Live: Senate Republicans hold a press conference on the Iran nuclear deal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Feld3TARqCU
BARACK Hussein OBAMA: THE CLOSET MUSLIM PSYCHOPATH WHO HATED AMERICA!
"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these."
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/02/monica-showalter-barack-obama-proud.html
The mullahs rolled in cash as a result of rolling Obama and his gullible team over the deal, knowing that Obama was desperate for some sort of legacy. MONICA SHOWALTER
BEHIND THE SAUDIS INVASION IS THE BUSH FAMILY'S HALF-CENTURY AND TWO WAR DEALS WITH THE SAUDIS.
FOLLOW SAUDIS MONEY INTO THE BUILDING OF THE PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES OF BUSH, CLINTON AND OBAMA AND THE FUNDING OF THE FRAUDULENT CLINTON FOUNDATION FAMILY SLUSH FUND.
HAVE LOOTED THE COUNTRY AS MUCH AS THE BUSH CRIME FAMILY!
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/12/bush-family-mourns-hw-bush-man-who-did.html
The perilous ramifications of the September 11 attacks on the United States are only now beginning to unfold. They will undoubtedly be felt for generations to come. This is one of many sad conclusions readers will draw from Craig Unger's exceptional book House of Bush House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties. As Unger claims in this incisive study, the seeds for the "Age of Terrorism" and September 11 were planted nearly 30 years ago in what, at the time, appeared to be savvy business transactions that subsequently translated into political currency and the union between the Saudi royal family and the extended political family of George H. W. Bush.
History: Islam’s Greatest Enemy
Why the study of true history can lead to Islam’s downfall.
18 comments
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
The history of Islam and the West has been one of unwavering antagonism and seismic clashes, often initiated by the followers of Muhammad. By the standards of history, nothing between the two forces is as well documented as this long war. Accordingly, for more than a millennium, both educated and not so educated Europeans knew—the latter perhaps instinctively—that Islam was a militant creed that for centuries attacked and committed atrocities in their homelands, all in the name of “holy war,” or jihad. In the words of Konstantin Mihailović, a fifteenth century Serb who was forced to convert to Islam in his youth and made to fight as a slave-soldier for the Turks until he escaped: “the Persians, the Turks, the Tatars, the Berbers, and the Arabs; and the diverse Moors… [all] conduct themselves according to the accursed Koran, that is, the scripture of Mohammed.”
This long-held perspective has been radically twisted in recent times. According to the dominant narrative—as upheld by mainstream media and Hollywood, pundits and politicians, academics and “experts” of all stripes—Islam was historically progressive and peaceful, whereas premodern Europe was fanatical and predatory. Or, to quote the BBC, “Throughout the Middle Ages, the Muslim world was more advanced and more civilised than Christian Western Europe, which learned a huge amount from its neighbour.”
The reason for these topsy-turvy claims is that “Who controls the past controls the future,” as George Orwell observed in his 1984 (a dystopian novel that has become increasingly applicable to our times). It is, therefore, unsurprising to discover that the greatest apologia for politically active Islamists and their Leftist allies—and the first premise for all subsequent apologias for Islam—is purely historical in nature.
Recall, for instance, the most popular and oft-asked question to arise after the September 11, 2001 terror strikes: “Why do they hate us?” Unbeknownst to most, this question presupposed—indeed, was heavy laden with—a historical point of view that had been forged over decades and largely remains unquestioned, even by critics of modern Islam: Because Islam was tolerant and advanced in the past, this entrenched perspective holds, its current problems in the present—authoritarianism, intolerance, violence, radicalization, terrorism, etc.—must be aberrations, products of unfavorable circumstances, politics, economics, “grievances”—anything and everything but Islam itself. Simply put, if they did not “hate us” before—but were rather progressive and tolerant—surely something other than Islam has since “gone wrong.”
Nor is it much help to argue that the Koran and hadith make it clear that Islam is inherently intolerant thanks to the widely entrenched notion that everything—especially old scriptures—is open to “interpretation.”
From here one can see the importance of safeguarding the current narrative of a historically “advanced” and “tolerant” Islam vis-à-vis a historically “backwards” and “intolerant” Europe.
I myself experienced firsthand just how important controlling this narrative is for political Islamists. After the U.S. Army War College invited me to lecture on my last history book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, “CAIR”—an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist funding case in U.S. history—and its leftist allies launched an “unprecedented” attack on me and the War College. They issued—on two separate occasions—press releases, hysterical petitions (presenting the War College—even me, an ethnic Egyptian—as “white supremacists”), and made several direct calls to and met with the heads of the War College—all in an effort to get my talk canceled.
In the end, they failed, in part because the National Association of Scholars sent a petition letter to then president Donald Trump—signed by over five thousand people, mostly university affiliated academics; ten congressmen also came to my support. More to the point, and as retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Allen West, who also came to my support, explained, “not one sentence of his recent literary project [Sword and Scimitar] was mentioned by these Islamo-fascists [as being wrong].”
When CAIR and its “woke” allies realized that their attempts at academic censorship had failed, and that I would speak anyway, they urged the War College and it agreed to allow another historian to present a “counterview” in response to my lecture. This was John Voll, professor emeritus of Islamic history at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. (See here for how this renowned apologist misrepresented and whitewashed Islam’s history of terror vis-à-vis the West.) Unfortunately, and despite the fact that the War College videotaped my talk (objectively summarized by a reporter here), and informed me that, like all of their talks, it would be posted online, it was never published.
At any rate, why did CAIR and its allies launch such an attack on me in the first place, especially considering that they did not respond similarly to my other books which I also lectured about in other worthy venues—books that dealt with current and hot topics (e.g., Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians and The Al Qaeda Reader)? Why instead did they go after a book that revolved around, of all things, “ancient history”—and with such vehemence, at one point desperately insisting that if I am allowed to lecture on it at the War College, American servicemen would get so riled as to start massacring Muslims on sight?
Because they too know what is at stake; they too know that “who controls the past”—which they are determined to continue doing—“controls the future.” So long as the people of the West accept as a first premise that Islam was historically and for centuries an advanced, enlightened, and tolerant force—especially in comparison to Europe—so long must all the violent and terrible things currently being committed in its name be chalked up to other factors—territorial disputes, grievances, economics, education, politics, and/or “lack of jobs” to quote the Obama White House—never Islam itself.
Such logic is admittedly sound—but only as long as its first premise remains unchallenged. For those, however, who become acquainted with Islam’s true history vis-à-vis the West, there is no “why do they hate us?” or “what went wrong?” to explain away. Rather, the obvious becomes painfully clear: the Muslim world’s present is, sadly, an extension—often a mirror representation—of its past.
Putin, Biden, Iran, and Nuclear War
How real is the threat?
William Kilpatrick is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. His books include Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West (Ignatius Press), What Catholics Need to Know About Islam (Sophia Press), and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad.
One of the ironies of our times is that while Vladimir Putin threatens nuclear war, the Biden administration is anxious to enter into a nuclear deal with Iran which, critics say, will only serve to hasten Iran’s development of nuclear weapons.
As the world contemplates the awful possibility of a Russian-inflicted nuclear holocaust, Biden is facilitating the emergence of a similar threat from a country that regards America as the “Great Satan.”
Would Putin actually carry through on his threat? Some experts, such as Russia analyst Fiona Hill say that he would. She points to what he has already done—in Syria, Chechnya, and now in Ukraine. And she cites his obsession with returning Russia to its former greatness.
By contrast, other analysts maintain that although Putin cultivates a “madman” image—someone who might do anything—he is actually quite calculating. He adds up the odds of what he can get away with, and adjusts his moves accordingly.
It’s difficult to say if Putin will use nukes. Maybe he’s bluffing, but it wouldn’t be wise to count on it.
But how about Iran? If they had a supply of nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, would they use them? No one can know for sure, of course, but my guess is that they would.
Why? Because Iran’s clerical leaders would consider it a religious duty. Fighting and dying for Allah is, for a religious Muslim, life’s highest calling. That’s why martyrs are the most highly honored individuals in the Islamic world. That’s why Palestinian youth are taught from an early age to emulate the martyrs.
The martyrs reward? According to Koran 78: 31-33, “Theirs shall be gardens and vineyards, and high-bosomed maidens for companions.” The maidens are described in numerous passages in the Koran—sometimes as “bashful virgins”, sometimes as “dark-eyed virgins, sometimes as “dark-eyed houris.” They recline on soft couches and dwell in shaded gardens surrounded by fruit trees, fountains, and running water.
How many “brides” are assigned to each martyr? The Koran doesn’t say. But according to Islamic tradition the number is 72. Raymond Ibrahim notes that jihadi organizations regularly invoke the following saying which they attribute to Muhammad:
“The martyr is special to Allah. He is forgiven from the first drop of blood [that he sheds]. He sees his throne in paradise…And he will copulate with seventy-two houris.”
Hmm… to the Western ear it sounds like an adolescent daydream. But the Muslim mindset is quite different. The promise of a harem-like paradise is taken quite seriously—if not by every Muslim, then by many. It is, perhaps the main motivation for joining the jihad.
But if young men can be lured into battle by the allures of paradise, how about older men? How about the aging mullahs of Iran who will decide if and when to use nuclear weapons? Well, Islamic tradition maintains that jihadist of whatever age will enjoy almost supernatural sexual power in paradise. And the mullahs will almost certainly be familiar with those traditions.
Moreover, waging jihad does not necessarily entail combat on the battlefield. Pressing the nuclear button will do just fine. And it might even be considered more meritorious since it will result in the death of many more of Allah’s enemies.
And if the mullahs also die in a nuclear holocaust? Well, that’s the point, isn’t it? As jihadists like to say, “we love death more than you love life.” Death means that you are immediately brought into the company of your 72 brides.
Death in the service of Allah also means that you are forgiven all your sins, and thus saved from the fires of hell. That, of course, is another motive—for both young and old—to join the jihad. On a per page basis, descriptions of hell are far more frequent in the Koran than in the ‘Bible. And the descriptions of hell in the Koran are as appalling as the descriptions of paradise are appealing.
In short, there are good reasons to believe that Islamic states which develop nuclear weapons will have a strong incentive to use them. Fortunately, the only Islamic state which does possess nuclear weapons has never used them. Although there is much tension between Pakistan and neighboring India, and although Pakistan has possessed nuclear weapons for over two decades, it has had the good sense not to use them.
One possible explanation is that the leadership in Pakistan (at least until recently) has always been more moderate than the general populace. Unfortunately, the reverse is true in Iran. Ever since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, Iran has been controlled by true believers—men who are more radical in their outlook than the people they rule. Men, in short, who might be willing to risk all for the sake of Allah and for their heavenly reward.
Which brings us back to Vladimir Putin. Theoretically, Putin’s Christian faith should act as a restraint on his conduct of the war in Ukraine. Yet, Putin’s army attacks civilians, and targets them with cluster bombs and devastating hyperbaric “vacuum” bombs. And he is responsible for similar—if not worse—atrocities in Syria, Chechnya and Georgia. According to many observers, he is simply an evil madman.
But there’s another side to the story. Many, both inside and outside Russia look upon Putin as a savior—a man who will resist the decadence of the West and restore Christendom to its rightful place. And many of Putin’s statements and actions suggest that he shares this vision of his role.
It’s tempting to think that Putin is faking it—that he only puts on a show of religion in order to win the support of the Orthodox Church in Russia and of conservative Christians abroad. But that doesn’t seem to be the case. Putin does go to church, does confess himself to priests, and does receive communion, but he doesn’t advertise his faith in the way that other politicians—such as Joe Biden—do. In addition, Putin has done a great deal to reconstruct churches, monasteries, and shrines throughout Russia. Moreover, his support for traditional families and his rejection of the LGBT movement seems genuine. One of his complaints against Ukrainian leaders is that they are decadent “Nazis.”
At first glance it looks as though we have to choose between two possibilities—either Putin the evil madman or Putin the Christian hero.
But there is another possibility—namely, that Putin, ‘though a Christian, has a poor understanding of his faith. As with other Christians, it’s probable that he has adopted a pick and choose approach to his faith. In his case, that means a focus on the militant aspect of Christianity and a neglect of the peaceful. In other words, he seems to have compartmentalized his faith. We can assume, for instance, that he assents to the Gospel injunction to “love your neighbor.” However, based on his actions, we can also assume that he’s not going to let the injunction interfere with his ambitions for himself and Russia.
Putin may hardly be aware of the inconsistency, or else, like many Christians, he has learned to rationalize his behavior. Or worse, perhaps he mistakes his own will for God’s will. Such a mistake is not at all uncommon in leaders who possess absolute power.
In short, though Christian belief often does act to put a brake on evil impulses, there is no guarantee that it will always have that effect. Given Putin’s record of invading and brutalizing other countries, and his seeming conflation of Christianity and Russian nationalism, it would be unwise to assume that his nuclear threat is nothing more than a bluff.
Of course, it would be equally unwise to assume that the Islamic Republic of Iran wouldn’t use nuclear weapons once it had acquired enough of them. One might think that the certainty of a devastating counter-attack from Israel (or the U.S.) would give them pause. But the Cold War theory that Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) will deter nuclear war doesn’t apply to cultures that look upon death in combat as the prelude to entering an eternal garden of delights.
The other party whose religious beliefs should be a matter of concern to all is President Joe Biden. ‘Though ostensibly a Catholic, Biden has a habit of interpreting Catholic teachings to suit his own interests and inclinations. It wouldn’t be surprising if he mistakenly thinks that “love your enemy” means “trust your enemy.” Thus far, in his dealings with tyrants and state-controlled corporations, Biden’s trust in their good will has enriched him personally. But it seems fair to say that the rest of us have only been put in greater danger.
Iran’s Ayatollah: ‘The U.S. Regime is a Mafia Regime. Political, Economic & All Sorts of Mafias Control Their Country’
(CNSNew.com) - Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, sent out a pair of tweets on March 1 charging the United States with being a “mafia regime” that “creates crises.”
“The U.S. is a manifestation of modern ignorance, discrimination, oppression & creating crises in the world today,” said the Ayatollah’s first tweet.
“Basically,” he said, “the U.S. regime creates crises, lives of crises & feeds on various crises in the world.
“#Ukraine is another victim of this policy,” he said.
“The U.S. regime is a mafia regime,” the Ayatollah said in his next tweet. “Political, economic, & all sorts of mafias control their country and bring presidents to power. They create crises in the world to maximize their profits.”
The Likely Return of the Disastrous Nuclear Deal with Iran
Will a desperate Biden make even more concessions?
President Joe Biden is on the verge of making another colossal foreign policy blunder. He wants to restore the disastrous nuclear deal with Iran known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that the Obama-Biden administration had concluded in 2015, along with Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and China. Some of the same Obama-Biden administration players involved in the original negotiations, who strongly denounced former President Donald Trump’s wise decision to withdraw from their fatally flawed handiwork, are determined to bring it back to life.
President Biden appears ready to make major concessions to Iran. For example, as reported by the Wall Street Journal, “Iran’s 'breakout time'—the duration needed to amass enough nuclear fuel [f]or a bomb—could be as little as six months,” under a restored deal as opposed to the JCPOA’s original twelve-month breakout time. As of mid-February, Iran had already amassed 33.2 kilograms of uranium material enriched to the 60 percent level, nearly double the amount it had in early November of last year.
“Iran would need around 40 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium to produce enough weapons-grade nuclear fuel for a weapon,” the Wall Street Journal reported. This means that Iran already has about three-quarters of what it would require to advance quickly to weapon-grade 90% fuel for a nuclear bomb.
Iran has put itself in the driver’s seat by plowing ahead to reach an incredibly short breakout time, enabling the regime to extort more concessions from the Biden administration. The war in Ukraine, which is destabilizing the global energy market, also provides the Iranian regime with a stronger bargaining position to achieve the maximum lifting of sanctions and unfreezing of Iran’s assets. The regime is counting on the West’s need for Iranian oil to make up for shortfalls from other oil producing countries.
President Biden finally announced the cut-off of U.S. oil and gas imports from Russia on March 8th. But instead of reversing his war on fossil fuels policies that have stymied more drilling and production of oil in the energy-rich United States, the Biden administration already has its hand out to Venezuela and Saudi Arabia for their oil to make up for the resulting shortfall. And the Biden administration has its eyes on Iran.
Out of sheer desperation, the Biden administration appears ready to turn to Iran to add its own oil to the global oil supply. This means agreeing to a nuclear deal on Iran’s terms. It is a quick fix to show the American people that the Biden administration is taking action to reduce the price of gasoline that they are paying at the pump. Anything to avoid offending the climate change activists at home, which would happen if the administration were to do the sensible thing and remove barriers it has imposed against more domestic production of oil and gas.
While trying to isolate Russia economically and diplomatically for its invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration is negotiating alongside Russia (and China) to restore the JCPOA. Even worse, since Iran has refused to negotiate face-to-face with U.S. representatives, the Biden administration has outsourced the principal intermediary role to Russia.
“Russia has been instrumental in shaping a compromise,” Reuters has reported, based on information from diplomats.
If there is a deal, Iran will most likely ship its excess uranium over the agreed upon cap to none other than Russia as it did the last time around. Only this time, Iran would be doing so in concert with a country that has just brought the world perilously close to a nuclear catastrophe.
When Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on January 19th, Putin noted that the two regimes “closely cooperate in the international arena.”
Raisi agreed. “We…have no restrictions on developing and expanding ties with friendly Russia and these ties will become strategic,” Raisi said.
It did not take long for the Iranian regime to prove how strongly it continues to stand by Russia after Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine.
A February 25th editorial in Keyhan, which serves as a mouthpiece for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, stated, as quoted by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs:
“Moscow had no other choice but to ensure the security of the people of Ukraine and prevent it being swallowed up by a dangerous (NATO) military bloc, and to send its troops across the border. With his blitzkrieg, President Putin delivered, in a brilliant diplomatic move, the message to the President of Ukraine, Zelensky, a Jewish comedian.”
Khamenei said that the “mafia regime” of the U.S. has created multiple crises around the globe, including in Ukraine. He took the words right out of Putin’s mouth.
Despite the close international cooperation between the Iranian and Russian regimes, the Biden administration does not seem too worried about the consequences of Russia’s leadership role in negotiating and implementing a restored JCPOA with the Iranian regime. A senior U.S. State Department official claimed that Russia and the United States share a common interest in reviving the JCPOA and preventing Iran from developing a nuclear bomb. The Biden administration believes that it can separate this common interest from the Ukrainian crisis where Russia and the West are at loggerheads.
Not so.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who has parroted Putin’s outrageous claim that Russia is denazifying Ukraine, linked the sanctions imposed on Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine with the JCPOA negotiations.
“We requested that our US colleagues… give us written guarantees at the minimum level of Secretary of State that the current [sanctions] process launched by the US will not in any way harm our right to free, fully-fledged trade and economic and investment cooperation and military-technical cooperation with Iran,” Lavrov said on Saturday.
Russia is asking the United States to guarantee that the Ukraine-related sanctions will not get in the way of its “military-technical” cooperation with Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism that is developing long-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
The White House has been mum on exactly what concessions it is willing to offer to bring the JCPOA back to life. However, the Biden administration has already signaled it was prepared to lift sanctions across Iran’s economy, including its banking and energy sectors, and to unfreeze billions of dollars’ worth of oil revenues.
Iranian leaders have demanded complete sanctions relief, including a huge portion upfront.
"Our negotiators... do their best to ensure the nation's interests, and know that the final point is the lifting of all sanctions, especially on banking and trade," Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami said at Friday prayers in Tehran. "If these sanctions are not lifted, it is as if there were no talks."
What token gestures might Iran make in return at the outset of the revived deal? The regime may agree to permit the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, to resume implementing a limited set of on-site inspection and verification mechanisms that will not include inspections of Iran’s military facilities.
The regime may also agree to suspend right away its enrichment of uranium to the 60% level. It may “commit” to reduce its enrichment level further after all sanctions are lifted and Iran’s economy is back on track.
As noted previously, Iran would most likely ship any excess uranium above a negotiated volume limit to its Russian friends. With Iran in Russia’s corner supporting Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, does anybody seriously think that Russia will not help Iran cheat during this process and keep Iran’s stockpile in reserve to return to Iran upon its request? The Biden administration is so desperate for a deal that it may well look the other way and rely on the word of the butcher of Moscow who is massacring the Ukrainian people in the name of “liberating” them.
The original JCPOA enrichment cap of 3.67% will probably not survive the current negotiations. Even when sanctions are lifted, and the JCPOA snaps back to life, Iran’s nuclear chief said that the regime intends to exceed the original 3.67% cap.
"(Uranium) enrichment ... continues with a maximum ceiling of 60%, which led Westerners to rush to negotiations, and it will continue with the lifting of sanctions by both 20% and 5%," the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad Eslami, said according to the semi-official news agency Fars.
The sanctions relief concessions that the Biden administration ends up agreeing to may well extend beyond just the sanctions imposed on Iran relating to its nuclear activities. “Iran is demanding complete sanctions removal, including the elimination of human-rights or ballistic-missile-related sanctions that were exempted from the 2015 deal,” the Wall Street Journal has reported.
Iran is also demanding the lifting of sanctions directed at Iranian entities involved in the financing of terrorism. In fact, the Iranian regime is insisting on the removal of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its affiliates, which have American blood on their hands, from the sanctions list.
And let us not forget about the JCPOA’s “sunset” provisions. Unless there is a change to these provisions to push the “sunsets” further out in time, major restrictions on Iran’s nuclear-related activities will soon go away, starting in 2025. This means that the Iranian regime will have a clear path to develop and produce nuclear weapons suitable for mounting on its ballistic missiles.
If an agreement is reached with Iran to restore the nuclear deal, there is no reason to expect the Biden administration to level with the American people about the concessions it had to make to close the deal. President Biden and his senior administration officials have a habit of making false statements to spin their disastrous policies.
For example, during his announcement that the United States would no longer be importing any oil and gas from Russia, President Biden tried to give the impression that nothing was stopping the U.S. oil and gas companies from producing more fossil fuels except their own business decisions. He conveniently ignored all of the roadblocks and disincentives that his administration’s obsession with pushing the Green New Deal agenda have put in the way of more domestic drilling and production.
Biden also claimed that U.S. oil production is now at an all-time high. This is totally false. The real annual all-time high was set in 2019 on former President Trump’s watch - 12.3 million barrels a day. By comparison, U.S. oil production averaged 11.19 million barrels a day in 2021.
President Biden is willing to spread misinformation to the American people even on something that can be easily fact-checked. Why should anyone believe what he and his senior officials say to justify a revised JCPOA negotiated in desperation with the Iranian regime?
The original nuclear deal with the Iranian regime was bad enough. The revived version is likely to be far worse, further cementing the close cooperation between two of the most repugnant regimes on the face of the earth that are enemies of the free world.
Report: Biden’s Iran Deal Gives Regime Access to $90 Billion, $7 Billion for Ransom, Sanctions Relief to Terrorists
President Joe Biden’s impending agreement to restore the Iran nuclear deal offers the regime access to $90 billion in foreign currency reserves and sanctions relief to some of the world’s worst terrorists, according to a former State Department official.
Gabriel Noronha, writing in Tablet magazine, says the deal does not restore President Barack Obama’s old Iran deal, a weak agreement from which President Donald Trump withdrew, but goes much further in giving Iran money and sanctions relief.
“Multiple career officials view these capitulations as so detrimental to U.S. national security that they contacted me requesting that I rapidly share details of these concessions with Congress and the public in an effort to stop them,” Noronha writes.
He describes some of the concessions that Biden’s negotiator in Vienna, Rob Malley, has reportedly made:
The list of concessions that follows is long, detailed, disturbing, but also somewhat technical. But this much is clear to me: The deal being negotiated in Vienna is dangerous to U.S. national security, to the stability of the Middle East, and to the Iranian people who suffer most under that brutal regime. The lack of evidence to justify a removal of U.S. sanctions is illegal, and the deal that will be foisted upon the world without the support of Congress will be illegitimate. This deal will not serve U.S. interests in either the short or long term.
With Robert Malley in the lead, the United States has promised to lift sanctions on some of the regime’s worst terrorists and torturers, on leading officials who have developed Iran’s WMD infrastructure, and has agreed to lift sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) itself. In exchange, Iran will receive fewer limitations than those imposed under the JCPOA, and the restrictions on its nuclear program will expire six years sooner than under the terms of the old deal. And that’s just the beginning.
Iran is set to get access to a massive windfall of cash: My latest estimate (derived from figures declassified during my tenure at the State Department) is $90 billion in access to foreign exchange reserves, and then a further $50-$55 billion in extra revenue each year from higher oil and petrochemical exports, with no restrictions on how or where the money can be spent.
Personally, the most troubling transfer of funds will be the $7 billion ransom payment the United States is preparing to pay for the release of four Americans from an Iranian jail. Now, let me be clear: I would be extremely glad to bring these Americans back home safely as quickly as possible. They are innocent victims who, along with their families, have suffered unjustly for far too long. But make no mistake: Biden’s payment will only supercharge Iran’s hostage-taking industry.
Read Noronha’s full article here.
Noronha notes that Malley’s team has lost several negotiators who resigned in protest against what they viewed as the weak terms of the deal he was negotiating. Their departures, Noronha said, were a desperate plea for Congress to intervene.
Rob Malley, former US negotiator during the Iran nuclear program negotiations and current CEO at the International Crisis Group, poses in his office May 7, 2018 in Washington, DC. – President Donald Trump will confirm on May 8, 2018 whether he will make good on a threat to re-impose US sanctions on Tehran and thereby throw the entire Iran nuclear deal into question.Trump’s announcement that a decision was imminent cut short a last-ditch European diplomatic drive to save the accord ahead of what had been a May 12 deadline. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo credit should read BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
The impression given is that Malley was simply told to agree to whatever Iran wanted in order to secure an agreement, thus fulfilling a campaign promise by then-candidate Biden and reversing a consequential decision by the hated Donald Trump.
As Breitbart News has reported previously, Malley is a serial appeaser who was kicked off the Obama campaign in 2008 for meeting with Hamas. He was alter brought back into the Obama administration to work on the first Iran deal, and was also the ISIS “czar,” a role in which he failed spectacularly to control the spread of the Islamic terror group. In 2018, once out of office, he was among those who said that Trump should not support protests against the Iranian regime by the Iranian people.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Addict, Degenerate and Bagman of a Corrupt Family Enterprise Exposed
Laptop from Hell: Hunter Biden, Big Tech, and the Dirty Secrets the President Tried to Hide by Miranda Devine 224 pp Kindle 14.99 Hardcopy 24.33, ISBN978-1-63758-105-6 A Liberatio Protocol Book Imprint of Post Hill Press New York 2021
It is hard to find words to describe the debauched and sleazy satyr that is Hunter Biden and how he used his family name and his father’s status as an important American politician to become an extraordinary international grifter involved in multi-million dollar -- sometimes billion dollar -- deals with international entities that included corrupt criminal enterprises such as Burisma Holdings of Ukraine and the government- and military-controlled companies of Russia and China, international enemies of the United States.
His business activities and lifestyle were revealed on the laptop he left in a Wilmington, Delaware Mac computer repair shop owned by a Mr. Isaac, who took possession after Hunter failed to pick it up after 90 days. Mr. Isaac had already fixed the water damage and looked at the contents, found discussions about Burisma (the Ukrainian oil and gas company) so he arranged through his father, a retired Air Force Colonel, to turn the laptop over to the FBI in Arizona.
Mr. Isaac kept a hard drive copy to protect himself. Then he made some inquiries after the FBI failed to do anything. The inquiry that was most productive was to Rudy Giuliani, who was Trump’s personal attorney and very interested in the Burisma matter. Mr. G had an old DOJ colleague named Costello from his federal prosecutor days who was an IT expert, and the hard drive was analyzed. Then, in October, it was presented to the New York Post for the bombshell it was -- proof of Hunter’s grifting and also proof that Joe Biden lied when he claimed he didn’t know anything about Hunter’s international machinations involving corrupt Ukrainians and nefarious Chinese and Russian autocrats/plutocrats.
The plot thickened as the Post did its due diligence. A full-court press was initiated to suppress and censor the Post's publication of the laptop materials in October of 2020, the run-up to the election and the interval in the debates being held between Trump and Biden.
Biden denied Trump’s accusations about corruption and influence peddling. Former CIA director John Brennan organized a letter by deep state intelligence doyens who claimed it was just Russian disinformation and the major social media banned the Post and anyone who quoted Post stories about the laptop.
The scandal of a lifetime -- son of a president selling his name and living a despoiled life of excess -- sidling up to Russian and Chinese on deals involving millions -- while living the life of a depraved sex fiend and cocaine/alcohol abuser.
My opinion is that if Hunter’s choice of drugs had leaned more to opiates he would be dead. But instead, the president’s scion lived the manic life of a cocaine addict bouncing in and out of rehab and even prompting repeat inquiries from his father about his situation, with the implication that Joe Biden was hesitant to run for president if Hunter was on the streets of the world hustling foreign investment deals, whoring, drinking, throwing money around and smoking crack cocaine.
Is that a mouthful -- Joe Biden, head of a corrupt enterprise -- proof of Joe’s sharing of Hunter's ill-gotten gains, trying to keep Hunter from blowing up his presidential ambitions? Imagine, a presidential candidate involved in an intervention of his addict son who was traveling the world selling the family name with his father’s support and approval. At one point the Chinese patron Hunter was taking money from and working on investments with even offered Hunter a side/back door deal of 10 million dollars just for “introductions” and “access,’’ certainly nothing more than selling the Biden name as a door opener.
The book revealing the details of the decadent life and dirty deals has been written by the New York Post’s journalist Miranda Devine about one year after Joe Biden was supposedly elected president of the United States. Here we are, and like the people trying to expose the election fraud, Ms. Devine is working uphill against a media and political army intent on burying the scandal and censoring the journalists who would expose the vile degenerate corrupt wickedness of Hunter and the enabling and complicit behavior of so many in the family’s close political circle of important and not so important players,
Laptop From Hell covers the life of the Biden family and focuses on the life of Hunter during the period of time exposed in the laptop: 2005 to 2020. Robert Hunter Biden was the third child of Joe Biden, born in 1970. In 1972 when Hunter was almost 3 his mother and younger sister were killed in a truck car crash when his mother ran a stop sign -- they were not struck by a drunk driver as Joe Biden has claimed so many times. Hunter and Beau, his older brother, were injured, Hunter with a head injury, and Joe Biden was sworn in as a newly elected and very young US Senator in the hospital room where the boys were recuperating.
The death of his mother and elective office of his father aside, Hunter had an unremarkable childhood, graduated from Georgetown with a history degree, and did religious volunteer work for a year before entering Georgetown Law after failing to get admission to Yale. He was advised a transfer would be available after Georgetown and was accepted and graduated Yale Law in 1996, becoming an attorney for a bank and credit card company in Delaware, MBNA. Delaware is and was the most corporate and bank/credit card company-friendly state in the nation. MBNA has been a major contributor to the Joe Biden campaigns. In two years, he was executive vice president then he went to the Clinton administration Dept. of Commerce until Bush became president and then he became a lobbyist but quit lobbying when his father was elected Vice President.
From 2006 forward, Hunter was active in investment banking with a focus on natural resource extraction and technology. A sequence of investment entities was formed, first with Uncle James, then with Devon Archer (now in prison for fraud) and Chris Heinz (yes, Ketchup heir Chris, who dropped out because of concern about the appearance of influence peddling).
Hunter’s China connections started with a discounted stake in a China investment company, and that was followed with multiple Chinese generated arrangements built on his father’s status as Vice President, Air Force Two and other visits with Chinese asset managers that were always connected to the Bank of China and Chicom political and military leaders/autocrats. The lifestyle depicted from the laptop shows that a lot of big money flowed to Hunter during those years, from China and other sources, like Burisma, that paid him $83 K a month to be on the board until Joe Biden stepped down after the 2016 election and then Burisma reduced the monthly to $40 K plus.
Laptop from Hell puts on display the personal life of a sociopath -- whoring, partying, blowing gigantic amounts of money on expensive hotels, toys, clothes, cars, homes -- excesses that can only be marveled at along with mistreatment of friends, associates, family, involvement in criminal and immoral nihilistic behavior. Hunter is a monument to bad parenting -- so he is Exhibit One for the case that Joe and Jill Biden are their own form of sociopath -- sociopathic behavior runs in families for a reason.
When you read the book, a very good story of vile and vicious degeneracy and decadence for sure, consider this description from Psychology Today:
Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) describes an ingrained pattern of behavior in which individuals consistently disregard and violate the rights of others around them. Individuals with antisocial personality disorder may behave violently, recklessly, or impulsively, often with little regard for the wants and needs of others. The disorder is best understood within the context of the broader category of personality disorders. A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of personal experience and behavior that deviates noticeably from the expectations of the individual's culture, is pervasive and inflexible, has an onset in adolescence or early adulthood, is stable over time, and leads to personal distress or impairment.
The symptoms of antisocial personality disorder can vary in severity, and consequences can include imprisonment, drug abuse, and alcoholism. The more egregious, harmful, or dangerous behavior patterns are often colloquially referred to as “sociopathic” or “psychopathic.” Although neither sociopathy nor psychopathy are official diagnostic terms in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), . . . the constructs are thought to be closely related.
People with antisocial personality disorder may seem charming on the surface, but they are likely to be irritable and aggressive as well as irresponsible. Due to their manipulative tendencies, it may be difficult to tell whether they are lying or telling the truth.
The diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder is not given to individuals under the age of 18. However, ASPD symptoms will first appear in childhood or adolescence and may garner a diagnosis of conduct disorder during that time. Antisocial personality disorder is much more common in males than in females. The highest prevalence of antisocial personality disorder is found among males who abuse alcohol or drugs or who are in prisons or other forensic settings
In history, sociopaths have played important destructive roles because they have no moral compass and no commitment to virtuous conduct. A republic cannot stand without a virtuous people.
"[V]irtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government."
George Washington
"Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics."
John Adams
John Dale Dunn MD JD is a retired emergency physician, inactive attorney and consultant
iden's Tough Guy Talk on US Corporations Cozying Up to China Is Just That...Talk
By John Moore | March 3, 2022 | 10:55am EST
The Biden Administration knows how to talk the talk on China, but it certainly doesn’t know how to walk the walk.
For proof of the administration’s tough talk, look no further than when reporters recently asked the White House about SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk opening a showroom in China’s Xinjiang region. That’s the area where over a million Uyghur Muslims are believed to be detained against their will in re-education camps.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki left no doubt about what seemed to be the Biden Administration’s tough stance against this latest move from Musk, a repeat China offender.
“We’ve been clear about our views on the ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang,” Psaki said. “Companies that fail to address forced labor in their supply chains and other human rights abuses face serious legal, reputational, and customer risk.”
With that kind of resolve, it’s easy to imagine the Chinese government and any U.S. company thinking of doing business with China quaking at the thought of the severe consequences. The trouble is, China and its business partners know the Biden White House has hardly been consistent.
On Feb. 23, the administration ended the U.S. initiative to stop espionage from the Chinese Communist Party despite the fact that the CCP continues to spy on Americans at a disturbing pace.
And it doesn’t end there.
Although the Biden Administration signed Sen. Marco Rubio’s Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act into law, it reportedly wanted to weaken it. "While the administration supports the legislation in public, [it asked] Democrats to essentially water it down in private," according to The Washington Post.
At the same time, the administration also allowed U.S. athletes to participate in the recently concluded Beijing Winter Olympics. Even though the U.S. did not send diplomats or official representatives to China for the event, that symbolic boycott didn’t accomplish much since U.S. Olympic athletes and their sponsors were still involved.
The hypocrisy of Psaki and other administration officials condemning U.S. companies for doing business in China while the executive branch continues to help lavish positive attention to the nation and its brutal communist government is undeniable.
So it’s no wonder that what Sen. Rubio categorizes as “nationless” American companies, like Musk’s Tesla, continue to do business in China generally – and the Xinjiang region specifically. They know that the White House’s talk is cheap and that, despite its signing of legislation that signals the contrary, there will be no real consequences for doing so.
While Musk and Tesla are the most recent example of a U.S. company cozying up to China, they are far from the only ones. Nike and Coca-Cola were “among the major companies and business groups lobbying Congress to weaken a bill that would ban imported goods made with forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region,” according to The New York Times.
In July 2021, Reuters reported that a congressional commission “has called on Hilton Worldwide not to allow its name to be associated with a hotel project on the site of a mosque bulldozed by authorities in China’s Xinjiang region, where Washington says minority Muslims have been victims of genocide.” The Biden Administration said nothing.
The irony of the Biden Administration reluctantly signing the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act into law while continuing to silently weaken enforcement mechanisms against the country and prop up the communist regime is not lost on the Uyghur population. Uyghur restaurant owner Hamid Kerim told Fox News he could not watch the Olympics “because it reminds him of his brother and sister-in-law who are imprisoned in his home of Xinjiang.”
“If I watch this Olympics, in my eyes I can see my brothers, my sister, my nation, and my motherland,” Kerim said. “His very difficult life in jail. Very difficult life in camp, very difficult life in cheap labor factory. … So, I think this Olympics is [the] genocide Olympics; this is no normal Olympics.”
None of this is breaking news to all of those who are familiar with President Biden’s record. As Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) aptly put it in a recent Senate Floor speech, “This is no surprise given the fact that Joe Biden has been soft on China for 50 years.”
When he was vice president, Biden said, “a rising China is a positive development not only for China, but for America and the world writ large.” During his run for president, Biden said China was not a threat to the United States. At a campaign stop, he said, “they're not bad folks....They're not competition for us.”
So, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that nationless U.S. corporations continue to run wild in China under his reign.
At the highest level of government, they know they have an ally — and that’s as big of a national security problem as they come.
John Moore is a former U.S. Army Ranger who served in Iraq and devoted a total of 24 years to military service. After retiring from the military, Moore was elected to the Nevada State Assembly.
No comments:
Post a Comment