Help fight the
liberal media

click title for home page
  
Be a subscriber

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
The stuff you won't see in the liberal media (click "Replies" for top stories)
Calendar Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
Seriously

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,042
Reply with quote  #1 

Is Obama secretly working to Replace Netanyahu?

Nurtured in the Saul Alinsky-style, ACORN-esque tactics  of organizing revolution under the banner of "social change," Barack Obama, as a young community organizer in Chicago in the 1980s understood early on the importance of a crisis and how to ride the waves of an emergency to effect the fundamental transformation of society.

Aaron Klein is reporting that as the nation's chief executive, Obama has demonstrated a particular specialty in the use and perpetuation of crises to push through policies that the public otherwise might not willingly accept, including the wildly unpopular healthcare law, immigration reform, and the first-term "stimulus" legislation. It is therefore unsurprising to detect the international export of the Obama's "crisis" game plan to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

A dispassionate look at the sequence of events shows that the Obama administration has generated an unprecedented crisis in US-Israeli relations, a crisis utilized at every twist and turn by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's political rivals, most notably those within his coalition, to try to shake up the country's leadership. There is more than a hint of White House interference in helping to agitate the coalition drama that provoked Netanyahu's hesitant decision last Tuesday to dissolve parliament and schedule early elections that could potentially see the prime minister unseated.

Before divining the Obama administration's fingerprints on the events that led to Netanyahu's predicament, the immediate question is just what about the Israeli premier makes him so problematic for this White House. The answer is fraught with policy implications that cut to the very heart of Obama's dangerously myopic, academic view of the world and America's place among friend and foe.

Unforgivable to Obama is Bibi's stubborn refusal to acquiesce to the concept of a sweeping, final deal with Iran that many experts believe will leave the mullahs perpetually within months of a nuclear weapon. Never mind that Iran has numerous times threatened to wipe Israel off the map and is a main state sponsor of the Palestinian terrorist organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Obama is more than annoyed at Netanyahu's Congressional activism of lobbying for tougher sanctions on Tehran at precisely the same time the US administration is working with European allies to extend sanctions relief until next June 30, as the deadline for nuclear talks was yet again postponed until that date. Netanyahu has repeatedly accused Iran of using the drawn-out negotiations as a smokescreen to develop an illicit nuclear infrastructure.

Also problematic for the White House is the breakdown of Israeli-Palestinian "peace" talks, with rhetoric from the Obama administration indicating that the US largely blames Netanyahu for the collapse of the negotiations. In the Alice's looking-glass lens through which Obama views the Middle East, the sturdy legs of the bargaining table broke because of Netanyahu's decision to build Jewish homes in sections of Jerusalem that will most likely remain under Israeli sovereignty in any future deal. Also, like every other prime minister before him who engaged in these kinds of negotiations, Netanyahu had dared to insist that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state, an understanding that Israelis see as central to peaceful co-existence.

Never mind that Netanyahu took the unprecedented step of freezing Jewish construction in the West Bank and sections of Jerusalem and even released Palestinian terrorists as "good will gestures" to help jumpstart talks with an intransigent Palestinian leadership.

Using a different lens on Palestinian complacency, the White House is blind to such infractions as Abbas's decision to walk away from the talks and instead seek unilateral recognition at the United Nations; the near daily anti-Israel and anti-Jewish incitement in the official Palestinian media; the role of Abbas's Fatah organization in helping to guide riots currently rocking Jerusalem; the question of whether or not Abbas, amid Hamas gains in Gaza and the West Bank, even represents the Palestinian people; and of course the Palestinians' long history of walking away from every other major international attempt to broker peace.

The White House has singled out Netanyahu as standing in the way of Obama's utopian vision for a new Middle East and Persian Gulf.   What better way to bypass this obstacle than aiding in Netanyahu's removal from office?

Let's look at the clues. Netanyahu's decision last week to disband his coalition came when he dismissed his finance minister, Yair Lapid, and his justice minister, Tzipi Livni, both of whom have not disguised their ambitions for the country's highest office. Tellingly, both took advantage of the steady stream of US criticism toward Netanyahu by leading an escalating public campaign in which they repeatedly accused Netanyahu of causing this dangerous rift in relations with Israel's most important ally.

Case in point.  In October, Israel's Ynet news website reported that a request by Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon to meet with Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and National Security Adviser Susan Rice during his visit to Washington had been denied by the White House. This reported move is highly unusual, and was a nearly unprecedented snub of Netanyahu's government. It helped to set off a firestorm against Netanyahu in Israel, particularly among the center and the left, with Livni and Lapid leading the charge.

Also in October, in what can only be viewed as an orchestrated campaign, the US espoused uncharacteristically harsh language to oppose a plan for Israel to build 2,610 new homes on empty lots in Givat Hamatos, a Jerusalem neighborhood in the eastern section of the city where Palestinians want to build a future state.

Immediately following a meeting between Netanyahu and Obama in October, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki and White House spokesman Josh Earnest took the Israeli leader's delegation by surprise when they released nearly identical statements slamming the Jerusalem construction. They warned the housing plans could distance Israel from its "closest allies," a clear euphemism for the US, and questioned whether Netanyahu was interested in peace. Netanyahu for his part said at the time that he was "baffled" by the US criticism, stating the American position "doesn't really reflect American values."

As if on queue, Lapid and Livni raced to endorse the US condemnation and accuse Netanyahu once again of damaging US-Israeli relations.  That month, Lapid took further issue with Netanyahu's plan to build roughly 400 homes in Har Homa and about 600 in Ramat Shlomo. "This plan will lead to a serious crisis in Israel-US relations and will harm Israel's standing in the world," Lapid said.

In another seemingly orchestrated development, The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg in October described relations between the US and Israel as a "full-blown crisis" and reported that senior Obama administration officials had called Netanyahu "chickenshit" on matters related to the so-called peace process.  Goldberg gratuitously added that Bibi is a "coward" on the issue of Iran's nuclear threat.

This level of speech in a diplomatic confrontation between putative allies is close to unprecedented.  The Atlantic published a comically ruder exchange, but it was between enemies.

Lapid jumped on the puerile and vulgar remarks to release a vaguely nuanced criticism of Netanyahu: "I said only a few days ago that there is a real crisis in the relations and it needs to be dealt with responsibly," he said, while faux-lecturing US and Israeli officials on the "need to tackle the crisis behind the scenes."

Adding more fuel to the anti-Bibi firestorm, Ha'aretz reported last week the Obama administration had held a classified discussion a few weeks earlier about possibly taking more proactive measures against the "settlements," including mulling sanctions or punishing Israel at the United Nations. While the State Department dismissed the claims as "unfounded and completely without merit," the Ha'aretz article is already providing more fodder to target Bibi.

Here's the kicker. In March, an informed diplomatic source in Jerusalem told me that representatives of the Obama administration held meetings with Lapid to check him out politically and to discuss the kind of prime minister he would make if he won elections in the future. The diplomatic source said the Obama administration identified Lapid as a moderate who would support Israeli-Palestinian talks. While the alleged meeting might have been as innocent as getting to know the powerful finance minister, the claim does fuel the perception of Obama administration tentacles working surreptitiously to change the political order in the Jewish state.

At the end of the day, this political interference could backfire monumentally. Obama's support among the Israeli populace is dismal. Just last week, The Jerusalem Post reported on a poll that showed the number of Israelis who believe Obama had either a "positive" or a "neutral" view of Israel has fallen sharply. Israelis largely see Iran as their single greatest existential threat and seem to react positively to Netanyahu's tough stance against the US-led negotiations. And remarkably, Netanyahu has the quiet support of the Egyptian and Saudi governments for his regional policies. It remains to be seen if Israelis are ready to entrust their security to a relative political newcomer like Lapid or the perpetually evolving Livni in the face of mounting threats that even now engulf the Jewish state in all directions.


__________________
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #2 

Just a matter of priorities


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Seriously

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,042
Reply with quote  #3 
Ahmadinejad says the same thing as Obaa

Algemeiner reported:

Interestingly, in an interview with the Washington Post’s David Ignatius published today, Iran’s anti-Semitic President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad used exactly the same term when describing concerns that the Israelis have raised over the country’s nuclear program.

IGNATIUS: “I want to ask as my first question the one every citizen of the world would like to ask today: What is the chance of a war in Iran that would result from an Israeli attack on your nuclear facilities?”

AHMADINEJAD: “I have spoken about this topic at length, previously. We generally speaking do not take very seriously the issue of the Zionists and the possible dangers emanating from them. Of course they would love to find a way for their own salvation by making a lot of noise and to raise stakes in order to save themselves.


__________________
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #4 

Noise! -- Barack Obama throws Israel under the bus

Daniel Halper is reporting that in an interview to air tonight on CBS's 60 Minutes, Barack Obama will refer to Israel's concern over Iran's march toward a nuclear program as "noise."
 
"When it comes to our national security decisions -- any pressure that I feel is simply to do what's right for the American people. And I am going to block out -- any noise that's out there," Obama says, according to AFP.

STEVE KROFT: "How much pressure have you been getting from Prime Minister Netanyahu to make up your mind to use military force in Iran?"

PRESIDENT OBAMA: "Well -- look, I have conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu all the time. And I understand and share Prime Minister Netanyahu's insistence that Iran should not obtain a nuclear weapon, because it would threaten us, it would threaten Israel, and it would threaten the world and kick off a nuclear arms race."

STEVE KROFT: "You’re saying, you don't feel any pressure from Prime Minister Netanyahu in the middle of a campaign to try and get you to change your policy and draw a line in the sand? You don’t feel any pressure?"

PRESIDENT OBAMA: "When it comes to our national security decisions -- any pressure that I feel is simply to do what's right for the American people. And I am going to block out -- any noise that's out there. Now I feel an obligation, not pressure but obligation, to make sure that we're in close consultation with the Israelis -- on these issues. Because it affects them deeply. They're one of our closest allies in the region. And we’ve got an Iranian regime that has said horrible things that directly threaten Israel’s existence."


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #5 

Time for Whoopi but not Netanyahu

o

Priorities!


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #6 
But Obama has time to celebrate "National Pirate Day"


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #7 

Obama doesn't have the time to meet with Netanyahu


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #8 

Netanyahu: U.S. may not support Israel in case of military strike on Iran

Jason Howerton is reporting that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insinuated in an interview published Friday that Israel cannot entirely rely on the U.S. to act against Iran's suspect nuclear program, a sign that the Israeli leader is not backing down from the sharp rhetoric that strained relations this week with the Obama administration.
 
Netanyahu has been arguing in recent weeks that Iran is getting close to acquiring nuclear weapons capability, a claim Iran denies. He has been pushing the U.S. to commit to the circumstances under which the U.S. would lead a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have repeatedly hinted that if the United States does not attack, Israel will.
 
"I hear those who say we should wait until the last minute. But what if the U.S. doesn't act? It's a question that must be asked," Netanyahu told Israel Hayom, in an interview marking the Jewish New Year.
 
The paper, a free mass-circulation daily, is funded by Netanyahu's billionaire Jewish-American supporter Sheldon Adelson.
 
The Obama administration also suspects Tehran is seeks to become a nuclear power and says it is committed to preventing a nuclear Iran, but insists more efforts must be made before resorting to military action. Washington is refusing to be specific about what exactly would necessitate a strike on Iran and has rejected an Israeli demand for "red lines" that cannot be crossed.

Earlier this week Netanyahu issued a rebuke of the U.S. cautious stance, perceived as an indirect swipe at the Obama administration. He said that "those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before Israel."
 
Netanyahu's harsh rhetoric has drawn criticism in Israel and abroad. It even prompted a leading Jewish-American senator to take the extraordinary step of publicly rebuking him. Some have charged that Netanyahu's comments were aimed at helping his longtime friend and Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, in his November election showdown with Barack Obama.
 
In the interview, Netanyahu strongly rejected the claims.
 
"I am guided not by the elections in United States but by the centrifuges in Iran," he said. "If the Iranians were to say 'stop' and cease enriching uranium and preparing a bomb until the end of the elections in the United States then I could wait."
 
Adding to tensions, Romney criticized Obama at a New York fundraiser on Friday for allegedly not planning to meet in person with Netanyahu on the sidelines of the upcoming United Nations General Assembly meetings later this months.
 
Earlier this week Obama called Netanyahu and the White House followed up the phone call with a rare late-night statement denying reports of a rift. Netanyahu's office said the two men had a "good conversation."
 
White House spokesman Jay Carney downplayed any signs of discord with Israel.
 
"The president has made clear that he is committed to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. We are completely in sync with Israel on that matter. There is no daylight between the United States and Israel when it comes to the absolute commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon," he said


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
lawyer12

Registered:
Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #9 

Whose Democratic Party?

Check this out if you are a Democrat/Independent...

I already know Obama is an apostate muslim. No friend of Israel.

Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #10 

Intel from Israel on what's getting set to happen in the Middle East

Steve Quayle says:  My brother and his family live in Jerusalem -- he is a minister -- his office is close to one of Israel 's largest underground military bases.
 
He called me last night which is very unusual -- usually it is email.  He called to tell me that he is sending his family back to the US immediately due to what he is seeing happen within the last week and what he is being told by his military contacts in both the Israel and US military.
 
He said he is seeing with his own eyes military movements the likes of which he has never seen in his 20+ years in Israel -- what he called a massive redeployment and protective tactics of forces is underway.
 
Over the last two days he has seen anti-aircraft missile deployments throughout the Jerusalem area including 3 mobile units that he can see from his office windows.
 
In addition, he has seen very large Israeli armored columns moving fast toward the Sinia where Egypt has now moved in Armor.
 
There are reports of the top military leaders meeting with Israel's Sr. Rabbi which is something that has happened preceding every prior military campaign.
 
His admonition is to watch carefully and pray for Israel and its people.
 
He is convinced that barring something extraordinary Israel will attack Iran -- with or without the US -- and very soon.
 
It is the belief in Israel that Obama does not stand with Israel but with the Arab countries.
 
He has told me before that Israel will saber rattle from time to time but that this time is very different from what he is seeing and hearing.
 
He was at the Wailing Wall 2 days ago and there were hundreds of IDF soldiers there. As he was leaving he passed at least 20 military buses full of soldiers in route to the wall.  He has never seen this before either.

My brother is not an alarmist by any means.  When he talks like this it gets my attention for sure and usually I find he knows more than he shares.
 
There are reports that Israel is asking Obama to come to Israel immediately but they are being answered with silence.
 
My opinion is that I see the making of the perfect storm.

Just thought I would pass this along.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #11 

October surprise?  Canada cuts ties with Iran, closes embassy, orders Iranian diplomats home

Mike Blanchfield is reporting that Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird has severed Canadian ties with Iran over its sponsorship of terrorism and amid fears about the safety of diplomats in the country.
 
Baird says the Canadian embassy in Tehran will close immediately and Iranian diplomats in Canada have been given five days to leave.
 
The skeleton staff that was operating Canada's Tehran mission has already fled the country.
 
Baird says he's worried about the safety of diplomats in Tehran following recent attacks on the British embassy there.
 
"The Iranian regime has shown blatant disregard for the Vienna Convention and its guarantee of protection for diplomatic personnel," he said.
 
"Under the circumstances, Canada can no longer maintain a diplomatic presence in Iran. Our diplomats serve Canada as civilians and their safety is our No. 1 priority."
 
He also condemned the regime as a sponsor of terrorism.
 
"Canada views the government of Iran as the most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today," he said.
 
He recited a litany of complaints about Iran, including its support for the Assad regime in Syria, its nuclear program, its threats to Israel and its abysmal human rights record.
 
"The Iranian regime is providing increasing military assistance to the Assad regime," Baird said.
 
"It refuses to comply with United Nations resolutions pertaining to its nuclear program. It routinely threatens the existence of the state of Israel, and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide."
 
Foreign Affairs is also warning ordinary Canadians to avoid any travel to Iran.

Continue reading here . . .


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #12 

Obama will not back an Israeli strike against Iran

Shimon Shiffer is reporting that the United States has indirectly informed Iran, via two European nations, that it would not back an Israeli strike against the country's nuclear facilities, as long as Tehran refrains from attacking American interests in the Persian Gulf, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Monday.

According to the report, Washington used covert back-channels in Europe to clarify that the US does not intend to back Israel in a strike that may spark a regional conflict.

In return, Washington reportedly expects Iran to steer clear of strategic American assets in the Persian Gulf, such as military bases and aircraft carriers.

Israeli officials reported an unprecedented low in the two nations' defense ties, which stems from the Obama administration's desire to warn Israel against mounting an uncoordinated attack on Iran.

The New York Times reported Monday that US President Barack Obama is promoting a series of steps meant to curb an Israeli offensive against Iran, while forcing the Islamic Republic to take the nuclear negotiations more seriously.

Iranian drill in Strait of Hormuz (Photo: MCT)

One of the steps considered is "an official declaration by Obama about what might bring about American military action, as well as covert activities that have been previously considered and rejected," the report said.

Several of Obama's top advisors believe that Jerusalem is seeking an unequivocal American statement regarding a US strike on Iran – should it actively pursue a nuclear bomb.

Israel hopes such a statement is made during Obama's address before the UN General Assembly on September 25.

Others in the White House said Israel is trying to drag the US into an unnecessary conflict in the Gulf.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday that "There is absolutely no daylight between the United States and Israel when it comes to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon."

Carney said that all options remain on the table for Iran. He said the "window for diplomacy remains open," adding that the diplomatic process remains the best way to deal with the Islamic Republic, though "that window will not remain open indefinitely."

Cyber war a go?

According to the New York Times, Washington has also sent Iran a back-channel deal suggesting they curb their nuclear ambitions, but Tehran rejected the deal, saying no agreement is possible sans lifting all West-imposed sanctions.

According to the report, the Obama administration is exploring the possibility of mounting a covert operation, as well as waging a "quiet" cyber war against Iran.

Barack Obama had previously rejected the notion, fearing such cyber assaults would wreak havoc on Iranian civilian life.

Later in September, the United States and more than 25 other nations will hold the largest-ever minesweeping exercise in the Persian Gulf, in what military officials say is a demonstration of unity and a defensive step to prevent Iran from attempting to block oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz.

In fact, the United States and Iran have each announced what amounted to dueling defensive exercises to be conducted this fall, each intended to dissuade the other from attack.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #13 

WSJ in scathing editorial justifies Israel's mistrust of Obama

Gil Ronen is reporting that the largest-circulation newspaper in the United States, the Wall Street Journal, has penned a scathing editorial against the Obama Administration's handling of the crisis with Iran, saying that its attitude is pushing the Jewish state to strike Iran on its own.

Following Gen. Martin Dempsey's statement that "I don’t want to be complicit" if Israel chooses to attack Iran, the Journal writes acidly: ”We don’t know what exactly Gen. Dempsey thinks American non-complicity might entail in the event of a strike. Should the Administration refuse to resupply Israel with jets and bombs, or condemn an Israeli strike at the U.N.? Nor do we know if the General was conducting freelance diplomacy or sending a signal from an Administration that feels the same way but doesn’t want to say so during a political season."

The editorial sides with Israel, and says it's no wonder the Israelis are upset at the U.S. Administration. "It’s one thing to hear from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that he wants to wipe you off the map: At least it has the ring of honesty. It’s quite another to hear from President Obama that he has your back, even as his Administration tries to sell to the public a make-believe world in which Iran’s nuclear intentions are potentially peaceful, sanctions are working and diplomacy hasn’t failed after three and half years."

"The irony for the Administration is that its head-in-the-sand performance is why many Israeli decision-makers believe they had better strike sooner than later. Not only is there waning confidence that Mr. Obama is prepared to take military action on his own, but there’s also a fear that a re-elected President Obama will take a much harsher line on an Israeli attack than he would before the first Tuesday in November ".

The Obama Administration should be making an effort to show Israel that it takes the Iranian threat seriously, the newspaper opines. Instead, it is doing the opposite. "Since coming to office, Obama Administration policy toward Israel has alternated between animus and incompetence. We don’t know what motivated Gen. Dempsey’s outburst, but a President who really had Israel’s back would publicly contradict it."

As Arutz Sheva noted, Gen. Dempsey's statement means, in essence, that the U.S. does not "have Israel's back," in contradiction to the pledge made by Obama earlier in the year.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #14 

"Sparks fly" over US policy on Iran at meeting between Netanyahu and US envoy

Ilan Ben Zion is reporting that tensions between the Israeli and United States governments reached fever pitch over the issue of Iran's nuclear program in a recent high-level meeting between the prime minister and the American ambassador, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Friday.
 
Last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened a closed-door meeting with visiting Congressman and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and American Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro. Netanyahu opened the discussion by lambasting the Obama administration for what he considered its ineffectual policy vis à vis Iran.
 
Netanyahu then expressed his belief that the US should be pressuring Iran to stop its nuclear program rather than pressuring Israel not to attack.
 
"Instead of effectively pressuring Iran, Obama and his people are pressuring us not to attack the nuclear facilities," he reportedly said. He concluded by saying that the time for diplomacy had run out, the Yedioth report said.
 
At one point during the meeting, Shapiro grew enraged by Netanyahu's remarks, broke diplomatic protocol, and snapped at the PM, saying he was misrepresenting Obama's position on Iran.
 
According to a source at the meeting, "sparks and lightning were flying."
 
The US embassy did not comment on the Yedioth Ahronoth report.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #15 

Israel gives Obama deadline of September 25

Published on Aug 28, 2012 by

It appears that a date is set for an attack from Israel.

Iran's allies are China and Russia, so who knows what might happen, if Iran actually gets attacked from Israel.

2:16 United States has never been threatened by Iran, but Iran threatens Israel DAILY, so Nuclear advance is not an option for Iran at this point, stated by Israeli Official.

News Articles:

Iran's Khamenei: Israel will eventually disappear
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4269167,00.html

Obama initiates September meeting with Netanyahu to renew Iran dialogue
http://www.debka.com/article/22278/

Israeli minister warns of 30-day Iran war
http://www.prisonplanet.com/israeli-minister-warns-of-30-day-iran-war.html

Israel, U.S. play diplomatic chicken over Iran
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57493482/israel-u.s-play-diplomatic-ch...

Israel 'prepared for 30-day war with Iran'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19274866


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #16 

Netanyahu "determined to attack Iran" before US elections

The Times of Israel is reporting that Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “is determined to attack Iran before the US elections,” Israel’s Channel 10 News claimed on Monday night, and Israel is now “closer than ever” to a strike designed to thwart Iran’s nuclear drive.

The TV station’s military reporter Alon Ben-David, who earlier this year was given extensive access to the Israel Air Force as it trained for a possible attack, reported that, since upgraded sanctions against Iran have failed to force a suspension of the Iranian nuclear program in the past two months, “from the prime minister’s point of view, the time for action is getting ever closer.”

Asked by the news anchor in the Hebrew-language TV report how close Israel now was to “a decision and perhaps an attack,” Ben-David said: “It appears that we are closer than ever.”

He said it seemed that Netanyahu was not waiting for a much-discussed possible meeting with US President Barack Obama, after the UN General Assembly gathering in New York late next month — indeed, “it’s not clear that there’ll be a meeting.” In any case, said Ben-David, “I doubt Obama could say anything that would convince Netanyahu to delay a possible attack.”

The report added that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak believe Obama would have no choice but to give backing for an Israeli attack before the US presidential elections in November.

There is considerable opposition to an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the report noted — with President Shimon Peres, the army’s chief of the General Staff and top generals, the intelligence community, opposition leader Shaul Mofaz, “and of course the Americans” all lined up against Israeli action at this stage.

But, noted Ben-David, it is the Israeli government that would have to take the decision, and there Netanyahu is “almost guaranteed” a majority.

Other Hebrew media reports on Tuesday also said Netanyahu had despatched a senior official, National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror, to update the elderly spiritual leader of the Shas ultra-Orthodox coalition party, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, on the status of the Iranian nuclear program, in order to try to win over Shas government ministers’ support for an attack.

 

__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #17 

Netanyahu contradicts Obama’s claim that sanctions are helping to thwart Iran

Paul Mirengoff says Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu have had their share of, shall we say, differences of opinion. The latest concerns the efficacy of sanctions against Iran. This morning on ABC, President Obama’s mouthpiece Robert Gibbs claimed that “we have made progress in delaying [Iran's] nuclear program.” “Our goal,” he added “is to prevent Iran from having a nuclear program and I think we’re making progress on that.”

But Netanyahu, the world leader with the biggest stake in making real progress on this front, doesn’t see any. He stated:

We have to be honest and say that all the sanctions and diplomacy so far have not set back the Iranian program by one iota. And that’s why I believe that we need a strong and credible military threat coupled with the sanctions to have a chance to change that situation. (video)

So who is right, the man whose country faces the prospect of a devastating Iranian nuclear attack or the man who needs to persuade American voters that he’s tough on Iran?

Well, let’s see. The Washington Post has declared that “The danger Iran will become a nuclear power is growing, not diminishing.” And the Wall Street Journal reports that the Obama administration has granted waivers from sanctions to all twenty of Iran’s major trading partners, including China. As the Journal explained:

Though economic sanctions still haven’t slowed or stopped Iran’s nuclear drive, the Obama Administration has decided to make them even weaker. The Iran sanctions regime is looking like the U.S. tax code—filled with loopholes. It’s so weak, in fact, that all 20 of Iran’s major trading partners are now exempt from them. We’ve arrived at a kind of voodoo version of sanctions. They look real, insofar as Congress forced them into a bill Barack Obama had to sign in December. The Administration has spoken incantations about their powers. But if you’re a big oil importer in China, India or 18 other major economies, the sanctions are mostly smoke.

But at least Obama is consistent. He attempted to water down the congressionally mandated sanctions before they were enacted. Now, he’s undermining them by granting waivers.

So I think we should take the word of Netanyahu, who has real skin in the game, not the word of the perenially duplicitous American president, whose only skin is political. The sanctions have not set back the Iranian program by one iota. Nor, Netanyahu could have added, was Obama ever serious about setting that program back.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #18 

Iran attack decision nears, Israeli elite locks down

"The window of opportunity is before the U.S. presidential election in November."

Michael Stott is reporting that the time for that decision is fast running out and the mood in Jerusalem is hardening.

Iran continues to enrich uranium in defiance of international pressure, saying it needs the fuel for its civilian nuclear program. The West is convinced that Tehran's real objective is to build an atomic bomb - something which the Jewish state will never accept because its leaders consider a nuclear armed-Iran a threat to its very existence.

Adding to the international pressure, U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Shapiro said this week American military plans to strike Iran were "ready" and the option was "fully available".

The central role Iran plays in Netanyahu's deliberations is reflected in the huge map of the Middle East hanging by the door of his office. Israel lies on one edge, with Iran taking pride of place in the centre.

Experts say that within a few months, much of Iran's nuclear program will have been moved deep underground beneath the Fordow mountain, making a successful military strike much more difficult.

As the deadline for a decision draws nearer, the public pronouncements of Israel's top officials and military have changed. After hawkish warnings about a possible strike earlier this year, their language of late has been more guarded and clues to their intentions more difficult to discern.

"The top of the government has gone into lockdown," one official said. "Nobody is saying anything publicly. That in itself tells you a lot about where things stand."

Last week Netanyahu pulled off a spectacular political surprise, creating a coalition of national unity and delaying elections which everyone believed were inevitable. The maneuver also led to speculation that the Israeli leader wanted a broad, strong government to lead a military campaign.

The inclusion of the Iranian-born former Israeli chief of staff and veteran soldier, Gen. Shaul Mofaz, in the coalition, fuelled that speculation - even though both Mofaz and Netanyahu deny that Iran was mentioned in the coalition negotiations.

"I think they have made a decision to attack," said one senior Israeli figure with close ties to the leadership. "It is going to happen. The window of opportunity is before the U.S. presidential election in November. This way they will bounce the Americans into supporting them."

Those close to Netanyahu are more cautious, saying no assumptions should be made about an attack on Iran - an attack with such potentially devastating consequences across the volatile Middle East that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas even went so far as to predict in an interview with Reuters last week that it would be "the end of the world".

Continue reading here . . .

  


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
BuckeyeMike

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 105
Reply with quote  #19 
Fox News reports that Benjamin Netanyahu has canceled early elections ahead of speculation of possible Iran attack.

In a dramatic turn of events that could influence a possible Israeli strike on Iran, Israeli media reports early Tuesday indicate that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reached an agreement with the Kadima opposition party for a unity government, canceling an early election.

  There was no immediate comment from official sources on the decision that was reported at about 2 a.m.

  The reports came as Israel's parliament held debates long into the night over whether to break up ahead of early elections called for the fall. Knesset spokesman Yotam Yakir said no final vote was taken and parliament is not dispersing.

  Earlier Monday, the Israeli government proposed that the election be moved up to Sept. 4.

  The election had originally been set for 2013.

  According to the media reports, Netanyahu forged an agreement with opposition leader Shaul Mofaz of Kadima shortly before parliament was set to vote to disperse.

  The appointment of Mofaz, a former military chief and defense minister, is significant in Israel's standoff with Iran as he has been a vocal critic of Israel striking Iran's nuclear sites on its own.

  The call for early elections had renewed speculation that Israel might attack Iran's suspect nuclear program, perhaps within months.

  Israel, like the West, thinks Iran is developing nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies. But it has repeatedly hinted it might strike Iran if it concludes that U.S.-led diplomacy and sanctions have failed.

  Netanyahu has hinted at the possibility of an Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities but has not made an open threat.

  Israel considers Iran a threat to its existence because of its nuclear and missile development programs, frequent reference to Israel's destruction by Iranian leaders and Iran's support of violent anti-Israeli groups in Lebanon and Gaza.



BuckeyeMike

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 105
Reply with quote  #20 
The Isreali National News reports Iran has become confident further sanctions on their uranium enrichment program will not be forthcoming thanks to the willingness of Obama to make Iran a campaign issue.

Iran Optimistic as Obama Capitulates
  
Tehran's envoy to the IAEA is upbeat ahead of nuclear talks after learning the United States is unlikely to oppose continued enrichment

By Gabe Kahn
First Publish: 4/30/2012, 6:15 PM

Barack Obama
Barack Obama
Reuters
       

An Iranian envoy voiced hope on Monday that talks with the UN nuclear watchdog in mid-May would help resolve "outstanding issues."

However, Iran's ambassador to the Vienna-based IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, again ruled out any halt to Tehran's controversial uranium enrichment program.

The International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] said on Saturday it would resume discussions with Iran nearly two months after the last meeting on Iran's nuclear program, on 14-15 May.

"We hope that this will be a very constructive and successful meeting," Soltanieh told reporters in vienna.

"The main purpose is to negotiate on a modality and framework to resolve outstanding issues and remove ambiguities," he added, echoing language Iranian officials have used prior meetings that failed to yield fruit.

He said that such a "framework" for future co-operation would have to be agreed to before Iran would grant the IAEA access to sites where the nuclear watchdog, Israel, the United States, several European Union countries, and the Gulf Arab states believe military nuclear work is being undertaken.

Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which obligates Tehran to allow IAEA inspectors full and unrestricted access to all of its nuclear sites.

"Every action will be implemented based on this framework, afterward," Soltanieh said when asked whether the IAEA could visit Parchin southeast of the capital Tehran.

The IAEA last November issued a report detailing alleged Iranian research and development activities that were relevant to manufacturing nuclear weapons, lending independent weight to Western suspicions based on intelligence soundings.

"We [will] never stop enrichment activities in Iran," Soltanieh said, describing it as an "inalienable right."

Western diplomats have said Tehran still appeared to be stonewalling over the body's most pressing demand to let its inspectors visit the site.

However, US president Barack Obama indicated he is ready to capitulate to Iranian demands. (not my emphasis)

The Obama administration now is willing to allow 5 percent enrichment if Iran were to take other major steps to curb its ability to develop a nuclear bomb,” the Los Angeles Times reported Monday.

"Other steps” appears to refer to inspection by United Nations officials and undefined safeguards. 

The proposed concession by Obama will likely stake out a policy difference in his race against de facto GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has charged the US president has implemented a failed and weak foreign policy.

However, Americans are far more concerned with the domestic economy than Obama's foreign policy decisions.

The new concession will also strain already difficult relations between Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu told CNN earlier this month, “They have to stop all enrichment," including even 3 percent grade uranium.


Seriously

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,042
Reply with quote  #21 

LEAKED STRATFOR EMAILS: Benjamin Netanyahu Was A Stratfor Source From 2007 To 2010

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was a source to Stratfor Vice President for intelligence Fred Burton since at least May of 2007, according to internal Stratfor emails leaked by WikiLeaks.

In an email dated May 1, 2007, Burton says that "BiBi [i.e. Netanyahu] believes he can unseat Olmert and there is a movement underway to do so."

After an analyst sends a message to clarify, Burton responds: 

BiBi (protect) has said that Olmert is "finished" Thursday. 

In looking at my notes... it looks like BiBi is the one that wants the job very badly. He said, "it's mine, I've shored up Likud [i.e. Israel's major center-right political party]. Thank you Fred for your support of Israel..." 

In mid-May 2009— the week before Netanyahu met with President Barack Obama for the first time since both took office— an email discussed Obama's Middle East policy and Burton wrote:

BB, being the man of honor that he is, intends to let Obama know (I've been told man to man) that he is the vanguard of the State of Israel, with the hell bent intentions (Bush like I may add) of neutralizing the Iranian nuclear menace, because he trusts this Presidency about as much as I do. For that, he gets my man of the year award.

As 2009 progresses Iran's nuclear capabilities and a potential Israeli strike become the main topic of discussion. In a November 2009 email titled "Insight - Blowback ** internal use only **Burton provided intel from both U.S. and Israel:

A very good source just informed me that extremely quiet discussions are underway between [the Department of Homeland Security] and the FBI on the blowback to the Jewish community, facilities, synagogues, day-cares, et al in the United States, in the event of an Israeli strike on Iran... 

From my lips to your ears. I would imagine that my good friend BB Netanyahu told Obama what the Sword of Gideon has in store for the Iranian menace. I also have it on good word that BB trusts Obama about as much as he trusted Arafat or Waddi Haddad.

The next month an email with the subject "Insight - Iran Nukes" discloses information about Iran already having two nuclear missiles:  

From Fred-

According to an Israeli source, Iran has two nukes on missiles ready to go.  

The Iranians are going out of their way to spread disinformation on their capabilities. They want the community to think they are not anywhere near [highly enriched uranium].  

Its a head fake. 

White House is doing everything possible to block Israels next steps.

Israel will go it alone.

Israeli subs are off Iran's coast

An analyst then asks a question to clarify and Burton replies: "my source is bb (eyes only)."

After being asked when an Israeli strike would occur, Burton replies "I've never asked him. He thinks I'm CIA, which I may be."

After being asked if he had any idea what the Israelis are waiting for, Burton says: "The Jews are crazier than the Iranians."

On February 22, 2010, the topic of discussion stays on Israel's next move as Burton wrote:

The point is what is Israel's next move? ... I also know what BB will do, i.e., protect the State of Israel. One can look at MOSSAD's recent covert activities and get a sense of their mindset. I also think they will assassinate A-Dogg. His helo will have a malfunction.

Three days later in an email titled "RE: ANALYST TASKING - CLIENT QUESTION - Israeli strike against Iran" Burton wrote: 

When they [lose] their HUMINT [i.e. human intelligence] coverage they will move. Thus far, elements of their disruption strategy has been working from what I understand.  

When the window closes, BB knows what he must do. We won't be given any warning, similar to their strike on Abu Jihad.

On March 19, 2010, Burton went back to discussing the relationship between Netanyahu and Obama— Vice President Joe Biden had just visited Israel and Netanyahu was headed to the U.S. that week— as he wrote

BB dislikes Obama immensely. After hosting Biden, the last thing he wants to do is kiss Obama's arse. 

From my lips to your ears.

Burton is a former Deputy Chief of the Department of State's counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS). The DSS assists the Department of Defense in following leads and doing forensic analysis of hard drives seized by the U.S. government in ongoing criminal investigations.

Stratfor provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations and government agencies, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency.

In an email from March 2009 that contains a report about the British and U.S. engaging Hezbollah, Burton replies:

BiBi will kill [Hezbollah leader Hannan] Nasrallah unless the U.S. can insure [Hezbollah] is in their box.


__________________
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson
BuckeyeMike

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 105
Reply with quote  #22 
Following this weekends G5+1 negotiations with Iran, Benjamin Netanyahu stated he felt Iran got a "freebie" on sanctions regarding their ongoing nuclear enrichment programs.
(Netanyahu's viewpoint here)

Of course Obama denies giving freebies to anyone.
(Obama's story here)

I think saying "goodbye, see ya in 5 weeks, take care now. By the way leave that nuclear stuff alone till we talk again or you'll be in trouble"... is a pretty good freebie. As the song goes, "Time is on my side..."
Longknife 21

Registered:
Posts: 2,024
Reply with quote  #23 
These people are professional propagandists dedicated to a 'secret' agenda totally at odds with our Constitution. You can't pry the Truth out of 'em with a crowbar! (This is border-line perjury & malfeasance, and should be treated as such.)
 
And "our Media" protects them. Does this airhead qualify for Secret Service protection, yet?  Can thereby be protected from protest or questions. That's a FELONY now Mr. Lee!
Claudia

Registered:
Posts: 1,186
Reply with quote  #24 

and America NEVER LANDED A SPACE SHIP ON THE MOON.......OR PLANTED THAT AMERICAN FLAG THERE!!!!    Same kind of ADULTERED TRUTH!!!

Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 23,051
Reply with quote  #25 

Is Jerusalem in Israel?
 

Seems like a simple question, but James Morrison says it stumped a State Department spokeswoman who refused to answer this simple question:

What is the capital of Israel and where is it located?

The ever-quotable chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee knew the answer, and she jumped on the State Department for appearing to claim that Jerusalem isn’t even inside Israel.

 

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida Republican quipped, "Where does the [Obama] administration think Jerusalem is, on Mars?"

Her zinger followed the announcement of travel plans for Kathy Stephens, acting undersecretary for public diplomacy and public affairs.

The State Department in late March said Ms. Stephens would be visiting "Algeria, Qatar, Jordan, Jerusalem and Israel" between March 23 and April 5.   That announcement sounded as if the State Department refused even to concede that Jerusalem is within the boundaries of Israel, as Ms. Ros-Lehtinen noted.

On March 26, three days after Ms. Stephens left Washington, the State Department issued another announcement that removed all references to the countries she was visiting.  It said she would travel to the cities of "Algiers, Doha, Amman, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv."

An alert reporter, Matt Lee of the Associated Press, noticed the original announcement and challenged State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland to explain whether the United States considers Jerusalem as part of Israel and whether it recognizes the Holy City as the capital of the Jewish state.

Lee and Nuland parried through nine questions as he pressed for answers and she stuck to the diplomatic script.

Nuland made it clear that even Jerusalem’s western part, the Jewish side of the city, controlled by Israel since 1949, is not recognized as part of Israel.

 The question was asked repeatedly:

 Q: "What is the capital of Israel?"

 A: "Our policy with regard to Jerusalem is that it has to be solved through negotiations.  That's all I have to say on this issue."

Lee pressed Nuland:

 Q: "Is it your -- is it your position that all of Jerusalem is a final-status issue, or do you think -- or is it just East Jerusalem?"

 A: "Matt, I don't have anything further to what I've said 17 times on that subject.  Okay?"

 And again:

 Q: "All right.  So hold on.  So I just want to make sure.  You're saying that all of Jerusalem, not just East Jerusalem, is a final-status issue."

 A: "Matt, I don't have anything further on Jerusalem to what I've already said."

 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Help fight the
ObamaMedia

The United States Library of Congress
has selected TheObamaFile.com for inclusion
in its historic collection of Internet materials

Be a subscriber

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011 - 2017
All rights reserved