The Front Page Cover
"I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened"
Featuring:
Country before camaraderie
Caroline B. Glick
"Rise up together as one voice"
"Be careful where you stand"
~~~lll~~~
State Dept. to Undermine nObama's Keystone Veto Threat?
Barack nObama may have greeted the 114th Congress with threats to veto the Keystone XL pipeline, but the State Department signaled it's wrapping up its review of the project, possibly undermining the president's threat. nObama's reasoning for threatening the veto was because the executive branch hasn't reviewed the project -- as if nObama cares about the separation of powers. Now, State has set a deadline for Feb. 2 to gather the executive branch's thoughts on Keystone. "Fox News has learned eight agencies have been asked to provide their views. The State Department has been wading through a review process for months and in setting a deadline, signaled it was preparing to make a final decision." The Fox News report continued, "That is important because the White House had said previously that it was waiting for the agency to conclude its probe before President nObama decides whether to support the project." The State Department's move seems to weaken nObama's stance, but we expect them to find environmental reasons for ditching the pipeline, thereby giving the president even more ammo. More... -The Patriot Post 
Canadian Firefight in Iraq Indicates U.S. Mission Slip
In an instant, the Canadian Special Forces, who were only in Iraq to train the Iraqi Army to fight ISIL, found themselves in a firefight with jihadists. Canadian Brigadier General Michael Rouleau told AFP, "My troops had completed a planning session with senior Iraqi leaders several kilometers behind the front lines. When they moved forward to confirm the planning at the front lines in order to visualize what they had discussed over a map, they came under immediate and effective mortar and machine gunfire." It took some Canadian sniping to "neutralize both threats," according to the general, which we infer means Canadian snipers -- boots on the ground -- sent a few ISIL soldiers to meet their 72 virgins. Increasingly, the 2,200 American soldiers who also advise Iraqi troops are coming under ISIL mortar fire themselves. If the distinction between nObama's military advisers who have "no boots on the ground" and active soldiers is a firefight, America is creeping towards another campaign in Iraq. More... -The Patriot Post
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Does Anything But
In Orwellian fashion, the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau does not protect consumers' finances, but wastes them. In starting luxurious renovations on its building -- which include a glass staircase and a water wall -- the bureau ignores the fact that consumers are taxpayers. And they are wasting the taxpayers' money. "A government report pegs the price of the work at $210 million -- $120 million more than initial estimates, with off-site leasing costs included," Watchdog.org reports. "'That's more per square foot than the Bellagio hotel-casino in Las Vegas,' said John Berlau, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. And, critics add, CFPB doesn't even own the building." The bureau is less than five years old (the bureau was created in response to the 2008 financial crisis), but it's already become a monument to big-government narcissism and inefficiency. Too big to fail, indeed. More... -The Patriot Post
Supreme Court Agrees to Define Marriage
For Americans who maintain that marriage is between one man and one woman, gear up for the next battle. On Friday, the Supreme Court announced it had agreed to hear cases regarding same-sex marriage. Given the track record of activist judges on the High Court, we are not overly optimistic the justices will rule in favor of the third pillar of Liberty. In October, the Supreme Court declined to hear cases from five states seeking to preserve their lawful, voter-approved definitions of marriage. By choosing not to take on those cases, the Supreme Court left in place lower court rulings overturning laws on same-sex marriage. And two years ago, the Supreme Court tossed Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, ruling that the federal government is bound to recognize same-sex marriages from states in which they are legal. The justices did not, however, go so far as to declare same-sex marriage a right -- yet. The result of that decision led to most of the lower courts striking down numerous state bans on same-sex marriage. -The Patriot Post
nObama's SOTU Oil Slick
The oil boom blindsided Barack nObama. In his 2012 re-election campaign, the president said the adage "Drill, baby, drill" would never bring about $2 gas. So when he described America's oil boom, he couched the success of the free market in leftist terms. "We believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil and protect our planet," nObama crowed during last night's State of the Union. "And today, America is number one in oil and gas. America is number one in wind power. Every three weeks, we bring online as much solar power as we did in all of 2008. And thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump." nObama's green energy has not propelled Americans down the roads, and it won't unless the government massively manipulates the markets. Despite oil production on federal land being stifled 16%, the federal government snatching up tracts of land, and an Environmental Protection Agency hostile to conventional sources of energy, America's oil production continues to grow in the private sector. In spite of nObama trying to orchestrate his "middle-class economy," free enterprise brought a true benefit to the American people. -The Patriot Post
1.
nObama Releases Convicted Terrorist al-Marri
(Andrew McCarthy) - Long War Journalreports that the nObama administration has released Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri from a U.S. prison – not from Gitmo, but from a civilian jail after a federal terrorism conviction...Al-Marri is an al-Qaeda operative who was planted as a “sleeper” in the United States by Khalid Sheikh Mohamed to await instructions on carrying out a second wave of attacks after the 9/11 atrocities – against water reservoirs, the New York Stock Exchange, U.S. military academies, and other targets. The Justice Department quietly sprung him on Friday so he could return to his native Qatar, a country the administration regards as a crucial counterterrorism ally . . . and a country that is notorious for providing material support to jihadists. While appalling, this news was inevitable. The al-Marri case was a cause célèbre for the Bush-deranged Left because he was detained as an enemy combatant, rather than arrested and charged in court as a criminal defendant, despite being apprehended in the United States. Upon taking office, nObama ordered him transferred from military detention under the law of war to the civilian criminal-justice system. Once there, he was given a bargain-basement plea deal by Attorney General Eric Holder and his minions. http://www.aim.org/guest-column/obama-releases-convicted-terrorist-al-marri/?utm_source=AIM+-+Daily+Email&utm_campaign=email012315&utm_medium=email
2.
Islam experts: No-go zones looming for America
(Bob Unruh) - The “no-go zones” in some Western nations, where law enforcement has lost control because of the influence of Islamic law, are coming to America...That’s according to several Islam experts interviewed by WND who believe the kind of Muslim enclaves that have developed in Europe due to a lack of assimilation will eventually arise in the U.S. as the Muslim population grows. The contention that “no-go” zones exist is controversial, as evidenced by the widespread ridicule that arose when an analyst said in a Fox News interview shortly after the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack in Paris that the major English city of Birmingham was a “no-go” zone itself. The analyst apologized, but only for exaggerating his point, not for asserting “no-go” zones exist. http://www.wnd.com/2015/01/islam-experts-no-go-zones-looming-for-america/
(Bob Unruh) - The “no-go zones” in some Western nations, where law enforcement has lost control because of the influence of Islamic law, are coming to America...That’s according to several Islam experts interviewed by WND who believe the kind of Muslim enclaves that have developed in Europe due to a lack of assimilation will eventually arise in the U.S. as the Muslim population grows. The contention that “no-go” zones exist is controversial, as evidenced by the widespread ridicule that arose when an analyst said in a Fox News interview shortly after the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack in Paris that the major English city of Birmingham was a “no-go” zone itself. The analyst apologized, but only for exaggerating his point, not for asserting “no-go” zones exist. http://www.wnd.com/2015/01/islam-experts-no-go-zones-looming-for-america/
3.
Pope Francis Condemns Muhammad!
(David Wood) - Following the recent Charlie Hebdo Massacre in Paris, Pope Francis condemned Muhammad ... without even realizing it...According to Pope Francis, it is wrong and immoral to insult another person's religion. Yet history shows that Muhammad and his companions regularly insulted other people's religion. Hence, the Pope has declared that Muhammad and his companions were immoral! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do8ZZWCShdk&x-yt-ts=1421914688&x-yt-cl=84503534
4.
nObama asks for trade promotion authority
(Tom Karst) - While Republicans in Congress are likely to ignore most of President nObama’s proposals in his State of the Union address, trade promotion could be the exception...nObama asked Congress to give him trade promotion authority to negotiate agreements with European and Asian trading partners. Stating the U.S. should have a hand in global trade pacts, nObama asked both parties to give him trade promotion authority to “protect American workers with strong new trade deals from Asia to Europe that aren’t just free, but fair.” http://www.thepacker.com/fruit-vegetable-news/Obama-asks-for-trade-promotion-authority-289354211.html#sthash.ygHuxXzA.dpuf
5.
Dem Senator Drops Bombshell About nObama and Muslim Country
(conservativetribune.com) - President Barack nObama has made no bones about how he is “a friend” of the Iranian regime, and how he wishes to “partner” with them going forward...However, his secret negotiations and one-sided concessions to the tyrannical theocratic regime have been infuriating, and there is bipartisan opposition to his efforts at outreach to Iran. Despite nObama’s threats to veto any new sanctions on Iran passed by Congress, they are nevertheless pushing forward with them, surprisingly with a Democrat senator at the forefront of that push, according to the Washington Times. http://conservativetribune.com/dem-senator-bombshell-obama-iran/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_content=936184&utm_campaign=0
6.
GOP Congress Delivers Some Epic Bad News to Mexico
(conservativetribune.com) - Now that the GOP has a firm grip on Congress, or so we hope, they’re set to launch an anti-immigration initiative aimed at decreasing the number of illegal aliens who sneak into the U.S. every year...The border security bill, said to be part of a piecemeal strategy to reform nObama’s disastrous immigration policies, is scheduled to hit committee next week. That’s the last step before heading to the House floor for a formal vote. The bill would do what Mexico hates and has protested before — impose much tighter controls on the southern border, set a timeline for securing the entire southern border, and repair damaged border fencing, among other things. http://conservativetribune.com/gop-bad-news-to-mexico/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_content=936184&utm_campaign=0
7.
Sleeper Cells: The Immigration Component of the Threat
(Michael Cutler) - In the wake of the terror attacks in Paris, France terror raids were carried out in Belgium and Greece to identify, locate and hunt down so-called “sleepers cells.”...Journalists and politicians have finally raised the issue of the threats potentially posed by sleeper agents in the United States, going back to the future — the same concerns about sleeper cells in the United States were voiced in the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 including by the then-director of the FBI, Robert Mueller. Of course any discussion about sleeper agents gaining entry into the United States would logically call into question the multiple and massive failures of the immigration system. Today politicians from both sides of the political aisle are hell-bent on making certain that the flood of foreign workers, foreign tourists and foreign students continue without impediment. Consequently admitting that immigration is a vital component of national security and must be treated as such would run contrary to the goals of advocates for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/michael-cutler/sleeper-cells-the-immigration-component-of-the-threat/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=7e9470bc8b-Mailchimp_FrontPageMag&utm_term=0_57e32c1dad-7e9470bc8b-156509103
8.
Islam’s Self-Destructive Seed
(Nonie Darwish) - Within the DNA of Islam is a self-destructive element: a prophecy by Mohammed in which he said that Islam will eventually be rejected by the world and would return back to where it came from...Ask your local imam, and he’ll tell you: Mohammed doesn’t lie. Incredibly, Mohammed himself was not optimistic about his own message and the future of Islam and Muslims: The Messenger of Allah (Mohammed) observed: Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.” [Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0270.] http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/nonie-darwish/islams-self-destructive-seed/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=7e9470bc8b-Mailchimp_FrontPageMag&utm_term=0_57e32c1dad-7e9470bc8b-156509103
9.
Fed Agencies Stonewall House Committee’s Benghazi Investigation
(Sharyl Attkisson) - Some federal agencies continue to stonewall when it comes to the ongoing investigation into the Benghazi terrorist attacks, according to insiders familiar with the process...They say the House Benghazi Select Committee isn’t getting access to all relevant documents and witnesses. That will be the topic of the committee’s first public hearing of 2015 called for Tuesday next week. Most of the committee’s work since a (slightly) bipartisan vote created it May 8, 2014, has quietly focused on the massive task of gathering information. The committee has provided relevant federal agencies a list of several dozen witnesses it wishes to interview. http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/22/federal-agencies-stonewall-house-committees-benghazi-investigation/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRolva3LZKXonjHpfsX56%2BQpWqS%2BlMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ETctgI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D
10.
ISIS Hints it Wants to Depose Hamas and PA
(Dalit Halevy, Ari Yashar) - The Islamic State (ISIS) branch in "Bayt al-Maqdis," an Arabization of the Hebrew Holy Temple and a term for Jerusalem, has started distributing publications explaining ISIS's platform...in a campaign to expand its influence in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. On the opening page of the publication by ISIS in "Palestine" is written "this is our position, this is our worldview, these are our founding principles. ...The liar will not be left with an excuse, and the supporters will not be left with doubt." A large ISIS symbol is drawn on the center of the page, including the oath of allegiance to Islam that reads "there is no God but Allah." Along with it appears a ring of Mohammed, the founder of Islam, with three words on it: Allah, Prophet, Mohammed. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/190384#.VMKN0Jt00pl
Country before camaraderie
Caroline B. Glick
(jewishworldreview.com) - Iran has apparently produced an intercontinental ballistic missile whose range far exceeds the distance between Iran and Israel, and between Iran and Europe.
On Wednesday night, Channel 2 showed satellite imagery taken by Israel’s Eros-B satellite that was launched last April. The imagery showed new missile-related sites that Iran recently constructed just outside Tehran. One facility is a missile launch site, capable of sending a rocket into space or of firing an ICBM.
On the launch pad was a new 27-meter long missile, never seen before.
The missile and the launch pad indicate that Iran’s ballistic missile program, which is an integral part of its nuclear weapons program, is moving forward at full throttle. The expanded range of Iran’s ballistic missile program as indicated by the satellite imagery makes clear that its nuclear weapons program is not merely a threat to Israel, or to Israel and Europe. It is a direct threat to the United States as well.
Also on Wednesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was invited to address a joint session of Congress by House Speaker backstabber John Boehner.
backstabber Boehner has asked Netanyahu to address US lawmakers on February 11 regarding Iran’s nuclear program and the threat to international security posed by radical Islam.
Opposition leaders were quick to accuse backstabber Boehner and the Republican Party of interfering in Israel’s upcoming election by providing Netanyahu with such a prestigious stage just five weeks before Israelis go to the polls.
Labor MK Nachman Shai told The Jerusalem Post that for the sake of fairness, backstabber Boehner should extend the same invitation to opposition leader Isaac Herzog.
But in protesting as they have, opposition members have missed the point. backstabber Boehner didn’t invite Netanyahu because he cares about Israel’s election. He invited Netanyahu because he cares about US national security. He believes that by having Netanyahu speak on the issues of Iran’s nuclear program and radical Islam, he will advance America’s national security.
backstabber Boehner’s chief concern, and that of the majority of his colleagues from the Democratic and Republican parties alike, is that President Barack nObama’s policy in regard to Iran’s nuclear weapons program imperils the US. Just as the invitation to Netanyahu was a bipartisan invitation, so concerns about nObama’s policy toward Iran’s nuclear program are bipartisan concerns.
Over the past week in particular, nObama has adopted a position on Iran that puts him far beyond the mainstream of US politics. This radical position has placed the president on a collision course with Congress best expressed on Wednesday by Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez. During a hearing at the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee where Menendez serves as ranking Democratic member, he said, “The more I hear from the administration and its quotes, the more it sounds like talking points that come straight out of Tehran.”
Menendez was referring to threats that nObama has made three times over the past week, most prominently at his State of the Union address on Tuesday, to veto any sanctions legislation against Iran brought to his desk for signature.
He has cast proponents of sanctions – and Menendez is the co-sponsor of a pending sanctions bill – as enemies of a diplomatic strategy of dealing with Iran, and by implication, as warmongers.
Indeed, in remarks to the Democratic members of the Senate last week, nObama impugned the motivations of lawmakers who support further sanctions legislation. He indirectly alleged that they were being forced to take their positions due to pressure from their donors and others.
The problem for American lawmakers is that the diplomatic course that nObama has chosen makes it impossible for the US to use the tools of diplomacy to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
That course of diplomatic action is anchored in the Joint Plan of Action that the US and its partners Germany, France, Britain, China and Russia (the P5+1) signed with Tehran in November 2013.
The JPOA placed no limitation on Iran’s ballistic missile program. The main areas the JPOA covers are Iran’s uranium enrichment and plutonium reactor activities. Under the agreement, or the aspects of it that nObama has made public, Iran is supposed to limit its enrichment of uranium to 3.5-percent purity.
And it is not supposed to take action to expand its heavy water reactor at Arak, which could be used to develop weapons grade plutonium.
THE JPOA is also supposed to force Iran to share all nuclear activities undertaken in the past by its military personnel.
During his State of the Union address, nObama claimed that since the agreement was signed, Iran has “halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material.”
Yet as Omri Ceren of the Israel Project noted this week, since the JPOA was signed, Iran has expanded its uranium and plutonium work. And as the Eros-B satellite imagery demonstrated, Iran is poised to launch an ICBM.
When it signed the JPOA, nObama administration officials dismissed concerns that by permitting Iran to enrich uranium to 3.5% – in breach of binding UN Security Council Resolution 1929 from 2010 – the US was enabling Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Enrichment to 3.5%, they said, is a far cry from the 90% enrichment level needed for uranium to be bomb grade.
But it works out that the distance isn’t all that great. Sixty percent of the work required to enrich uranium to bomb grade levels of purity is done by enriching it to 3.5%. Since it signed the JPOA, Iran has enriched sufficient quantities of uranium to produce two nuclear bombs.
On the launch pad was a new 27-meter long missile, never seen before.
The missile and the launch pad indicate that Iran’s ballistic missile program, which is an integral part of its nuclear weapons program, is moving forward at full throttle. The expanded range of Iran’s ballistic missile program as indicated by the satellite imagery makes clear that its nuclear weapons program is not merely a threat to Israel, or to Israel and Europe. It is a direct threat to the United States as well.
Also on Wednesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was invited to address a joint session of Congress by House Speaker backstabber John Boehner.
backstabber Boehner has asked Netanyahu to address US lawmakers on February 11 regarding Iran’s nuclear program and the threat to international security posed by radical Islam.
Opposition leaders were quick to accuse backstabber Boehner and the Republican Party of interfering in Israel’s upcoming election by providing Netanyahu with such a prestigious stage just five weeks before Israelis go to the polls.
Labor MK Nachman Shai told The Jerusalem Post that for the sake of fairness, backstabber Boehner should extend the same invitation to opposition leader Isaac Herzog.
But in protesting as they have, opposition members have missed the point. backstabber Boehner didn’t invite Netanyahu because he cares about Israel’s election. He invited Netanyahu because he cares about US national security. He believes that by having Netanyahu speak on the issues of Iran’s nuclear program and radical Islam, he will advance America’s national security.
backstabber Boehner’s chief concern, and that of the majority of his colleagues from the Democratic and Republican parties alike, is that President Barack nObama’s policy in regard to Iran’s nuclear weapons program imperils the US. Just as the invitation to Netanyahu was a bipartisan invitation, so concerns about nObama’s policy toward Iran’s nuclear program are bipartisan concerns.
Over the past week in particular, nObama has adopted a position on Iran that puts him far beyond the mainstream of US politics. This radical position has placed the president on a collision course with Congress best expressed on Wednesday by Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez. During a hearing at the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee where Menendez serves as ranking Democratic member, he said, “The more I hear from the administration and its quotes, the more it sounds like talking points that come straight out of Tehran.”
Menendez was referring to threats that nObama has made three times over the past week, most prominently at his State of the Union address on Tuesday, to veto any sanctions legislation against Iran brought to his desk for signature.
He has cast proponents of sanctions – and Menendez is the co-sponsor of a pending sanctions bill – as enemies of a diplomatic strategy of dealing with Iran, and by implication, as warmongers.
Indeed, in remarks to the Democratic members of the Senate last week, nObama impugned the motivations of lawmakers who support further sanctions legislation. He indirectly alleged that they were being forced to take their positions due to pressure from their donors and others.
The problem for American lawmakers is that the diplomatic course that nObama has chosen makes it impossible for the US to use the tools of diplomacy to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
That course of diplomatic action is anchored in the Joint Plan of Action that the US and its partners Germany, France, Britain, China and Russia (the P5+1) signed with Tehran in November 2013.
The JPOA placed no limitation on Iran’s ballistic missile program. The main areas the JPOA covers are Iran’s uranium enrichment and plutonium reactor activities. Under the agreement, or the aspects of it that nObama has made public, Iran is supposed to limit its enrichment of uranium to 3.5-percent purity.
And it is not supposed to take action to expand its heavy water reactor at Arak, which could be used to develop weapons grade plutonium.
THE JPOA is also supposed to force Iran to share all nuclear activities undertaken in the past by its military personnel.
During his State of the Union address, nObama claimed that since the agreement was signed, Iran has “halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material.”
Yet as Omri Ceren of the Israel Project noted this week, since the JPOA was signed, Iran has expanded its uranium and plutonium work. And as the Eros-B satellite imagery demonstrated, Iran is poised to launch an ICBM.
When it signed the JPOA, nObama administration officials dismissed concerns that by permitting Iran to enrich uranium to 3.5% – in breach of binding UN Security Council Resolution 1929 from 2010 – the US was enabling Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Enrichment to 3.5%, they said, is a far cry from the 90% enrichment level needed for uranium to be bomb grade.
But it works out that the distance isn’t all that great. Sixty percent of the work required to enrich uranium to bomb grade levels of purity is done by enriching it to 3.5%. Since it signed the JPOA, Iran has enriched sufficient quantities of uranium to produce two nuclear bombs.
As for plutonium development work, as Ceren pointed out, the White House’s fact sheet on the JPOA said that Iran committed itself “to halt progress on its plutonium track.”
Last October, Foreign Policy magazine reported that Iran was violating that commitment by seeking to procure parts for its heavy water plutonium reactor at Arak. And yet, astoundingly, rather than acknowledge the simple fact that Iran was violating its commitment, the State Department excused Iran’s behavior and insisted that it was not in clear violation of its commitment.
More distressingly, since the JPOA was signed, Iran has repeatedly refused to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to access Iran’s nuclear installations or to inform the IAEA about the nuclear activities that its military have carried out in the past.
As a consequence, the US and its partners still do not know what nuclear installations Iran has or what nuclear development work it has undertaken.
This means that if a nuclear agreement is signed between Iran and the P5+1, that agreement’s verification protocols will in all likelihood not apply to all aspects of Iran’s nuclear program. And if it does not apply to all aspects of Iran’s nuclear activities, it cannot prevent Iran from continuing the activities it doesn’t know about.
As David Albright, a former IAEA inspector, explained in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last May, “To be credible, a final agreement must ensure that any effort by Tehran to construct a bomb would be sufficiently time-consuming and detectable that the international community could act decisively to prevent Iran from succeeding. It is critical to know whether the Islamic Republic had a nuclear weapons program in the past, how far the work on warheads advanced and whether it continues. Without clear answers to these questions, outsiders will be unable to determine how fast the Iranian regime could construct either a crude nuclear-test device or a deliverable weapon if it chose to renege on an agreement.”
Concern about the loopholes in the JPOA led congressional leaders from both parties to begin work to pass additional sanctions against Iran immediately after the JPOA was concluded. To withstand congressional pressure, the nObama administration alternately attacked the patriotism of its critics, who it claimed were trying to push the US into and unnecessary war against Iran, and assured them that all of their concerns would be addressed in a final agreement.
Unfortunately, since signing the JPOA, the administration has adopted positions that ensure that none of Congress’s concerns will be addressed.
Whereas in early 2013, Secretary of State Hanoi John Kerry declared that “the president has made it definitive” that Iran needs to answer all “questions surrounding Iran’s nuclear program,” last November it was reported that the US and its partners had walked back this requirement.
Iran will not be required to give full accounting of its past nuclear work, and so the US and its partners intend to sign a deal that will be unable to verify that Iran does not build nuclear weapons.
As the administration has ignored its previous pledges to Congress to ensure that a deal with Iran will make it possible to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons, it has also acted to ensure that Iran will pay no price for negotiating in bad faith. The sanctions bill that nObama threatens to veto would only go into effect if Iran fails to sign an agreement.
As long as negotiations progress, no sanctions would be enforced.
nOBAMA’S MESSAGE then is clear. Not only will the diplomatic policy he has adopted not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons (and the ability to attack the US with nuclear warheads attached to an ICBM), but in the event that Iran fails to agree to even cosmetic limitations on its nuclear progress, it will suffer no consequences for its recalcitrance.
And this brings us back to backstabber Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu.
With nObama’s diplomatic policy toward Iran enabling rather than preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power, members of the House and Senate are seeking a credible, unwavering voice that offers an alternative path. For the past 20 years, Netanyahu has been the global leader most outspoken about the need to take all necessary measures to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, not only for Israel’s benefit, but to protect the entire free world. From the perspective of the congressional leadership, then, inviting Netanyahu to speak was a logical move.
In the Israeli context, however, it was an astounding development. For the past generation, the Israeli Left has insisted Israel’s role on the world stage is that of a follower.
As a small, isolated nation, Israel has no choice, they say, other than to follow the lead of the West, and particularly of the White House, on all issues, even when the US president is wrong. All resistance to White House policies is dangerous and irresponsible, leaders like Herzog and Tzipi Livni continuously warn.
backstabber Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu exposes the Left’s dogma as dangerous nonsense.
The role of an Israeli leader is to adopt the policies that protect Israel, even when they are unpopular at the White House. Far from being ostracized for those policies, such an Israeli leader will be supported, respected, and relied upon by those who share with him a concern for what truly matters.
Last October, Foreign Policy magazine reported that Iran was violating that commitment by seeking to procure parts for its heavy water plutonium reactor at Arak. And yet, astoundingly, rather than acknowledge the simple fact that Iran was violating its commitment, the State Department excused Iran’s behavior and insisted that it was not in clear violation of its commitment.
More distressingly, since the JPOA was signed, Iran has repeatedly refused to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to access Iran’s nuclear installations or to inform the IAEA about the nuclear activities that its military have carried out in the past.
As a consequence, the US and its partners still do not know what nuclear installations Iran has or what nuclear development work it has undertaken.
This means that if a nuclear agreement is signed between Iran and the P5+1, that agreement’s verification protocols will in all likelihood not apply to all aspects of Iran’s nuclear program. And if it does not apply to all aspects of Iran’s nuclear activities, it cannot prevent Iran from continuing the activities it doesn’t know about.
As David Albright, a former IAEA inspector, explained in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last May, “To be credible, a final agreement must ensure that any effort by Tehran to construct a bomb would be sufficiently time-consuming and detectable that the international community could act decisively to prevent Iran from succeeding. It is critical to know whether the Islamic Republic had a nuclear weapons program in the past, how far the work on warheads advanced and whether it continues. Without clear answers to these questions, outsiders will be unable to determine how fast the Iranian regime could construct either a crude nuclear-test device or a deliverable weapon if it chose to renege on an agreement.”
Concern about the loopholes in the JPOA led congressional leaders from both parties to begin work to pass additional sanctions against Iran immediately after the JPOA was concluded. To withstand congressional pressure, the nObama administration alternately attacked the patriotism of its critics, who it claimed were trying to push the US into and unnecessary war against Iran, and assured them that all of their concerns would be addressed in a final agreement.
Unfortunately, since signing the JPOA, the administration has adopted positions that ensure that none of Congress’s concerns will be addressed.
Whereas in early 2013, Secretary of State Hanoi John Kerry declared that “the president has made it definitive” that Iran needs to answer all “questions surrounding Iran’s nuclear program,” last November it was reported that the US and its partners had walked back this requirement.
Iran will not be required to give full accounting of its past nuclear work, and so the US and its partners intend to sign a deal that will be unable to verify that Iran does not build nuclear weapons.
As the administration has ignored its previous pledges to Congress to ensure that a deal with Iran will make it possible to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons, it has also acted to ensure that Iran will pay no price for negotiating in bad faith. The sanctions bill that nObama threatens to veto would only go into effect if Iran fails to sign an agreement.
As long as negotiations progress, no sanctions would be enforced.
nOBAMA’S MESSAGE then is clear. Not only will the diplomatic policy he has adopted not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons (and the ability to attack the US with nuclear warheads attached to an ICBM), but in the event that Iran fails to agree to even cosmetic limitations on its nuclear progress, it will suffer no consequences for its recalcitrance.
And this brings us back to backstabber Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu.
With nObama’s diplomatic policy toward Iran enabling rather than preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power, members of the House and Senate are seeking a credible, unwavering voice that offers an alternative path. For the past 20 years, Netanyahu has been the global leader most outspoken about the need to take all necessary measures to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, not only for Israel’s benefit, but to protect the entire free world. From the perspective of the congressional leadership, then, inviting Netanyahu to speak was a logical move.
In the Israeli context, however, it was an astounding development. For the past generation, the Israeli Left has insisted Israel’s role on the world stage is that of a follower.
As a small, isolated nation, Israel has no choice, they say, other than to follow the lead of the West, and particularly of the White House, on all issues, even when the US president is wrong. All resistance to White House policies is dangerous and irresponsible, leaders like Herzog and Tzipi Livni continuously warn.
backstabber Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu exposes the Left’s dogma as dangerous nonsense.
The role of an Israeli leader is to adopt the policies that protect Israel, even when they are unpopular at the White House. Far from being ostracized for those policies, such an Israeli leader will be supported, respected, and relied upon by those who share with him a concern for what truly matters.
Comments