I’d rather go to War than Make a Deal with a Devil


John R. Houk

© July 31, 2015

Let me begin with a thirteen minute speech delivered by Caroline Glick. If you didn’t know that Glick was an American born Jewish gal that is now an Israeli citizen and senior editor for the Jerusalem Post, you would think she was an evangelical preacher. THIS IS GOOD PREACHING!

VIDEO: Caroline Glick speaks at Stop Iran Rally in New York City #StopIranRally

Published by Bob David

Published on Jul 22, 2015

Caroline Glick speaks out against Obama’s surrender to Iran and his facilitation of their mass murder terrorist operations and acquisition of nuclear weapons. (Video Hat Tip: United with Israel)

America has endured seven years of Obama cover-ups and lies. Combine this with a gullible duped electorate that admires America’s first Black President while ignoring the destructive nature of Obama’s transformation of America. You will see the full swing of tragedy engulfing America with Congress laying down its constitutional power to Executive Order authority.

International agreements that have the force of law comes under the category of a Treaty. The Constitution tells us all treaties need Congressional approval. Obama has flouted the Constitution by pushing the envelope of the rule of law with the fiat of an Executive Order. The Executive Order/Agreement is nothing new in the evolution of the Executive Branch stretching the bounds of the Constitution often with the consent of the Judicial Branch. UNFORTUNATELY this Iran Nuke Deal by Obama’s Administration has all the elements of a Treaty; however Obama’s EO power has placed Congress in the position of passing legislation to overrule an agreement that will affect America’s future National Security, Israel’s existence and undermine the few Arab/Sunni-Muslim allies the government has courted because of a threatening Twelver-Shia Iran.

Rather than being the constitutional position of the required 2/3 Senate approval of a Treaty, Obama is forcing legislation to pass both Houses and if there is a Presidential veto both Houses have to come up with 2/3 majorities to override the veto.

On a personal level it is my feeling that any agreement that allows a saber rattling and terrorist supporting nation such as Iran is not worth the paper signed upon. It is my understanding that Iran’s nuclear program is left intact including the ability to enrich weapons grade uranium. Iranians are just promising they won’t pursue such an enrichment for ten years. So even if we can believe weapons grade enrichment is suspended, Iran can pick up where they left off. And assuming there is no clandestine nuclear enrichment, Iran is more than free to develop weaponry including Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) capable of carrying some form of weapon(s) of mass destruction (WMD).

Also Obama’s nuke deal stops all economic sanctions against Iran BEFORE any verification of Iranian trustworthiness proceeds which includes releasing hundreds of billions of dollars confiscated due to previous sanction violations by Iran.

For clarity’s sake then, Iran can develop weaponry systems, continue to supply Islamic terrorists with weapons and plan Israel’s destruction pertaining to the death to America and death to Israel rhetoric that Obama dismisses as playing politics to the Iranian Twelver constituents who believe their Hidden 12th Imam will emerge to cause global chaos ushering in a Shi’ite-Islamic domination of planet earth.

The Obama supporters (including BHO) are planting the seeds of fear that the only alternative to the best deal that can be arrived at with Iran is war. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that war with Iran in some form or another is inevitable. So is it better to engage in a military action now in which Iran can only respond with conventional weapons now better than a nuclear war later in which many more lives perish including creating inhabitable land due to radiation?

Also the Obama international cohorts seem to indicate they are going through with sanction lifting against Iran whether Congress thwarts Obama or not. Iran Nuke Deal supporters claim that European abandonment to economics and oil benefits Iran who continue to enrich uranium without a deal thus producing a nuke weapon. So again, is a conventional war in the present favorable or a nuke war in the future which includes psycho-Iranians that have a death culture? That death culture means the Cold War adage that prevented an American vs. a Sino-Soviet nuclear war via the military theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) will not stop Iran.

Iran is not a secular nation that reasons in geopolitics in the same way that Western Nations and global economic minded despotic nations like Russia and China would reason even today. As far as Twelver-Shi’ites are concerned a MAD scenario will simply bring a global Islamic era under Allah quicker.

For all the bad things Iran Nuke Deal supports believe will read this Foreign Policy essay by Suzanne Nossel: “This Is What Will Happen if Congress Blows Up the Iran Nuclear Deal: If the naysayers manage to blow up the newly minted agreement, it will be a disaster for the United States — and will only push Iran closer to the bomb.” –July 30, 2015

I know I’m just a small time Okie blogger, but sure seems a “NO” to the Iran Nuke Deal means bad consequences now. AGAIN I’m here to tell you a “YES” to the Iran Nuke Deal means WORSE consequences in our future. AND if Iran proves untrustworthy as I suspect, those WORSE consequences will arrive sooner rather than later.

Iran Nuke Installation May 2015 Map

I believe Norman Podhoretz sums up the reality of the Iran Nuke Deal in the last paragraph of his July 28 Wall Street Journal editorial: “Israel’s Choice: Conventional War Now, or Nuclear War Later”.

The brutal truth is that the actual alternatives before us are not Mr. Obama’s deal or war. They are conventional war now or nuclear war later. John Kerry recently declared that Israel would be making a “huge mistake” to take military action against Iran. But Mr. Kerry, as usual, is spectacularly wrong. Israel would not be making a mistake at all, let alone a huge one. On the contrary, it would actually be sparing itself—and the rest of the world—a nuclear conflagration in the not too distant future. (Israel’s Choice: Conventional War Now, or Nuclear War Later; By Norman Podhoretz; WSJ; 7/28/15)

The best thing for the U.S. to do would be to back Israeli military action against Iranian nuke sites. When Iran counterattacks Israel, then would be a good time to demonstrate to Israel and other nominal Middle East allies that we protect our allies and nail Iran from all sides without necessarily planning an invasion. Incapacitating Iran’s infrastructure will cause Iran to run out of retaliatory options soon enough. AND thank god, a military strike now means no nuke WMD future options for Iran.

Further Reading:

Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (Iran Nuke Deal PDF) Vienna 7/14/15

Obama’s Gamble with Iran’s Theocratic RegimeIsrapundit cross posted from Gatestone Institute 7/28/15

Obama Administration’s “Side Deals” with Iran Make Waves in CongressBreaking Israel News 7/27/15

John Kerry hasn’t even seen one of the most crucial parts of the Iran agreementBusiness Insider 7/30/15

State Spokesman Repeatedly Refuses to Answer Whether There Are ‘Side Deals’ Between Iran and Nuclear WatchdogWashington Free Beacon 7/22/15

JRH 7/31/15

Please Support NCCR

Foreign Christians and the Obama Administration


Sister Diana Momeka – Iraqi Refugee Nun and BHO

 

John R. Houk

© July 26, 2015

In an earlier post I shared that persecuted Pakistani-Christian Asia Bibi received a stay of execution by hanging. I wanted to draw attention that the Pakistan government was still keeping her in prison even though a few Western nations had offered her and her family asylum if she is released. In conjunction with her continued incarceration I excerpted from various sources how ill-treated Bibi has experienced and that her family was constantly receiving death threats and thus are in hiding as in having to move around a lot to avoid deadly persecution.

Since America is still the land where Christians can enjoy religious liberty without fear of Muslims demanding Sharia punishments be enforced for believing Jesus Christ is the Son of God and true Messiah while Mohammed was (as in past tense and dead as a rusty door nail) falsely claimed to be a messenger a divine deity called Allah who went out his way to tell listeners that Jesus Christ is NOT the Son of God, that the Lord did NOT die on the Cross AND NEVER did arise bodily from the grave reclaiming the divine attributes given up to be a sacrifice for the redemption to a lost and separated from God humankind.

This basic theological Christian faith is blasphemy to a Muslim because in their view it belittles Mohammed and that fake deity Allah.

And so Asia Bibi is still in prison and her family is still stuck in Pakistan in a nation in which the Sunni-Muslim majority believes they should die horribly to honor Mo and Allah.

Do you think President Barack Hussein Obama and his Administration care about the suffering that Christians like Asia Bibi receives at the hands of lunatic Muslims believing they are honoring their deity and prophet?

The President has allowed a destructive nuke deal to move forward with Iran without requiring the Christian American citizens imprisoned on various bogus charges to be released. Obama has allowed the mass slaughtering of Christians in Iraq and Syria by psycho-Muslims that have carved land out of those two nations and called it the Islamic State (IS). Our President still calls them ISIL, most American media outlets calls the “IS” ISIS (See Also HERE) and most Muslim nations and Israel calls the “IS” Daesh (pronounced like dash – See Also HERE).

You’d think a nation like the United States of America that still has a large affinity for Christianity would be more accommodating toward persecuted Christians in Muslim dominated nations, right?

Raymond Ibrahim examines Obama’s Administration to shine a light on some curious practices being used against persecuted Christians to prevent their voice from being heard by American voters.

JRH 7/26/15

Please Support NCCR

*****************************

U.S. State Dept. Bars Christians from Testifying about Persecution: Muslim Persecution of Christians, May 2015

By Raymond Ibrahim

July 24, 2015

Raymond Ibrahim – Islam Translated

Also at Gatestone Institute

During the height of one of the most brutal months of Muslim persecution of Christians, the U.S. State Department exposed its double standards against persecuted Christian minorities.

Sister Diana, an influential Iraqi Christian leader, who was scheduled to visit the U.S. to advocate for persecuted Christians in the Mideast, was denied a visa by the U.S. State Department even though she had visited the U.S. before, most recently in 2012.

She was to be one of a delegation of religious leaders from Iraq — including Sunni, Shia and Yazidi, among others — to visit Washington, D.C., to describe the situation of their people. Every religious leader from this delegation to Washington D.C. was granted a visa — except for the only Christian representative, Sister Diana.

After this refusal became public, many Americans protested, some writing to their congressmen. Discussing the nun’s visa denial, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said:

This is an administration which never seems to find a good enough excuse to help Christians, but always finds an excuse to apologize for terrorists … I hope that as it gets attention that Secretary Kerry will reverse it. If he doesn’t, Congress has to investigate, and the person who made this decision ought to be fired.

The State Department eventually granted Sister Diana a visa.

This is not the first time the U.S. State Department has not granted a visa to a Christian leader coming from a Muslim region. Last year, after the United States Institute for Peace brought together the governors of Nigeria’s mostly Muslim northern states for a conference in the U.S., the State Department blocked the visa of the region’s only Christian governor, Jonah David Jang.

According to a Nigerian human rights lawyer based in Washington D.C., Emmanuel Ogebe, the Christian governor’s “visa problems” were due to anti-Christian bias in the U.S. government:

The U.S. insists that Muslims are the primary victims of Boko Haram. It also claims that Christians discriminate against Muslims in Plateau, which is one of the few Christian majority states in the north. After the [Christian governor] told them [U.S. authorities] that they were ignoring the 12 Shariah states who institutionalized persecution … he suddenly developed visa problems…. The question remains — why is the U.S. downplaying or denying the attacks against Christians?

The testimony of another nun, Sister Hatune Dogan, also made in May, indicates why the State Department may not want to hear such testimonials: they go against the paradigm that “Islam is peace.” According to Sister Hatune:

What is going on there [Islamic State territories], what I was hearing, is the highest barbarism on earth in the history until today… The mission of Baghdadi, of ISIS, is to convert the world completely to the Islamic religion and bring them to Dar Al Salaam, as they call it. And Islam is not peace, please. Whoever says ISIS has no connection to Islam or something like this is, he’s a liar. ISIS is Islam; Islam is ISIS… We know that in Islam, there is no democracy. Islam and democracy are opposite, like black and white. And I hope America will understand. America today has the power that they can stop this disaster on the earth, with other Western countries.

The rest of May’s roundup of Muslim persecution of Christians around the world includes, but is not limited to, the following accounts, listed by theme.

Muslim Attacks on Christian Churches

Pakistan: Three separate incidents involved attacks on churches:

1) On May 28, in the city of Chakwal, south of Lahore, Muslim men destroyed a Protestant church and beat six Christians, including the pastor. Some of those wounded had to be hospitalized. A few days earlier, Pastor Suhail Masih and his companions had been accused by local Muslims of carrying out “proselytism and conversions of Muslims,” according to a preliminary report.

2) Javed David, head of Hope for the Light Ministries in Lahore, and his associates, have been receiving death threats since February. The latest incident occurred in April, but became public knowledge only in May. According to David:

I had been to church in Sheikhupura to attend a meeting with colleagues. It was 8 o’clock in the evening when we left to return to Lahore. We were about to reach the main road when a motorbike drove up and blocked the way. Maybe they were following us. The two bikers were wearing a helmet (sic). One of them came up to my window and spoke to me. “We know what you are doing here,” he said. “Stop building churches. Convert to Islam, which is the true religion. Otherwise we will make a horrible example of you.”… [On another] occasion too, I was going home when a motorcycle stopped in front of me. The driver knocked on the window and threw in a piece of paper. I did not open it before I got home. It said, “This is an Islamic nation. We cannot allow church building. Either you convert to Islam or you leave this country! Stop building churches or you’ll pay the consequences!”

3) On May 29 in Faisalabad, around 2 a.m., a gang of Muslims on motorcycles attacked a church near the Sadar police station. They opened fire on the church and set its main gate on fire, damaging its windows. According to church cleric Dilawar Masih, “Though no human loss was reported in this incident, attackers gave a clear-cut message that Christians and their places of worship are not safe and they may be attacked any time by the terrorists.”

Egypt: Two churches were attacked:

1) On May 16, a homemade explosive device planted next to a Coptic Christian church was detonated around sunset. As the St. George Church in Tamiya (Fayum governorate) was mostly empty at the time, there were no casualties. However, the church’s administrative offices and second floor windows were shattered, creating chaos and panic in the area. Church security cameras captured the two men on a motorcycle, who stopped at the church. One of the men dismounted and placed a bag containing the bomb next to the church, and they then sped off.

2) On Sunday morning, May 31 in Senoras city, Fayum, masked men on motorcycles opened fire on an Evangelical church. Security forces guarding the church briefly exchanged fire with the masked men before they fled on their motorcycles. No one was reported hurt.

Canada: On May 26, a 22-year-old man of Muslim background was charged with alleged hate crimes committed against the St. Catherine of Siena Church and its neighboring elementary school in Mississauga, Ontario. Iqbal Hessan faces five counts of mischief, and over $5,000 in fines. On May 20, the Sacred Heart of Jesus statue that stands in front of the church was covered in black paint and the fingers of its outstretched arms were broken off. Behind the church, graffiti with the words “There is no Jew God” was scrawled across the brick wall along with a drawing of a face labelled “Jewsus.” That vandalism was the fourth time the church was targeted. On April 9, surveillance cameras caught a young man breaking into the church, ripping pages of the Sacramentary book on the altar, throwing them at the tabernacle, and then stealing one of the church’s sound-system speakers. On May 17, a drawing of a hand gesturing with the middle finger was found spray-painted on the front steps of the church. And on May 25, graffiti was sprayed on the school walls.

Algeria: According to Abdel Fattah Zarawi, the Muslim leader of the Salafi party, also known as the Free Front of Algeria, any and all Christian churches remaining in the North African nation must be closed and reopened as mosques. Although the transformation of Christian churches into Muslim mosques is nearly as old as Islam itself — Algeria was Christian-majority and even gave the world St. Augustine before Islam invaded and conquered it in the seventh century — the Salafi leader tried to portray his proposal as a “grievance” against rising anti-Muslim sentiment in Europe, especially France. Launched on social media and networks, the Salafi campaign against Algerian churches even calls for the transformation of the nation’s most important churches into mosques — including the Church of Notre Dame d’Afrique in Algiers, the Church of St. Augustine in Annaba, and the Church of Santa Cruz in Oran — since “they have no relation whatsoever to the religion of Algerian Muslims,” in the words of the Free Front.

Saudi Arabia: Sheikh Adel al-Kalbani, former Imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca and current prayer leader of Muhaisin Mosque in Riyadh, issued a tweet from his personal Twitter account, saying, “My beloved nation: It suffices me that you shelter me from hearing church bells ringing in you.” Due to his importance, the New York Times once issued an entire spread about al-Kalbani. The “hopeful” theme is how al-Kalbani managed to rise to the top in Saudi Arabia by becoming the first black Imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca. No word in any English language media, however, about his abhorrence for Christian churches and their bells.

Turkey: A 900-year-old Christian church in Turkey is to be renovated into a functioning mosque — despite previous governmental assurances that it would be renovated into a museum. Enez’s Hagia Sophia, the name of the ancient church, is located inside the city of Ainos, along the border with Greece and stationed atop a hill, visible to all. Another centuries-old church, Hagia Sophia in Trabzon, along the Black Sea, was reopened in 2013 as a mosque, although it was a museum for many years. Meanwhile, a majority of Turks await the re-transformation of the greatest Hagia Sophia (Constantinople’s) into a mosque.

Yemen: A Catholic church was seriously damaged during a Saudi bombing raid around mid-May. The church of the Immaculate Conception in Aden had earlier been occupied by Houthi rebels who had vandalized its interior. The airstrike by Saudi bombers — in support of the Yemeni government in its struggle with the rebels — did further damage to the structure. Only one Catholic priest remains in Yemen. Two priests fled the country to escape the violence, while another, who was out of the country when the fighting began, has been unable to return. Twenty members of the Missionaries of Charities have chosen to remain in the war-torn country, tending to the sick and the poor.

Muslim Attacks on Christian Freedom

Pakistan: On Sunday, May 24, a Christian man in the Sanda neighborhood of Lahore was accused of blasphemy when some Muslims saw him burning newspapers that reportedly contained Arabic verses from the Koran. After the accusation, a Muslim mob caught the Christian, severely beat him, and even attempted to set him on fire. A few months earlier, another Muslim mob burned a Christian couple alive inside a kiln after they, too, were accused of insulting Islam. The Christian youth — named Humayun Masih, said to be “mentally unstable” — was imprisoned and charged under section 295-B of Pakistan’s penal code, which prohibits the desecration of the Koran. After the attack on the Christian youth, the Muslim mob, reportedly thousands, rampaged through the neighborhood and set fire to Christian homes and a church. Christians in the region were attacked, and most fled the region; some of the mob was armed and gunshots were heard.

Egypt: On May 5, another Coptic Christian was convicted of blaspheming against Islam: “ridiculing or insulting a heavenly religion” in violation of Article 98 (f) of the Egyptian Penal Code. A judge in Daqahliya sentenced Michael Munir Beshay to one year’s imprisonment and a fine of one thousand Egyptian pounds. As International Christian Concern puts it: “Despite steps taken by the Sisi-led government to bring about greater tolerance and reforms, the conviction of Beshay is just another of many recent incidents highlighting the continued persecution of the country’s Christian minority.”[1] And Bishoy Armia Boulous – formerly known as Mohammed Hegazy, an apostate from Islam to Christianity — has remained imprisoned now for approximately a year, well past the legal six-month investigation period. All this time, he has been subject to physical and verbal abuse, from both prison guards and fellow inmates, on account of his “apostasy” from, and “blasphemy” against, Islam. He has been denied a Bible and has not had eyeglasses since they were intentionally broken some time ago. [2]

Iran: Ibrahim Firouzi, a Muslim convert to Christianity, was sentenced to the maximum five years in prison for “action against national security through collusion and gathering.” After Firouzi converted to Christianity, he was arrested on August 25, 2013 and convicted of evangelizing, colluding with “anti-regime” foreign networks, launching a Christian website, and working against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Although his prison term was supposed to end on January 13, 2015, authorities continued to hold him illegally, and on March 8 they sentenced him to serve another five years “in very difficult conditions.”

Dhimmitude

Syria: After failed negotiations, the Islamic State (IS) refused to release 242 Christian hostages captured during a late February raid along the Khabur River. On May 1, the IS demanded $242 million USD for the release of 93 women, 51 children, and 98 men taken captive. The Assyrian church, family and friends, unable to raise such a large sum, made a lesser, undisclosed offer, which IS rejected, saying it would no longer negotiate concerning the fate of the captive Christians. Based on Islamic law, their fate will now likely be slavery (especially women and children) or execution (especially men).[3]

Ethiopia: A Muslim mob in Deder attacked a Christian man and forced him out of his home on pain of death, in an effort to appropriate his land and build a mosque on it – despite recent court rulings confirming the Christian man’s property rights. “Their first plan was to kill my husband,” said Fikere Mengistu’s wife. “Now, he has escaped from the area. We are fasting and praying for God to rescue us from this forceful action.” She remains with her five children, elderly mother-in-law and 30 other Christians, praying on the property. “We did our best try to defend our faith based on the law of the country… Muslims are out of the control of the government and the law. What can we do?” said Mengistu.[4]

Iraq: Juliana George, a 16-year-old Christian girl living in Baghdad, was abducted from her home. According to her family, a person knocked on the door of their home and when she answered, she was seized by four men who forced her into a waiting taxi and sped away. Her grandfather, Joseph, a priest, chased the taxi on foot and grabbed its door, but eventually fell to the side as the vehicle sped away. She was eventually released after her family paid a $55,000 ransom to the abductors for her return. Juliana’s father, George, said that she has been traumatized by the experience: “I fear for her and my two other daughters…. There is no reason to believe that we will not be targeted again. I don’t see how we can stay in Baghdad after this.”

Turkey: On the same year that millions around the world commemorated the centennial of the Armenian Genocide, Turkish authorities started the demolition of Kamp Armen, an Armenian orphanage in the metropolitan district of Tuzla, despite the attempts by some political representatives to intervene. The orphanage was built in 1962 on the initiative of the Armenian Protestant community. A brief historical recap of the orphanage follows:

Thanks to its activities, the institution has helped 1,500 children to grow up in an environment based on the spirituality and culture of Armenian Christianity. There was also Hrant Dink among its students, the Armenian Turkish journalist, founder of the bilingual magazine Agos, killed in 2007 after being repeatedly threatened with death for his positions on the Armenian Genocide. The Turkish State had expropriated the orphanage in 1987, and all legal attempt (sic) by the Armenian Protestant communities to regain control of the building fell on deaf ears.

Italian Dhimmitude

Accounts of Muslim immigrants taunting and even assaulting Christians in Italy are increasing. Earlier this year, a crucifix was violently destroyed in close proximity to a populated mosque, and a statue of the Virgin Mary was destroyed and urinatedon by a group of North Africans in Italy. In addition:

· A Muslim schoolboy of African origin beat a 12-year-old girl at a school because she was wearing a crucifix around her neck. The boy, who had only started to attend the school a few weeks earlier, began to bully the Christian girl — “insulting her and picking on her in other ways all because she was wearing the crucifix” — before he finally assaulted her. Italian police did not charge the boy with any offense; they said he was a minor.

· On Sunday, May 10, after church mass, a group of young Muslim immigrants from the Islamic Center interrupted a Catholic procession in honor of the Virgin Mary. They shouted verbal insults and threats as the group passed in front of the Islamic Cultural Center in Conselice, a small town in lower Romagna. Approximately 100 Catholic Christians, including several small children, were preparing to receive their first Holy Communion. They were reportedly stunned and confused and halted the procession before regrouping and hurrying past the Center.

Egyptian Dhimmitude

On Sunday, May 24, in the village of Kafr Darwish, just south of Cairo, a Muslim mob attacked Coptic Christian homes by throwing stones and Molotov explosives at them. More than 10 homes were torched and damaged. This attack was apparently prompted by a familiar narrative: one of the Coptic villagers, Ayman Youssef, was accused of posting cartoons offensive to Muhammad on his Facebook account. Youssef is illiterate and says he lost his mobile phone a few days before the alleged Facebook posting. Village elders and security representatives held a “conciliation session” and decreed that Youssef’s entire family — including the 80-year-old father and 75-year-old mother — must leave the village if angry Muslims were to calm down. The Christian family was told by the village mayor Ahmed Maher that police “cannot guarantee their safety if they remained in the village.”

Dr. Khaled Montaser, an Egyptian intellectual and frequent critic of the Islamization of the country, discussed how discrimination against Coptic Christians is widespread in certain medical professions. He said during a televised program that, although the pioneer of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Egypt was a Coptic Christian (Dr. Naguib Mahfouz), his grandson is banned from entering these professions because he is a Christian. Montaser confirmed that this policy, even if not a formal law, has caused Christian students increasingly to continue their studies abroad. He pointed out that this “policy” has become a norm — one of many that discriminates against Copts.

In a 25-minute interview on Arabic satellite TV with Dr. Mona Roman, Coptic Christian Bishop Agathon fully exposed the plight of his Christian flock in Minya, Egypt — a region that has a large Coptic minority that is steadily under attack. It was pointed out that the Egyptian state itself is often behind the persecution of and discrimination against Christians. According to the bishop, local governmental authorities — including the State Security apparatus — do not just ignore the attacks on Copts, but are often the very ones behind them.[5]

During a recent interview on Egyptian television, Dr. Yunis Makioun, head of the Al-Nour Party, the political wing of the Salafis, insisted that Islam commands Muslims to “protect” the nation’s Christian minority — a reference to their “dhimmi” status — and treat them properly. Even so, said the Salafi spokesman, Muslims, according to Islam, are forbidden to offer greetings or congratulations to Copts on any Christian holiday.

Coptic Kidnappings

Since the “Arab Spring” came to Egypt, the kidnapping of Coptic Christians has been on the rise. In Nag Hammadi alone, 77 persons have been abducted, and two killed.

Makram Nazir, a 55-year-old Coptic Christian man was kidnapped and killed. Nazir was returning home from his second job in the middle of the night on April 26, when he was seized. His abductors called his brother and demanded a million Egyptian pounds (equivalent of $131,000 USD). As it was an impossible amount to raise, the Coptic man’s family negotiated a significantly reduced price by phone with the abductors. The brother went to the local police station, provided them with all the information, including recordings of the phone calls, but, according to Watan News, “no one made a single move or took the matter seriously.” After paying the ransom, three days passed before Nazir’s family found the Coptic man’s corpse in a canal. Killing Christian hostages even after being paid the ransom is not uncommon in Egypt. The same happened to 6-year-old Cyril Joseph: on May 2013, it was reported that his “family is in tatters after paying 30,000 pounds [about $4000 USD] to the abductor, who still killed the innocent child and threw his body in the sewer system, where the body, swollen and moldy, was exhumed.”

Armed gunmen seized an 8-year-old Coptic Christian child, Antonious Zaki Hani, who was walking with his mother to school in Nag Hammadi. Four armed gunmen appeared, forced the child from his mother on the threat of death, and fled in a car. The kidnappers demanded two million Egyptian pounds ($262,000 USD) in ransom. Police eventually released the boy 17 days after he was kidnapped, although some activists say police knew earlier where the boy was being held.

On May 2, another Coptic Christian girl, Marina Magdi Fahim, 17, vanished after leaving her home around midday in the Hanofil region of Alexandria. Her family reported her disappearance to the authorities. Human rights activists say the girl was not reported injured at any hospital — a sign that she was kidnapped. She has not been seen since.

A few days earlier, another 17-year old Coptic Christian was kidnapped in the village of al-Kom al-Qibliyya in Samalout. An eyewitness said he saw a Muslim neighbor named Ahmed Khalifa seize the girl. Although the family planned to organize a protest, the village elders counseled against it, lest it backfire by provoking more of the area’s Muslims to retaliate against the Christian minority of the region, as often happens whenever Copts ask for their human rights.

About this Series

The persecution of Christians in the Islamic world has become endemic. Accordingly, “Muslim Persecution of Christians” was developed to collate some—by no means all—of the instances of persecution that surface each month. It serves two purposes:

1) To document that which the mainstream media does not: the habitual, if not chronic, persecution of Christians.

2) To show that such persecution is not “random,” but systematic and interrelated—that it is rooted in a worldview inspired by Islamic Sharia.

Accordingly, whatever the anecdote of persecution, it typically fits under a specific theme, including hatred for churches and other Christian symbols; apostasy, blasphemy, and proselytism laws that criminalize and sometimes punish with death those who “offend” Islam; sexual abuse of Christian women; forced conversions to Islam; theft and plunder in lieu of jizya (financial tribute expected from non-Muslims); overall expectations for Christians to behave like cowed dhimmis, or third-class, “tolerated” citizens; and simple violence and murder. Sometimes it is a combination thereof.

Because these accounts of persecution span different ethnicities, languages, and locales—from Morocco in the West, to Indonesia in the East—it should be clear that one thing alone binds them: Islam—whether the strict application of Islamic Sharia law, or the supremacist culture born of it.

Previous Reports:

· April, 2015

· March, 2015

· February, 2015

· January, 2015

· December, 2014

· November, 2014

· October, 2014

· September, 2014

· August, 2014

· July, 2014

· June, 2014

· May, 2014

· April, 2014

· March, 2014

· February, 2014

· January, 2014

· December, 2013

· November, 2013

· October, 2013

· September, 2013

· August, 2013

· July, 2013

· June, 2013

· May, 2013

· April, 2013

· March, 2013

· February, 2013

· January, 2013

· December, 2012

· November, 2012

· October, 2012

· September, 2012

· August, 2012

· July, 2012

· June, 2012

· May, 2012

· April, 2012

· March, 2012

· February, 2012

· January, 2012

· December, 2011

· November, 2011

· October, 2011

· September, 2011

· August, 2011

· July, 2011

++

1] Beshay’s case is only one of several concerning Christians accused of, and punished for, insulting Islam. In April, Gad Yunan, a Coptic Christian teacher, and some of his Coptic students, were arrested on the charge of insulting Islam. Their crime was to have made a 30-second video on Yunan’s iPhone mocking the Islamic State — which Egypt’s Muslims and authorities apparently equate with mocking Islam, even as Muslims in the West insist ISIS has “nothing to do with Islam. Last year, Kerolos Shouky Attallah, a young Coptic Christian man accused of blaspheming Islam for simply “liking” an Arabic-language Facebook page administered by an anonymous group of Christian converts, was sentenced to six years in prison. The Copt did not make any comments on the site, share any of the postings or upload anything to it, and removed his name from the page once he realized that it might offend Muslims. In the hours preceding the sentencing, a rioting mob burned down several Christian-owned shops. He remains in hiding.

[2] According to lawyer Karam Ghobrial, the reason his client is being held and tortured in prison has to do with what made Bishoy notorious some years back in the first place: his audacity not only to convert to Christianity, but to try formally to change his religious identity from Muslim to Christian on his ID card — prompting much public animosity and death threats against him at the time.

[3] According to Bishop Mar Mellis:

We tried many times to negotiate with the people that captured them and for their release.

We offered them an amount of money in accordance with the law of jizya but sadly after a week the negotiator between us returned and told us that ISIS wanted $100,000 for each person. They were asking for over $23 million.

We are a poor nation. These people [Christian captives] have not done anything wrong and won’t harm anyone. We as Assyrians do not have this amount of money you are asking for. We offered an amount of money that we cannot disclose at this time. With the amount we offered, we thought it was acceptable, to have the return of the 230 people.

After two days, they [Islamic State] told us: “The amount the church offered was not acceptable. From now on, we will no longer negotiate with you.” We then thought we would wait, hoping they would come back to talk. Sadly, we received word that the 230 kidnapped people will be sent to the Court of Sharia in Raqqa, where a Muslim judge from Mosul will deliver their fate.

In the context of these ongoing attacks that the ancient Assyrian Christian community has been exposed to, particularly at the hands of IS, Archimandrite Emanuel Youkhana of the Assyrian Church of the East declared before a European parliament on human rights that “Assyrian Christians are facing a danger that threatens their existence in their historical regions.”

[4] According to International Christian Concern:

Fikere Mengistu’s family has owned their land for more than 90 years, but a mob of more than 20 Muslims in Kufanzik village remain intent on forcibly building a mosque on the Mengistu farm in defiance of the law. Muslims make up the religious majority in the area. They have destroyed his fence and have looted his possessions. In addition, the local police are complicit in these attempts to steal his land…. The authorities are letting it happen. In the past, he has faced threats from local police officers, has been forced to pay bribes, and has been imprisoned simply because he is a Christian.

[5] For example, when the Copts were having a serious council meeting with government officials about the possibility of building a church, one of the authorities actually contacted the Islamic sheikhs of the village asking whether they “stand with the Coptic church or with the State?” If the latter, each Muslim household was instructed to send one family member to protest against the proposed building of a church — so that security can then point to the mob and, as usual, just tell the Copts, “Sorry, no can do.”

Other times, State Security is complicit: Male and female Christian minors — currently 21 from just Minya alone, said the Coptic leader — are habitually abducted by surrounding Muslims. At the moment, the youngest Christian girl abducted had just started elementary school. Whenever any of these attacks occur, Copts, working with the church, prepare bundles of documents, including photos and other verifications, incriminating the culprits. These then are placed into the hands of top officials, to make sure they don’t get “lost” or “misplaced” by underlings. The bishop named many of these top people — at no small risk to himself — and said he even put such proofs and documents into the hands of the Director of Intelligence himself. “Absolutely nothing was done,” said the despondent Christian.

He discussed the difficulties that Copts encounter whenever they want to build a church — due to their dearth, some of the current churches serve tens of thousands of Christians — or even make simple repairs. By way of example, he explained how the Virgin Mary Church in Safaniya village has no bathrooms or running water. Christians “tried time and time again to get approval to build bathrooms, to no avail.” The bishop lamented how elderly and sick people sometimes urinate on themselves during service, while mothers must change their crying babies’ diapers right on the pews.

In response, authorities told the bishop to “Go and ask the Muslims of your region if they will approve the building of a church, or bathroom, or anything — and if they do, so will we.”

It should be noted that Islamic law specifically bans the construction or repair of churches.

Clearly frustrated, the bishop added: “We as Copts are human beings. And envy takes us when we see our Muslim brothers build mosques where they will, how they will, at any place and at any time. And the State helps them! But as for us, we cannot build anything and that which is already open is being closed…. We, the Copts, are citizens with rights; and we see Muslims get whatever they want, while we are always prevented.”

The Coptic bishop also said that sometimes Christians are punished whenever they go and “bother” authorities about their treatment. For example, when a Coptic delegation went to make a formal complaint, one of them was immediately kidnapped. His kidnappers demanded and received 120,000 Egyptian pounds for his release. Police were notified — even told where the exchange of money for hostage was to take place — but did absolutely nothing. The bishop referred to this incident as a “punishment” while Dr. Roman, the Coptic hostess, called Minya, Egypt a “State of Retribution” against those Copts who dare refuse to suffer quietly,” adding, “Al-Minya is apparently not an Egyptian province; it is governed by ISIS.”

Finally, Bishop Agathon made clear the despondency he and the average Christian in Egypt feel, repeatedly saying that, no matter which official they talk to, “nothing will change.” If anything, the plight of Egypt’s Christians has gone “from bad to worse,” said the bishop: “We hear beautiful words but no solution.”

Dr. Roman concluded by imploring Egyptian President Sisi, saying: “I’ve said it before: President Sisi is very meticulous and aware of the nation’s issues. Why, then, is it that the Coptic plight in Minya is being ignored? Why is he turning a blind eye toward it?”

Bishop Agathon concluded by saying that “Copts are between a state anvil and aggressor hammers,” meaning that, the state serves only to keep its Christian citizens in place while Islamic radicals pound away at them.

Foreign Christians and the Obama Administration

John R. Houk

© July 26, 2015

__________________________________________________

U.S. State Dept. Bars Christians from Testifying about Persecution: Muslim Persecution of Christians, May 2015

 

© 2015 Raymond Ibrahim

 

The reproduction of any material or information originating on this website
must include either a link to this website or cite the name of this website
(
RaymondIbrahim.com) as the source of the material or information reproduced. 
Violators will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

 

Raymond Ibrahim is a Middle East and Islam specialist and author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007). His writings have appeared in a variety of media, including the Los Angeles Times, Washington Times, Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst, Middle East Quarterly, World Almanac of Islamism, and Chronicle of Higher Education; he has appeared on MSNBC, Fox News, C-SPAN, PBS, Reuters, Al-Jazeera, NPR, Blaze TV, and CBN. Ibrahim regularly speaks publicly, briefs governmental agencies, provides expert testimony for Islam-related lawsuits, and testifies before Congress. He is a Shillman Fellow, David Horowitz Freedom Center; a CBN News contributor; a Media Fellow, Hoover Institution (2013); and a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow, Middle East Forum. Ibrahim’s dual-background — born and raised in the U.S. by Coptic Egyptian parents born and raised in the Middle East — has provided him with unique advantages, from equal fluency in English and Arabic, to an equal understanding of the Western and Middle Eastern mindsets, positioning him to explain the latter to the former.

Is Obama Promising to Protect Iranian Nukes from Sabotage?


John R. Houk

© July 23, 2015

President Barack Hussein Obama has hailed the P5 + 1 nuke deal with Iran as a peace in our time deal. AND YET Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has these sentiments for Israel and America:

Iran’s supreme leader on Saturday hailed the Iranian masses for demanding the destruction of Israel and America, and said he hoped that God would answer their prayers.

In a viciously anti-US speech delivered in Tehran four days after Iran and the world powers signed an accord designed to thwart Iran’s nuclear program, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei praised “the slogans of the people of Iran” which “indicated what directions they’re heading for,” according to the English translation of his speech by Iran’s Press TV.

At Al-Quds day rallies last week, Khamenei noted appreciatively, “You heard ‘Death to Israel’, ‘Death to the US.’ You could hear it. The whole nation was shaken by these slogans. It wasn’t only confined to Tehran. The whole of the nation, you could hear, that was covered by this great movement. So we ask Almighty God to accept these prayers by the people of Iran.” (Iran’s Khamenei hails his people for demanding death to America and Israel; By TIMES OF ISRAEL STAFF AND AFP; Times of Israel; July 18, 2015, 4:37 pm)

Hmm … Since those of who pay attention KNOW President BHO is a compulsive liar to American voters which includes his used car sell-job about the Iran Nuke Deal, Iran will develop nukes. Obama has informed the gullible that Khamenei is a politician and the old Ayatollah is just playing to his constituents.

Those who believe Obama that Khamenei is merely playing to his Iranian supporters should know that the Supreme Leader was not elected to a political office. Rather Khamenei acquired the leadership mantle after the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. This Supreme Leader junk is the typical blend of Islamic Mosque and State. The Iranian Mosque-State theopolitical leader calls the shots and is answerable to Allah, the Hidden 12th Imam and perhaps the Guardian Council theopolitical Ayatollahs.

So Obama lies and Khamenei proclaims Iran’s reason to exist to destroy Israel and the USA for the good of Islam to spread globally. With that in mind check out how Obama’s participation in P5 + 1 has promised to Iran pertaining to the theopolitical republic’s nuclear agenda:

I know I wrote this somewhere before – either on this blog or on Twitter: The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Iran requires the P5+1 countries to protect Iranian nuclear facilities against sabotage by Israel.

However, one provision of the deal has received scant coverage. Blogs, specialized media outlets, the Israeli and some Jewish press have reported on a troubling section of the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) that commits the signatories to help protect Iran from sabotage of its nuclear facilities. But the popular press has not widely covered this troubling element of the deal.

Arutz Sheva reports on Article 10 of the agreement:

In the deal the world powers obligate to “co-operation in the form of training courses and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to prevent, protect and respond to nuclear security threats to nuclear facilities and systems as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems.” Leaving no doubts about the intentions, the text then promises “co-operation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage.”

Reports are that these clauses were not present in the interim JPOA signed in April. This was apparently a last minute concession to Iran.

Since the United States and its Western allies are signatories to this agreement, the “protection” and “response” would not be to any action undertaken by them. The same can be said for China and Russia who would be unlikely to sabotage Iran anyway. Therefore, the “nuclear security threats, including sabotage” must refer to potential actions by Israel, believed to be party to previous acts of sabotage against Iran’s nuclear program.

In other words, the United States will be protecting Iran, whose leaders frequently chant “Death to America,” from Israel, frequently described as “America’s best friend in the region.”

Obama has always wanted an excuse to go to war with Israel. Now he has one. (ICYMI: P5+1 agreed to protect Iranian nuke program against Israel; Posted by Carl in Jerusalem; Israel Matzav; 7/23/15)

Israel is backed into an existential corner. Obama apparently is not only committed to destabilizing the Middle East and Muslim dominated nations, there is all the appearance Obama is in cahoots with Russia, China, UK, France, Germany and the unanimity of the United Nations Security Council will join Iran in punishingin reality destroying – the Jewish State of Israel. I guess that is Obama giving diplomacy and negotiation every opportunity to work no matter the consequences.

The truth of the matter is Israel has to do something militarily even if the Western world joins the despotism inherent in the Eastern world as well as the Muslim world to take on that tiny sliver of land that is ONLY a portion God promised to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. OR Israel can wait until Iran designs WMD loaded ICBMs tactically aimed to only destroy Jewish population centers.

OR Congress can override any Obama veto and negate his idiotic deal that at best Iran becomes a nuke power in ten years, or at worst the Iranian Twelver Ayatollahs laugh at the Dem Party/Obama sell-outs as they arm nuke WMDs in a very short unanticipated time beyond the belief of American statists among both Dems and Republicans who believe Iran is years from creating a nuke warhead.

A Congress rejection of Obama’s nuke deal with Iran should be followed with serious talk of impeachment if Obama punishes Israel for attacking Iranian nuke locations.

AND so I really enjoyed the ideas of David Rubin who lays out five reasons for Israel to attack Iran.

JRH 7/23/15 (Hat Tip: Breaking Israel News)

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Five Reasons to Attack Iran

By David Rubin

7/15/2015, 2:07 PM

Arutz Sheva 7 – Israel National News

Blogs- Zion’s Corner

“If someone comes to kill you, get up early to kill him first.” (Talmud Sanhedrin 72:1)

As details of the agreement with Iran continue to emerge, it becomes more and more evident that the deal is an existential danger to the survival of the State of Israel. While it is seems clear that US President Barack Obama will be preparing a compensation package to placate Israel and other concerned nations in the Middle East, this will only increase the arms race in the region, thereby making nuclear conflict more likely, as the Persian Gulf nations will now feel compelled to achieve nuclear capability to counter the Iranian threat.

There is only one realistic way of stopping that nightmare scenario – an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, with logistic support provided by Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf nations. Such support from concerned Sunni Muslim nations would be covert, but would provide a cushion to counter the expected international condemnation against any Israeli military offensive. Sadly, there will be those Israelis who will warn against ruffling American feathers by launching an attack which would effectively scuttle the agreement, but such warnings should be ignored. The deal with Iran certainly cannot be relied on to protect Israel, and therefore, a preemptive action should be ordered ASAP for the following reasons:

1. There will be no surprise inspections of the Iranian nuclear facilities. Giving twenty-four days advance notice gives them sufficient time to hide the evidence of nuclear weapons production.

2. The Parchin military plant and the Bushehr reactor, where substantial covert nuclear activity has taken place, are not even mentioned in the deal.

3. The immediate removal of sanctions and the subsequent infusion of vast billions to Iran’s coffers will lead to a sharp increase in Iran’s already substantial support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist organizations in the region.

4. The longer Israel waits, the more complicated a preemptive strike will become, both politically and militarily.

5. An early and effective lightning strike, while risky, will forestall a massive Middle East nuclear arms race.

If one is to believe the repeated claims of Israel’s political leadership proclaiming that “Israel will know how to defend itself”, there comes a time that bold action must be taken, despite the negative political reaction that is sure to come, at least publicly. However, the private praise for a successful operation will also pour in from every nation that has felt itself threatened by the madmen in Teheran.

Wishing Israel’s political leadership the wisdom and especially, the courage to know how and when to do what is clearly necessary!

_______________________

Is Obama Promising to Protect Iranian Nukes from Sabotage?

John R. Houk

© July 23, 2015

_________________________________

Five Reasons to Attack Iran

 

David Rubin is former mayor of Shiloh, Israel. He is founder and president of Shiloh Israel Children’s Fund, and the author of four books, including The Islamic Tsunami and his latest, Sparks From Zion.

 

For more info, click on these links: www.DavidRubinIsrael.com or www.ShilohIsraelChildren.org

 

© Arutz Sheva, All Rights Reserved

Michael Oren Interviewed by Daniel Pipes


This is an interview conducted by Daniel Pipes with Michael Oren centered around the book “Ally: My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide”. The interview brings out Oren’s thoughts on Barack Obama, how Obama has conducted foreign policy with Israel and Obama seemingly allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

JRH 7/22/15

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Michael Oren Interviewed by Daniel Pipes
A discussion reveals how Obama purposefully broke the historic US-Israel alliance

Interview

June 24, 2015

DanielPipes.org

Originally: FrontPageMag.com

Daniel Pipes Email Sent: 7/21/2015 9:16 AM

N.B.:

(1) This interview took place at the Free Library of Philadelphia. FrontPageMag.com transcribed it and I edited it. The transcript does not include the question-and-answer period but the video does.

(2) The video is available to watch here.

(3) About the alarm that goes off at the very end: As Amb. Oren was answering my final question, a buzzer went off, we could not continue talking, the event organizer came on the stage to announce that the library had to be evacuated immediately, and the video camera suddenly shuts off. This unceremonious conclusion, fortunately, was just a drill and no one or property were harmed.

(4) The transcript has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Daniel Pipes

+++

Multimedia for this item

Video [Link]

[Blog Editor: Explicit language ALERT. When Oren tells a story relating to Rahm Emanuel and Washington-Speak, the profanity flies especially the F-bomb.]

http://www.danielpipes.org/audio-video/embed_iframe.php?av_id=319

Daniel Pipes: I am delighted to be here with Michael Oren.

I’ll admit that when I began reading his book, Ally: My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide, a very well-written account of his four-plus years as Israeli ambassador to the United States, I started at the beginning, as one tends to do with books, so I had no idea of the news bombshells that lay ahead. (Laughter)

The first inkling came to me when I read a column by John Podhoretz, who suggested that “the annals of diplomatic history” had never witnessed “anything quite like this astonishing account” that “makes news on almost every page.” Indeed, the next few days saw a furor over the book and its related three articles. “Borderline hysteria” is how one Israeli journalist, Ben Caspit, summarized the Obama administration’s response.

Because of the enormous attention the book has attracted, I will make the assumption that you, the audience, know something about its contents, and I will focus my questions on specific issues regarding three topics: US-Israel relations, the response to the book, and Barack Obama.

Michael: You portray two principles governing historic US-Israel relations—no daylight and no surprises. You argue these have been broken since 2009 and you hope they’ll be quickly reasserted. But do you really see this as possible in the year and a half left of Obama’s administration? Or do you only hope for this after he leaves office?

Michael Oren: The US-Israel relationship is not static but has evolved. We fought the ’67 war with French bullets, not American ones. Beginning in the 1980s, in the middle Reagan years. These two principles, no surprises and no daylight, began to coalesce. What I mean by them?

No surprises: if the United States is going to set out a major new policy position on issues related to the Middle East and Israel’s security, it will give us an advance draft of the speech or paper to give us a chance to look at it, give our comments.

No daylight: the two governments will differ over settlements, Jerusalem, and a lot of other issues. But we keep these differences behind closed doors, not display them in public where our mutual enemies will discern the distance between us and will insinuate themselves between us.

Photo: Obama and Oren in the Oval Office

I can’t say that these two principles were always honored; we did surprise one another; there was occasional daylight. But these were the historic twin pillars of our alliance. Starting in 2009, however, the new Obama Administration as a matter of policy decided it would not preserve these two pillars.

On surprises, the rupture isn’t a matter of debate. For example, the president went to Cairo in June 2009 and gave a very long speech (twice as long as his first inaugural address) which served as the foundational document of his administration’s positions on the Middle East. It also touched on many issues vital to Israel’s security, such as America’s relationship with what Obama called the Muslim world, particularly the outreach to Iran and Iran’s right to nuclear energy. Although it had amazing and far-reaching ramifications for Israel, we in the embassy never saw a draft of it, we had no warning of it. And that was just one of many such speeches.

As for daylight, the president openly said, “Look at the past eight years [a reference to the George W. Bush administration]. During those eight years, there was no space between us and Israel, and what did we get from that? When there is no daylight, Israel just sits on the sidelines, and that erodes our credibility with the Arab states.” Turns out, he put daylight between the two countries on other issues too, like Iran.

These two pillars were jettisoned and they must be restored. It’s not only in the interest of the United States and Israel but, given the immense chaos in the Middle East, it’s important for that region as well. Indeed, it’s needed for the wellbeing of the world. Why? Because everybody looks at the US-Israel bond. Whether jihadist or Japanese, the globe looks at the way the United States treats its Israeli ally as a litmus test of its ability to rely on the United States.

Therefore, the two pillars need to be restored. Whether that’s possible in the year and a half remaining of this presidency, I don’t know. All I can say is, I hope so. My book is an ardent and impassioned call to bring this relationship back from the brink, which we’ve reached, and restore it.

Daniel Pipes: Along with the problems you just delineated, all in the know agree that the US-Israel military relationship is better than ever. How is this possible, what’s the logic behind it?

Michael Oren: True, it is better than ever. The cooperation on weapons development, on military aid—which is close to $4 billion a year (75 percent of it spent in the United States)—joint maneuvers, ports of call, and intelligence sharing are indeed superb right now.

Why so? Because the Obama administration distinguishes between diplomatic daylight and security daylight and it calculated that the closer relations are in the security field, the greater leeway it has to put daylight in the diplomatic field. This amounts to a very interesting intellectual exercise, one that did not work.

Middle Easterners simply do not distinguish between diplomatic and security daylight. In the Middle East, daylight is daylight. Daylight in our area of the world, where the sun is very strong, can be blinding and searing. What most Middle Easterners saw over the course of the last six-plus years was the United States and Israel drifting quite far apart in spite of increased security cooperation.

By the way, if you define security relationship more broadly, things look differently. If you include the fact that the United States negotiated for seven months with the Iranians—and that has a certain impact on our security—without even telling us, you can’t say the security relationship is better than ever.

Daniel Pipes: You mentioned being unaware of US-Iranian discussions, yet, the president has said that he and his administration have consistently shared information with Israel. True?

Michael Oren: We had a longstanding, intimate dialog with the United States on the Iranian nuclear program which I was privileged to take part in. The Americans were very candid. We looked at the same data and often derived the same conclusions. But we were unaware of the content of that secret track taking place in the Persian Gulf.

Daniel Pipes: You quote former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel waking you up early one morning and yelling, “I don’t like this eff-ing excrement.”

(Laughter) On another occasion, the deputy secretary of state, the number-two man in the State Department, Tom Nides, screamed at you, “You don’t want that eff-ing UN to collapse because of your eff-ing conflict with the Palestinians.”

Michael Oren: You understand, if we were in Israel, we’d have no problem actually saying this word? (Laughter) So American. (Laughter)

Daniel Pipes: My question: Is this really the state of diplomacy today? (Laughter)

Michael Oren: Yes. (Laughter) Yes, it is funny. As an aside, Ally went through seven security vettings by the State of Israel: the military censor, two departments within the Defense Ministry, the Mossad, and others. They were very good; believe me, it’s amazing there’s actually a book.

I was never a diarist, I never before wrote a book in the first person. Making that transformation was profound for me and not at all easy. But when I took this job, my wife Sally gave me a little diary and said, “Hey, you may want to jot down a few things.” I replied, “Nah, I don’t believe in diaries.”

Then, soon after that, Rahm Emanuel calls me at 2 o’clock in the morning and says—can I say this? “I don’t like this f**king s**t.” (Laughter) And it’s like 2 o’clock in the morning. And I said, “Well, I don’t like this f**king s**t, either.” And it begins from there. (Laughter) So I wrote this incident into my diary. The diary is not classified; you’re not going to find secrets in there. But it did provide a lot of color and depth to the book.

Tom Nides—poor Tom Nides. That line, “UNESCO teaches Holocaust studies, for chrissakes. You want to cut off f**king Holocaust studies?” gets quoted a lot as evidence of Nides’ animus against the State of Israel. But it’s just the opposite: Tom Nides is a great friend of mine and of the State of Israel. In Washington, that’s just the way people talk.

One story I didn’t include in the book, from a high-ranking member of the administration, a very sweet, young man, who says to me something like, “We’re getting out of f**king Iraq, because we’ve f**king had it with the f**king Iraqis. And we’re coming f**king home.” And then he looks at me and says, “Why am I talking like this?” (Laughter)

Daniel Pipes: Did you get “special” treatment because you’re a born American? Had you been from another country, and not a Native American, would you have been treated the same way?

Michael Oren: No I wouldn’t have. This is the flip side of the special US-Israel relationship.

It was also part of my special relationship with people like Rahm Emanuel, who I’d known for a long time before I got into office. Rahm’s father had fought in the Irgun, in the Israeli War of Independence. (Hence, his name, Rahm, or thunder.) Rahm had a deli accident when he was 16 and sliced off the top part of a finger. According to Obama, when he lost the top part of that finger, he lost half of his vocabulary. (Laughter) I used to get that finger, all the time.

But when Rahm left the White House and went off to be the mayor of Chicago, I viewed it as a loss for me because he was somebody I could call in the middle of the night. Yes, I was going to get that language. Even though we had serious policy disagreements sometimes, I know he cared passionately about Israel. He was a proud Jew, proud of his father. That created a link that couldn’t be broken by policy differences.

Photo: Emanuel and Oren in the mayor of Chicago’s office.

The same thing’s true with Dennis Ross (who doesn’t talk like Rahm). Dennis was that rare Washington Middle East expert who wasn’t, as we say in Washington-speak, stove-piped. Which means, you know, you go to somebody who’s an expert in Lebanon between 1976 and 1977, that’s what they know. (Laughter) Dennis was the only person I knew in Washington who saw the entire region and also saw it historically. He saw it vertically and horizontally. And he had a personal memory too, having been involved in peacemaking for 30 years. When he left, there was another huge loss.

Daniel Pipes: I’d like to try out two favorite theories of mine on you. First: Noting that the government of Israel tends to give away too much when relations are really warm between Jerusalem and Washington, I believe that low-level tensions between the two governments are actually good.

Michael Oren: Here I’d beg to disagree. Historically, Israelis make concessions when we feel secure. In his first meeting with American Jewish leaders, as I quoted earlier, Obama said that he’s going to put daylight between Israel and the United States because when there is no daylight, Israel “just sits on the sidelines.”

Interesting observation, but empirically wrong. During the Bush years, for example, there was no daylight, so Israelis felt secure. As a result, Israel yanked up 21 settlements from Gaza in 2005. It made a full offer of Palestinian statehood to Mahmud Abbas in 2008: all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, half of Jerusalem. At the height of the second intifada in 2002, Israeli support for a two-state solution was exactly zero; by the time I came onboard in 2009, the intifada was behind us and 70 percent of Israelis supported a two-state solution.

So, when we feel secure, we make more concessions. Strangely enough, the person who understood this best was Richard Nixon: give them support, they’ll make concessions.

Daniel Pipes: That was my point.

Michael Oren: Okay. I’m sorry.

Daniel Pipes: I’m saying when US-Israel relations are flourishing, Israelis hand things over. For example, the Philadelphia Corridor in 2007, but that was a mistake. Therefore, I don’t mind seeing—

Michael Oren: Oh, you want a little low-level tension, so we don’t give in.

Daniel Pipes: Exactly.

Michael Oren: Well, I can’t argue with that.

But my responsibility as ambassador was to try to get us on the same page. They were coming to us and asking us to do many very difficult things: “We demand a settlement freeze on the West Bank, a building freeze in eastern Jerusalem, a final-status map for the Palestinians.” Take the map issue: every time we gave the Palestinians a map, they put it in their pocket, walked away, and came back two years later saying, “Okay, let’s start negotiating from the map you gave us last time.” So, we didn’t want to give them another map, although the administration demanded we do so.

I would say all the time to the administration, “Rather than threaten us, try love.” That was always my line, “Try love, try love.” Because Israelis make concession when we feel secure. That’s not just Israelis, it’s human nature.

Daniel Pipes: Second theory: there used to be a consensus, say in the 1980s, between Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, on Israel. It’s falling apart, with conservatives ever more friendly to Israel and liberals ever cooler to Israel. From the anecdotes in your book, it sounds like you agree with this analysis, correct?

Photo: Michael Oren and Daniel Pipes

Michael Oren: My anecdotes point to the challenges we faced from certain segments of the American electorate. American opinion on Israel is a little like what physicists say about the universe—it’s expanding and contracting at the same time. If you look at all the polls, support for Israel in this country keeps on going up. Even last summer, at the height of Gaza war with the terrible images coming out of Gaza, American support for Israel went up. When I left Washington, something like 74 percent of Americans defined themselves, to one degree or another, as pro-Israel. Crazy! We were right behind Sweden and Canada, which is amazing, considering all the bad press we get.

On the other hand, if you break these statistics down demographically by ethnic group, age group, and party affiliation, the picture’s a lot less sanguine.

I’ve lived in Israel for close to 40 years. Yes, I’ve come back and even taught at various universities. But for the first time in 2009, I returned for an extended period. I had a Rip Van Winkle experience, as though I’d woken after 25 years and didn’t recognize my own village. America had transformed demographically.

America is no longer a white majority population. There are more single-parent families than two-parent families. There was one Jewish judge on the Supreme Court and the rest basically WASPs; now, there’s not a single WASP on the Supreme Court but three Jews and six Catholics. The populations growing the most and having greater political influence, especially the Hispanics, lack a traditional attachment to Israel.

Because many Israeli leaders, including our prime minister and defense minister, had been educated in America in the ’70s or ’80s; they remembered a different America. So, I had to tell them, “Guys, the America you remember … it ain’t there anymore.”

I saw Obama’s election in 2008 as the symptom of a transformative moment. I’m no prophet but I told Israeli leaders back in 2009 that we have to plan for a two-term president because these changes are permanent. The election of 2012 was much more significant than 2008; it confirmed that the changes are permanent and that Israel has to adjust to them.

Israel has a paramount strategic interest in preserving support for Israel as a bipartisan issue; we should never become the monopoly of one party. This has become increasingly challenging because Israel’s experience with terror moved it significantly to the right even as America moved to the left. Israel became more traditional; America less traditional. I had to grapple and try to bridge this reality. Did I succeed entirely? Obviously not. Can we give it up? We cannot. We have to keep on reaching out.

Daniel Pipes: Turning to responses to your book—American officials have been incensed by Ally. Secretary of State John Kerry‘s spokesman said that it is “absolutely inaccurate and false.” Your former counterpart, the US ambassador to Israel, Daniel Shapiro, said, “I can say as an ambassador that sometimes ambassadors have a very limited view of the conversations between the leaders, and his description does not reflect the truth about what happened.” Oddly, Shapiro says he doesn’t know anything and therefore you don’t know anything. Your response?

Photo: Criss-crossing ambassadors: Daniel Shapiro and Michael Oren.

Michael Oren: It’s a strange remark for one ambassador to say about another ambassador. In the past week and a half, I’ve been called a moneygrubbing politician, delusional, and some other choice words. But all these ad hominem attacks aside, nobody’s taking on the book substantively. I tell a story in 400 pages and virtually no one says the facts are faulty: that, say, the Americans did not negotiate for seven months without telling us or that the administration did not cancel flights to Ben Gurion Airport in mid-2014. No one says I just imagined these events.

I think part of the reaction I’ve received from people in government—notice people in government, not people out of government—has been an oversensitivity to the issues I’m trying to raise.

Which brings me to my reason to bring the book out now. June is a terrible time to bring out a nonfiction book. It’s already summer reading, when you bring out Jaws. (In this spirit, I told Random House we should change the name of the book to Jews.) (Laughter) People will read it on the beach! They won’t go in the water! You bring out a book like this in October or November to take part in Jewish book month in November and jump on the Christmas-Hanukkah book season.

Also, I’m in the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, which means I can’t promote the book as I should. I previously went on two-month book tours, which I cannot do with this one.

Nonetheless, I brought it out now because in the next week or so there is liable to be an agreement signed between the United States, other permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany, with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The State of Israel—not just my party, not just the prime minister—views this as a terrible deal, one that deeply endangers us. I would be derelict if I did not tell this story right now. The book had to come out now to trigger the precise conversation we’re having tonight. What do they expect from us—to go silently into that night of the signing of this agreement? The Jewish people can’t do that.

Daniel Pipes: Let’s turn to the last of the three topics: the American president. What do you better think explains Obama’s approach to the Middle East and the world: a grand strategy or improvising responses as things happen?

Michael Oren: Barack Obama—as all presidents—came into the White House with a worldview. His happens to be very challenging for the State of Israel. It does not include the notion of American exceptionalism or American leadership. Instead, it prefers a collegial approach to crisis management and world affairs. It implies a certain recoiling from the use of military might and a heavy reliance on international organizations, like the UN, that are not always so friendly to the State of Israel.

Some of us wake up in the morning and say a little berakhah [blessing] that the greatest democracy in the world just happens also to be the greatest military power. It’s a wonderful thing. In this light, one of the most illuminating remarks I ever heard Barack Obama make was at the nuclear security summit in 2010, where he said—these words are engraved on my soul, “Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower.” Think about that for a second. That was very revealing about the president’s attitude toward military might. Would John Kennedy have said that? Would Bill Clinton? George W. Bush?

And then there are Obama’s positions on our specific issues, such as his outreach to the Muslim world. I thought it perfectly fine, indeed, it’s in our interest, that America improves relations with Muslims—so long as it’s not at our expense. The unprecedented support for the Palestinian cause and the reconciliation with Iran, are very problematic for us, however.

This worldview has collided with reality and the result looks like patchwork. Intervention against Qaddafi but nonintervention against Assad. Sort of implicitly cooperating with Shiite forces against ISIS in Iraq but kind-of resisting what Saudi Arabia is doing in Yemen against ISIS and definitely opposing what Egypt is doing against ISIS in Libya. I can go on.

After almost five years of unprecedented turmoil, violence, and disappointment in the Middle East, that worldview has remained mostly impermeable to change.

______________________________________________

Edited by John R. Houk (particularly profanity)

 

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2015 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

 

Support Daniel Pipes’ work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.

Iran WMD to the Left and Right of US


John R. Houk

© July 20, 2015

President Barack Hussein Obama believes his will is absolute in his agenda. That is the only explanation for attitudes such as “I have a pen and a phone and I know how to use them” as well as the warning that he will “veto” any Congressional action against his Nuke Iran Deal. In order to get public support he is employing a political tactic he used to get elected in 2008 and 2012 and to whip up voter support from the beginning of his Presidency right on through the present: HE LIES.

The Constitutional recourse against this despotic President is embodied in the first words of the U.S. Constitution: WE THE PEOPLE.

Article II Section 2 Clause 2

The President… shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur….

From the Heritage Foundation:

The Treaty Clause has a number of striking features. It gives the Senate, in James Madison’s terms, a “partial agency” in the President’s foreign-relations power. The clause requires a supermajority (two-thirds) of the Senate for approval of a treaty, but it gives the House of Representatives, representing the “people,” no role in the process.

Midway through the Constitutional Convention, a working draft had assigned the treaty-making power to the Senate, but the Framers, apparently considering the traditional role of a nation-state’s executive in making treaties, changed direction and gave the power to the President, but with the proviso of the Senate’s “Advice and Consent.” In a formal sense, then, treaty-making became a mixture of executive and legislative power. Most people of the time recognized the actual conduct of diplomacy as an executive function, but under Article VI treaties were, like statutes, part of the “supreme Law of the Land.” Thus, as Alexander Hamilton explained in The Federalist No. 75 … (Treaty ClauseHeritage Guide to the Constitution; By Michael D. Ramsey; Heritage Foundation)

It is doubtful that the U.S. Senate would ratify a Nuke Deal with Iran such as currently negotiated with Iran. So how does Obama make the Deal a done deal? By using the Legalese of an Executive Order that does not need Senate approval:

How can Obama sign a nuclear arms deal with Iran without submitting that agreement to the Senate?

The same way that Obama has rewritten federal immigration and education law without Congress: by expanding executive power.

Obama will claim that his deal with Iran is not a treaty but a “sole executive agreement” that requires no approval from Congress. Sole executive agreements have been used by presidents since the early 1800s, but the exact scope of this power has long been in question. The Supreme Court has allowed many such agreements to stand (e.g. Dames & Moore v. Regan or American Insurance Ass’n v. Garamendi), but the Court has always required at least some evidence that Congress at least acquiesced to those policies.

The sole executive agreement power has also been used to end formal arms treaties, most recently by President Bush in 2001 when he unilaterally exited the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia. However, new arms deals have almost always been submitted to the Senate for approval, including Bush’s 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty with Russia. (How Obama Will Bypass Congress On His Iranian Nuclear Arms Deal; By Conn Carroll; Townhall.com; 3/3/15)

According to the analysis of Congressional options on overriding an Obama Nuke Deal Executive Order with Iran, the deal is subject to a – for or against – Resolution from Congress. It is likely Congress’ Joint Resolution under a Republican Congress will be disapproval. However, under the Obama promise to veto any Joint Resolution throwing a monkey wrench in Obama’s Nuke Deal Executive Order. This means instead of the Senate needing a 2/3 majority to ratify a treaty, both Houses of Congress can only override an Obama veto with BOTH Houses drumming a 2/3 vote:

Now that more than a year and a half of nuclear negotiations are in the books, attention on a signature legacy item for President Barack Obama now shifts to Congress.

Here’s a brief overview of what happens next:

· Once Congress receives the details of the deal, it will have 60 days to debate and vote on it, according to the terms of the law Obama signed in May. A GOP congressional aide told Business Insider that it has not yet received the details.

· If Congress sends a joint resolution of disapproval to Obama (meaning both chambers of Congress disapprove of the deal), it would trigger a new timeline. He would have 12 days to veto the resolution. That’s likely, considering his promise Tuesday morning to veto anything that would hamper the deal’s implementation.

· Following an Obama veto, Congress would have 10 days to vote to override his veto, which would require a two-thirds majority of both chambers of Congress.

· If both chambers vote to override, it would prevent Obama from suspending sanctions on Iran related to its nuclear program.

… (Here’s how Congress could kill the Iran deal; By BRETT LOGIURATO; Business Insider; July 14, 2015, 4:28 PM)

So now we come back to Founding Father original intention of WE THE PEOPLE. Make sure you write or call District Congressman and both of your Senators. Even if you have a Republican in the Congressman-Senator categories, make sure you write in case they are a RINO. If you have a Democratic Party Congressman and/or Senator you need to participate in a massive inundation of persuasive letters to let them know that agreeing with America’s despot-in-chief Obama will cause you to VOTE against them in their reelection bid in the next voting cycle. Unless of course you actually want to join America’s lying President in making our Middle Eastern ally Israel have an existential threat AND have crazy Twelver-Shi’ite (See HERE and HERE) nuclear armed warhead intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) aimed at the USA (See HERE and HERE).

Thanks to Paul Sutliff I became aware of a big rally is being planned and scheduled to occur in New York City on Wednesday July 22 to protest Obama’s Nuke Deal with Iran. NYC is a good beginning place but you people with organizing skills should organize a local version in your area. Contact local Tea Party organizations, local ACT for America chapters, Stop Islamization of America/American Freedom Defense Initiative organizers active in your area and/or any other organization that understands how completely deplorable this Iran deal is for American National Security. Contact your local Congressman and Senators with an invitation to a scheduled event. Perhaps that Congressman and Senators would be amiable to help in organizing the protest thus insuring media coverage.

Here is a list of Conservatives, Pro-Israel, Counterjihad and National Security speakers participating in the NYC rally on Wednesday:

John Batchelor

David Brog

Monica Crowley

Alan Dershowitz

US Congressman Trent Franks

Steven Emerson

Frank Gaffney

Caroline Glick

Kasim Hafeez

Pete Hoekstra

Richard Kemp

Tony LoBianco

Clare M. Lopez

Herbert I. London

U.S. Navy Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons

Kevin McCullough

Robert Morgenthau

George Pataki

General Paul Vallely

Allen West

Genevieve Wood

James Woolsey

Mortimer Zuckerman

Our mission is to educate our countrymen on the dangerous accord being negotiated today in Geneva that will soon be put up for a vote in Congress.

Our aims:

1. An end to the farce being perpetrated against the American people with a pending deal which will endanger America and our allies.

2. A restoration of the ORIGINAL demands – NO nuclear military capability, NO centrifuges and authority for any and all unannounced inspections of all known and any future facilities discovered.

3. Providing an understanding that a failure to STOP IRAN NOW will necessitate a military response later. (Rally Speakers; Stop Iran Rally)

If you are like and too far to attend there is a way to show your support for this rally. You can join the Facebook Page Stop Iran Now. Here is an excerpt from that Facebook page which includes the numerous organizations that have placed their names in support stopping Iran NOW:

The direct goal of the gathering is to alert the American public of the danger concerning the negotiations with Iran and the terrible conclusions we expect. We all must come together as one united nation to protect the security and safety of our country and closest allies.

We will be addressing engaging lawmakers on the following criteria that will shape a good agreement that truly blocks all Iranian pathways to a nuclear weapon:

• Anytime, anywhere, unannounced inspections of Iranian facilities

• Dismantling of all existing centrifuges

• Surrendering existing stockpiles of enriched uranium

• Dismantling of Iranian plutonium plants

• Eradication of Iran’s ballistic missile systems

Sponsored by The Jewish Rapid Response Coalition (JRRC) In Partnership With:

AISH Center
ALL4Israel
AMCHA
America-Israel Friendship League (AIFL)
American Center for Democracy
American Friends of Ariel University
American Friends of Ateret Cohanim/Jerusalem Chai
American Friends of Likud
American Friends of Yeshivot Bnei Akiva (AFYBA)
American Values
Americans Against Terrorism
Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI)
Americans for Peace and Tolerance
CAMERA
Center for Security Policy (CSP)
Christians’ Israel Public Action Campaign (CIPAC)
Christians United for Israel
Clarion Project
Coalition for Israel
Confederation of Iranian Students (CIS)
Congregation Or Chayim
Dror for the Wounded
Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET)
Family Security Matters
Fuel For Truth
Hampton Synagogue & Community Center
Hasbara Fellowships
Hispanic Clergy Association
Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI)
Human Rights Voices
IAC Dor Chadash
Iron Dome Alliance (IDA)
Israel Independence Fund
Israeli American Council (IAC)
IsraelLives
Jewish Broadcasting Service (JBS)
JCCWatch
Jewish National Fund
Jewish Political Education Foundation
Jewish Press
Jewish Rapid Response Coalition
JFK Regular Democratic Club
Just Enough Heshy Show
London Center for Policy Research
Manhattan Jewish Experience (MJE)
MERCL
Middle East Forum
Midreshet Shalhevet
Mothers Against Terrorism
National Center for Policy Analysis
National Council of Young Israel
National Iranian Congress (NIC)
New York State Conservative Party
New York State Federation of Republican Women
New York State Republican Party
NORPAC
One Family Fund
One Israel Fund
Orthodox Union
Phyllis Chesler Organizations
Proclaiming Justice to the Nations (PJTN)
Rabbinical Council of America
Rachel’s Children Reclamation Foundation
RAJE
Rambam Mesivta
Religious Zionists of America
Republican Friends of Israel
Republican Jewish Coalition
Rescue Christians
Rjeneration
Scholars for Peace in the Middle East
Sephardic Community Alliance
Shomrei Haam
Simon Wiesenthal Center
StandWithUs
Strength to Strength
The International Committee for the Land of Israel
The Investigative Project
The World Values Network
Toronto Zionist Council
United With Israel
West Side COJO
Young Jewish Conservatives
Young Jewish Zionists
Zionist Organization of America (ZOA)

*The Event Chairs of the Coalition to Stop Iran*

Jeff Wiesenfeld, Marvin Belsky, Richard Allen, Helen Freedman, Judy Kadish, Hillary Barr, Sarri Singer, Eve Stieglitz, Paul Brody and Ken Abramowitz (Stop Iran Now; July 22, 2015)

Here is the page that Paul Sutliff sent to me via email which a report on the event occurring in two day.

JRH 7/20/15 (Hat Tip: Paul Sutliff of Civilization Jihad)

Please Support NCCR

************************

‘Stop Nuclear Iran’ Rally Next Wednesday at Times Square

Yesterday’s agreement should be an opportunity for most GOP presidential candidates to show up.

 

By Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

July 15th, 2015

The Jewish Press

A mass rally that might attract tens of thousands of people is scheduled for next Wednesday 5:30 p.m. (EDT) at Times Square in New York City.

Police have planned for thousands of people to show up, but Tuesday’s agreement with Iran and the explosive opposition from Israel and the Jewish community in the United States is likely to draw much larger crowds.

The long-rage forecast is for temperatures in the 80s (Fahrenheit) and a 50 percent chance of scattered thunderstorms.

Speakers at the rally include:

Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor; John Batchelor, Radio Host WABC-AM; Caroline Glick, Deputy Managing Editor of the Jerusalem Post;

David Brog, Executive Director, Christians United for Israel; Steven Emerson, founder of The Investigative Project on Terrorism; Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy;

Kasim Hafeez, founder of “The Israel Campaign” and Christians United for Israel’s Outreach Coordinator; Pete Hoekstra, former U.S. Congressman and Chair of the House Intelligence Committee Tony LoBianco, “The French Connection” Actor and Activist;

Clare M. Lopez, former CIA officer, Terrorism and Iran Expert at Center for Security Policy; George Pataki, former three-term governor of New York and in office during 9/11; Allen West, former Congressman and retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel;

James Woolsey, former Director of the CIA and Chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; and Mortimer Zuckerman, chairman and editor-in-chief of U.S. News & World Report and the publisher of the New York Daily News and former Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

The rally organizers have stated that their mission is:

— an end to the farce being perpetrated against the American people with a pending deal which will endanger America and our allies;

— restoration of the ORIGINAL demands – NO nuclear military capability, NO centrifuges and authority for any and all unannounced inspections of all known and any future facilities discovered; and

–providing an understanding that a failure to STOP IRAN NOW will necessitate a military response later.

_____________________________________________________

Iran WMD to the Left and Right of US

John R. Houk

© July 20, 2015

______________________________________________________

‘Stop Nuclear Iran’ Rally Next Wednesday at Times Square

 

About the Author: Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu is a graduate in journalism and economics from The George Washington University. He has worked as a cub reporter in rural Virginia and as senior copy editor for major Canadian metropolitan dailies. Tzvi wrote for Arutz Sheva for several years before joining the Jewish Press.

 

© 2015 The Jewish Press. All rights reserved.

The 5 Biggest Obama Lies On His Iran Deal


Yesterday I cross posted an email from United with Israel [as of 12:10 PM the website was down. I pray the reason was an inundation of petition signing and not a hack] which sent out a link for petition signers against President Barack Hussein Obama’s Iran Nuke Deal. You can find that link at SlantRight 2.0 (one of my blogs). I introduced that petition post by claiming the Obama press conference promoting the deal was all a lie. Today in an email from the Western Center for Journalism (WJ) I saw a subject title that certainly got my attention: “The 5 Biggest Obama Lies On His Iran Deal”. Here is the paragraph blurb that email that includes the link that addresses the five lies:

When Obama lies, he lies big and without equivocation. Here are the 5 biggest lies he just told in reference to his deal that puts Iran, the world’s biggest state sponsor of terrorism, on the path to obtaining nuclear weapons…

The WJ email link goes to the Lie One page created by America’s Conservative News. Beginning with that first page here are the Five Lies.

[Blog Editor Aside: In case United with Israel website is still down and desire to voice your displeasure about Obama’s Iran Nuke Deal; thanks to Dajjal here’s another place to make your voice known: Reject The Iran Nuke Deal!]

JRH 7/18/15

Please Support NCCR

************************

The 5 Biggest Obama Lies On His Iran Deal

By Chris Carmouche (as noted ACN)

By Staff (as noted at 5 Lies Page)

July 17, 2015

America’s Conservative News

Big Lie # 1

FALSE: According to this faux arms treaty, there is a potential window of up to 24 days from the time when a request is made to visit a suspicious location to the time when the visit may actually occur. Of course, such a window would give Iran more than enough time to conceal any violations of the deal. Also, an “independent commission” will be empowered to review all requests and the provisions of the faux treaty also allow Iran to contest the request and even reject it outright.

ABC News, hardly a bastion of conservative opinion confirmed that contention: “Any inspections at those sites would need to be approved by a joint commission composed of one member from each of the negotiating parties. The process for approving those inspections could take as many as 24 days, which critics will claim is enough time for Iran to cover up any non-compliance.”

Moreover, it would appear that only representatives from nations that are friendly to the rogue Iran Regime will be allowed to conduct these inspections. Gary Bauer with American Values reports; “[I]nternational inspectors must ‘come from nations that have diplomatic relations with Iran.’ That means there will be no American inspectors allowed into Iran. Why would we agree to that?”

Of course, Barack Obama isn’t the only one spinning tall-tales about the “inspection” provisions of the deal. Congressman Don Beyer (D-VA) says: “Iran’s nuclear program will be under lock, key and camera 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The eyes of the international community are on every centrifuge, every ounce of uranium, in all of Iran’s nuclear facilities.”

Really?

Bauer again: “Far from being under lock and key, we have to ask permission to inspect a site and then the Iranians have more than three weeks to scrub it. That’s not exactly the “anywhere, anytime” inspections that the administration was demanding in April.

Big Lie # 2

FALSE: More than being false, this Obama fabrication is probably the most fanciful, as “snapping back” any sanctions is tantamount to closing the barn door after the horses have fled.

Under the terms of the deal, once it has been “verified” (and what constitutes “verified” is anyone’s guess) that Iran is dismantling its centrifuges and moth-balling its stockpiles of enriched uranium, the United States will release $100 billion in frozen assets.

ABC News reports: “Once it has been verified that Iran has committed to dismantling its centrifuges and diluting or selling its stockpile of enriched uranium, all economic sanctions will be lifted, effectively releasing over $100 billion in frozen Iranian assets.”

The question that sane people should be asking is; how does the United States go about recovering $100 billion dollars in released assets when -not if – Iran reneges on the deal in the foreseeable future?

Answer: It’s impossible.

Moreover, the United States is not the only nation that has sanctions against Iran. How would our political leaders ensure that other nations would follow suit if the United States decide to re-impose sanctions?

Answer: We can’t.

ForeignPolicy.com reports: “The phrase ‘snap back’ is vivid, and conveys precisely the sort of rapid, alert, and decisive action skeptical hawks have been demanding… But if sanctions really do ‘snap back’ as promised, it would be an unprecedented episode of economic diplomacy.”

An “unprecedented episode of economic diplomacy”? How about calling it an unprecedented act of prestidigitation. Even Barack Obama admitted, during the so-called negotiations, that global support for sanctions could fail if negotiations failed. In that vein, it would seem to make sense that some nations would be hesitant to reimpose sanctions.

But Iran may already have all it really wants. $100 billion may not seem like a lot of money but Iran’s economy is only $300-$400 billion, for them, $100 billion is a huge chuck of change.

And once the frozen assets are released, any imposition of sanctions may become meaningless as Iran may have already achieved its endgame, or at least achieved a major victory.

Jeffrey Goldberg with The Atlantic argues: “The U.S. could reimpose sanctions on Iran if Tehran cheats on the deal, but it would be reimposing these sanctions on what will be a much-richer country, one that could withstand such sanctions for quite a while.”

Snap back is a fantasy… a fool’s folly.

Big Lie # 3

FALSE: Does Barack Obama believe that anyone, including his supporters, are fooled by such a juvenile and moronic statement?

The Daily Caller reports: “Experts, including some in the U.S. government, are already warning that, whether Iran’s nuclear capacity is restricted or not, today’s deal is unlikely to stop the ongoing race for nuclear capacity in the Middle East.”

NBC News, among others, are already reporting that other nations in the region, such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are skeptical and will likely start to follow through on plans to acquire nuclear weapons.

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton states: “We have given Iran the path it has been seeking for almost 35 years. The other states in the region are not going to sit idly by, which is why in effect the nuclear arms race is already underway.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner agrees: “Instead of making the world less dangerous, this ‘deal’ will only embolden Iran — the world’s largest sponsor of terror — by helping stabilize and legitimize its regime as it spreads even more violence and instability in the region… Instead of stopping the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, this deal is likely to fuel a nuclear arms race around the world.”

But Obama’s opponents aren’t the only ones who are sounding the alarm. The media is chiming in as well and the consensus is that this deal is going to make the world a much more dangerous place.

CNBC says: “An Iran nuclear deal could mean a new arms race in the Middle East…”

Fox News reports: “The newly announced Iran nuclear deal and the negotiations leading up to it already are fueling an all-but-declared nuclear arms race in the Middle East, according to current and former government officials who say the situation also creates an opening for Russia to exert more influence in the region.”

Ron Dermer, writing for the Washington Post, states: “Because states throughout our region know that the deal paves Iran’s path to the bomb, a number of them will race to get nuclear weapons of their own. The most dangerous region on earth would get infinitely more dangerous. Nuclear terrorism and nuclear war would become far more likely. In fact, if someone wanted to eviscerate the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, this deal is definitely a great place to start.”

But nuclear weapons aren’t the only danger that may destabilize the region.

ABC News reports: “The final win for Iran is the gradual lifting of an international arms embargo. The accord states that Iran will be permitted to buy and sell conventional arms on the international market in five years; and in eight years they’ll be able to do the same with ballistic missiles. The embargo was a major sticking point throughout the talks, with Iran demanding it be lifted.”

Rather than stopping the spread of nuclear weapons in the region, Obama may have jump-started an arms race in the Middle East.

Big Lie # 4

FALSE: When Barack Obama lies, he lies big and he lies with no equivocation; but we’ve come to expect whoppers from the man who told us that we could keep our doctor if we liked our doctor under ObamaCare.

This raw deal certainly doesn’t have the backing of our greatest ally in the region, Israel. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is apoplectic and is calling the deal a “mistake of historic proportions.”

Other nations in the Middle East don’t appear to be too happy either.

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton: “We have given Iran the path it has been seeking for almost 35 years. The other states in the region are not going to sit idly by, which is why in effect the nuclear arms race is already underway.”

Many of our adversaries appear to like the deal.

Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani gloated:

“At the start of the negotiations, the other side would tell us that… Iran could have only 100 centrifuges… Today, the agreement is carried out under conditions that state that [Iran] will retain over 6,000 centrifuges, over 5,000 of which will be at Natanz and over 1,000 at Fordo. All centrifuges at Natanz will continue to enrich.

“They said, ‘The period of your restrictions will be 20 years, in addition to 25 years.’ Later they said ’20 years and 10 years.’ Then they said: ‘Last word – 20 years, and we will not capitulate any more.’ But in the final days of the negotiations, they went down to eight years.

“On the issue of sanctions, they would say, ‘Months must pass and you must earn trust so that later the sanctions can be gradually frozen – not lifted… Today I announce to the Iranian nation that under this agreement… all the sanctions – even the embargo on weapons, missiles, and proliferation – will be lifted.”

China and Russia might like the deal too, but it hardly has “the full backing of the international community.” It would be more apt to say that this deal has the full backing of the international community of America-haters.

Big Lie # 5

FALSE: Really Mr. Obama? Says who…?

Perhaps Barack Obama knows something that those who have already started to read the agreement don’t know. Perhaps there are some secret provisions that have yet to see the light of day that support Mr. Obama’s absurd assertion.

But as things now stand, everyone else is saying something different.

Gary Bauer with American Values writes: “Under the agreement Obama announced yesterday, Iran will have at least 5,000 centrifuges spinning away. Pakistan needed fewer than half that number to develop its nuclear weapons.”

An ABC News report confirms Bauer’s assertion: “Iran’s 19,000 installed centrifuges will have to be cut to no more than 6,104 for the next 10 years.”

The terms of the deal beg some questions, foremost among them: How can we be certain that Iran is not using its advanced centrifuges to produce enriched uranium if those centrifuges are up and running?

Answer: We can’t, not under the present terms for inspections.

If we wish to have a facility inspected, we must ask permission. Inspections will be conducted by individuals designated by a joint commission of nations that have diplomatic relations with Iran. Iran will maintain the right to reject the request and even if a request is approved, it could take up to 24 days to actually inspect the facility, meaning that Iran has more than adequate time to scrub evidence of non-compliance from the facility.

Centrifuges will keep spinning and facilities will keep functioning because Barack Obama moved his red line multiple times throughout these so-called negotiations.

Why does a nation that has more oil than Marcus Licinius Crassus had coin need to develop its nuclear program for peaceful purposes? Why should a nation that has broken so many agreements in the past in regards to its nuclear program be trusted now?

Ron Dermer, writing in the Washington Post, raises the same point: “Iran has been deceiving the International Atomic Energy Agency for years and has consistently refused to come clean about the possible military dimensions of its nuclear program — a commitment that Iran has once again been permitted to dodge before signing this agreement.”

Even Barack Obama once asked the same question, at least by implication.

Bauer again: “Two years ago, Obama said, ‘They don’t need to have an underground, fortified facility like Fordo in order to have a peaceful nuclear program.’ But this deal allows the Fordo facility to keep functioning.”

Lies, lies and more lies…

____________________

Copyright © 2015

ACT NOW! Urge the US Congress to Reject the Iran Deal


Don’t fall for the guilting of President Barack Hussein Obama. His news conferences saying any deal is better than no deal, that sanctions would snap back for Iran violations, immediate on site nuke inspections is all a lie. The lack of verifiability of this deal means Iran will cheat! AND if by some miracle Iran doesn’t cheat, the nuke enrichment is unabated and after ten years the Mullah dictatorship is free to develop nuke WMD. Since ICBM development isn’t covered in the deal that means at very least nuke ICBMs will be aimed at Israel and most likely the United States of America.

SIGN THE PETITION

JRH 7/17/15

Please Support NCCR

*********************

ACT NOW! Urge the US Congress to Reject the Iran Deal

July 17, 2015

United with Israel

In what Prime Minister Netanyahu called a “stunning historical mistake,” world powers including the US signed a dangerous nuclear deal with Iran. The deal now goes to Congress for approval and it’s up to your representatives to decide whether or not to validate the deal. Call your Senators and Congressmen and urge them to reject the deal!

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action reached between the P5+1 and Iran endangers Israel’s national security as well as the security of the entire world.

Here are the four main problems with the Iran nuclear deal as Israel’s Ambassador to Washington Ron Dermer emphasized in his recent article in the Washington Post:

First, the deal leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure. Inspections will not be “anytime, anywhere,” instead, Iran will be granted 24 days (not hours!) notice. If Iran cheats, as they have done in the past and most agree they will continue to do, Iran’s breakout time to a nuclear bomb is very short. Israel is in grave danger, with little time to react.

Second, the restrictions being placed on Iran’s nuclear program are only temporary, with the most important restrictions expiring in 10 years. After 10 years, Iran’s path to the bomb will be quick and undeterred. This is a major existential threat to Israel.

Third, because states throughout the Middle East know that the deal paves Iran’s path to the bomb, many Arabs states will race to get nuclear weapons of their own. This also poses a major risk to the security of Israel.

Finally, Iran gets billions for its global terror network. As part of the economic benefits of the agreement, Iran will gain access to frozen funds of about $150 billion.

These funds will be used increase Iran’s subversive activities in the region and its support of terror. Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad will get huge sums of money and tens of thousands of more missiles to fire at Israeli communities.

As Dermer explained, “any one of these problems would be sufficient to make this a bad deal. But all four make this deal a disaster of historic proportions.”

IMPORTANT ACTIONS YOU MUST TAKE NOW:

1. Sign the Petition to the US Congress

It is urgent that you sign the petition to encourage members of Congress to oppose the deal. After you sign, please send it to everyone you know. We will keep you updated with the latest news.

Sign the Petition to Oppose the Nuclear Deal with Iran

The US Congress must reject the dangerous deal with Iran and ensure that sanctions remain in force until the nuclear threat is completely eliminated.

I strongly oppose any deal with Iran that allows for easing sanctions before the nuclear threat has been completely eliminated. Allowing Iran to enrich uranium without being subject to ‘anytime, anywhere’ inspections is extremely dangerous and unacceptable. This bad deal with Iran is far worse than no deal and must be rejected.

[Blog Editor: This is where you click this link: http://unitedwithisrael.org/act-now-urge-congress-to-reject-the-nuclear-agreement-with-iran/?utm_source=MadMimi&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Netanyahu+%27Sparring+Match%27+with+British+FM%3B+Urge+Congress+to+Oppose+Iran+Deal&utm_campaign=20150717_m126613974_Netanyahu+%27Sparring+Match%27+with+British+FM%3B+Urge+Congress+to+Oppose+Iran+Deal&utm_term=ACT+NOW_21+Urge+the+US+Congress+to+Reject+the+Iran+Nuclear+Deal

Scroll to this point and begin the process of signing petition, sharing the petition and a path to contacting Congress.]

 

2. Click Here to Share the Petition with Your Friends

3. Call Your Representatives in Congress: If you are an American citizen, it is extremely important that you CALL your own Senator and Congressman and urge them to reject the current nuclear deal with Iran.

Click here to locate and contact your Senator.

Click here to locate and contact your Congressman.

Please fill in the form below and let us know what you’ve done:

[Blog Editor: AGAIN click the lengthy link just above to “fill in the form” at the very bottom of page.]

______________________

© United with Israel 2015

 

About United with Israel

 

United with Israel is a global, grassroots movement comprised of individuals who are deeply committed to the success and prosperity of Israel. Our primary mission is to build a massive network of pro-Israel activists and foster global unity with the People, Country and Land of Israel. In short, we seek to fight and win the battle of public opinion for Israel. We maximize the incredible power of social media to spread the truth about Israel to the entire world.

 

From incessant rocket attacks to threats of annihilation and fears of nuclear attack, Israel is alone in a big world of unfriendly nations. And for the first time, Israel is under intense pressure to divide Jerusalem, the eternal capital of Israel. This is a defining moment for the nation of Israel.

 

Now more than ever, Israel needs the support of its friends throughout the world. To bond with Israel by READ THE REST

 

Donate to United with Israel