IS the wisest course, I contacted two highly respected and knowledgeable international lawyers, and here share their responses.  Please, walk this through with me:


One lawyer, deeply involved in legal issues in Judea and Samaria, was interested in looking at the repercussions in terms of international law.

What those repercussions would be “all depends on whether any such resolution is adopted under Chapter 6 of the UN charter (non-binding recommendation) or chapter 7 (binding, action oriented).

“None of the existing resolutions were adopted under chapter 7, which can be used only in the event of a threat to international peace and security which requires military intervention. I can’t see that happening with us [he speaks as an Israeli].”

As I understand this, then, calling the settlements “illegal” would have no real legal import in terms of forcing Israeli communities out of Judea and Samaria.

As to establishing a state, it is, as I have indicated before (having discussed the issue with this lawyer before) that: “The UN doesn’t have the power to establish a state, but merely to accept existing states as members, subject to Security Council invitation.”

He does see it as possible (though unlikely) that such an invitation might be issued.

He predicts that Obama would be reluctant even now “to undermine the entire Oslo process in such a blatant manner.”  His opinion (this is not a legal opinion) is that a resolution would be tempered, and would “call for an immediate return to negotiations, with the aim of establishing a Palestinian state and recommending a freeze in settlements.”  All this, he says would not “really dramatically change the present situation.”

But the settlement issue as well as that of Jerusalem have regrettably reached panic proportions thanks to very clever Palestinian manipulation of Obama and the EU and their evidently existing predisposition to harm Netanyahu and hence harm Israel.” (My emphasis added here)


The other lawyer, a man with sterling international credentials, chose to look at other, non-legal aspects of the issue (my emphasis added):

”The SC resolution would be very very damaging. Not because of any particular legal point, but because it would lock in a fundamental delegitimization of Israel, trigger a wave of EU sanctions, and make it harder for future US presidents to support Israel.

If holding off on new building for now is the price of Obama’s veto, it may be worth it. However, there is no reason to believe he promised to veto the resolution. Rather, he may have threatened to NOT veto if we build. But that doesn’t mean that he WILL veto if we don’t – i.e., he is likely to NOT veto anyway.

“Unless Bibi has concrete assurances on this, it makes sense to assume there will be no veto and build anyway…His (Obama’s) promise may be worth something if made publicly or with some other additional indicia of reliability.”


What we see then is that this is not a simple matter and should be taken seriously, but received without panic.  It is not easy, being the head of a state that is isolated internationally and against which much venom is directed.

In the end it may well be that now is the time to stand up and claim our rights.  But I would not make light of Netanyahu’s hesitancy to move forward.


The good news for today? We’ve had rain. Heavy rain. The first of the season. After the terribly hot and dusty summer we’ve had it is particularly welcome. And it is considered a blessing. May many more blessings follow.


Credit: Globes

Jerusalem Assault

Our Watcher’s Council Nominations – Jerusalem Under Assault Edition

The Watcher’s Council

Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:

This week, The Pirate’s Cove, The Federalist and Simply Jews earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won’t be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6 PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning.

Simple, no?

It’s a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let’s see what we have for you this week…

Council Submissions:

Honorable Mentions:

Non-Council Submissions:

Enjoy! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that! And don’t forget to tune in Friday for the results!

Mike Hewitt

Listen Live – House of Bribes: How the United States Led the Way to a Nuclear Iran

Please note change in time below…

Listen live Wednesday October 8th at 9:00 AM Eastern

Mike Hewitt

Mike Hewitt (News Talk 1090 WKBZ-AM) interviews Denise Simon, one of the authors of House of Bribes: How The United States Led The Way To A Nuclear Iran

  • Valerie Jarrett, John Kerry, and George Soros have used Barack Hussein Obama and the Presidency to legitimize Islamic terror. Their plans were helped along by a patient and methodical domestic Iranian lobby.
  • The United States government, in particular the White House and Congress, are deeply corrupt. The representatives of the American people put a higher value on personal profit and reelection than they do on national security and the security of America’s allies.  According to a recent Gallup poll, a full 75% of Americans see “widespread corruption” in their government.
  • The sovereignty of the United States has been sold to the international highest bidder. Congress no longer serves as an effective check on treaty-making. The U.S.A.’s foreign policy is now largely directed by the United Nations, which is, in turn, dominated by the 57-state Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
  • The Obama administration seems to be more interested in the profitability of foreign companies as opposed to domestic companies. Indeed, a reasonable reading of events indicates that Obama viewed foreign business interests as his best allies in securing the Iran nuclear deal.
  • IAPAC (Iranian-American Political Action Committee) donated the most money to political candidates in 2008. This was certainly to ensure the election of Barack Hussein Obama.
  • From the beginning, the bi-partisan Iranian lobby was tied to Tehran, the United Nations, and George Soros.
  • The United States’ reputation is now tied to that of Iran, the most prolific state sponsor of Islamic terror. Unless a military strike cripples the Iranian nuclear facilities, the terror regime will very soon have nuclear weapons with which to strike Israel, the Gulf region, Europe, and any other enemy within range.

Axis of Evil

The Moscow-Washington-Tehran Axis of Evil

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

The conventional wisdom is that Vladimir Putin has blindsided Barack Obama in the Middle East, catching the U.S. off-guard. It’s another Obama “failure,” we’re told. “Obama administration scrambles as Russia attempts to seize initiative in Syria,” is how a Washington Post headline described it. A popular cartoon showsPutin kicking sand in the faces of Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry on a beach.

The conventional wisdom is driven by the notion that Obama has the best of intentions but that he’s been outmaneuvered. What if his intention all along has been to remake the Middle East to the advantage of Moscow and its client state Iran? What if he knows exactly what he’s doing? Too many commentators refuse to consider that Obama is deliberately working against U.S. interests and in favor of the enemies of the U.S. and Israel.

In his U.N. address, Obama said, “As President of the United States, I am mindful of the dangers that we face; they cross my desk every morning. I lead the strongest military that the world has ever known, and I will never hesitate to protect my country or our allies, unilaterally and by force where necessary.”

This is laughable. We still have a strong military, but the inevitable conclusion from what’s recently transpired is that he doesn’t want to protect the interests of the U.S. or its allies in the Middle East. This is not a “failure,” but a deliberate policy.

The trouble with conventional wisdom is the assumption that Obama sees things the way most Americans do. In order to understand Obama’s Middle East policy, it is necessary to consult alternative sources of news and information and analysis. That includes communist news sources.

A fascinating analysis appears in the newspaper of the Socialist Workers Party, The Militant, one of the oldest and most influential publications among the left. You may remember the old photos which surfaced of Lee Harvey Oswald selling copies of The Militant before he killed the American president.

The headline over The Militant story by Maggie Trowe caught my eye: “‘Reset’ with US allows Moscow to send arms, troops to Syria.” It was not about Hillary Clinton’s reset with Moscow years ago, but a more recent one.

Here’s how her story began: “Moscow’s rapid military buildup in Syria is a result of the ‘reset’ in relations forged with the Russian and Iranian governments by the Barack Obama administration. The deal—reshaping alliances and conditions from Syria, Iran and the rest of the Middle East to Ukraine and surrounding region—is the cornerstone of U.S. imperialism’s efforts to establish a new order in the Mideast, but from a much weaker position than when the now-disintegrating order was imposed after World Wars I and II.”

Of course, the idea that “U.S. imperialism” is served by giving the advantage to Russia and Iran is ludicrous. Nevertheless, it does appear that a “reset” of the kind described in this article has in fact taken place. The author writes about Washington’s “strategic shift to Iran and Russia” and the “downgrading” of relations with Israel and Saudi Arabia. She notes that Moscow “seeks more influence and control of the country [Syria] and its Mediterranean ports and a stronger political hand in Mideast politics.” Iran “has sent Revolutionary Guard Quds forces to help prop up Assad, and collaborates with Moscow on operations in Syria,” she notes.

It is sometimes necessary to reject the conventional wisdom and instead analyze developments from the point of view of the Marxists, who understand Obama’s way of thinking. They pretend that Obama is a pawn of the “imperialists” but their analysis also makes sense from a traditional pro-American perspective. Those who accept the evidence that Obama has a Marxist perspective on the world have to consider that his policy is designed to help Moscow and Tehran achieve hegemony in the region.

At the same time, the paper reported, “Since Secretary of State John Kerry’s congenial visit with Putin in May, it has become clear that Washington would accept Moscow’s influence over its ‘near abroad’ in Ukraine and the Baltics, in exchange for help to nail down the nuclear deal with Tehran.” Hence, Obama has put his stamp of approval on Russian aggression in Europe and the Middle East. This analysis, though coming from a Marxist newspaper, fits the facts on the ground. It means that more Russian aggression can be expected in Europe.

The wildcard is Israel and it looks like the Israeli government is being increasingly isolated, not only by Obama but by Putin. The story notes that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Putin in Moscow on September 21, saying his concern was to “prevent misunderstandings” between Israeli and Russian troops, since Israel has carried out airstrikes in Syrian territory targeting weapons being transported to the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon.

Some reports indicated that Israel had set up a joint mechanism with the Russian military to coordinate their operations in Syria.

However, the Russian leader reportedly told Obama during their U.N. meeting that he opposes Israeli attacks in Syria. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz ran a storythat Russia intends to “Clip Israel’s Wings Over [the] Syrian Skies.” The paper added that Putin’s remarks to Obama showed that despite Netanyahu’s meeting with Putin in Moscow, “Russia intends to create new facts on the ground in Syria that will include restricting Israel’s freedom of movement in Syrian skies.”

It hardly seems to be the case that Obama has been outsmarted in the Middle East, or that Putin and Obama don’t like each other. Instead, it appears that Obama is working hand-in-glove with Putin to isolate Israel and that Obama is perfectly content to let the former KGB colonel take the lead.

Israel has always been seen by most U.N. members as the real problem in the region. Obama is the first U.S. President to see Israel in that same manner and to act accordingly. This is why Putin has not caught Obama off-guard in the least. They clearly see eye-to-eye on Israel and Iran.

Don’t forget that Obama actually telephoned Putin to thank him for his part in the nuclear deal with Iran. The White House issued a statement saying, “The President thanked President Putin for Russia’s important role in achieving this milestone, the culmination of nearly 20 months of intense negotiations.”

Building off the Iran nuclear deal, it looks like the plan is for Russia and the United States to force Israel to embrace a U.N. plan for a nuclear-free Middle East. That would mean Israel giving up control of its defensive nuclear weapons to the world body. Iran will be able to claim it has already made a deal to prohibit its own nuclear weapons development.

Such a scheme was outlined back in 2005 in an article by Mohamed Elbaradei, the director-general at the time of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). That’s the same body that is now supposed to guarantee Iranian compliance with the terms of the nuclear deal signed by Russia and the U.S.

Elbaradei argued there would have to be “a dialogue on regional security as part of the peace process,” to be followed by an agreement “to make the Middle East a nuclear-weapons-free zone.”

The “dialogue” appears to be taking place now, mostly under the authority and auspices of the Russian government, with President Obama playing a secondary role.

The obvious danger is that Israel would be forced to comply with the plan for a “nuclear-weapons-free-zone,” while Iran would cheat and develop nuclear weapons anyway.

Netanyahu told the U.N. that “Israel deeply appreciates President Obama’s willingness to bolster our security, help Israel maintain its qualitative military edge and help Israel confront the enormous challenges we face.”

This must be his hope. But he must know that Israel’s security is slipping and that the survival of his country is in grave danger in the face of this Moscow-Washington-Tehran axis.

Before Putin further consolidates his military position in the Middle East and Iran makes more progress in nuclear weapons development, Netanyahu will have to launch a preemptive strike on the Islamic state. “Israel will not allow Iran to break in, to sneak in or to walk in to the nuclear weapons club,” the Israeli Prime Minister said.

In launching such a strike before the end of Obama’s second presidential term, Israel would bring down the wrath of the world, led by Russia and the U.S., on the Jewish state.

Wild Bill

The New Christian Outlaws


A Posting Written in Pain

Arlene from Israel

I had no intention of writing now, before Shabbat. But I must. Because I have no confidence that the international news agencies will put this out.  And people must know:

Last night, a young couple from Neria was driving between Itamar and Elon Moreh, in Samaria, with four of their children, when they were attacked by drive-by terrorists, and killed.

Their children, ages four months, and four, seven and nine years, were not physically injured in the shooting.  But I shuddered at the irony of reading reports that said, “The children were unhurt.”  Unhurt??  Their parents were killed before their eyes.

Security officials are speculating that the terrorists may simply not have seen the children in the back seat, which is why they are still alive.

The pain of absorbing this sort of information makes it difficult to breathe.


The identity of the parents caused a jolt:  They were Rabbi Eitem and Naama Henkin.  Henkin is a well known and greatly respected name here in Israel.  Eitem’s mother is  Rabbanit Chana Henkin, founder of the Nishmat Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem; his father is Rabbi Yehuda Henkin, well known posek (decisor in Jewish law).

Rabbi Eitam Henkin and Naama Henkin
Courtesty family

It is a phenomenon that I cannot comprehend: time and again the people who suffer in these attacks are of the very finest.

The Henkins have two other children who were – blessedly – not with them. There are six orphans.


The terrorists have not yet been caught as I write.  Four battalions of the IDF have been called up to track them.  They will be caught.


The cries of anguish, and fury, have gone up in Israel and the question is what will be done next.  Security procedures have been tightened recently in the face of increasing Arab violence. But it is not enough yet.  Not nearly enough. We are at war, though some do not see it.  And the question is how we will proceed.  This becomes a topic, then, which I will come back to after the holidays.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, in New York after his speech to the UN, blames PA incitement – and particular the incitement ongoing on the Temple Mount. The message is being put out that Jews are the enemy, to be defended against.  It creates a climate of obscene hatred.  PA incitement?  Incitement by Abbas at the podium of the UN this week.

An arm of Fatah – Abbas’s Fatah – known as the Martyr Abdul-Qader al-Husseini Brigades, associated with the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, which is Fatah, claimed responsibility for the attack.

“Abu al-Walid, a spokesperson for the Martyr Abdul-Qader al-Husseini Brigades, told the Lebanese Al-Akhbar in an interview last August during the war that Iran plays a direct role in funding and training his terrorist organization.

’There is always contact between the Palestinian resistance and Hezbollah and Iran,’ he said. ‘This is no longer a secret.’ (Emphasis added)

“’These contacts take different forms, such as training, preparation, equipment, logistical support and developing the resistance and its weapons.’”
Senior Fatah official Azzam al-Ahmed praised the attack.

Abbas has remained mum, as he usually does in these situations.  No expressions of horror. No condolences. But wait, he will be told by advisors that his silence does not look good and he will mumble something insincere.


We are at war.  And soon there will come the Quartet, telling the world that this can be solved via a “two-state solution.”


Netanyahu’s speech at the UN was wonderful.  He gets it.  And now we will see have he translates this into policy.  Policy that would require us to stand alone in the world, as indeed we do now in any event.

I mentioned that the holiday of Simchat Torah begins Sunday night. This Dry Bones by Yaakov Kirschen exquisitely reflects our truth.  May we have the wisdom to recognize it:

(1999) Dry Bones cartoon: Kirschen, Jewish holiday, holidays, Torah, Jewish culture,Simhat Torah,


May there be peace for Shabbat, and may our people know no more pain.


The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 10/02/15

The Watcher’s Council


The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

When the winds of change blow, some people build walls and others build windmills. – Chinese proverb

Peace is purchased from strength. It’s not purchased from weakness or unilateral retreats. – Benyamin Netanyahu

The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries. – President Barack Hussein Obama

Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster — and nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life. I cannot help asking those who have forced that situation: Do you realize what you have done? – Vladimir Putin at the UN September 2015, commenting on those whom supported Islamist revolutions and left a vacuum of power in the region.


This week’s winning essay, Joshuapundit’s, The Real Story Behind Putin And Netanyahu’s Moscow Meeting – Updated, deals with the real story of what went down at Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s meeting with Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu in Moscow, an analysis on what the Russians are up to in Syria and my accurate prediction on whom they would mount airstrikes against – and it wasn’t ISIS.

Here’s a slice:

The recent meeting between Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu and Russian leader Vladimir Putin has sparked the usual nonsense in the media, usually complemented by analysis from ‘experts’ in academia or a former security head or two – usually affiliated with the Leftist Labor party – long out of the loop.

Here’s an outline on what actually went down, according to one of my notorious Little Birdies.

The Israelis actually welcome, in a sense, the new Russian base in Syria. They see it as a stabilizing force, and they also know that Russia is chiefly interested in preserving their ally Assad and their Mediterranean access via the Syrian port of Tartous.

Israel’s chief concerns are the possible build up of a new terrorist front in the Golan Heights now that Iran has all that cash courtesy of President Obama, avoiding any clashes with Russian personnel now deployed in Syria and stopping any weapons shipments going to Hezbollah. The Israelis already understand that the Russian alliance with Iran means that Russia is going to be little or no help in dealing with Iran’s nuclear threat.

Contrary to what you may be reading elsewhere, Russia did not request nor did Israel agree to any formal limits on its ability to intervene in Syria to stop weapons shipments to Hezbollah or terrorist attacks on the Golan. What Israeli chief of staff Lt. Gen. Gady Eisenkot and his Russian equivalent Gen. Valery Gerasimov agreed on was the establishment of a hotline between the Russian and Israeli general staffs.

This will connect the offices of Gerasimov’s deputy, Gen. Nikolay Bogdanovsky in Moscow and Eisenkot’s deputy, Gen. Yair Golan, in Tel Aviv. It is designed to facilitate communications and clarify things during or after Russian or Israeli military operations in Syria and to avoid any unnecessary clashes between the two military forces.

Israel has a similar setup with American forces in the region to facilitate military cooperation. Since Russia is by now the dominant source of non-native boots on the ground in the region, such an arrangement only makes sense.

Other possible topics for discussion likely involved an Israeli request that the Russians not introduce certain advanced weapons systems into the area. Israel had a similar deal with Putin in the past after successful Israeli strikes on Syrian bases storing arms bound for Hezbollah. That arrangement exploded after Putin found out that President Obama had secretly moved 1,800 US troops to the Jordan border with Syria while the two of them were supposedly working on a diplomatic solution to Syria and the EU ended an arms embargo on the rebels in what was obviously a co-ordinated move.

Much is being made of Russian S-300 missile systems, but the last time Putin shipped S-300s into the Middle East, the Russian Ship Arctic Sea was mysteriously hijacked en route to Iran, the S-300s were removed and disappeared and it was Israel’s Mossad who told the Russians where they could find their ship, which had been boarded by a mysterious group of men posing as narcotics agents off the coast of Sweden some days earlier.

The Israelis have obviously had their hands on these for some time and figured out how to deal with them. And the Russian SAMS guarding Syria’s nuclear site they set up in connivance with North Korea didn’t have much effect on Israel’s planes either, you’ll recall.

Putin will likely continue to sell arms to Syria and Iran for transfer to Hezbollah, but will turn a blind eye on Israeli interdiction of those shipments as long as he gets paid and there are no major Russian casualties. He may also have agreed to avoid introducing certain weapons systems into the region like the Kornet missiles as part of this new understanding.

Netanyahu was quoted in the Times of Israel as saying that he told Putin in “no uncertain terms” that Israel will not tolerate Tehran’s efforts to arm Israel’s enemies in the region, and that Jerusalem has taken and will continue to take action against any such attempts. “This is our right and also our duty. There were no objections to our rights and to what I said. On the contrary: there was readiness to make sure that whatever Russia’s intentions for Syria, Russia will not be a partner in extreme actions by Iran against us.”

Putin responded by saying that the Syrian army was too bogged down in its own civil war to deal with fighting against Israel.

“All of Russia’s actions in the region will always be very responsible,” Putin said. “We are aware of the shelling against Israel and we condemn all such shelling. I know that these shellings are carried out by internal elements. In regard to Syria, we know that the Syrian army is in a situation such that it is incapable of opening a new front. Our main goal is to defend the Syrian state. However, I understand your concern.”

To find out what Russia is up to in Syria and whom they’re mounting airstrikes against instead of ISIS, go to the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Mark Steyn with The Emperor’s Moral Narcissism, submitted by Bookworm Room . It’s his superb take on the invasion of Europe.

Here are this week’s full results. Only Don Surber was unable to vote this week, but was not subject to the normal 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Iran Nuclear Deal

House Of Bribes: How The United States Led The Way To A Nuclear Iran

USA Transnational Report

Iranian Nuclear Deal

“I think that the American companies will be welcomed in Iran… This is not a game for junior companies, and I call juniors anything below a billion-dollar market cap. This is a big-money game.”
– An American Portfolio Manager, July 2015

Table of Contents

Executive Summary
The Trailblazers: Namazi & Nemazee
National Iranian-American Council (NIAC)
The Open (Iranian) Society of George Soros
Valerie Jarrett – The Puppetmaster
Complicity of the GOP

A PDF version of this document is available here.

Executive Summary

The Iranian nuclear deal is a full capitulation to Iran’s terrorist mastermind Mullahs, and the latest in a series of betrayals of the American people and allies by the Obama administration.  At the highest level of the administration, Barack Obama’s Senior Advisor, the Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett, prioritized rapprochement with the terror state.  Throughout the process and negotiations, she had the backing of billionaire investor (and Obama-backer) George Soros, and his multi-headed network of tax-exempt foundations.  Their efforts were driven by deep-rooted anti-Semitism and personal greed.  Meanwhile, since the mid-1990s, a small but very connected Iranian lobby (funded, in part, by George Soros) has been laying the groundwork for normalizing relations with Tehran.  Operating through a variety of non-governmental organizations and political action committees, the lobby courted Democrat and Republican politicians.  With the election of (Soros-backed) Obama in 2008, the Iranian lobby had very receptive ears in the White House.  International business interests were courted and effectively bribed with access to Iranian markets, until finally the deal was realized, approved, and sealed by a vote of the United Nations Security Council.


Thus far, the reports and exposés issued by the New Coalition of Concerned Citizens* have focused on the threat posed by Islamists to American sovereignty.  The Qatar Awareness Campaign brought to light extensive influence network of the State of Qatar and their ruling al-Thani family.  The Betrayal Papers explained the Muslim Brotherhood’s domination of the Obama administration’s agenda and policies, foreign and domestic.

This report will detail the sinister influence of the small, yet well-connected and very powerful, Iran lobby.  Though the Iran lobby’s highest level contacts are prominent Democrats, their reach spans both major political parties.  Like previous exposés, this investigation will mention familiar names, including George Soros, Valerie Jarrett, and the United Nations.

Iran is widely regarded by counterterrorism experts as the heart of Islamic radicalism, and the point of origin for terrorism with a specific geopolitical agenda (i.e., the creation of an Islamic Caliphate, much like the Islamic State, but dominated by Shiites, not Sunnis).  With the eager embrace of a legacy-hungry Obama administration, the Iran lobby managed to achieve a deal which makes the United States the de facto most powerful backer of Islamic terrorism in the world.

How did this happen?


Since its 1979 Islamic revolution, Iran has been the epicenter of Islamic terrorism throughout the region and the world.  Immediately following Ayatollah Khomeini’s return to Tehran from France and ascension to power, Iran took American hostages at the embassy in Tehran.  In 1983, Iranian terror proxy Hezbollah bombed the Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 307, including 241 American servicemen.  In 1994, Iran’s proxy Hezbollah bombed a Jewish center in Buenos Aires, killing 85 and wounding more than 300.  Sponsors of both Hamas and Hezbollah, a New York court found that Iran materially supported and directed Al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks.

In the decades since the Islamic Republic came into existence, Tehran has proved eager to embrace terror, partnering with various factions around the world.  Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, translated the work of the Muslim Brotherhood’s leading author and theorist, Sayyid Qutb, into Persian, proving that Sunnis (Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Al Qaeda, etc.) and Shiites (Iran, Hezbollah) will gladly cooperate in terrorizing the West.

Today, Iran’s presence in Latin America is also strong.  In countries such as Venezuela, Mexico, Peru, and Argentina, Iranian-backed Islamic terror cells work hand-in-hand with drug cartels.  The tri-border region between Paraguay, Argentina, and Brazil is Hezbollah’s main hub in South America.  Terrorists, cartels, and organized crime “move liquor electronic goods, cocaine, refugees, even babies” across the region’s three frontiers.  Following the 1992 and 1994 bombings in Buenos Aires, western intelligence tracked Islamic terrorist activity to the tri-border region.  Today, although intelligence continues to operate in the area, the criminal activity is so rampant that local authorities rarely interfere.

Partnering with South American cartels and organized crime provides a revenue source for terror, while increasing Iran’s strategic footprint in our southern hemisphere.  It also highlights a unique problem related to the non-enforcement of security on America’s southern border.

The Trailblazers: Namazi & Nemazee

The Iran lobby of today appears to have its origins in the work of two individuals.  One of those individuals is Baquer Namazi, who heads a central and critical Iranian non-governmental organization (NGO).  Namazi’s son, Siamak, co-founded theNational Iranian-American Council (NIAC) with Trita Parsi, who was a consultant to Republican Congressman Bob Ney of Ohio.

The other individual is Hassan Namazee, who was a major political fundraiser, especially (but not exclusively) for Democrats.  He is now serving a prison sentence after admitting guilt in committing bank fraud.

Baquer Namazi and Hamyaran – Corruption and Influence through NGOs and the United Nations

In 1998, elements within the Iranian government, Iranian NGO community, and international organizations (including the United Nations) formed the NGO Hamyaran.  It was conceived as, and operates as, an “umbrella” NGO for all other Iranian state-connected NGOs.

As one source explains:

“In addition to monitoring and controlling the Iran’s NGOs, Hamyaran is charged with channeling all contacts and relations of the NGOs with the international organizations and the UN. Under the supervision of the government, Hamyaran is also charged with creating communication channels with the Iranians living in the US.”

In a word, Hamyaran is Tehran’s organization to police and propagate the pro-Iranian (and thus pro-Mullah) message within the United States, and more broadly to the West.  It does this under the auspices of the United Nations.

Since Hamyaran’s founding in 1998 by Dr. Hossein Malek-Afzali, a high ranking Iranian government official who at one time served in President Ahmadinejad’s cabinet, the NGO has been co-led by Malek Afzali and Baquer Namazi.

  • Like Malek-Afzali, Baquer Namazi is closely tied to the government in Tehran. Baquer was previously the governor of the province of Khuzestan, in addition to holding multiple other high level positions in the government.  He has also held positions with the United Nations, including being a Member of the Advisory Panel of U.N. Center for Regional Development, Nagoya.
  • Namazi’s son, Siamak, founded the International Association of Iranian Managers (I-AIM). The organization is dedicated to recruiting high-powered “Iranian elites” in the United States.
  • Siamak’s partner in I-AIM, Ali Mostashari, was a strategic advisor to the Assistant Secretary General and Director of the Regional Bureau for Africa at the United Nations Development Program. He has been accused by reporters of directing U.N. funds into Iran for his own benefit and the benefit of the ruling Mullahs.
  • Siamak Namazi, with Republican consultant Trita Parsi, founded the National Iranian-American Council. It is arguably the primary lobbying arm of Tehran in Washington, D.C.

Like many of the Obama administration’s other scandals, it is clear from the facts above that the United Nations was used to supersede American law and sovereignty.  Furthermore, in keeping with the trends of Obama scandals, several tax-exempt NGOs were central to the plan.  This points to an inept, if not complicit, I.R.S.

Hassan Nemazee & Iranian- American PAC (IAPAC): Democrat Fundraiser Extraordinaire

If Baquer Namazi, his son Siamak, and their associates cemented the relationship between the Iran lobby and United Nations, Hassan Nemazee[i] was the Iran lobby’s man in the Democrat Party.  Before admitting to bank fraud in 2010, Nemazee was a star fundraiser for top Democrats.

  • In 2008, Nemazee served as one of Hillary Clinton’s national fundraising chairmen when she was running against Barack Obama in the Democrat primary.
  • Nemazee was eventually credited by the Obama campaign with helping raise $500,000, following Clinton’s defeat in the primary. He donated an additional $50,000 to Obama’s inauguration committee.
  • Also in 2008, Nemazee donated $9,200 to Biden for President Inc.
  • In 2007, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was the featured guest speaker at IAPAC’s annual New York City reception.
  • In 2006, Senator Chuck Schumer asked Nemazee to serve as finance chairman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Nemazee raised $119 million, helping to retake the Senate for Democrats and installing Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader.
  • In 2004, Nemazee raised $500,000 for Democrat nominee (and current Secretary of State) John Kerry. Kerry, of course, was the lynchpin in securing the Iranian nuclear deal.
  • In 2000, Nemazee donated $50,000 to the Gore-Lieberman Recount Committee.


Hassan Nemazee (right) with Terry McAuliffe

Hassan Nemazee (right) with Terry McAuliffe

Yet Nemazee’s influence was not limited exclusively to the Democrat Party, and neither is the Iran lobby’s influence in general.   He and his partner, Alan Quasha had a history of giving to Republicans, too.

  • Before joining with the Clintons, Nemazee gave to Republican senators, including: Jesse Helms (R-NC), Sam Brownback (R-KS), and Alfonse D’Amato (R-NY).
  • Nemazee was represented in his fraud case by attorney Marc Mukasey, son of former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007.
  • In the 1980s, Namazee’s business partner, Alan Quasha, provided George W. Bush a spot on the board of his oil company, Harken Energy.
  • Quasha is a decidedly bipartisan donor: he gave to Bush and Gore in 2000, to Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, and Barack Obama and Chris Dodd in 2008.

Hassan Nemazee was on the board of the Iranian-American Political Action Committee (IAPAC) until 2009.   Public disclosures of IAPAC highlight the bi-partisan nature of their enterprise; from 2008-2014, it gave significantly to Republicans and Democrats.

  • 2014 Total Spent: $87,668       Democrats: 63%               Republicans: 37%
  • 2012 Total Spent: $88,264       Democrats: 59%               Republicans: 41%
  • 2010 Total Spent: $67,609       Democrats: 46%               Republicans: 38%
  • 2008 Total Spent: $395,852     Democrats: 52%               Republicans: 48%
  • 2006 Total Spent: $263,579     Democrats: 58%               Republicans: 42%
  • 2004 Total Spent: $224,871     Democrats: 42%               Republicans: 58%

Source: OpenSecrets.org

(See here for more information related to IAPAC campaign contributions; also available on a per-candidate basis.  A full list of IAPAC endorsed candidates can be found on their website, here.)

Note that the greatest sum of money was spent by IAPAC in 2008, the year that Barack Hussein Obama was elected to the Presidency.  He brought with him his Iranian-born advisor, Valerie Jarrett.

National Iranian-American Council (NIAC)

The Iranian lobby that convinced Washington to thaw relations with the world’s most prolific state sponsor of terror evolved out of the work of Baquer Namazi and Hassan Nemazee, as well as the guiding hand and money of George Soros.

The National Iranian-American Council (NIAC) is the primary conduit for Tehran’s lobby efforts in Washington, D.C.  NIAC managed to pressure the U.S. government to subordinate international security and stability to narrow corporate interests, access Iranian markets, and the revenues that it can potentially provide.

Let’s take a closer look at one of NIAC’s co-founders, Siamak Namazi.

Siamak Namazi – Background Information

  • Son of Baquer Namazi. Family is close to Iranian regime; in particular, they are a core part of the (former president) Rafsanjani faction within Iran.
  • Co-founder of NIAC with Trita Parsi.
  • Works for family company, the Iranian-based consultancy called Atieh Bahar Consulting (AB). The consultancy serves as a facilitator for outside business interests looking to enter the Iranian market.  It does so by brokering relationships with key officials and Iranian powerbrokers.
  • Currently the Head of Strategic Planning at the United Arab Emirates Crescent Petroleum. Gulftainer, which, like Crescent Petroleum, is owned by the Crescent Group, recently acquired a long-term lease of Port Canaveral for container operations.  It is in the immediate vicinity of a nuclear sub pen, a USAF base, and NASA.

The Namazi family business, Atieh Bahar Consulting, depends on foreign business interest in Iran to generate revenues.  Their work is done with the blessing of Tehran, and thus they are in good graces with the Islamic Republic and its ruling Mullahs.

Following first President Clinton’s sanctions on Iran, and then the nuclear issue, American business was blocked from entering the Iranian market.   Siamak needed a way to circumvent Clinton’s sanctions.  He found an academic partner in Trita Parsi, who also brought his critical experience as a Washington-based political consultant.

Siamak Namazi

Siamak Namazi

In 2002, Siamak Namazi, son of Baquer, co-founded the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC).
His partner in this new enterprise was Trita Parsi, an Iranian Swede, then employed as a political consultant to Congressman Robert Ney (R-OH).  (Note: In 2006, Ney pled guilty to corruption charges related to the lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and served 17 months in prison.)

Beginning in 1997, Parsi systematically convinced Ney to lobby for the normalization of Iranian diplomatic and economic relations.  He did this through his original organization, Iranians for International Cooperation (IIC).

In the words taken from a document prepared by Parsi himself:

“The first achievement of IIC can be traced back to the summer of 1997 when Trita Parsi worked as a political consultant for Congressman Robert Ney of Ohio. Congressman Ney was at the time a proponent of the US’s isolation policy of Iran and had contacts with the Mujahedine Khalq terrorist organization. Mr. Parsi was hired to consult the Ohio Congressman on his policy vis-à-vis Iran, and persuade him to reconsider his position in favor of a pro-dialogue, pro-engagement policy.”

Like Hamyaran, which is at the center of the Iranian NGO web, NIAC is at the center of the Iran lobby’s web.  It serves as a magnet for Iranian Americans who are sympathetic to Tehran, and in many cases have a financial interest in normalizing relations.

NIAC’s Influence in the United States

NIAC has approximately 5,000 dues paying members, and access to tens of thousands of additional fellow travelers.   The below profiles some of NIAC’s most accomplished associates.

  • Trita Parsi – In addition to the information above, Trita Parsi has courted the leading presidential advisors, Republican and Democrat, including those to George W. Bush and Barack Hussein Obama. In 2003, Trita had Congressman Ney present a “grand bargain” to Karl Rove from the Iranian government.  Parsi is a practical VIP in the Obama White House, reportedlyconsulting with Valerie Jarrett and advising both the State Department and the CIA.
  • Reza Marashi – A former employee of AB Consulting, Marashi found employment with the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University, which functions as a think tank for the Pentagon. Later he worked for the Office of Iranian Affairs at the U.S. Department of State “as a desk officer overseeing Iran democracy and human-rights programs.”
  • Sahar Nowrouzzadeh – A top advisor to Obama on Iran policy, Nowrouzzadeh is National Security Council director for Iran at the White House. Prior to this position, she worked at the State Department and Department of Defense.

Of course, NIAC propagandists like Marashi and Nowrouzzadeh had a more than friendly audience in the Obama administration: they had a White House willing to finish their work for them.  The whole history of the administration showcases Obama’s and Valerie Jarrett’s infatuation with Iran.

  • Prior to the 2008 election, the Obama team dispatched former ambassador William G. Miller to Iran, informing the Mullahs that they would get a better deal once Obama was in office.
  • Obama ignored the revolutionary Green Movement in 2009, and let the Iranian government kill and imprison the reform-minded protestors.
  • Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State at the time of the Green Movement’s uprising, was advised by Trita Parsi not to support the protesters.
  • John Kerry’s son-in-law’s best man at his daughter’s wedding is the son of Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, the Iranian’s main negotiator in nuclear talks.

Minutes from a 2007 NIAC Board of Directors meeting make it clear that NIAC was in contact with and supportive of Hassan Nemazee’s lobbying efforts.  From the minutes:

“Goli Ameri initiative and the creation of PAAIA with Hassan Nemazee and others… Trita mentioned key Silicon Valley’s IA’s as having contributed… and expressed admiration for Goli Ameri’s fundraising ability… Kami wondered whether we could ask PAAIA to join us in the ‘stop the war’ cause.”

Finally, as if it was written in the stars that the Obama administration would usher in an Iranian nuclear regime, Valerie Jarret was born in Shiraz, Iran, in a hospital named after Hassan Nemazee’s father.

Trita Parsi

Trita Parsi

NIAC Action – NIAC’s New Political Action Committee

In the opening weeks of the controversy over the Iranian nuclear deal this year, NIAC launched its own political action committee.  A 501(c)(4) organization (i.e., tax exempt), NIAC Action “aims to direct money from the Iranian-American community, which is relatively well-off compared to other immigrant groups, toward more concerted political activism.”

From his earliest days as a pro-Iranian activist, Trita Parsi was deeply impressed by the American-Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC).  Perhaps the clearest indication of the pro-Iranian lobbyists’ awe of the Israeli lobby was the name chosen to be AIPAC’s Iranian counterpart – IAPAC (mentioned above).

NIAC Action is “explicitly meant to counter the influence of AIPAC.”  Minutes from the 2007 NIAC Board of Directors meetingconvey NIAC’s near obsession with the Israeli lobby:

“Trita clarified the fact that AIPAC does not debate – they are all-action and only move forward with their clear agenda.  Alex raised the fact that AIPAC is successful in some measure because they operate ‘under the radar’ and employ the axiom ‘don’t do it publicly.’  ‘A lobby is a night flower’ quote was mentioned by Trita as another example of how to lobby effectively.”

Indeed, the origins and thinking of the Iran lobby have been anti-Israel, and anti-American, from the outset.

The Open (Iranian) Society of George Soros

Billionaire investor and political manipulator George Soros played a significant role in shaping and funding the Iranian lobby.  As in the Arab Spring, Soros deliberately sided with the most extreme elements in Iran, who, like the Muslim Brotherhood, also happen to be the most anti-Semitic.

Soros, whose wealth from investing and hedge fund management exceeds $20 billion, has used his political influence to affect political “change” in multiple countries.  For example, in Ukraine, he has funded NGOs going back to the Cold War.  In Egypt, he was instrumental in ousting long-time American ally Hosni Mubarak, and beginning the so-called Arab Spring.

Likewise, Soros has funded, and supported otherwise, various organizations that have been influential in opening Iran to the West.

  • In 2006, the National-Iranian American Council (NIAC), led by Trita Parsi, received $50,000 from Soros’s Open Society Institute.
  • In 2009, NIAC received $125,000 from the Open Society Institute, and an additional $25,000 from its foundation, the Foundation to Promote Open Society.
  • Minutes from a 2007 NIAC Board of Directors meeting indicate that Parsi spent a weekend strategizing with Steve Clemons(spelled “Clemence” in linked document) of the Soros-funded New America Foundation. They discussed how to counter the $75 million that the U.S. government had allocated to support regime change in Iran.
  • NIAC hosted Ambassador Thomas Pickering to lead a panel discussion on “finding the nuclear fix,” a reference to Iran’s standoff with the West. Not only is Pickering a trustee at Soros’ International Crisis Group, but he helped cover up the Benghazi scandal, and has ties to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (a Muslim Brotherhood front organization).
  • In June 2015, Pickering argued on NPR that the Iranian nuclear deal was good policy.

Soros and the National Endowment for Democracy

Moreover, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is known to be closely associated with George Soros.  It also funded NIAC.

In 2012, documents released by a Malaysian press outfit detailed receiving grants from the National Endowment for Democracy.  Evidencing the corruption that Soros money brings to media, a former news editor of the outfit had resigned a decade earlier because of the NED’s relationship with Soros.

Similarly, NED’s connection to Soros and various “color revolutions,” which have occurred since 2000 (e.g., Georgia’s 2003 Rose Revolution and Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution), caused Russia to ban the NED this summer.

  • NED is technically a private institution that receives an annual appropriation from the U.S. Congress through the State Department. Many speculate it is also funded privately by Soros.
  • In 2002, shortly after NIAC was formed by Trita Parsi and Siamak Namazi, the National Endowment for Democracyexpedited an application for grant money to NIAC.
  • NIAC is estimated to have received approximately $200,000 in grants from the NED.
  • NIAC’s spent the NED grant money on sending two NIAC members to work with Baquer Namazi’s Hamyaran, the Iranian government’s umbrella NGO. Allegedly NIAC was teaching Hamyaran to use “computer based digital media.”

The Ploughshares Fund

The Ploughshares Fund, an international charity, characterizes itself as “a global security foundation.  [Ploughshares] support[s] experts and advocates who implement smart strategies to secure a more peaceful world, including one free of nuclear weapons.”

The Ploughshares Fund describes the Iranian nuclear deal as “a major advance for global security.”  Joe Cirincione, its president, is quoted as saying on July 14, 2015:

“This is a very good deal. It is a major victory for American national security. We have a once-in-a-lifetime chance to stop Iran from building a nuclear bomb, without putting a single U.S. soldier in harm’s way.”

The Ploughshares Fund, besides being a strong proponent of the Iranian nuclear deal, is a Soros-funded operation, with several key connections to American policy makers, and NIAC.

  • Former Secretary of Defense under Obama, Chuck Hagel (a Republican), was on the Board of the Ploughshares Fund when nominated by Obama. (He joined Ploughshares in 2009.)  Ploughshares applauded his nomination to Secretary of Defense.
  • One of the primary advocates of the Iranian nuclear deal for the Obama administration is Robert Creamer. The Wall Street Journal reviewed a transcript of a conference call hosted by Ploughshares, which quoted Creamer as saying: “The other side will go crazy. We have to be really clear that it’s a good deal.”
  • According to Aaron Klein at WND, “a primary Ploughshares donor is the Tides Foundation, a money tunnel in which leftist donors provide funds to finance other radical groups. Tides is itself funded by Soros.”
  • One of Ploughshares other benefactors is Soros’s Open Society Institute.
  • The Ploughshares Fund has partnered with other Soros-funded and anti-Israel groups including Code Pink, the Institute for Policy Studies, and the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation.
  • Former CIA covert officer Valerie Plame, who accused President George W. Bush of outing her in an attempt to intimidate, was hired by Ploughshares Fund in September 2015. In fact, it was Undersecretary of State, Richard Armitage, who, while serving under Colin Powell, “outed” Plame.  The manufactured scandal was used to smear and discredit President Bush, who, at the time, was trying to counter Iran’s influence in Iraq.
  • Powell has come out in support of the Iranian nuclear deal: his support is touted by Ploughshares.
  • Finally, a recent attack piece on one of the deal’s critics provides additional evidence of Soros’s determination to seal the deal. Media Matters, a Soros-funded operation, published a weak retort to an exposé in The Daily Beast.   Among other claims, it attempts to dismiss the overwhelmingly obvious connection between the Namazis and NIAC.

On more than one occasion (see here and here), Soros has used his relationship with the American government for his own financial benefit.  Opening Iran, with the world’s second largest natural gas reserves and fourth largest oil reserves, could prove a windfall for businesses with the right political connections.

Is it Soros’s greed that caused him to support this deal?  Is it his anti-Semitism?  Perhaps, most likely, it is the twisted intersection of both.

Martin Indyk: The Soros-linked, Foreign-funded Salesman for the Iranian Deal

Ambassador Martin Indyk has served as U.S. Ambassador to Israel twice (April 1995 to September 1997 and January 2000 to July 2001), appointed both times by President Bill Clinton.  In July 2013, when Indyk was at the Brookings Institution, Obama appointed Indyk to be Washington’s special Middle East envoy for the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.  Indyk has been a vocal critic of Israel – to the point of being insulting – and one of the strongest voices in favor of the Iranian nuclear deal.

  • Indyk is the Executive Vice President at the Brookings Institution and a founding director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings (located in Doha, Qatar).
  • The President of the Brookings Institution is Strobe Talbott, a friend and advisor of George Soros who has interviewed him on the War on Terror.
  • In September 2014, The New York Times ran a story about the influence of foreign governments on American think tanks. The Brookings Institution was one of their focuses.
  • In March 2013, Indyk was a panelist at the Soros-funded Center for American Progress. The topic of the discussion was U.S. policy in the Middle East.
  • In 2013, while Indyk was serving as Obama’s special envoy, the Brookings Institution accepted a $14.8 million check from the State of Qatar, a known backer of Hamas in Gaza.
  • Indyk has a history of degrading and insulting comments directed at Israel. He has used the analogy of the United States as a “circus master” who “crack[s] the whip” and gets Israel and other countries in the Middle East to “move around in an orderly fashion.”
  • He has also justified terrorist violence against Israelis, calling it “a plausible safety valve” through which Palestinians can “vent their anger.”

On the topic of the Iran nuclear deal, Indyk has written a pro-deal position paper for Brookings, the most influential think tank in Washington, D.C., (Parts One and Two).  Calling for collaboration with the terror state as a means to avoid war, Indyk writes, “Without an agreement, it is impossible to imagine cooperation with Iran on regional issues… With an agreement, collaboration . . . becomes possible.”

martin indyk

Amb. Martin Indyk with John Kerry

The folly of engaging a soon-to-be nuclear terror state notwithstanding, Indyk proved that he was completely uninterested in the Israeli perspective (which is driven by self-preservation) through an interchange with the former Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren.  Following the release of Oren’s book, in which he criticized the Obama administration, Indyk penned a critical review for Foreign Affairs.  He then verbally sparred with Oren on CNN.  Throughout, there is little indication that Israeli and regional (e.g., Jordanian, Saudi Arabian, Egyptian) security concerns figure into Ambassador Indyk’s thinking.

Valerie Jarrett – The Puppetmaster

President Obama’s Senior Advisor is the Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett.  It was Jarrett who, when working for Mayor Richard Daley in Chicago, first introduced a young Michelle Robinson to Barack Obama.  Ever since then, her influence over the first couple is legendary.  Likely as a result of this domineering influence, other Presidential advisors do not trust Jarrett, nor appreciate her voice in Obama’s ear.  In the words of one former administration official, other presidential advisors “think she’s a spy.”

Reinforcing this view of Jarrett, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), says in regard to Jarrett “She seems to have her tentacles into every issue and every topic… Her name ultimately always comes up.”

The Iranian deal is no exception to the rule:

  • In 2012, news broke that Valerie Jarrett had been acting personally as an emissary to Iran. According to the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, Jarrett held meetings with Iranian officials in Bahrain over a period of several months.
  • A month prior to the report in Yediot Ahronot, an unnamed source reported that negotiations between Iran and the United States had occurred in Doha, Qatar. (Note: Doha is the home of the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader, Yusuf al-Qaradawi.  It is also where the Taliban opened an embassy in 2013.)  In hindsight, it is very likely Jarrett was the American representative at these talks.
  • Former Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, wrote in his memoir that Jarrett (as well as other advisors such as David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs) “[has] a role in national security decision making that I had not previously experienced.”
  • Jarrett has earned the menacing nickname “Night Stalker” because of her exclusive, regular visits to the White House’s private residence after dark.
  • Gen. Paul E. Vallely (Ret.) believes that Valerie Jarrett is responsible for the purge of top-level military commanders over the last several years.
  • Jarrett comes from a family of spies, subversives, and aspirational totalitarians. The FBI had a lengthy file on Jarrett’s father, James Bowman, because he was a Big “C”  Bowman, for example, was in communication with the paid Soviet agent, Alfred Stern.
  • Jarrett’s grandmother, Dorothy Taylor, was an early activist with Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood’s founder was eugenicist Margaret Sanger, who published in her magazine Birth Control an article submitted by Ernst Rüdin, founder of the Nazi Society for Racial Hygiene.  The pseudo-science of “racial hygiene” was the Third Reich’s way of justifying their policy of exterminating “undesirables” – the Holocaust – including Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, homosexuals, etc.  (More on Jarrett’s family available here.)
valjar puppet

Who is really pulling the strings?

The elusive and mysterious Jarrett, dubbed by The New Republic as “The Obama Whisperer,” undoubtedly found a willing partner in George Soros to help realize her dream of normalizing relations with Iran, thus paving the way for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.  Soros has provided the financial and organizational means to Jarrett, who controls the President of the United States of America.  Together, the two of them leveraged the Iranian lobby as a counterweight against Israel.  Throughout the ordeal, Jarrett’s puppet responded expertly as his strings were pulled.

In the haunting words of Jarrett herself, regarding Obama, “We have kind of a mind meld… And chances are, what he wants to do is what I’d want to do.

Or else….?

Complicity of the GOP

Although the preponderance of the responsibility for the Iranian nuclear deal rests with the progressive left, especially with Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, and George Soros, it behooves recounting the key ways in which Republicans have helped make this disastrous deal a reality.

  • Disgraced Republican Representative Robert Ney helped Trita Parsi to establish the National-Iranian-American Council. Indeed, without Ney and his connections to the establishment (including Karl Rove), it is difficult to conceive how Parsi would have been able to succeed in founding NIAC.
  • Several Republican members of Congress have accepted campaign donations from the Hassan Namazee-connected IAPAC (see above).
  • Obama-appointed Secretary of Defense, Republican Chuck Hagel, was a board member of the Ploughshares Fund, and thus connected to George Soros and various pro-Islamic organizations.
  • Finally, as Andrew McCarthy points out, The Boeing Company is one potential big winner in the deal. They’re also a big GOP donor.  Updating even a fraction of Iran’s commercial airline fleet would be a huge contract.  Specific language wasincluded in the final deal to allow U.S. aircraft manufacturers to sell to Iran, likely to benefit Boeing.  (It is worth noting here Boeing’s massive contracts with the terror-finance center of Qatar.)

Mitch McConnell and John Boehner control Congress, and therefore the power of the purse.  This gives them far more than the ability to merely throw sand in Obama’s gears.  If they had the will, the Iranian deal could have been stopped by threatening to defund Obama’s agenda, period.

Instead, McConnell lamely surrendered and Boehner passed a series of useless resolutions designed to make the Republican base feel good.  Symbolic votes, however, will not stop Iran.

The Republican-controlled Congress put on a decent show for voters, but has done nothing, and apparently has no intention, to stop this disastrous agreement from becoming accepted American policy.

Sellout of Sovereignty to International Business Interests

A few words should be included here on the legal and commercial nature of the Iranian nuclear deal.  The deal’s highly abnormal formulation (not technically a treaty, not strictly a U.N. agreement) creates a number of new paradigms that suggest American sovereignty was not even a thought among the negotiators.  Indeed, it is not even clear that American companies stand to gain much from the deal, in comparison to their European, Russian, and Chinese counterparts.

  • Instead of a traditional treaty, which requires ratification by the U.S. Senate, this deal is a complex of U.N.-centered agreements, overlapping with bi-lateral agreements.
  • Due to the deal’s unusual structure, the Senate was basically powerless to stop it. (To defeat it, Congressional Republicans could have used political guerilla tactics, such as defunding Obama’s agenda.)  This impotence was reinforced once the U.N. Security Council blessed the deal shortly after it was agreed upon by the negotiating parties.
  • The agreement included secret “side deals” that were not presented to the Senate. Included in the deal’s provisions areguarantees for business that, regardless of Iran’s compliance with the agreement, companies would be allowed to continue to do business with Iran.  The agreement also severely limits Congress’s ability to re-impose sanctions on Iran.
  • Almost immediately after the deal was complete, Russia announced that it lifted a ban on the sale of a sophisticated missile system used for air-defense.
  • Likewise, China announced that they would sell Iran 24 J-10 fighter jets. The value of the deal is estimated at $1 billion.
  • Europe is eager to embrace the newly legitimated Iran. Germany, France, Italy, Britain, Austria, Spain, Poland, and Sweden all have plans for Iranian business.

According to one U.S.-based portfolio manager: “I think that the American companies will be welcomed in Iran… This is not a game for junior companies, and I call juniors anything below a billion-dollar market cap. This is a big-money game.”

Yet, strangely, U.S. sanctions on the Iranian regime will remain in force:

“After years of painstaking negotiations and at great political cost, the Obama administration has created a means for foreign businesses to re-enter Iran—but U.S. law still sidelines all but the biggest American multinationals.

Even in the case of big U.S. corporations with foreign subsidiaries, any U.S. citizen employed by an overseas unit would likely be prohibited from participating in transactions with Iran unless granted permission by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Controls, experts said.”

In effect, the deal secures Iranian markets for foreign companies, while American firms still face complex legal and regulatory hurdles should they choose to engage the Iranian market.


The information presented above demands that certain observations are called out, and conclusions drawn.

  • Valerie Jarrett, John Kerry, and George Soros have used Barack Hussein Obama and the Presidency to legitimize Islamic terror. Their plans were helped along by a patient and methodical domestic Iranian lobby.
  • The United States government, in particular the White House and Congress, are deeply corrupt. The representatives of the American people put a higher value on personal profit and reelection than they do on national security and the security of America’s allies.  According to a recent Gallup poll, a full 75% of Americans see “widespread corruption” in their government.
  • The sovereignty of the United States has been sold to the international highest bidder. Congress no longer serves as an effective check on treaty-making. The U.S.A.’s foreign policy is now largely directed by the United Nations, which is, in turn, dominated by the 57-state Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
  • The Obama administration seems to be more interested in the profitability of foreign companies as opposed to domestic companies. Indeed, a reasonable reading of events indicates that Obama viewed foreign business interests as his best allies in securing the Iran nuclear deal.
  • IAPAC (Iranian-American Political Action Committee) donated the most money to political candidates in 2008. This was certainly to ensure the election of Barack Hussein Obama.
  • From the beginning, the bi-partisan Iranian lobby was tied to Tehran, the United Nations, and George Soros.
  • The United States’ reputation is now tied to that of Iran, the most prolific state sponsor of Islamic terror. Unless a military strike cripples the Iranian nuclear facilities, the terror regime will very soon have nuclear weapons with which to strike Israel, the Gulf region, Europe, and any other enemy within range.

Finally, while it is impossible to predict the future, a few outcomes appear almost certain as a result of the deal.

  • War is more, not less, likely – the arms race has already begun in the region, beginning with a $1 billion deal agreed upon in September between the United States and Saudi Arabia.
  • The United States has lost the trust of Israel. Russia is filling the American vacuum in the Middle East and Africa (i.e. Egypt, Libya, etc.).
  • America’s traditional Gulf allies, who view Iran and their designs for regional hegemony with great trepidation, are rethinking their alliance with Washington. The ice is melting fast, and previously unthinkable alliances and/or cooperation at various levels are taking place.
  • Political Islam is fully legitimized, rather than reformed to be peaceful. Obama’s acquiescence of Tehran is in direct contrast to his harsh treatment of Cairo, and the reform-minded Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

Regardless of who the next American President may be, what will he or she do to rectify this world class nuclear debacle?

House of Bribes: How the United States led the way to a Nuclear Iran is a product of the New Coalition of Concerned Citizens:

Adina Kutnicki, Andrea Shea King, Dr. Ashraf Ramelah, Benjamin Smith, Brent Parrish, Charles Ortel, Denise Simon, Dick Manasseri, Gary Kubiak, Hannah Szenes, Right Side News, Marcus Kohan, General Paul E. Vallely, Regina Thomson, Scott Smith, Terresa Monroe-Hamilton, Colonel Thomas Snodgrass, Trevor Loudon, Wallace Bruschweiler, and William Palumbo.

[i] Namazi and Nemazee: A Note on Names. It may be that Namazi and Nemazee are different transliterations of the same Persian name.   One internet source suggests that ‘Nemazee’ was the spelling of the name for branch of the family residing in Hong Kong.  Indeed, the Nemazee family was in China and involved with the opium trade.  Though the authors make no claim at a relationship, the possibility seems plausible given the same phonetics and overlapping relationships, interests, and objectives regarding Iran’s relationship with the United States.

Weasel Statuette of Shame

Our Weasel Of The Week!! – 10/01/15

The Watcher’s Council

It’s time to present this week’s statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!

Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they’ve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week’s nominees were all slimy and despicable, but the votes are in and we have our winner… the envelope please…

WGN TV’s Production Department!

Puma By Design: My nominee for Weasel of the Week are the boneheads in the production department at WGN-TV, Chicago who chose for last week’s news story on Yom Kippur that horrible image of the yellow Star of David that Nazis forced Jews to wear during the Holocaust.

According to the first news report I saw, once an editor pointed the offense of using the illustration, WGN-TV immediate issued an apology on social media. However, according to the Telegraph.co.uk, WGN, stated that “the image came from its image bank, and they ‘failed to recognise that the image was an offensive Nazi symbol.’”

The next day, WGN issued an on-air apology, “Last night we ran a story to recognize Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement. Regrettably, we failed to recognize that the artwork we chose to accompany the story contained an offensive symbol. This was an unfortunate mistake. Ignorance is not an excuse.”

While ignorance is no excuse, the production department, the journalists and those working behind the scenes should have immediately noticed the error before the news story went live.

Finally, who will be held accountable? Oh my bad, NO ONE. Yet if it were a Black person, Muslim or a member of the Gay Gestapo, head(s) would have rolled and a lawsuit pending by now.

I have to admit, using an image of the Nazi’s yellow star on a story about Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement is a real lapse of judgment, especially since it had ‘Jude’ written across it and a background of striped cloth to represent the garb the Nazis made concentration camp inmates wear.

In his book Crusade in Europe, General Eisenhower related how once the camps were liberated, he immediately got in touch with reporters, photographers and media outlets and leaned on them heavily to come to Europe, record what they saw and interview the survivors because he foresaw a time when ‘men would deny that this happened.’

As a matter of fact, one of those men, Mahmoud Abbas addressed the UN today with an absolute pack of lies, among them that; ‘Palestine’ has always educated its people for peace. Abbas’ book on Holocaust denial, his thesis while he was being trained by the Soviets at Moscow University is required reading in what passes for the school curriculum in the PLO’s little kleptocracy.

In spite of the noble efforts of General Eisenhower and others, the world has pretty much forgotten the Holocaust. And words like ‘Nazi,’ ‘concentration camp,’ and ‘genocide’ get thrown around pretty freely these days by people whom you’d think would be embarrassed to do so.

Well, there it is.

Check back next Tuesday to see who next week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week are!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Blood Moon

Our Watcher’s Council Nominations – Sending A Message Edition

The Watcher’s Council


Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

So, let’s see what we have for you this week…

Council Submissions:

Non-Council Submissions:

Enjoy! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that! And don’t forget to tune in Friday for the results!