02/22/15

How Ugly Can It Get?

Before I get to the ugly stuff, let me begin with a lovely scene: Jerusalem in the snow.

The snow fell this past Thursday night, accumulating to the better part of a foot and enfolding our beautiful city in a mantle of white. It is gone now because of heavy rains over Shabbat.

Credit: thejc.com

The windmill you see in this picture is a Jerusalem landmark. Built in the Mishkenot Sha’ananim neighborhood – the first Jewish neighborhood outside the walls of the Old City – in 1857, it was restored to working order a couple of years ago.

~~~~~~~~~~

From the sublime – the beauty of Jerusalem in the snow – to the ridiculous. Because ridiculous is how I see the current political hoopla, which, yes, is also very, very ugly.

The issue is the scheduled talk by Prime Minister Netanyahu on March 3 in the Congress, on the subject of the negotiations with Iran. Should he go? Is he damaging Israel’s relationship with the US by doing this? Has the focus on Iran been lost because of the politics? Is this a partisan issue in the US, pitting Democrats against Republicans? And on and on and on…

Now it has been announced that Obama and Biden and Kerry may boycott the AIPAC conference, which is being held at the time Netanyahu will be in Washington.

And I doubt we’ve seen the end of this yet.

~~~~~~~~~~

I am not going to belabor every step of this on-going maneuvering. It would be a waste of my time and yours.

For all who have eyes to see, the situation that underlies this is quite clear: Obama is seeking to throw up a political smokescreen. He wants to make things difficult for Netanyahu – to make him look small and less competent, to seem to be a trouble maker – because he desperately does not want the Congress or the American people to give credence to what our prime minister is going to say. For what Bibi intends to say stands a reasonable chance of undercutting the negotiations.

This is not about personal animosity between Obama and Netanyahu, it is about an existential issue.

~~~~~~~~~~

It is not really a partisan issue, dividing Democrats and Republicans, either. A piece written in Algemeiner last week estimated that 98% of the Senate and 95% of the House of Representatives will attend. “Despite two weeks of intense anti-Netanyahu leaks, insults, and pressure, the White House has so far succeeded in persuading only a handful of Democratic members of Congress to stay away from the speech.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/02/18/obamas-boycott-of-netanyahu-is-collapsing/

I would say it is more an issue that divides the Congress from the White House. Which is why Congress should be given the courtesy of having Netanyahu share directly the information he has.

~~~~~~~~~~

As to damaging our relationship with the US… In the end, what is being damaged is our relationship with one particular president, not our relationship with the US. Both Congress and the American people are with us. Note that just today Israel announced the purchase of 14 additional next-generation US-made F-35 fighter jets, to be delivered in 2016.

Were Israel to adhere to whatever Obama wanted of us now, it would be suicidal. In Hebrew we say, ein breira – no choice. Obama has to be challenged. Netanyahu has made the point repeatedly now that we have displeased American presidents several times over the years, and yet have sustained a solid relationship with the US. It started, our prime minister reminds us, with Ben Gurion, who flouted President Truman’s wish that he not announce Israeli independence when he did.

I am one of those who believes Netanyahu absolutely must not back down now – rescheduling his talk or changing the venue. There can be no backing down at this point. There has been so much talk about how politicized this issue has become. But for Bibi to decline to speak to Congress as scheduled would also be a political act, because of how the situation has been framed. He would be seen as weak, and Obama as the winner. And he would be letting down those who have spoken out for him to come.

~~~~~~~~~~

Senator Marc Rubio (R-FL) makes yet another point: it is exceedingly important for Israel’s enemies to see that the Congress stands with Israel, for if they believe Congress is not with Israel as strongly as was once the case, they will be emboldened. He implores all members of Congress to be present, to provide the support that Israel deserves. They must not be distracted, he says, by the minor issues such as the way Boehner extended the invitation. Israel has been the most loyal of allies, and is in trouble now – and the members of Congress must provide public backing with their presence.

Please, see and then widely share Senator Rubio’s extraordinary speech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODjcm7U4lo0#t=148

Credit: Newstalkflorida

~~~~~~~~~~

The public figure who most recently voiced support for what Netanyahu is doing is former NY City mayor, Rudy Guiliani. In an interview with Israel Hayom, he said (emphasis added):

“Netanyahu’s speech is absolutely essential. If I had been in his position, and the third most important person in the U.S. [the speaker of the House of Representatives] invited me to speak before Congress to explain the danger of a nuclear Iran — of course I’d accept the invitation and come. You have to understand that I, as an American, fear a nuclear Iran no less than the prime minister of Israel and no less than the people of Israel. Think for a moment — a bad agreement with Iran would give a group of irrational and insane people nuclear capability. If I were Netanyahu, I would go to the ends of the earth to discuss Iran’s nuclear program — on any stage I was given and in every situation. In our case, it’s the Congress….

“I met with Bibi privately on two occasions two weeks ago. I told him I would be doing the exact same thing if I were him. I told him that the American people respect him and agree with him, even if Obama and his administration are trying to paint a different picture. Netanyahu is doing exactly what he needs to do: to come and speak out against a bad agreement, even if the government doesn’t like it. Most Americans agree with Netanyahu on the Iranian issue.”

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=23673

Credit: AP

~~~~~~~~~~

In the course of this on-going political melodrama, we have just learned that Netanyahu has been accused of “leaking” information about the negotiations. In fact, Obama has now admitted that he has been withholding information about the negotiations from Israel.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/ari-lieberman/obama-withholds-iran-negotiation-info-from-israel-1/

Obama’s claim is that Netanyahu would “cherry pick” the information he wished to leak without placing it “in context.” He claims that Israel does not know the full context of negotiations, and thus is in no position to critique what’s going on. But truth lies elsewhere: Obama does not want anyone to know how bad the deal is.

As to not having full context, there are certain elements of what is going on that have been made public and are clear: that the infrastructure for enriching uranium would be left in place, that there are no restrictions on building of the missiles that would deliver a nuclear warhead, etc.

~~~~~~~~~~

Key here is the matter of a confidential report from the IAEA, which has been obtained by AP and Reuters. Any deal with Iran that lifted all sanctions is supposed to be predicated on the ability of the IAEA to monitor its program. But, says, the IAEA, Iran is being “evasive and ambiguous” as it tries to do a full assessment of the Iranian nuclear program.

In the face of this evidence of the unreliability of Iran, world powers should not be wooing Iran for a deal, declared Netanyahu.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/pm-stop-courting-an-iran-thats-refusing-to-come-clean-on-its-nuke-program/

Not exactly “cherry picking,” is it?

~~~~~~~~~~

I note with more than passing interest that Sunni Arab states have been voicing concern to the US about the impending deal with Iran.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/arab-nations-said-deeply-concerned-over-nuclear-agreement/

What I wonder is whether these states would be speaking out if Netanyahu had not done so first.

Of course, they are not saying explicitly that they agree with the Israeli prime minister. Perish the thought. But this is implicit in what’s happening. And as I see it, it shifts the dynamic. While Obama is prepared to come out swinging when the critic is Netanyahu, his tone is more deferential with the Arabs.

In fact, we’re hearing something now that we haven’t heard in a while. For some time Obama has been saying that a deal is close, is possible. But yesterday, Kerry declared that there were “significant gaps” and that the US was prepared to walk away if terms were not satisfactory. Doesn’t mean they don’t still intend to push ahead (they do), but this is a different tone.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4629230,00.html

That the US is pushing ahead was made evident as Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Secretary of State John Kerry were meeting today for “intensive talks.”

~~~~~~~~~~

I end with this piece, “Divided over that speech, not over a lousy deal with Iran,” by David Horovitz, editor of The Times of Israel (emphasis added):

“It is time to reframe the dispute. We are not witnessing what is being widely depicted as a battle between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government over the timing, content and ostensible partisan implications of the prime minister’s scheduled March 3 address to Congress over Iran. We are, rather, watching the collapse of trust between the two leaderships over the critical issue of thwarting Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions.

“The looming deal is similarly inexplicable to the political rivals of Netanyahu who are campaigning to oust him in general elections on March 17…

”Where [Zionist camp head Bujie] Herzog and other Israeli party leaders differ with Netanyahu is over his handling of the crisis. Like Herzog, centrist Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid does not underestimate the Iranian threat. They just both think that Netanyahu is acting counterproductively and for domestic political reasons by preparing to lobby publicly against Obama in Congress, when they say he ought to be working to shift the administration more discreetly, behind the scenes.

“Of course, party leaders like Herzog and Lapid have to publicly criticize and castigate the prime minister; we’re less than a month from elections, and their entire domestic political goal is to undermine Israeli public confidence in his leadership so as to unseat him…”

No, no. There is no “of course” here! Horovitz elaborates on this point:

”In truth, it can hardly be doubted that Netanyahu has tried to impact the president’s stance in years of one-on-one conversations and in the endless top-level contacts between his officials and the Obama administration. The nature of the imminent deal — whose terms cannot be independently verified, but are profoundly troubling to such diplomatic veterans as Henry Kissinger and George Shultz — would indicate that private argument and entreaty have failed…

”In these final weeks of the election campaign, the face-off with Obama has become one more issue for the challengers to use against Netanyahu…

”Three years ago at a graveside in Jerusalem, the prime minister eulogized his father, historian Benzion Netanyahu, for having ‘taught me, Father, to look at reality head-on, to understand what it holds and to come to the necessary conclusions.’

“The prime minister says it would have been unthinkable to turn down the invitation to set out his concerns in the world’s most resonant parliamentary forum.

“Israel and those who care for Israel should not be blindsided by the battling between Netanyahu and Obama, or between Netanyahu and his domestic rivals, over the Congressional speech.

“They should be sounding the alarm to prevent a deal that would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment capability and other core aspects of its nuclear program.

“Those who care for Israel, in short, should look at reality head-on, understand what it holds, and come to the necessary conclusions…”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/divided-over-that-speech-not-over-a-lousy-deal-with-iran/

02/22/15

There Will Always Be War

By: Alan Caruba
Warning Signs

We begin with the reality that the United States and many other nations are at war with militant Islamists. They are a growing army of religious zealots murdering Christians, Jews, others who are not Muslim, and even other Muslims.

In my youth America knew how to win wars. In Europe it bombed Germany into submission, leading its allies in an invasion that left Germany divided for decades until the Soviet Union collapsed. In Asia Truman dropped two atomic bombs on Japan because they didn’t get the message when Hiroshima was destroyed on August 6, 1945. It took a second bomb on Nagasaki on August 9 to bring about Japan’s surrender.

Millions died in World War II but the alternative would have been the loss of freedom for millions worldwide.

If one spends any time learning history, the primary lesson is that war has been a constant factor from the beginning of what we call civilization about five thousand years ago.

The Bronze Age introduced new weapons that gave the residents of the Fertile Crescent in the Middle East a distinct advantage over invading nomadic people, but the invaders introduced chariots and it took the Egyptians and Babylonians a while to catch up. War has always been about new, more lethal weaponry.

Why would we be surprised to learn that the Assyrians who originated in what is now northern Iraq or the Islamic State (ISIS) were the most violent and bloodthirsty of the ancient world’s peoples? Known to all their neighbors by 1300 B.C.E., their army become a source of terror for the Middle East during the ninth century. They destroyed the Kingdom of Israel around 732 B.C.E., but the southern part of the Kingdom of Judah survived. In time the Babylonians would defeat the Assyrians.

Not all wars involved religion. The Greeks fought each other and then fought the Persians. Alexander the Great, a Macedonian, loved waging war and was very successful. The constant factor, however, was war and, of course, Rome would become the greatest empire of its time, beginning around 509 B.C.E., fighting three Punic wars with Carthage, but losing an estimated 400,000 in the first war and 150,000 in the second.

Eventually, Rome was so powerful it imposed a “Pax Romana” on the entire Mediterranean area it controlled. In time, Rome would be destroyed by the “barbarians”, Visigoths, Vandals, Ostrogoth’s, and Burgundians. By 476 C.E., the Roman Empire was history.

After establishing a group of followers in the Arabian Peninsula as the “last prophet”, proclaiming Islam as the one, true faith, Muhammad died in 632 C.E. Within ten years, the Arabs had conquered Jerusalem and were taking aim at Damascus and Cairo. Baghdad and the Libyan Desert were the next to be conquered. They moved on to Spain and Central Asia.

During his lifetime, Ali, Mohammad’s son-in-law, was the leader of the Arab forces. As noted in Samuel Willard Crompton’s ‘The Handy Military History Answer Book’, by the time the Arabs fought the Byzantines and the Persians they had also initiated the great split that remains today between the Sunnis and the Shiites.” Shiite means “follower of Ali.” The Sunnis wanted to elect their own caliph.

After taking the southern half of Spain, the Muslim army was poised to take all of Europe, but their 732 C.E. defeat in the Battle of Tours put an end to further expansion. Their momentum in Asia was stopped in 751 C.E. with a defeat in the Battle of Talas. As Crompton notes, “in the century that followed the Prophet’s death, the Arabs took over ninety percent of all the urban centers in the Western world, and their conquests equaled those of ancient Rome.”

The Crusades

Which brings us to the first Crusade; it began when Pope Urban II in 1095 told a gathering of 10,000, mostly French and German knights, that a “new accursed group”, the Muslims, had taken control of the holy land were preventing pilgrims from visiting holy sites. The knights responded to his call to liberate Jerusalem by chanting “Deus Volt! Deus Volt!”—God wills it.

They were joined by a “Peasants Crusade” between 1095 and 1096. By June 1099 the knights arrived outside Jerusalem and what followed was a wholesale murder of everyone there. In 1185, Saladin, the emir of Cairo and Lord of Damascus, proclaimed a jihad—a holy war—against the Christians in the Kingdom of Jerusalem. The knights defending it were defeated.

A Second Crusade followed in 1147 C.E. but accomplished little and the Third Crusade had the same result. A Fourth Crusade resulted in the Europeans taking control of Constantinople in August 1204 C.E. They would rule it for the next fifty years. Years later, in 1489, a war drove the Muslims from Spain.

The spokeswoman from our Department of State who said that the present generation of Muslim holy warriors can’t all be killed doesn’t know that this is the way wars are won. You kill the enemy until the enemy decides that dying for their cause is not worth it.

If ISIS is insane enough to bring the war to our homeland (and even if it doesn’t), a war of total destruction will be the only way to end the present conflict. Currently, the Jordanians and the Egyptians are doing what they can to resist ISIS, but recent polls confirm that Americans are beginning to conclude that our active boots-on-the-ground participation is the only way this will end.

Obama is merely going through the motions of conducting a war against ISIS, but retired generals and diplomats have told Congress that only full-scale war will end the threat they represent.

Meanwhile, ISIS is committing genocide against the Christians of the Middle East while Boko Haram is doing the same in Africa. Hezbollah would do the same against Israel if it could. Given nuclear arms, Iran will assert control over all of the Muslim warriors, threatening both Israel and the U.S.

Our next President will have to commit to destroying ISIS. There is no alternative. That is history’s primary lesson.

Editor’s Note: The Handy Military History Answer Book is published by Visible Ink, $21.95, softcover.

02/22/15

President Obama: Do you really love America?

Hat Tip: BB

02/22/15

Raging Rudy Giuliani Destroys Obama’s Policies on Islamism and Iran

02/22/15

White House Holds Summit On “Extremism”

Hat Tip: BB

02/22/15

The Russian Bear Moves In Next Door

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Guess who’s meeting with our new BFF, Cuba? Russia. Moscow’s Defense Minister Sergei Shoygu had an intimate and cozy meeting with defense and military leaders in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua week before last. As they caught up with their fellow comrades on all the latest commie happenings… Russia agreed to provide military training and increase military visits and exercises. The Russians are not just probing next door anymore, they’ve moved in.

They signed several agreements on warship visits and military training during the visit, which ran from Feb. 11 to 14. Gee, that didn’t seem to make the news. You know why? Because our inept leaders say there is nothing to worry about. That all countries have the right to form alliances with whomever they want. Screw the Monroe Doctrine, which Kerry has already pronounced dead. It’s party time in Latin America!

The Russian leader is seeking bases in the region for strategic bomber flights that Shoygu recently promised would include flights over the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean. In November, Shoygu announced that Russian strategic nuclear bombers would conduct long-range training flights over the Gulf of Mexico. Please note, these are nuclear capable bombers.

From The Washington Free Beacon:

In November, Shoygu announced that Russian strategic nuclear bombers would conduct long-range training flights over the Gulf of Mexico. “In the current situation we have to maintain military presence in the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific, as well as the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.”

Marine Corps. Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, confirmed the likelihood of future Russian bomber flights during testimony earlier this month before the House Armed Services Committee.

“Moscow has made significant progress in modernizing its nuclear and conventional forces, improving its training and joint operational proficiency, modernizing its military doctrine to integrate new methods of warfare and developing long range precision strike capabilities,” Stewart said.

Stewart said Russian military forces, including Tu-95 bombers, conducted “record numbers” of out of area air and naval deployments.

“We expect this to continue this year to include greater activity in the Caribbean and Mediterranean Seas,” he said.

Amidst the poo-pooing from Washington and Central Command that there is nothing to worry about, I enjoyed what Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS), a member of the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee, said:

The Russian bear is out of hibernation from Damascus, to Donetsk, and from Pyongyang to Peru.

Putin and his coterie of ‘former’ communists smell weakness. Their window to expand Russian influence is now and they are acting with great vigor and with nearly zero resistance from America and the West. Russian military expansion into Latin America is simply one more manifestation of their resolve and American inaction.

Glad he shares my viewpoint and this is what I have been saying for a long time now. The Russians are doubling and tripling down. Their latest move next door gives them immediate “Red Dawn” capability. Gee, if I were a Marxist President aligned with a country which I pretended was an enemy, but which in reality shared my hidden agenda… I might do something like facilitate across my borders a first wave invading force, just like Islamo-fascists do. I might encourage following that with terrorist groups and then a full blown invasion force, just as you have seen happen in the Middle East. Do you think it is a coincidence they are all taking plays from the same book here?

Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua all belong to the 11-member Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, known as ALBA, a leftist alliance set up by Cuba and Venezuela in 2004 as an anti-US grouping of states. Almost, if not all, countries in Latin America are led by dictators and one flavor of communism or another. Instead of trying to stem the anti-freedom shift of our neighbors as the Monroe Doctrine dictated, we instead, especially recently, have gone the “non-aggression” route which screams of weakness and opens the door to terrorism, communism, violence and severe aggression. Our biggest enemies have now moved into virtually every country to our south… those enemies are Iran, Russia and China – the new axis of evil. It won’t be long before Putin himself visits these countries to solidify his hold and sway over them. It’s a ticking bomb.

Obama keeps ranting on about how the sanctions are really hurting Russia economically. Maybe, maybe not so much. Even if they are, I hardly think Putin cares. He’s throwing every dime they have into their military buildup, while Obama guts ours. Putin doesn’t mind starving his own people if need be. After all, it is for the Motherland. With Russia continuing their out in the open warlike attacks on the Ukraine, NATO and Europe are getting very nervous indeed. In fact, Germany and France are crawling into bed with Russia. With the US no longer a global player, these countries will align themselves with a strong man and that would be Russia. We’re no longer the heavy-hitting force of yore; instead we’re “flexible” about power grabs by Putin and friends.

We have crickets coming from the Obama Administration on Russian military encroachment in the western hemisphere. Russian Tu-95 Bear H bomber flights have increased sharply near US coasts in recent months, with one recent air defense zone incursion simulating a practice nuclear cruise missile strike on the United States from northeastern Canada. Doesn’t that just send a thrill down your spine? British jets on Thursday intercepted Russian bombers flying along the coast near Cornwall, in southwest England. So, Russia is testing the defenses of their biggest enemies and, I’m sad to say, finding them easy to breach.

Nicaragua

Shoygu inked an agreement that will simplify procedures for Russian warships to make port calls. A second accord was reached that will increase military training in Russia for Nicaraguan military personnel. Never one to miss a chance at military build up, Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista President Daniel Ortega announced last year that he plans to do just that with his armed forces with Moscow’s assistance. Russia has also promised to supply naval gunboats to Nicaragua beginning in 2016.

Venezuela

Venezuela is a also being gifted with a plethora of Russian weapons, including an estimated $12 billion in arms. Those arms would include Su-30 jets, Mi-17, Mi-26 and Mi-35 helicopters, T-72 tanks, Smerch multiple launch rocket launchers, S-300 anti-aircraft missiles and artillery. In return, they have agreed to increased visits by Russian warships and Caracas will hold joint military exercises with the Russians. Joint Russian-Venezuelan air defense training is also on the menu. Russian air force aircraft may make use of Venezuelan bases in the future.

Cuba

Cuba’s Dictator, Raul Castro, noted that military relations continued to “develop constructively.” Cuba is hosting port visits by Russian naval vessels, including the intelligence-gathering ship Victor Leonov, which made a port call in Havana in January — which coincided with the Obama’s diplomatic initiative to seek normalized relations with the regime – in Obama’s eyes, we are all communists now. Cuba will also be sending their people to Russia for intense training in military and intelligence. US defense officials said the Leonov was anchored some 25 miles off the coast of Jacksonville, Florida, two weeks ago where it is suspected of conducting surveillance on our nuclear missile submarines based at nearby Kings Bay, Georgia.

Once again, John Bolton sees the true threat when so many others don’t:

Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton said the Russians appear to be filling a power vacuum in the region by the lack of focus from the Obama administration.

“Russia’s perception of American weakness under Obama has fueled their new adventurism in this hemisphere,” Bolton said. “Since I see no chance of Obama waking up to the potential threat, I am very worried about the situation a new president will face in January 2017.”

Which is certainly on purpose by Obama. He’s looking to tie our hands long after he’s gone and sabotage any effort to recover from his destructive moves on the American front.

So, while Russian President Vladimir Putin says other countries should not have the illusion that they can attain military superiority over Russia, they seem to have little to worry about from the US, who is busy becoming obsolete.

Russia is knocking on our door and I doubt that they will take no for an answer. The Russian bear has moved in next door and is setting up military house. Can war be far behind since Obama has laid out the welcome mat to our enemies? And what, pray tell, would that war look like?

02/22/15

“America’s Enemies in Hollywood Then and Now” – UPDATED

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

Actor Bryan Cranston (right) plays Soviet/Nazi agent
of influence Dalton Trumbo in the upcoming film “Trumbo

A press conference on “America’s Enemies in Hollywood Then and Now” will be held on February 24 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. to offer commentary on the direction of the Academy Awards and the politics of Hollywood.

Sponsored by America’s Survival, Inc. (ASI), a public policy organization, the event will also explore whether Congress should reinstate a committee on un-American activities and internal security – the same kind that led to the exposure and “blacklist” of Stalinist Communists in Hollywood. Copies of the new book, Blood on His Hands: The True Story of Edward Snowden, will be available. The book analyzes the Snowden espionage operation and how Hollywood is working to glorify the illegal leaker and traitor.