We constantly hear the Biden administration lecturing Israel about how they should soften up their attacks in Gaza, and for the need for a ceasefire with Hamas.
Hamas, along with other terrorist organizations supported by Iran, have pledged to wipe Israel off the map, but Israel is portrayed as a villain for wanting to wipe these terrorists off the map.
The administration, which includes a lot of Obama holdovers, has over the years, built up Iran’s finances and helped the terrorist organizations themselves:
Biden Empowered Iran Proxies Attacking US Forces and Threatening Wider War Against Israel
Not only has the president empowered Iran by relaxing former President Donald Trump’s sanctions on the world’s top state sponsor of terrorism, but he has also empowered Iran’s proxies through various geopolitical moves that make war more likely. Biden is not alone; previous administrations have directed funds to ostensible U.S. allies in the region, funds that likely contribute to the proxies’ forces.
Biden has repeatedly told Iran to stop but strangely, the terroristic regime hasn’t listened. Trump put maximum pressure on Iran and devastated its finances by using economic sanctions to target the regime’s main source of revenue (oil). From Reuters:
As Trump’s sanctions bite, Iran’s oil exports slide further in June
Iranian crude exports have dropped so far in June to 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) or less after the United States tightened the screw on Tehran’s main source of income, industry sources said and tanker data showed, deepening global supply losses.
The United States reimposed sanctions on Iran in November after pulling out of a 2015 nuclear accord between Tehran and six world powers. Aiming to cut Iran’s sales to zero, Washington in May ended sanctions waivers to importers of Iranian oil.
Now four months after Iran supported Hamas, Iran’s oil exports are 300% higher (and the price much higher) than they were under Trump:
Iran’s exports of crude oil grew by roughly 50% last year to a five-year high of about 1.29 million barrels per day, with the vast majority going to China, helping to prevent a sharp increase in prices triggered by conflict in the Middle East.
And, as you could expect, the exports are mostly going to China, a nation which also hates America, but one that the Biden administration relies on for most of the minerals needed to build expensive, impractical, inefficient, unreliable electric cars powered by a flammable pollutant, which Biden wants to force Americans to buy.
As the brilliant Biden administration reportedly looks for peace in the Middle East while trying to protect Hamas and other terrorist organizations, it appears as though he has vetoed a few options for peace in Ukraine, including one deal right after the war started.
Why didn’t the public hear about these ceasefire offers, that the Biden administration blocked, in Ukraine? That would seem to be an important piece of information when the administration is essentially asking for a blank check:
U.S. repeatedly blocked Ukraine peace deals; is it rethinking its strategy yet?
It is clear that the U.S. and its allies were out to sabotage possibilities for peace immediately after the Russian invasion. Were it not for their interference, the current war could have ended in early March 2022—about a week after it started. Thanks to Arakhamia, we now have confirmation of this fact.
Also, from Reuters:
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s suggestion of a ceasefire in Ukraine to freeze the war was rejected by the United States after contacts between intermediaries, three Russian sources with knowledge of the discussions told Reuters.
So they blocked peace deals while demanding a blank check from Americans to fund the war. Anyone who dares want accountability for the money spent in Ukraine is falsely called a Putin puppet or supporter. The talking points are repeated endlessly.
I see that Putin has endorsed Biden for president and it is no surprise:
Russian President Vladimir Putin openly expressed his preference for President Joe Biden as a better choice for the White House than former President Donald Trump. During a recent interview, he indicated that it would be easier for Russia to deal with Washington with Biden in the Oval Office and downplayed concerns about the president’s age and mental acuity.
Obama and Biden repeatedly have appeased Putin. Obama told Russia he would be more flexible if he were reelected in 2012, and he certainly was. When Putin attacked Ukraine, Obama refused requests from Ukraine for weapons to appease Putin.
When Biden was (s)elected he reversed Trump’s sanctions on the gas pipeline to Germany, and Biden’s energy policies have jacked up the price of crude oil by almost 100% from $40 per barrel when Biden took office to almost $80 today. The crude oil price was low during Trump’s years and has been much higher while Biden has been in charge. Putin must be thankful for all that extra money to finance his aggression and ambition.
And who wouldn’t want a president like Biden who trashes Trump for telling NATO countries to fulfill their obligation to spend more for their own defense. Putin loves it when European countries spend little to defend themselves.
Anyone who believes that China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or any country that relies on oil for the bulk of their income gives a hoot about their carbon footprint should have their head examined; the oil producers are laughing all the way to the bank. (They also love it when Biden continually says that the greatest existential threat to the world is either Trump and his supporters or climate change.)
Any president or candidate who believes that a hypothetical few degree temperature rise, or Republican voters who want to make America great again are the greatest threat instead of enemies like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, doesn’t have their priorities straight and should not be allowed to destroy our great country.
These types of politicians are especially dangerous when they invite people from around the world, with little or no vetting to cross our border.
I can see the foreign leaders licking their chops as they watch the U.S. military lose recruits as woke brass concentrate on DIE, pronouns, and electrifying military vehicles instead of doing their job to build and maintain the strongest defense necessary to protect the American people.
Our enemies are laughing at us. They are building their military while the Bidenites worry about using “problematic” gendered language here:
As Global Conflicts Rage, Blinken Lays Down the Law on Gender Pronouns for State Department Employees
Problematic terms like ‘manpower,’ ‘you guys,’ ‘ladies and gentlemen’ and even ‘mother/father,’ ‘son/daughter,’ and ‘husband/wife’ should be avoided.
And here:
Biden’s State Department Unveils ‘Equity Action Plan’ to Make Diplomacy More ‘Equitable’
I wonder why the military is having trouble meeting recruitment targets.
The choice gets easier every day. Vote for either the candidate that Putin and our media support or vote for Trump, who kept energy prices much cheaper and therefore the world much safer.
Image: Free image, Pixabay license, no attribution required.
Antony Blinken, Iranian Tool
Is there a U.S. enemy that the Biden administration doesn't take orders from?
November 28, 2023 by Bruce Bawer 10 Comments
Under George W. Bush, U.S. foreign policy was nothing to write home about. White House advisors who sought to use 9/11 as an excuse to remake the Middle East – but who had absolutely no understanding of Islam – got us into deadly, expensive wars that ended up accomplishing nothing. Bush himself kept insisting that we weren’t at war with Islam – which he called, either foolishly or dishonestly, a “religion of peace” – but with “terror,” a meaningless formulation that doomed us from the start.
But at least Bush and his people weren’t actively trying to subvert America. Under Obama and again under Obama’s puppet, Biden, things have been different. Obama’s grotesquely fawning praise of Islam in his 2009 speech at Egypt’s Al-Azhar University set the tone. So did his scandalous bow, in the same year, to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. The previous year, quoting the Muslim call to prayer – including the Islamic profession of faith – Obama had called it “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”
So Obama’s enthusiasm for such otherwise inexplicable initiatives as the Iran deal made sense. Ditto his palpable hostility toward Israel.
One of the Obama administration’s top foreign-policy figures was Antony Blinken, who during Obama’s first term served as Biden’s national security advisor and, during Obama’s second term, was deputy national security advisor and then deputy secretary of state. His pedigree was striking. In a 2021 article for Commentary, the estimable Ruth R. Wisse wrote about Antony’s paternal grandfather, M.H. Blinken, a proud Jew and ardent backer of Israel, and about M.H.’s two sons, Donald, who became ambassador to Hungary, and Alan, who became ambassador to Belgium. According to Wisse, Donald and Alan’s devotion to American and Jewish interests gave way over the years, alas, to a more internationalist disposition.
Antony was Donald’s son, but grew up mostly in the home of his stepfather, Samuel Pisar, about whom he was wont to tell a moving story: Pisar, a Polish Jew who was the only child in his school to survive the Holocaust, spent four years in concentration camps and then, at the end of the war, escaping from “a death march into the woods in Bavaria,” encountered a tank. “He ran to the tank, the hatch opened, an African-American GI looked down at him. He got down on his knees and said the only three words that he knew in English that his mother taught him before the war, ‘God bless America.’” In the version of this story quoted by Wisse, Antony Blinken concludes: “That’s who we are. That’s what America represents to the world, however imperfectly.”
Tellingly, however, Antony Blinken, as Wisse points out, seems never to have talked publicly about about his paternal grandfather, M.B., who loved Israel and warned against “pandering to Arab ‘sensibilities.’” Why not? Because, in Wisse’s words, Antony became, like his father and uncle, “a committed internationalist, Europeanist, and, like his father, a Democratic Party loyalist.” As a devoted Obama man, he showed every sign of being glad to implement, and defend, the most firmly anti-Israeli American foreign policy ever.
Following the Trump interregnum, Biden became president, and named Blinken secretary of state. Blinken had been in office only a few months when calls came for him to resign over the disastrously botched Afghanistan withdrawal. As Josh Hammer wrote in the New York Post at the time, Blinken went on all the Sunday morning network shows and repeated an outrageous lie: “This is manifestly not Saigon” – a reference of course, to the 1975 fall of South Vietnam. No, it was worse than Saigon. To quote Hammer, “Blinken was not just wrong on the Saigon comparison — he was horribly, incontrovertibly wrong on everything related to the Afghanistan pullout.”
And he’d known better. He’d known that the Taliban was moving into Kabul very quickly, and that a full withdrawal would cause Kabul to collapse. But he ignored that information. “Resign, Tony,” demanded Hammer.
But Blinken didn’t leave. Then, this past July, there was a new call for him to quit. In a joint statement, the Republican secretaries of state of six states – Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wyoming – asserted that if Blinken had had something to do with the cockamamie October 2020 letter in which 51 ex-intelligence officials dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation, he should resign immediately.
Blinken denied any connection to the letter, and again kept his job.
Then came October 7.
To the surprise of many Americans, many Israelis, many Arabs, and a whole lot of political leaders and diplomats around the world, the Biden Administration responded to the Hamas massacres with a solid declaration of support for Israel. But even before Israel struck back, the folks at Foggy Bottom were disgruntled over Biden’s lack of what diplomats like to call nuance. And after Israel’s Gaza operation commenced, the mood in Blinken’s shop grew even angrier. On October 20, an anonymous U.S. official was quoted as saying that a “mutiny” was “brewing” at all levels of the State Department over Biden’s support for Israel. On November 18, the BBC reported that Biden was facing “an extraordinary level of criticism from within his own administration,” with functionaries at State registering their outrage via internal memos, and with some younger officials using pro-Palestinian language that “echo[ed] the rhetoric of young political activists.” The BBC cited Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, “a former US diplomat who is now president of the Middle East Policy Council,” to the effect that “the chorus of dismay has led to “significant shifts in US language and approach” since the Hamas invasion.
On November 19, in an article entitled “Blinken’s Diabolical Plan,” Mark Levin went a great deal further, declaring explicitly that Blinken was “exploiting the war against Israel to destroy the existing State of Israel by using pressure, threats, blackmail, leaks, the media, diplomatic backstabbing, the Arab states, the E.U. and the U.N.” A sweeping, and startling, charge. Levin quoted from a November 13 memo in which Blinken reassured colleagues that “we believe Palestinian people’s voices and aspirations must be at the center of post-crisis governance in Gaza. We believe in Palestinian-led governance of Gaza, with Gaza unified with the West Bank.”
Right, because the people of Gaza have shown themselves to be so wonderfully capable of self-government. These are the people who voted Hamas into power, who cheered the October 7 atrocities, and who tell pollsters now, by a large margin, that they still support Hamas. These are, moreover, people who have been brainwashed to hate Jews since infancy. The appalling condition of Gaza, even before the Israelis began reducing it to rubble, testified not only to Hamas’s wholesale misdirection of international aid to military uses but to the determination of most Gazans to wallow in hate rather than build up something resembling a real society.
“Israelis and Palestinians,” Blinken went on to say in his memo, must end up “living side by side.” Yes, and the lion shall lie down with the lamb. “With the Blinken plan,” Levin observes, “Israel will not survive, certainly not for long. This has been the plan since Barack Obama was president and Blinken was deputy secretary of state. John McCain was 100% right when he went to the Senate floor to excoriate Blinken and refused to vote for his confirmation as deputy secretary of state.”
The remarks by McCain to which Levin refers were delivered on December 16, 2014. Preserved on C-SPAN, they make for remarkable viewing. McCain, speaking for 24 minutes, summed up the disaster of Obama’s foreign policy – among them the folly of Benghazi, the insanity of the Iran deal, and the failure to prevent Bassad’s slaughter of Syrians and Putin’s invasion of Crimea – then zeroed in on Blinken, who’d made statements (for example, about the level of violence in Iraq) that were “divorced from reality”; whose determination to withdraw from Afghanistan on a specific date would lead to disaster (seven years later, McCain would be proven right); and who was personally responsible for crushing the popular Iranian movement to remove the murderous mullahs.
That’s not all. In a sensational October 2 article in the Tablet, Lee Smith reported on developments, most of which postdate McCain’s j’accuse, that probably have the late Arizona senator rolling in his grave. The thrust of Smith’s article is that, according to Iranian government emails, Biden’s envoy to Iran, Robert Malley, has in fact been secretly working with the Iranian mullahs to ensure that they, in effect, determine Biden’s Iran policy. Aiding in this nefarious effort were Malley’s protégé Ariane Tabatabai, whom he helped place at State and then at Defense, and a phalanx of Iranian American academics who were on the payroll of an official of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and who began as “outside ‘experts’” purportedly advising the U.S. government before being named to high-level posts in the U.S. government.
You couldn’t make it up if you tried. And even before Smith’s article appeared, it was obvious that something was fishy about Malley and his crew. Last year the National Union for Democracy in Iran (NUFDI), which opposes the mullahs, wrote to Blinken urging that he (1) adopt a new Iran policy driven by concern for freedom and human rights in Iran and (2) replace Malley. Even then it was clear to these liberty-loving Iranians that Malley’s priorities were way off. Needless to say, Blinken ignored the NUFDI’s request.
Anyway, the bottom line of Smith’s piece – which is far more elaborate and detailed than I’ve been able to indicate here – is that under Obama and then under Biden, many top officials at State were taking orders from the enemy. This, in itself, is nothing new. Back in the day, there were Stalinists in the State Department, among them Alger Hiss, whose innocence any number of Democrats went to their graves professing. It was Joe McCarthy, who tried to expose this treachery, who went down in history as the heavy. But at least Hiss and his ilk tried to cover their tracks. The presence of Iranian operatives in the Obama and Biden administrations could almost, it appears, have been described as an open secret.
Indeed, Smith suggests that the White House knew what Malley was up to and approved. For under Biden, as under Obama, Iran’s interests were America’s interests: the White House wanted to protect the mullahs and their nuke program. Smith concludes by saying that it’s time to find out why this is the case. But do we really have to ask? If Obama is pro-Iran, it’s because he hates America and Israel and loves Islam. If Biden, the current nominal president, is pro-Iran, it’s because he’s Obama’s puppet. And if so many people at State and even at the Pentagon are pro-Iran, it’s because they’re relatively recent graduates of elite universities where they learned to see America and Israel as evil oppressors and the mullahs as innocent victims.
In any case, why should we be surprised that Obama and Biden are partial to Iran? We already knew that the Biden family was paid off big time by both China and Ukraine. We already knew that the Clintons, who concocted the Russiagate hoax, were themselves, in fact, cozy with the Russians. Since the Democrats who run our government are already in thrall to our other major enemies, why not Iran, too?
Aside from which, well, let’s face it. Even in its best days, the State Department was largely a congregation of clowns – a bunch of Ivy League brats who looked down on the ordinary citizens of their own country while viewing even representatives of the most savage foreign regimes as charmingly exotic and essentially harmless. After all, even Hamas officials don’t decapitate you when you’re sitting across from them at a negotiating table. They may not partake of the cocktails at a cocktail reception, but they can seem eminently clubbable when they’re schmoozing you for giant pallets of cash.
Yes, the idiots at State know in detail what Hamas did to those kibbutz residents and Negev partygoers on October 7, but such events, in a sense, aren’t entirely real to them. Their world is the eminently civilized world of jet-set diplomacy. It’s a world in which you can very quickly come to believe that whereas the trucker in Arkansas or the farmer in Iowa is a hopelessly unsophisticated rube, the envoy from Tehran or Beijing is perfectly refined – a person who is very much like yourself, and with whom (you convince yourself) you could easily work out all the planet’s problems if only the pesky riffraff would keep out of it.
Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Western intellectuals in a Soros-backed think tank are all in for promoting Iran's interests
The Iranian regime does not solely advance its warmongering through employing a radical force like Hamas, or Hezbollah in Lebanon, or the Houthis in Yemen, with millions of dollars in payments and logistical support.
It also tries to influence policymaking in various European and American media and decision-making institutions. Iran does this to prevent any effort to halt to its massacres of the Iranian people, and to stop any efforts to block its warmongering, and any effort to end its construction of a nuclear bomb.
These advocates of appeasement also push economic interests in trade with Iran, while at the same time strongly condemning the wave of executions!
Recently, in an interview with the French newspaper Le Monde, Ali Vaez, a so-called Iran expert, said that if we put too much pressure on the Iranian regime because of the devastating war in the Middle East, this regime would move farther towards building a nuclear bomb. Ali Vaez works within the Brussels-based, Soros-backed, International Crisis Group as its Iran Project Director, one of the few think tanks that have close relations with the Iranian Foreign Ministry. Alex Soros sits on its board of directors.
The Iran Influence Network
Recently, a large number of emails discovered by two media outlets, the American Semafor, and the Farsi-language Iran International TV broadcast, show that Tehran's cooperation with the International Crisis Group was formed through the Center for Iranian Studies, which is affiliated with the Iranian Foreign Ministry.
These emails show that in the years 2013 and 2014, Crisis Group analysts were promoting the positions of the Iranian government, even when they contradicted the positions of the Obama administration. These emails reveal that the two had signed an agreement that was never made public. These documents well demonstrate that the International Crisis Group has played a significant role in nuclear negotiations and the lifting of sanctions on Iran for nearly a decade, consistently making recommendations to the Obama-, Biden-, and Trump administrations.
In their investigative report published in October, Semafor and Iran International clarified that Ali Vaez and his colleague Dina Esfandiary were part of an influence network formed and directed by Tehran.
Reports show that in 2013, a network of analysts outside Iran was formed under the title "Iran Experts Plan" to increase Iran's influence on the political scene. Although Vaez has defended his presence in this network, calling the group informal, memoirs of [Iran's Foreign Minister] Zarif and documents from the Iranian Foreign Ministry show how Tehran has benefited from members of this network and the International Crisis Group to advance its nuclear diplomacy.
According to obtained documents, initial negotiations between the International Crisis Group and the Political Studies Center began in 2013.
At that time, Robert Malley was responsible for the Middle East and North Africa at the International Crisis Group. Emails show that Malley was able to go to Iran for the first time through network connections. In 2014, Malley entered the Obama administration to advance nuclear negotiations with Iran. Documents show that while Malley was in the Obama administration, he continued to use Vaez to send messages to Iran.
Malley became the president and CEO of the International Crisis Group in 2017 and was appointed as Biden's special envoy on Iran in 2020.
However, following recent investigations into him, his security clearance was revoked. The reason has not yet been announced, but did his relationships with Iran go beyond official and turn him into an Iranian regime pawn? No one knows, but the sudden cessation of his duties fuels such speculations.
Despite these revelations, Vaez still presents himself, wittingly or not, as a proponent of the Iranian regime's narrative on the Middle East crisis and the nuclear program. He has gone to the White House at least nine times last year to discuss Middle East and Iran issues with relevant officials.
The time has come for Europe and America to pay attention to the Iranian people and their unequivocal demand to overthrow this regime, instead of investing in the illusionary equation that by giving concessions, the regime will come to its senses and stop domestic suppression, warmongering, terrorism, and the nuclear program. The only guarantee for peace and stability in the region, free from war, bloodshed, and an arms race, is a democratic, secular, and republican Iran—an outcome that the Iranian people are determined to achieve.
No comments:
Post a Comment