Senate To Probe Possible Obama Intrusion Of Israeli Election

Editor’s Note – With the election in Israel due this week; with Netanyahu facing a vote that seems to have turned from his favor, were the efforts by “One Voice” and associated groups successful in their efforts to unseat Netanyahu?

We will find out, but right now some in the Senate think so and they want to know if American tax dollars were used to sway the election in israel and if Obama is culpable if so:

Source: Senate panel probing ‎possible Obama administration ties to anti-Netanyahu effort

By  – Fox News

A powerful U.S. Senate investigatory committee has launched a bipartisan probe into an American nonprofit’s funding of efforts to oust Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after the Obama administration’s State Department gave the nonprofit taxpayer-funded grants, a source with knowledge of the panel’s activities told FoxNews.com.

The fact that both Democratic and Republican sides of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations have signed off on the probe could be seen as a rebuke to President Obama, who has had a well-documented adversarial relationship with the Israeli leader.

The development comes as Netanyahu told Israel’s Channel Two television station this week that there were “governments” that wanted to help with the “Just Not Bibi” campaigning — Bibi being the Israeli leader’s nickname.

OneVoice.Palestine

It also follows a FoxNews.com report on claims the Obama administration has been meddling in the Israeli election on behalf of groups hostile to Netanyahu. A spokesperson for Sen. Rob Portman, Ohio Republican and chairman of the committee, declined comment, and aides to ranking Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, of Missouri, did not immediately return calls.

The Senate subcommittee, which has subpoena power, is the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs’ chief investigative body with jurisdiction over all branches of government operations and compliance with laws.

“The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations does not comment on ongoing investigations,” Portman spokeswoman Caitlin Conant told Foxnews.com.

But a source familiar with the matter confirmed for FoxNews.com that the probe — undisclosed until now — was both underway and bipartisan in nature.

According to the source, the probe is looking into “funding” by OneVoice Movement – a Washington-based group that has received $350,000 in recent State Department grants, and until last November was headed by a veteran diplomat from the Clinton administrations.

A subsidiary of OneVoice is the Israel-based Victory 15 campaign, itself guided by top operatives of Obama’s White House runs, which seeks to “replace the government” of Israel.netanyahu_obama

“It’s confirmed that there is a bipartisan Permanent Subcommittee inquiry into OneVoice’s funding of V15,” the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity about the American group, which bills itself as working for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In his television interview, Netanyahu said the coalition seeking to oust him is generously funded by foreign donors who are also encouraging a high voter turnout among Israel’s Arab and left-wing voters in a bid to replace the existing leadership.

He characterized the campaign against him as “unprecedented.” While Netanyahu pointed the finger at “European countries and left-wing people abroad,” some observers note that he held back from openly criticizing Obama during his recent trip to the U.S. to address Congress on problems his government sees with administration-backed efforts to reach a nuclear weapons inspection deal with Iran.

“We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel,” Netanyahu told lawmakers — while Obama refused to meet with the Israeli leader, and later criticized his speech as “nothing new.”

No direct link has been confirmed between Obama and the anti-Netanyahu campaign in Israel, but polls have shown that a large majority of Israelis believe the administration has been interfering in the election, set for March 17.

One expert told FoxNews.com earlier this month the State Department grants constituted indirect administration funding of the anti-Netanyahu campaign by providing OneVoice with the $350,000 — even though State Department officials said the funding stopped in November, ahead of the announcement of the Israeli election.

Gerald Steinberg, founder and president of NGO Monitor, which tracks money flows to unmask non-governmental organizations that deviate from their stated human rights or humanitarian agendas, said even ostensibly unrelated grants keep an organization going during periods it is not engaged in political activity.

Indeed, by January, OneVoice – whose focus on Israel’s 1967 borders as a negotiating starting point reflects Obama’s thinking but is counter to Netanyahu’s – had announced its partnership with V15.

Around the same time, Jeremy Bird, who served as Obama’s deputy national campaign director in 2008, and his national campaign director in 2012, arrived in Israel to help direct V15. Bird took with him additional former Obama campaign operatives to help V15 achieve its goal of knocking on one million doors to make the case for a change in Israel’s leadership.

OneVoice is barred from directly targeting Netanyahu by U.S. law regulating its tax-exempt status, and doing so would threaten that status.

One Voice spokesman Payton Knox denied claims the group is working with the administration in the upcoming Israeli election.

“OneVoice is eager to cooperate with any inquiry,” he said Saturday. “And after a fair examination, we are confident no wrong doing will be found.”

But the recent FoxNews.com investigation showed that the nonprofit, in its 2014 Annual Report, said its Israel branch would be “embarking on a groundbreaking campaign around the Israeli elections.” In partnering with V15, the two groups have operated from adjacent offices in Tel Aviv.

In addition to McCaskill, other Democrats on the subcommittee are Sens. Jon Tester of Montana, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota.

Republican subcommittee members, who form the majority, are Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Rand Paul of Kentucky, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, and Ben Sasse of Nebraska, in addition to Portman.

State Department documents say the grants to OneVoice were meant for the group’s work in encouraging both Palestinian grass-roots civic activism and Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. The State Department itself, meanwhile, denied any of the funds had been used for election campaign activities despite OneVoice’s backing of V15.

Launched in 2002 by snack bar mogul Daniel Lubetzky and boasting the star power of such celebrities as Brad Pitt, Danny DeVito, Rhea Perlman and Sir Paul McCartney among its honorary advisors, OneVoice was headed until November by Marc Ginsberg, who advised President Carter on Middle East policy and served as President Clinton’s ambassador to Morocco.

Ginsberg, who has described the administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a “window of opportunity,” is now serving OneVoice as “special advisor” after resigning as CEO at a time that turned out to be just ahead of the early December announcement of the Israeli election.

“I resigned on November 11, 2014, because I had only committed to serve as CEO for one year and my resignation was effective December 19, 2014,” he wrote in an email to FoxNews.com. “I agreed to be available after that as a Senior Adviser on an occasional basis to the organization…along with many others, but have had ZERO decision-making authority over personnel, budgets, programs, etc. That responsibility was transferred to the Executive Director of the OneVoice Europe organization after I resigned.”

“Netanyahu’s Moment” – The “Deal,” a “Chamberlain Moment?”

By SUA Staff

Come Tuesday, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel will give his much discussed speech to a joint session of Congress.

Netanyahu has already arrived in Washington, D. C. and the anticipation builds. No matter what side of the aisle you reside, this is a momentous time for the Middle East, and all western nations.

With rumors that a deal with Iran is almost complete, and many saying Obama is giving away the farm, Netanyahu’s speech may not be just another version of his many previous speeches he has given in recent times regarding Iran and its ambitions.

The rancor between supporters of the speech, and those who may not attend in defiance, in defense of Obama, has been nothing short of acrimonious.

Netanyahu Moment Rice Destructive

Susan Rice, Obama’s National Security Advisor, called his presence here for the speech “destructive” to relations between the U.S. and Israel but today on the Sunday talk shows, Secretary of State John Kerry was downplaying the rhetoric.

Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday tried to calm tensions with Israel before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s congressional address, yet insisted the Obama administration’s diplomatic record with Iran entitles the U.S. to “the benefit of the doubt” as negotiators work toward a long-term nuclear deal. On a mission to warn of the dangers of a nuclear-armed Iran, the prime minister arrived in Washington for the speech the White House didn’t want him to give.

Kerry said in an interview broadcast before he arrived in Switzerland for talks with Iran’s foreign minister that Netanyahu was welcome to speak in the U.S. and that the administration did not want the event “turned into some great political football.”

That sentiment was a step back from some of the sharp rhetoric between the allies in recent weeks, and Kerry mentioned that he talked to Netanyahu as recently as Saturday. (Read more of “Netanyahu’s Moment” at AP here.)

Kerry is asking for “the benefit of the doubt” but we must remember how in the dark Obama kept Israel in the early secret talks with Iran in late 2013. The one nation most in the cross-hairs has had little to zero input on any deal and Netanyahu was correct to be somewhat indignant.

Neville Chamberlain brandishes the paper that he believed signified "peace for our time" on his return from Munich in 1938
Neville Chamberlain brandishes the paper that he believed signified “peace for our time” on his return from Munich in 1938

On Saturday, an unsubstantiated report was circulating in the Middle East and has gained international interest when it was revealed in a Kuwaiti media outlet that when the Israelis found out about the secret talks, they planned a raid on Iran that Obama stopped.

The Bethlehem-based news agency Ma’an has cited a Kuwaiti newspaper report Saturday, that US President Barack Obama thwarted an Israeli military attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Following Obama’s threat, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was reportedly forced to abort the planned Iran attack.

According to Al-Jarida, the Netanyahu government took the decision to strike Iran some time in 2014 soon after Israel had discovered the United States and Iran had been involved in secret talks over Iran’s nuclear program and were about to sign an agreement in that regard behind Israel’s back. (Read more at Arutz Sheva.)

Regardless if VP Biden and many Democrats do not attend, expect a full room as the desire to see the speech is much greater than the political tactic the Democrats are saying and threatening.

IranNuclearMost of America loves and supports Israel, and support for the speech is much greater than the you might think if you listen to liberal talking heads and Obama sycophants and surrogates – Obama, no matter what people think, is pissed.

Of course the Palestinians and their supporters do not like the fact that Netanyahu is here, in fact they are already boycotting Israeli products but that was to be expected, they are supported by Iran. And the supporters are woefully ignorant on so many facets of history and facts to the point that they are actually supporting Iran by their rhetoric.

Netanyahu is jeopardizing Obama’s legacy goal of being the President who made “the deal” with Iran in their eyes, but history will record whether or not that legacy is a “Neville Chamberlain Moment” or not. We believe it is disastrous moment if Obama lands this farce of a deal.

Israel cannot buy a break, so maybe his speech will at least inform the ignorant, and sway the outcome of any deal. Bill Kristol has an interesting take on this that worthy of reading:

Netanyahu’s Moment

By William Kristol – The Weekly Standard

Sometimes a speech is just a speech. Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech about Iran policy on March 3 will not be his first address to Congress. It will make familiar, if important, arguments. One might assume that, like the vast majority of speeches, it would soon be overtaken by events in Israel and the United States and the world.iran-israel-nuclear-

But the Obama administration’s reaction to the Israeli prime minister’s appearance suggests Netanyahu’s is more than just another speech.

An administration that disdains the use of disproportionate force has been, to say the least, disproportionately forceful in its efforts to undermine Netanyahu’s message and discredit the messenger.

What is Obama so worried about? What is he, if we may put it indelicately, so scared of?

We can get a clue from the almost equally disproportionate reaction of Obama’s surrogates to Rudy Giuliani’s suggestion that Barack Obama doesn’t love his country. Why, really, should anyone care about Giuliani’s comment?

We have no crime of lèse majesté in this country. But Obama defenders did care. Did they suspect Giuliani had struck a nerve?

It seems he did. After days in which the entire media and most politicians, including many Republicans, hurried to condemn Giuliani and to assure everyone that Barack Obama loves our country as much as the next red-blooded American, a new poll from YouGov reports only 47 percent of respondents saying they think the president loves America, with a slight majority either thinking he does not (35 percent) or being unsure (17 percent).

By contrast, 58 percent think Rudy Giuliani loves America, and only 10 percent think not. As for themselves, 85 percent of respondents say they love America, and only 6 percent say they do not.

What does this have to do with Netanyahu? Agree with his policies or not, no one doubts he loves his country. In fact, he seems to like America a lot, too. One suspects that if asked, respondents to the YouGov poll might have judged Netanyahu more of an America-lover than Barack Obama. And they would in a sense have been right.

Giuliani Destroys Obama! "I Do Not Believe That The President Loves America"
Giuliani Destroys Obama! “I Do Not Believe That The President Loves America”

After all, Obama is not just a citizen of America. He’s a citizen of the world. And he’s a disbeliever in American exceptionalism in any sense stronger than the British believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks in Greek exceptionalism.

There’s nothing surprising about this.

Obama is very much in the mainstream of modern progressive thought in his embrace of cosmopolitanism and his distrust of nationalism. He’s not interested in riding a high horse equipped, as he would see it, with patriotic blinders or nationalist spurs.

Netanyahu, by contrast, is a patriot and a nationalist. He’s an Israeli patriot and nationalist. But he also appreciates the historic role and accomplishments of the great nation-states of the West. History—the history of the Jewish people, but not only the Jewish people—is always on his mind.

He is inspired by the example of Ze’ev Jabotinsky—and also of Winston Churchill. He appreciates the legacy of David Ben-Gurion—and also of Harry Truman.

When Netanyahu walks to the podium of the House of Representatives on March 3, he’ll undoubtedly have in mind an earlier speech given by a foreign leader to a joint meeting of Congress. On December 26, 1941, Winston Churchill addressed Congress, though in the smaller Senate Chamber rather than in the House, as so many members were out of town for Christmas break.

On the 26th of December, 1941, Winston Churchill became the first British Prime Minister to address a joint session of the American Congress.
On the 26th of December, 1941, Winston Churchill became the first British Prime Minister to address a joint session of the American Congress.

Churchill enjoyed the great advantage in December 1941 of having an American president who, after Pearl Harbor, was a clear and unambiguous ally in the war for the West. Netanyahu has no such advantage.

So it might be hard for him to say, as Churchill did, that here in Washington he had “found an Olympian fortitude which, far from being based upon complacency, is only the mask of an inflexible purpose and the proof of a sure, well-grounded confidence in the final outcome.”

But Netanyahu won’t be speaking only to the Obama administration, which has, after all, made clear its lack of interest in listening to Netanyahu and whose allies won’t be there to listen. He’ll be speaking to the American people.

So he can echo Churchill in appealing to them and warning that, in the struggle in which we’re engaged, “many disappointments and unpleasant surprises await us.”

He can echo Churchill in expressing confidence that the West, led by the United States, will prevail. And he can look forward to a time when an Israeli prime minister will be able to say what Churchill could say in December 1941:

“Lastly, if you will forgive me for saying it, to me the best tidings of all—the United States, united as never before, has drawn the sword for freedom and cast away the scabbard.”

President Obama has not, and will not, cast away the scabbard. Though Netanyahu will of course focus, as he should, on the details of a possible Iran agreement—the speech will be a moment that points beyond the particulars of an Iran deal. It will be a moment that could cause us to reflect on what kind of people we are, and, with new leadership, what kind of deeds we might once again be capable of.

As it will be a moment of vindication for Zionism, the cause to which he and his family have dedicated their lives. In past episodes of Jews’ being consigned by the world to their fate, they were powerless to fight. And so the world (and not a few Jews) became accustomed to Jews’ playing the role of victim. On March 3, something remarkable and historic will happen.

The prime minister of Israel, speaking on behalf of not only his country and millions of Jews, but on behalf of the West itself, will command the world’s attention as he declares his refusal to appease the enemies of Israel and the West. Both Jabotinsky and Churchill, both Ben-Gurion and Truman, would appreciate the moment.

Obama's Unexplainable Stance on Iran – Threads Connect

Obama’s Swaps Israel for Iran

Connecting Events Across the Globe that Prove Iran is a Grave Threat to America

By Scott W. Winchell and Denise Simon, SUA Staff

Several stories in the news of late are seemingly unrelated but when we take a closer view, one thread connects them, Iran. Now ask yourself, is Iran a threat to America and how is Obama handling that threat?obama-iran

Let us list a few events for you and then try to show the ties that bind them all in an interesting fashion. Please understand, if these questions are not answered, we have a problem that is biblical in scale and some people have a lot of explaining to do – Mr. Obama, and not to the Glo-Zelle’s of the world!

Just in the last few days and weeks we watched as terrorists attacked in Paris, then there was a massive hunt by European authorities seeking other terror suspects across the continent and elsewhere, and news that an impending attack was quashed. Soon after, a unity gathering of massive proportions was held and no one of import from our government was sent to attend. Why?

We also found out that a rift had opened between French President Hollande and Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The rift widened because Netanyahu questioned France’s ability to safeguard Jews living in France and Hollande told Netanjahu not to attend.

He did attend however and gave a speech where he told France’s Jews that they would be welcomed back in Israel. The French government “fumed” over it. Has France thrown Israel under the bus as well?

ParisRallySoon after, the White House admitted it erred in not sending a higher ranking official and sent John Kerry to France on the now famous “big hug” tour with James Taylor in tow. Then there was the very awkward clench Kerry initiated and would not break from with Hollande.

Egg on the face was an understatement. But why really did the White House seemingly spurn the importance of the gathering? Would talks with Iran been jeopardized?

We then witnessed the President’s State of the Union address for 2015, and a state visit from British Prime Minister David Cameron and a puzzling joint press conference prior.

Much has been written about how Obama did not address foreign affairs adequately, but in both the SOTU and the Joint Press conference, we saw that Iran was once again being addressed very oddly, why?

Why are Cameron and Obama so in sync over the Iranian talks where deadlines had been postponed twice prior? Here is excerpt of his speech on Iran:

During a pause in his speech, Obama rests after declaring he would veto Republican efforts...
During a pause in his speech, Obama rests after declaring he would veto Republican efforts…

Our diplomacy is at work with respect to Iran, where, for the first time in a decade, we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material.

Between now and this spring, we have a chance to negotiate a comprehensive agreement that prevents a nuclear-armed Iran; secures America and our allies – including Israel; while avoiding yet another Middle East conflict.

There are no guarantees that negotiations will succeed, and I keep all options on the table to prevent a nuclear Iran.

But new sanctions passed by this Congress, at this moment in time, will all but guarantee that diplomacy fails – alienating America from its allies; and ensuring that Iran starts up its nuclear program again.

It doesn’t make sense. That is why I will veto any new sanctions bill that threatens to undo this progress. The American people expect us to only go to war as a last resort, and I intend to stay true to that wisdom. (Emphasis added.)

Really Mr. President. “It doesn’t make sense?” It is clear to us that you do not make sense.

Since the SOTU, a very big surprise emerged, Speaker of the House John Boehner invited Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress, without prior consultation with the White House.

Of course the response from the White House was immediate and they called his move a breech of protocol. The Obama administration said they would not meet with Netanyahu because it was too close to his election date.

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad (R) shakes hands with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in Damascus April 4, 2007. REUTERS/SANA   (SYRIA)
Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad (R) shakes hands with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in Damascus April 4, 2007. REUTERS/SANA (SYRIA)

Again, the subject here is Iran and the White House is not happy at all despite “plausible” excuses from Josh Earnest.

Even Nancy Pelosi, the then Speaker of the House who flew to talk to Assad in Syria during the Bush Presidency in 2007 is now decrying Boehner’s act as suspect, asking if it was to bolster Netanyahu’s election chances in two weeks? Talking points?

In the joint press conference we also learned that Cameron and many other European leaders were backing Obama on Iran.

Cameron even undertook the extraordinary step of lobbying our Senators on the subject. In that press conference Obama admonished Congress to “hold your fire” on Iran. Again, why? Even some in his own party are questioning his stance.

Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) criticized the Obama administration’s Iran rhetoric for sounding “like talking points that come straight out of Tehran” and supporting “the Iranian narrative of victimization” before a Senate hearing on Wednesday.

Then news came out of Argentina, yes way down there, about a curious case involving international intrigue, and you guessed it, Iran’s involvement. How does Argentina mesh with all these other curiosities? What we know now is that the “Argentine prosecutor who had accused both the president and the Iranians of covering up the country’s worst terrorist attack.”

He had been uncovering clues and facts dating back to the 1994 attack perpetrated on a Jewish center was about to testify that Iran was behind it all. Well, he turned up dead over the weekend and it definitely was not a suicide we now know.

Incidentally, Argentina was negotiating in Aleppo with Iran to circumvent sanctions on them back in the “Oil for Food” program in Iraq days long ago.

Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina Explosion that Iran was behind in 1994
Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina Explosion that Iran was behind in 1994

In the centre of Buenos Aires, a Renault van packed with over 600lbs of explosives was detonated on July 18 in front of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association, or AMIA – Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina.

The building collapsed, killing 85 people and injuring over 300. It was the worst terrorist attack in Argentina‘s history, and a terrible blow to South America’s largest Jewish community. An estimated 300,000 Jewish people live in Argentina – the sixth largest Jewish population in the world.

Alberto Nisman, the prosecutor was initially declared a suicide, but now we know that is not true either. What makes this tie to Iran so interesting is that he uncovered that Iran had been setting a terror network up in South America.

Iran’s tentacles seem box the compass and yet Obama is so determined to allow diplomacy to work its magic, yet Iran has no intention, nor will it negotiate ever in believable terms.

Also curious, just as this was unfolding “Israeli tourists were targeted in an anti-Semitic attack at an Argentina hostel” where a four-hour standoff resulted in injuries to police as well.

Now we come back to Boehner’s invitation, it seems the White House has already stated it will not meet with Netanjahu before or after his speech to the joint session of Congress. Why? Maybe Tony Blinken’s testimony Wednesday is more telling than is being reported:

A senior official in the State Department admitted on Wednesday that the Obama administration’s goal during negotiations with Iran is delaying the regime’s development of nuclear weapons rather than shutting down the Islamic Republic’s contested nuclear program.

Tony Blinken with Obama
Tony Blinken with Obama

Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken acknowledged during a tense exchange with senators on Capitol Hill a deal being sought by the Obama administration that would constrain its nuclear breakout capability without eliminating its nuclear program.

Blinken also floated the possibility of extending nuclear talks past the June deadline should additional time be needed to finalize details of a possible deal with Iran.

We have seen how Obama has spurned Netanjahu on several occasions, and watched John Kerry place heavy pressure on Israel in affairs concerning peace efforts with the Palestinians with clear disregard for Israel’s security. Of course Kerry’s efforts failed miserably, but why so much pressure on Israel.

Then we learned yesterday that the Israelis have discovered a new missile silo with intercontinental capability near the capital Tehran. But neither Obama nor Kerry will meet with him before the March elections and on the day of his speech scheduled for March 3rd.

But Obama will meet with the YouTube queen; “Glo-Zelle?”obama-glozell

In Obama’s SOTU he talked about an Iran that had ceased in its efforts to enrich nuclear fuel, but that too was not true.

The UN’s IAEA slammed Iran in the recent past and had indicated that Iran’s actions could not be validated and most experts know that Obama was out-of-touch with reality on the subject like he was on the status of actions against the Islamic State. Again, why?

Why is Obama and many in Europe so interested in slamming Israel and coddling Iran? Why is Iran so favored by Obama, maybe not in his words, but surely in his actions? We harken back to Obama’s “red line” in Syria, did he back down then because of his explainable favoritism for Iran?

Now that Sana’a, Yemen has fallen to Houthi Shiites supported by Iran, and Iran now controls at least four Middle East capitals; Damascus, Tehran, Sana’a, Baghdad, and arguably Beirut, Obama is detached, and/or showing that he is intentionally inept.

Incidentally, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki showed how woefully they were informed by a journalist yesterday in her briefing.

We also just learned that Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz has died, opening yet another question of great import, in which direction will the new king, his half-brother Salman will take our relationship. It has been a tepid relationship to say the least in their attempt to “kill American oil” and the way Obama has handled Syria.

New ICBM silo near Tehran
New ICBM silo near Tehran

While Iran is so clearly unworthy of joining the “community of nations” as a trusted equal, why is Obama so dead set on making them so, especially at Israel’s peril.

Maybe John Boehner has been waiting for just the right moment to expose the answer to some of these questions.

When Obama so clearly tells a story that misleads the American people, we are glad at SUA that Boehner invited Netanyahu to tell the real story, here, in a manner the White House can only try to “spin” away.

The excuse of the “proximity” to the Israeli elections is clear to critical thinkers, he has always hated Netanyahu and wants him to lose so his goals with Iran can be achieved.

Remember also, Russia just signed a pact with Iran on military cooperation, is Obama once again “bowing” to Putin as well? After all, Iran has been cultivating South America for years, all in line with Russia’s goals.

To top it off and bring us back to our original question ponder this – in December of 2010, our presumptive next Attorney General was instrumental in gaining the conviction of the cell that planned to blow up JFK airport in New York. In that trial it was clear, Iran and its network in South America were up to their eyeballs in the plot:

At trial, Kadir, a former member of the Guyanese parliament, admitted that he regularly passed information to Iranian authorities about sensitive topics, including the Guyanese military, and believed himself bound to follow fatwas from Iranian religious leaders.

On June 2, 2007, Kadir was arrested in Trinidad aboard a plane headed to Venezuela, en route to Iran. He was subsequently extradited to the United States. (Also, read more here.)

Let us also not forget the foiled 2011 plot to kill a Saudi Arabian in DC. No threat to America Geraldo? What next, Palestinian and Iranian wings at the soon to come Obama Library in Chicago?

GeraldoOnIran1.21.15

 

Coming to a shore near you? Israeli video of the new Iranian ICBM silo near Tehran:

%CODE%

UPDATE: Iran Wins, the World Loses – Goodbye Kobani

UPDATE 8:30 PM Eastern, 10/10/14 – SUA has received further information in regard to the analysis in this posted article from multiple, high ranking sources in the Middle East that affirm that the United States, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey have agreed to allow Kobani to fall to the ISIS (Daesh) forces. They have decided to deal with ISIS later, and that the US will fall in line with decisions made by this group.

The intent is to allow Bashir al Assad to remain in power in Syria, despite Turkey’s protests to affirm that Iran will then control Syria and Iraq. Additionally, SUA was told that these leaders do not want the Kurds to ever have a formal state of their own despite its current semi-autonomous stature to placate the Turks and the Iranians. SUA also learned that aid from the United States is not being delivered to the Peshmurga (Kurds) in Northern Iraq but is being held in Baghdad to ensure this end.

Please read the original article as well:

Iran Wins, the World Loses – Thanks Mr. Obama

By Denise Simon – SUA Analyst and Associate Editor

Have you wondered why Barack Obama says that a war to crush Daesh (IS) may take as much as three years to contain their terrorism? Have you wondered why we will not commit ground forces?

Have you wondered why we never attempted to removed Bashar al Assad or clean up Syria? Have you wondered about the GCC and those relationships and why there are splits in relationships in the region?obama_rowhanisplit

The Obama administration is on a single tracked mission to have a ‘nuclear accord’ with Iran, and nothing will be allowed to impede this objective.

There will be no consideration for historical terror globally at the hands of Iran, no allowance for millions of Syrian refugees displaced throughout the region and no attention paid to 300,000 dead in Syria and Iraq.

All of these facts are dismissed at the hands of John Kerry and his carefully selected team to engage Iran and bring them into the worldwide community demanding that leadership of other countries accept this agenda.

It is proven that John Kerry, the White House, and the NSC knows very well why and the players include as many as 100 notable DC insiders, a team of people you need to reacquaint yourself with. It is an interesting mix of strange bedfellows.

First, the administration engaged a delegation out of Switzerland to open and prod talks with Iran. Then after Hillary Clinton, who virtually had no interest in the matter knowing she had future Oval Office dreams left, John Kerry mobilized this team.

They are seen here as signatories to a report produced by the Iran Project called “Iran and Its Neighbors: Regional Implications for U.S. Policy of a Nuclear Agreement.” It is a long and tedious read full of assumed conceptions, omissions, and a stark “new global ranking” philosophy. It clearly sidelines Israel and other major players and injects facts, where others or voided, which are not in evidence and ignores many facets that are terror/Islam related issues.

This analysis is on part four of a four part series signed by the following:

Iran Group 1

Iran Group 2

For next week:  European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, and US Secretary of State John Kerry will meet in Vienna next week, October 14-15. They have a looming deadline for a final nuclear deal with Iran less than two months away, European and Iranian officials said Wednesday.

US negotiators, including Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns, Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, and senior advisor Jake Sullivan, will meet with their Iranian counterparts in Vienna on Tuesday Oct. 14, a day ahead of Kerry joining the Ashton Zarif meeting, the State Department said. The meetings come as there is a growing sense in the Washington policy community and beyond that concluding a comprehensive accord by the Nov. 24 deadline is unlikely.

So for some background here are some chilling facts gleaned from their report:

In 2002 George W. Bush called Iran as being a part of an “Axis of Evil” causing an escalation in hostilities between the United States and Iran. Since then, the Obama Administration has chosen to ignore the Bush proclamation and has engaged Iran in all aspects of middle east policy with sights on a nuclear weapons/enrichment accord.

There is no intention to stop the nuclear enrichment program but merely to contain it at a level that has not yet been determined. The U.S. using all the power-brokers listed above have purposely installed Iran as a peace partner and an emerging power in the Middle East. Through 2014-2016, Kerry et al, has deferred to Iran to maintain and manage al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan once we exit fully.

IranProject4

Today there is even chatter to remove Iran from being officially listed by the U.S as a ‘state sponsor or terror.’

John Kerry et al, have determined that Iran is now moderate and no longer a pariah such that all recent and future talks with Iran are aimed to integrate them into the world community on par with all other legitimate nations.

This is being accomplished by lifting sanctions, encouraging trade and investment in Iran, and by including Iran in not only on the diplomatic stage, but also militarily when it comes to Iraq and Syria.

At the behest of Iran, the U.S. has not taken on Syria or Assad fearing that it will fall further and become a failed state like Somalia. Syria is Iran’s beach-head. Early on, John Kerry asked Russia to take on Syria/Assad and work to impose a transitional government all for the sake of the ‘nuclear talks’. Russia declined.

It has been officially declared, though silently, that there is no military solution to Syria, either before or ‘after’ the nuclear agreement with Iran, and once the agreement is agreed to and signed, only then will a robust humanitarian solution begin at a Geneva lll meeting.

At that time, talks of a ‘unity’ state for Syria will begin and those invited to this future session will include: Saudi Arabia, Russian, Iran, Turkey, and Assad. In the meantime human slaughter continues in the region.

Israel is left out completely and after the nuclear accord is completed, the U.S. will then sell the program to Israel. Then they will sell it to Turkey to bridge all ‘gaps’ between Iran and Turkey, although those tensions have moderated since Erdogan was re-elected.

After this ‘nuclear accord’ is reached, the U.S. will aid Iran’s energy production to bolster Europe’s energy supply reducing their dependence on Russia. This will include pipelines, power grids, and natural gas delivery with cross border projects.

If no ‘nuclear accord’ is reached, certain blow-back triggers will begin and will include additional sanctions and renewed threats solicited from the West. At that point the U.S. will begin their blame game on Iran and will then reach out to Israel to clean up the mess militarily. Additionally, the U.S will threaten to wean herself completely from the Middle East interests for the next ten years.

132313_obama_kerry_rouhani_putin_assad_aps_605

The talks between the West and Iran are being positioned such that the entire plank is created and the approval and signing will go directly to Rouhani and Barack Obama. To date, Obama has successfully finessed and minimized Congress, Israel, and all lobby groups with regard to these talks.

There is only a feeble border between Afghanistan and Iran and Iran will use Afghani refugees as a bargaining chip in order to keep the new Afghan government in check economically as America and NATO exit the country and we will be taking our money with us.

To date, the John Kerry nuclear talks team has virtually ignored all countries in the GCC and Iran will be forced on those countries in spite of their positions today. Ignoring current and future ground conditions, the building of terror networks and the continued killing machines known as Daesh, along with al Qaeda factions merging, the outlook for global stability is grim such that even Leon Panetta and others have predicted a 30 year war.

John Kerry is playing a hidden hand with this nefarious objective such that the world is at risk due to Iran’s red carpet treatment at the hands of the Obama administration. Nuclear weapons are in the future for other countries due to Iran. This is not a Cold War Part Two building, rather it is a real hot war at genesis.

Here are some important excerpts to read from their report:

2.5.3 Improving reforms.

The Gulf States understandably fear Iran’s military capability, particularly its navy and ballistic missile arsenal; but the real threat is an ideological one. Gulf rulers believe that Iran is determined to subvert their domestic politics by exploiting aggrieved segments of their citizenry. One way to mitigate this challenge would be through domestic reform. This could help reduce Iran’s influence in internal Gulf State affairs. As of now, the kings and autocratic rulers in the region remain wary of an Iran that still symbolizes popular, Shi’ite-influenced revolution. U.S. encouragement of such reforms, while desirable, is problematic.

6.1.2 Syrian support during Iran–Iraq War.

When in 1980 Iraq invaded Iran, Saddam had been supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in an effort to topple Syria’s president, and Hafiz al-Assad at once committed his country to Tehran’s defense.1 Iran’s leaders named the war, which lasted until 1988, “the Sacred Defense” (of the revolution), and ever since has been meticulously building a Shi’ite sphere of influence. Called the “Shi’ite Crescent” by some detractors and the “Resistance Front” by those who belong to it, Iran’s network stretches across Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean. The Resistance Front, which was originally made up only of Hezbollah and Syria but which today includes Iraq, has been a central pillar of Iranian defense since the Islamic revolution. Without it, Tehran believes that its enemies could further isolate Iran and even bring about regime change. As one local cleric recently explained, “If we lose Syria, we cannot keep Tehran.”2 Among Iranian leaders, this rhetoric is widespread. Major General Qassem Suleimani, the principal architect of Iran’s military effort in Syria and head of its Qods Force, has asserted, “Syria is the front line of the resistance.”3

8.2.4.b Evidence of Iran–Al Qaeda antagonism.

Documents captured from the 2011 Abbottabad operation that killed Osama bin Laden support the insurance/bargaining-chip interpretation. According to bin Laden’s letters, relations between Iran and Al Qaeda was hostile, characterized by disagreements over releasing Al Qaeda members and their families, as well as over covert actions taken by Al Qaeda against Iran. A complex series of negotiations and hostage exchanges, all detailed in bin Laden’s letters, confirms their antagonism. The relationship has become even more troubled since Hezbollah and Al Qaeda affiliates began killing each other in Syria.

8.3.1 Terrorist designation remains a major obstacle.

Any nuclear accord that includes significant relief from sanctions will have to deal with the fact that some sanctions against Iran enacted by Congress have been keyed to terrorism. Thus removing Iran from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list would be difficult. The relevant legislation requires that the Secretary of State provide evidence either that the state has a new government (as was the case in Libya and Iraq) or that it has not engaged in terrorist activities in the prior six months and is committed not to do so in the future (as was argued in de-listing North Korea). Neither is the case here. Meanwhile, the Iranian public’s expectations for relief from sanctions are a major factor moving the Rouhani government toward agreement. The sanctions linked to terrorism mean that, even if a nuclear deal is struck, the domestic politics in both countries may make it difficult to sustain a positive momentum. This could lead to a new phase of U.S.–Iranian tension.

________________

Edited and Posted by Scott W. Winchell

Israelis Reveal Hamas War Crime Evidence

Editor’s Note – As the world continues to lay blame on Israel, for a whole host of charges, we ask again, do you know who the real criminals are? Is there true evil in Gaza? Is the U.N. capable and ready to look at the scene in a sincere and justified fashion? We doubt it. What we do know is, documentation easily refutes all these bogus charges but we all know the deck is always stacked against Israel.

Last week we saw numerous attempts to lay blame on Israel and to foment the tide of a visit to the Hague for war crimes. Of course, much of this comes from tortured logic, twisted meanings of wording, and a prejudiced slant, even from some Israeli human rights organizations like B’Tselem who said in the Progressive:IsraelReportScreenShot

“Israel states that all the attacks on Gaza were only aimed at military targets — yet it defines ‘military target’ so broadly that the term loses all meaning,” the group says. “Israel states that all its strikes in Gaza were proportionate, and that the fact that civilians were killed does not in itself contradict that. Yet after dozens of strikes, each killing many uninvolved civilians, while Israel did not prove or even claim military gains significant enough to render such damage proportionate, this argument is no longer tenable.”

Also from that article are others calling for accountability, that is to say, Israeli accountability with no word on Hamas or others:

Francis Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois, and author of Palestine, Palestinians, and International Law, says the Palestinians leadership should begin legal proceedings against Israel before the International Court of Justice in The Hague on the basis of the 1948 Genocide Convention. He has given up hope on the International Criminal Court, saying it is biased toward the United States and Israel.

Human Rights Watch and others take a different view.

Legal proceedings at the International Criminal Court “could ensure access to international justice for victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on Palestinian territories, and would send an important message that such crimes cannot be committed with impunity,” Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and several other human rights groups state in an open letter to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

“People who want to end the lack of accountability in Palestine and deter future abuse should urge President Abbas to seek access to the ICC,” Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director of the organization, states in a press release.

Damned the facts, damn the evidence, and rely upon a circular argument that vets itself in an incestual pool of thought is rampant among those who accuse Israel, no matter the provocation of being war criminals. Crickets are all we hear from them about the terror organization Hamas as we have documented time and again.Abbas is plotting

In the mean time, the Fatah wing of the Palestinian Authority is moving quickly, especially to regain Mahmoud Abbas’ lost power when Gaza was taken over by Hamas:

Aides to the Palestinian president said Sunday that he will soon appeal to the international community to set a deadline for Israel to end its occupation of lands captured in the 1967 Mideast war and make way for an independent Palestinian state.

President Mahmoud Abbas was expected to unveil his proposal as part of a “day after” plan following the current war in the Gaza Strip, likely at a meeting of the Palestinian leadership on Tuesday, said the aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan has not yet been made public.

Abbas is plotting his move even as the fighting continues to rage. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, warned Sunday that the 7-week-old military campaign in Gaza would stretch into September — despite growing anger among residents in southern Israel over the military’s inability to halt rocket and mortar fire out of the Palestinian territory following the death of a 4-year-old Israeli boy over the weekend.

Knowing this was always going to be the case, the Israelis did do something very smart, they documented everything. The following is a great example of the proof in video, on tape, in audio, and in real time as incidents occurred, you be the judge. This is a must see presentation:

%CODE%