Archive for Iran

Who Says They Don’t?

We’re the caliphate and we’re okay
We sleep all night and we work all day
We chop off heads, we wear high heels,
Suspenders and a bra.
We wish we’d been a girlie
Just like our dear papa.

Isis was a goddess you know. Just sayin’.

In its efforts to dislodge ISIS from the vast swathes of land it seized with little difficulty last year in Iraq, the Iraqi army has come to rely heavily on a range of Iranian-backed Shia Islamist militias. The militias are funded, trained and armed by Iran – and even, in some cases, commanded directly by Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers.

At least one Shia militia, however, has been overlooked by Tehran: the Al-Mukhtar Army, which has had a bumpy relationship with both Baghdad and Tehran. Its leader, Watheq Al-Battat, took to Iraqi TV to air his grievances – and issue a creative appeal for support.

In a speech which also included a brief reference to Adolf Hitler as a “hero”, Al-Battat promised that if his fighters were granted the same arms given to other Shia militias, they would need just one month to defeat ISIS… and make them wear women’s clothes – among other creative punishments.

“I swear by Allah that if I had those weapons, I would destroy ISIS. I swear by Hussein, I would make ISIS wear women’s clothing… I will make donkeys out of them… I will build them detention camps in which I will feed them barley.

Maybe Jihadi John wants to be Jihadi Jane. I could suggest a head for him to cut off that might solve his problem.

Anyway, a diet of barley isn’t all bad.

I love the way this lunatic talks (except for the Hitler as hero talk), but as Bibi put it: the enemy of my enemy is my enemy.

Comments

Final Thoughts Before Netanyahu’s Speech

Good idea, bad idea—nuts to all of that.

He was invited, he accepted. End of story. If someone (a jug-eared, thin-skinned someone) wants to have a fecal-fit, let him. Jews need to stop apologizing for themselves.

No more he shouldn’t have, no more it’s disrespectful, no more don’t make them angry. [Bleep] that noise, all of it. He was invited, he accepted. Leave the bowing and scraping to (jug-eared, thin-skinned) others.

I will be tuning in, as will millions of others. And I don’t think I’ll learn anything new. Iran is playing Obama like a 1745 Nicolo Amati violin; that’s obvious to everyone, even the jug-eared, thin-skinned fiddle himself, who wants to spread the WMD along with the wealth.

I just want to hear what a real leader who stands up for his country rather than apologizing for it looks and sounds like. It’s been so long, I’ve forgotten.

Comments

No Such Thing as Bad Publicity

Just spell the names right:

House Speaker John Boehner said Sunday that there is unprecedented demand for seats in the House for Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech Tuesday.

“I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “Everybody wants to be there.”

“What I do wonder is why the White House feels threatened because the Congress wants to support Israel and wants to hear what our trusted ally has to say.”

Support for Israel continues to be bipartisan, he stressed, and Democratic support for the Jewish state has not receded. “Really,” he added, “the only conflict here is between the White House and Israel.”

We addressed the reasons why in a lengthy post yesterday. We hinted that (or hope we did, we can’t remember) Obama’s character assassination campaign would send the TV ratings through the roof. Bibi and the Super Bowl; everything else will be public access cable.

Comments

Collateral Damage

I say Obama started it; maybe you say Bibi. Or Boeher.

Regardless, the casualty list is growing:

Untitled

A wall-to-wall array of Jewish groups condemned an ad accusing National Security Adviser Susan Rice of turning a blind eye to genocide.

“Susan Rice has a blind spot: Genocide,” said the ad appearing in Saturday’s New York Times, touting a talk on Iran this week in Washington hosted by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, the New Jersey-based author and pro-Israel advocate.

As soon as the Sabbath ended, Jewish groups rushed to condemn the ad. The American Jewish Committee called it “revolting,” the Anti-Defamation League called it “spurious and perverse”, the Jewish Federations of North America called it “outrageous” and Josh Block, the president of The Israel Project, said it was “entirely inappropriate.”

Marshall Wittmann, the spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which will host Rice on Monday at its annual conference, said, “Ad hominem attacks should have no place in our discourse.”

I get why they’re trying to distance themselves from the ad, even if I think the ad is valid. History teaches that Jews take the hit in time of conflict; these guys are ducking for cover. But this time is no different. Iran is frantically working toward an arsenal of nuclear weapons. The United States and Israel stand opposed (as does every Arab state, and most other nations in the world). Yet it is Israel and America who are fighting it out in the news.

I would say this is entirely how Iran intended it, and that would be true—but it would be less than half the story. This is how Obama intends it. This is his doing, and Susan Rice or Samantha Power or John Kerry are only his instruments. To his way of thinking, Israel and the US share one too many traits, colonialism most prominently. For the son of a Kenyan Marxist (and philanderer and alcoholic), that is unpardonable.

Dinesh D’Souza:

The climax of Obama’s narrative is when he goes to Kenya and weeps at his father’s grave. It is riveting: “When my tears were finally spent,” he writes, “I felt a calmness wash over me. I felt the circle finally close. I realized that who I was, what I cared about, was no longer just a matter of intellect or obligation, no longer a construct of words. I saw that my life in America–the black life, the white life, the sense of abandonment I’d felt as a boy, the frustration and hope I’d witnessed in Chicago–all of it was connected with this small piece of earth an ocean away, connected by more than the accident of a name or the color of my skin. The pain that I felt was my father’s pain.”

In an eerie conclusion, Obama writes that “I sat at my father’s grave and spoke to him through Africa’s red soil.” In a sense, through the earth itself, he communes with his father and receives his father’s spirit. Obama takes on his father’s struggle, not by recovering his body but by embracing his cause. He decides that where Obama Sr. failed, he will succeed. Obama Sr.’s hatred of the colonial system becomes Obama Jr.’s hatred; his botched attempt to set the world right defines his son’s objective. Through a kind of sacramental rite at the family tomb, the father’s struggle becomes the son’s birthright.

Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial.

Obama may not want to “wipe Israel off the map”, as Iran does, but he would like to see it cut down to size. The era of European outposts in indigenous lands (as he sees the Zionist entity) is over. It is past time that the post-colonial powers redress the “legitimate grievances” (a phrase Obama even when talking about ISIS!) of those oppressed by the past, be they African or Arab, Sunni or Shiite. The so-called Palestinians may be an invented identity, squatting in historically Jewish lands, but in Obama’s eyes they are perfectly cast in the role of oppressed minority. He’s not alone in that way of thinking, of course—even Condoleezza Rice likened the so-called Palestinians to the civil rights strugglers of her youth.

Who is this upstart, then, to speak against his dearest held beliefs? This foreigner who speaks English almost as well as His Articulateness? (Better, I would argue, as Netanyahu’s rhetoric is grounded in military and political battle, while Obama has been handed every success, including the presidency, based on an invented autobiography written by Bill Ayers.) Obama may hate Netanyahu—he sure seems to—but this mess is more than about private beefs. It’s a profound dispute over civilization.

If Early Obama was about getting high, and Middle Obama was about getting elected, Late Obama is about getting even. We have seen his recent determination in domestic politics by legally questionable executive orders and actions that bypass Congress, rewriting legislation (often more than once) to fit his fancy. And we see it in matters of state by this fight he and he alone has picked with Netanyahu. Everyone else—Rice, Kerry, Power, Psaki, the CBC, everybody—merely projects Obama’s thoughts.

Again, while the enmity is personal and deep, it is also philosophical. Netanyahu speaks as leader of a country with religious, cultural, and historic ties to its land. Obama sees it as an anachronism. Netanyahu sees the mullahs and ayatollahs of Iran through the eyes of a people who have seen popes, emperors, cossacks, czars and obergrüppenführers sworn to their extinction. Obama sees their “legitimate grievances”.

Worse yet, Netanyahu will speak directly to the people. Obama is most successful when his guard-dog media savages anyone who rises against him. Netanyahu is his worst nightmare: someone who will have direct access to Americans, and speak to them in their own language. (Indeed, his Wikipedia article notes he still speaks English with the Philly accent he learned as a teenager.) And he will speak from the heart—not only his own, but his nation’s and his people’s.

America elected Obama, twice, and Jews make up barely 2% of the population. But America loves Israel anyway, more than Obama knows. Or maybe he does know, and that’s why he’s so scared.

Comments

Is The Israeli Public As Brain Dead As The US Public?

Are they buying this?

former aide to President Barack Obama told Israeli television on Friday that the United States would be able to detect any Iranian effort to “sprint” toward an atomic weapon as part of the emerging nuclear agreement in the P5+1 talks.

Dennis Ross, the former Mideast peace envoy, told Channel 2 on Friday that the agreement being discussed would enable Western officials to perform “anytime, anywhere inspections of declared and undeclared sites” for a period of up to 10 years.

Ross said that while there is an obvious need to see what the final agreement would look like, he said that he has received indications that the Americans will insist on a deal that will include “verifiable mechanisms for detection.”

“It would take a year’s time if [the Iranians] were making a determination they wanted to move towards a nuclear weapon – and they would have to move quickly,” Ross told Channel 2. “That would be something that would be detectable. So you’d have a time frame if they were making a decision to move quickly to detect what they were doing and do something about it.”

Ross said that the Obama administration is aiming for a deal that offers “transparency.”

And I had always respected Dennis Ross… Well, sir, here are three questions: 1. What happens in 10 years? 2. The fact that the US could know what Iran is up to doesn’t mean that they will do anything about it, does it? 3. Why do you believe this nonsense. You’re better than that.

Very disappointing indeed.

– Aggie

Comments

Snowden Strikes Again

Released intel documents from 2013 show Britain and US cutting Israel out of intelligence loop

classified document leaked by US National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden reveals information about the cooperative intelligence gathering efforts of US, British and Israeli Intel against Iranian targets.

The document from April 2013, marked top secret, highlights the successes of US and British intelligence cooperation against Iran, the growing regional and cyber threat that Iran constitutes and reluctance to have an overarching intelligence sharing agreement with Israel.

The document was published earlier this month on website The Intercept, the platform created by journalist Glenn Greenwald to report on documents provided by Snowden.

More at the link.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

Must-See TV

Democrats may boycott the Israeli Prime Minister’s speech before Congress, but there’ll be another demographic bloc who will be all eyes and ears:

Arab governments have been privately expressing their concern to Washington about the emerging terms of a potential nuclear deal with Iran, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday, citing Arab and U.S. officials involved in the deliberations.

According to the report, the direction of American diplomacy with Tehran has added fuel to fears in some Arab states of a nuclear-arms race in the region, as well as reviving talk about possibly extending a U.S. nuclear umbrella to Middle East allies to counter any Iranian threat.

The major Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, have said that a final agreement could allow Shiite-dominated Iran, their regional rival, to keep the technologies needed to produce nuclear weapons, according to these officials, while removing many of the sanctions that have crippled its economy in recent years.

Arab officials said a deal would likely drive Saudi Arabia, for one, to try to quickly match Iran’s nuclear capabilities, according to The Wall Street Journal.

“At this stage, we prefer a collapse of the diplomatic process to a bad deal,” an Arab official who has discussed Iran with the Obama administration and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks told the newspaper.

Arab governments have steered clear of aligning their statements with Israel, but share many of that country’s fears, U.S. and Arab diplomats said.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has been perhaps the most vocal critic of the deal with Iran, said last week that Israel knows the details of the planned nuclear deal with Iran and warned that it is a bad one.

“I think this is a bad agreement that is dangerous for the state of Israel, and not just for it,” said Netanyahu, adding, “If anyone thinks otherwise what is there to hide here?”

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki later questioned whether Netanyahu indeed knows “more than the negotiators” about the talks, saying “there is no deal yet.”

Many years ago, Mrs. BTL and I were in discussions with our school system about the proper education of the heirs to the Bloodthirstani throne. We were at loggerheads. The school psychologist asked, with pain and exasperation, “Why don’t you trust us?” The sirens and flashing lights that followed were not from a school fire drill, but from the BS alert system hardwired into our brains. The question was either irrelevant or it answered itself. Either we had a disagreement over the facts of the case—in which case trust did not apply—or the facts were not in dispute—in which case something else explained the disagreement.

But mostly it was the manipulative nature of the question that so pi**ed us off. It’s not about you, we answered.

It’s the same tone I hear from Jen Space Cadet. She implies that we should trust the regime. But it’s not about the regime, or not just. It’s about the Islamic Republic of Iran that has compared the “Zionist entity” to a “filthy microbe” and has sworn to wipe it off the map. Israel is not a disinterested party in these negotiations.

And who is Jen Psaki that we should trust?

Psaki began her career in 2001 with the re-election campaigns of Iowa Democrats Tom Harkin and Tom Vilsack. Psaki then became deputy press secretary for John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign. From 2005 to 2006, Psaki served as communications director to U.S. Representative Joseph Crowley and regional press secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.[7]

Throughout the 2008 presidential campaign of U.S. Senator Barack Obama, Psaki served as traveling press secretary.[7] After Obama won the election, Psaki followed Obama to the White House as Deputy Press Secretary and was promoted to Deputy Communications Director on December 19, 2009.[8][9] On September 22, 2011, Psaki left that position to become senior vice president and managing director at the Washington, D.C. office of public relations firm Global Strategy Group.[10][11]

In 2012, Psaki returned to political communications as press secretary for President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign.[12] On February 11, 2013, Psaki became spokesperson for the United States Department of State.[12]

She’s a Democrat political flack—which is fine; she’s obviously successful. But when one’s very existence hangs in the balance, as Israel’s does, does she inspire trust? She—and trust—are irrelevant.

Oh yeah, what about her second in command, Marie “Jobs for Jihadis” Harf?

Harf began her career at the Directorate of Intelligence at the Central Intelligence Agency as an analyst focusing on Middle Eastern leadership issues. She later became the media spokesperson of the CIA.[3]

During the 2012 presidential election, Harf helped craft President Obama’s national security and communications strategy, and also served as campaign spokeswoman on national security issues.[2][3]

In June 2013, Harf was appointed Deputy Spokesperson for the US State Department, where she currently serves as deputy under Jen Psaki.[2][3]

Better: she at least earned a job in the field of her expertise. But she too exists largely as a mouthpiece for others. And I seriously doubt her former colleagues at the CIA who have studied ISIS and its ideology agree that all we need to do to defeat it is find them positions as stock clerks at Walmart. At least I pray not.

Why don’t we trust you? The question answers itself.

Comments (2)

Obama To Israel: You Are Officially Alone [Update: US Denies Report]

State Department told not to report to Israel about state of Iran negotiations

Our chickens*t little weenie of a President, Barack Obama, is having fits over the upcoming Netanyahu speech. And that means 2 things, Israel: 1. He’s using this as an opportunity to isolate you completely from any protection the US previously offered, and to stigmatize you as much as possible, and 2: You need to handle Iran on your own. We will capitulate to the mullahs.

The United States will no longer provide regular updates to the Israeli government on the status of the P5+1 nuclear talks with Iran, Channel 2 reported on Sunday.

The move is the Obama administration’s response to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plans to appear before a joint session of Congress, during which he is expected to discuss sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

Channel 2 reported that the White House is incensed over the Israeli government’s conduct in recent weeks regarding the Iranian issue, believing that Jerusalem has taken a sensitive issue with implications for national security and used it for political gain while interfering in American domestic politics.

According to Channel 2, the Obama administration is also angry over Israeli officials’ distorted use of information about the progress of the Iran nuclear talks.

Wendy Sherman, the under secretary of state for political affairs, informed her counterparts in Jerusalem that she would no longer provide updates on the Iran nuclear negotiations due to what Washington perceives as untoward use of the information for domestic Israeli political purposes.

The administration has also instructed Susan Rice, Washington’s ambassador to the United Nations, to cease communications with Netanyahu’s national security adviser, Yossi Cohen.

The Prime Minister’s Office responded to the Channel 2 report by saying that Israel and the US continue to maintain “deep strategic relations” and that Cohen is due to fly to the US soon to take part in a conference, during which he is scheduled to meet with both Sherman and Rice.

Don’t blink, Israel. And trust me on this – the US population is still largely behind you, but the young adults not so much. O-bots blame Israel for most of the world’s problems because they cannot blame Barry, The Messiah. So do what you need to do, whatever the heck that is.

Update: Administration denies report

Washington’s policy of briefing Israel on progress in negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program has not changed, senior US officials told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday, despite reports to the contrary in Israeli media.

Channel 2 reported earlier in the day the US would halt its briefings to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in light of his planned speech to Congress. Netanyahu is expected to criticize the state of the global diplomatic effort, which is geared towards crafting a comprehensive nuclear agreement.

“Conversations continue with Israel on the Iran nuclear negotiations,” one senior State Department official said. “Under Secretary [of State for Political Affairs Wendy] Sherman met with Israeli NSA Cohen and Minister for Intelligence and Strategic Planning Steinitz in Munich and will see NSA Cohen again this week.”

The official noted that the Iran talks were, “obviously,” the main topic of conversation.

“And Secretary [of State John] Kerry continues his conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu about this issue, as has always been the case,” the official continued.

The report is one of many from Israeli television that has been criticized in recent months by the White House. In January, a senior US official characterized claims the US had given in to 80 percent of Iran’s demands in the talks as “complete nonsense.”

I would love to believe the above, but I just don’t. Again, Israel needs to do what is best for Israel in order to protect Israel. Period.

– Aggie

Comments

Importing Churchill

Great as he was for the British in WWII, we were pretty well fixed ourselves with FDR.

But now is different. Israel has their Churchill in Netanyahu (if the parallel seems labored, remember Churchill was ejected from office shortly after the war); all we can answer with is Neville Hussain Chamberlain:

Five of the six world powers negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program have stepped back, leaving Washington to hammer out a deal with Tehran, a key US lawmaker said Tuesday.

“It’s evident that these negotiations are really not P5+1 negotiations any more,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker said as he emerged from a closed-door briefing by Obama administration officials on the status of nuclear talks with Iran.

“It’s really more of a bilateral negotiation between the United States and Iran.”

Corker and the Democrat he replaced as committee chairman, Senator Robert Menendez, left the latest briefing expressing concern about the administration basing negotiations on the need to maintain Iran’s potential nuclear weapons “breakout” time to at least one year.

“One of my major concerns all along that is becoming more crystal clear to me, is that we are, instead of preventing proliferation, we are managing proliferation,” Menendez said.

Doesn’t that last line echo in your brain? It does in mine. That’s why I think Netanyahu has to go through with his speech to Congress. Let the Democrats stage their boycott. When Iran tests their first bomb—more realistically, when Israel bunker-busts their reactor sites—let’s all remember who didn’t show up to hear the truth, however unwelcome it may have been.

Comments

Netanyahu Blinks

Considering either a closed-door format or just an AIPAC speech

Israeli officials are considering amending the format of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s planned address to the US Congress next month to try to calm some of the partisan furor the Iran-focused speech has provoked.

Netanyahu is due to address a joint session of Congress about Iran’s nuclear program on March 3, just two weeks before Israeli elections, following an invitation from John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the house.

Boehner’s invitation has caused consternation in both Israel and the United States, largely because it is seen as Netanyahu, a hawk on Iran, working with the Republicans to thumb their noses at President Barack Obama’s policy on Iran.

So disappointed. At this point, I wouldn’t vote for a democrat for school committee.

– Aggie

Comments

If You Repeat A Lie Often Enough, People Will Believe It

Did Bush lie us into Iraq?

n recent weeks, I have heard former Associated Press reporter Ron Fournier on Fox News twice asserting, quite offhandedly, that President George W. Bush “lied us into war in Iraq.”

I found this shocking. I took a leave of absence from the bench in 2004-05 to serve as co-chairman of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction—a bipartisan body, sometimes referred to as the Robb-Silberman Commission. It was directed in 2004 to evaluate the intelligence community’s determination that Saddam Hussein possessed WMD—I am, therefore, keenly aware of both the intelligence provided to President Bush and his reliance on that intelligence as his primary casus belli. It is astonishing to see the “Bush lied” allegation evolve from antiwar slogan to journalistic fact.

The intelligence community’s 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) stated, in a formal presentation to President Bush and to Congress, its view that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction—a belief in which the NIE said it held a 90% level of confidence. That is about as certain as the intelligence community gets on any subject.

Recall that the head of the intelligence community, Central Intelligence Agency Director George Tenet, famously told the president that the proposition that Iraq possessed WMD was “a slam dunk.” Our WMD commission carefully examined the interrelationships between the Bush administration and the intelligence community and found no indication that anyone in the administration sought to pressure the intelligence community into its findings. As our commission reported, presidential daily briefs from the CIA dating back to the Clinton administration were, if anything, more alarmist about Iraq’s WMD than the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate.

You can read it at the link. I happen to remember this, and find it shocking and discouraging that people who were adults at the time can’t recall it. I would also point out that among the western nations, only Israel stated that Saddam did not have WMD’s. Ariel Sharon said it publicly at the time. But one would have to read the Israeli press and assume that Israelis know something about what goes on in the Middle East in order to have taken him seriously. Sharon told the world that the problem was not Iraq, but Iran.

The scapegoating that the Left has employed against GW Bush will bite them really hard someday. This is because it contributed to the general cynicism about government which is ubiquitous today. Don’t get me wrong – Obama is a truly awful president and lies routinely to our faces (remember that red line in Syria? You can keep your health care plan?) but someday we might have a decent president again. And when he or she says we need to do something big, who will believe it?

– Aggie

Comments

Plot Twist

Are you serious?

The draft of an arrest warrant for Argentine President Cristina Fernández was found at the home of a prosecutor who was investigating the 1994 bombing of a Jewish center in Buenos Aires, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, citing the lead investigator.

Prosecutor Alberto Nisman had drafted a warrant that accused Fernández of trying to shield Iranian officials from responsibility in the bombing, according to the report. Nisman died on Jan. 18, a day before he was due to appear in Congress over his claims that Fernandez conspired to derail his investigation.

Nisman was lead investigator into the 1994 attack on the AMIA Jewish center that killed 85 people. He was found dead in his apartment on January 18, a 22 caliber pistol by his side.

He had accused Fernandez of trying to derail his investigation into the bombing and was due to present his case to Congress the next day.

It’s worth reading the same story told a different way:

The Argentinian prosecutor investigating the death of her colleague, Alberto Nisman, said he had prepared a warrant for the arrest of President Cristina Fernandez.

The prosecutor, Viviana Fein, had at first denied the existence of the arrest warrant after it was published in Clarín, but later said it indeed existed.

Fein said Nisman prepared the warrant for President Fernandez’s arrest but ultimately did not include it in his complaint alleging the president tried to cover up the suspected Iranian involvement in the bombing of a Jewish center.

The 26-page document was recovered from a garbage can in Nisman’s Buenos Aires apartment, where he was found dead January 18. Fein came under fire for not disclosing the warrant’s existence earlier.

In a related story:

Prosecutor Viviana Fein has confirmed that she will take two weeks’ leave starting from February 18, leaving the investigation into the death of Alberto Nisman in the hands of colleagues.

Sources in the Attorney General’s Office revealed that Fein had planned the break in December, long before the case involving the late AMIA investigator fell into her hands.

This is something out of Scandal or House of Cards.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »