We will lie to the public any time, anywhere

The post-Obama era is going to be something quite different from the one he inherited, as dangerous as it already was. This is the article in full: Obama’s dishonesty on Iran.

Under the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran, that nation’s theocratic regime receives relief from economic and arms sanctions in exchange for curtailment of its nuclear program. But there’s a catch — when inspectors seek to verify Iran’s compliance, the Iranians can delay the inspection of any site for at least 24 days.

But before the deal was struck, the Obama administration had promised much more — “anytime, anywhere” inspections, on demand. When asked about this on Sunday, Secretary of State John Kerry displayed symptoms of amnesia.

“This is a term that, honestly, I never heard in the four years that we were negotiating,” Kerry said. “It was not on the table. There’s no such thing in arms control as anytime, anywhere.”

Barring a genuine brain malady, there is no gentle way of skirting around the fact that this is a lie. The White House specifically promised this in public. Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser and spokesman, in making the case for the Iran deal in April, told CNN, “Under this deal, you will have anywhere, anytime, 24/7 access as it relates to the nuclear facilities that Iran has.”

Beyond this, Kerry appears to have specifically discussed it as a negotiating point with senior lawmakers. After speaking with Kerry, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., mentioned “anytime, anywhere” in a speech this spring to Jewish groups uneasy about the deal. And Kerry seems to have told the same thing to the Republican chairmen of the Senate Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, according to their recollection.

Unfortunately, Kerry’s difficulty in telling the truth extends well beyond the issue of inspections. For example, consider the far more dangerous and controversial provision in the deal that lifts the existing sanctions against Iran’s acquisition of conventional arms and ballistic missiles. Kerry said in the same Sunday interview that the deal extended those sanctions by five and eight years, respectively. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman John Kirby said the same thing explicitly — that the sanctions would have ended if not for the deal.

In fact, the U.N. sanctions needed no extension — they would have remained in place without further action until Iran stopped enrichment of uranium altogether. The deal that Kerry negotiated is what actually lifts the sanctions. And this concession is troubling by itself — after all, even if Iran can argue that its nuclear program has peaceful applications, it cannot say this of its ambition to develop its ballistic missile technology.

But it is even more troubling that Kerry and the Obama administration cannot just admit they traded this concession to get a deal. Instead, they are pretending that their dodgy concession is some kind of diplomatic victory for the United States.

In his weekly radio address, President Obama warned Americans, concerning the debate over the Iran deal, “you’re going to hear a lot of overheated and often dishonest arguments about it in the weeks ahead.” He was right. Only the dishonest arguments are coming from his own administration, which is desperately trying to defend dangerous concessions that will pave the way for a radical regime to finance terrorism and build a nuclear arsenal.

I just wish the Obama media would be more explicit about what the world has achieved with this deal. What do they see as the great positives for the future in a nuclear Iran? Lying in politics is not news. What ought to be news isn’t just the lying, but how dangerous for the future of world peace this deal is.

In the Middle East, involving Obama and Kerry may only make things worse

An interesting article about the war in Gaza, EGYPT/ISRAEL TO JOHN KERRY’S MEDIATION OFFER –‘PLEASE GOD, NO!’. Obama and Kerry on this account turn out to be of assistance only to Hamas:

Every major American push to impose a two state solution upon Israel and the Palestinians has not just failed to deliver a two state solution, it has delivered either mass waves of suicide terrorism against Israelis or outright terrorist wars against Israel.

Egypt’s new President not only wanted to reassert his country’s direct interest in the conflict by isolating Hamas from early cease fire iterations it feared anymore US involvement would prove counterproductive by providing more cover for Hamas. Egypt’s interest is in protecting Egypt which means helping Israel help itself by weakening Hamas.

Lifelines and breathing space should be the very last thing offered to terrorist war criminals, especially at the very moment they may have pushed themselves to the brink of their own doom. Of course Hamas understands that enabling John Kerry to embark upon yet another of his fool’s errands would provide them with just that.

Diplomacy is more than wanting to do the right thing and bringing every war to an end as soon as possible.

Obama, Mom jeans and John Kerry

US President Barack Obama rides his bicy

There really is idiocy about. If you are paying attention, even slightly, you would know that there are no end of problems in the world, from international terrorism, missing planes, poorly performing economies, and in the US, the disastrous introduction of the Affordable Care Act. But in the midst of all this, we can see what has really been on the mind of the American President:

Obama also took to the airwaves to set the record straight about his sartorial style. Earlier this month, former Gov. Sarah Palin criticized Obama’s weakness for the current situation in Ukraine, saying that while Russian President Vladimir Putin “wrestles bears and drills for oil,” people “look at our president as one who wears mom jeans.”

“I’ve been unfairly maligned about my jeans,” Obama told Seacrest on Friday. “The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans.”

This is what worries him. He is a teenage girl at heart. No gravitas, no seriousness, just a man who can read a teleprompter with only the occasional mistake (see “r-s-p-e-c-t”). That he spent a nanosecond on something no one in the world had thought twice about until he raised it himself is a spooky reminder of what a nitwit he is, incapable of any kind of useful concentrated thought on any issue of substance.

Meanwhile re the Ukraine, this is what John Kerry had to say:

We hope President Putin will recognize that none of what we’re saying is meant as a threat, it’s not meant in a personal way.

It is meant as a matter of respect for the international, multilateral structure that we have lived by since World War II, and for the standards of behavior about annexation, about succession, about independence, and how countries come about it.

Unless you are very low on the low-information voter totem pole, Americans must be truly embarrassed by who they elected as President. I only wish it was just a matter of embarrassment. This catastrophic period of American governance will rebound through the rest of this century and affect far more than we can even begin to foresee.

That is just the message of assurance Putin needed so you will not be surprised to find that Russia has begun its invasion of the Ukraine.

Where from here?

The new Middle East:

Tehran boasted at home that the accord recognised its ‘right’ to enrich uranium – which it says is for peaceful purposes – but Western leaders said the deal made no such reference.

Hassan Rowhani, whose election as Iran’s president in June raised hopes of a thaw with the West, insisted ‘Iran’s right to uranium enrichment on its soil was accepted in this nuclear deal by world powers’.

But US Secretary of State John Kerry was adamant: ‘This first step does not say that Iran has the right of enrichment, no matter what interpretative comments are made.’

I would say that Obama and Kerry are fools except that this is exactly what they want. The Iranian President is merely letting cats out of bags. No one is in any doubt about the troubles this is intended to cause.

The thing about being on the left when I was young was that there were adults still in charge who took a sober view of our interests and tried to act on them. We could go off to protest but it wouldn’t matter, and we knew it wouldn’t matter, because there were people at the top who paid no attention to us. Now there are no protests and the people at the top, if they are not opposed to our success and our way of life, certainly have an odd way of showing it.

If you are a nation dependent on American support, you would be wise to look for other kinds of friends and alliances. That Israel and Saudi Arabia may now make common cause is one more example of my enemy’s enemy is my friend. All this from Drudge today.

Netanyahu: ‘Historic Mistake’…
Deal leaves Israel few options…
Obama calls…
BOLTON: Abject Surrender…
Six-Month Freeze, but Enrichment Issues Remain…
Iranians hail ‘smiling’ FM…
GOP sour…
Secret US-Iran talks…
Anger, jitters in Mideast…
Disagreements emerge…
‘Iran got what it wanted’…
Relief sweeps Tehran…
REPORT: Israelis inspect Saudi bases for possible strike…

Where from here? Two out of three of the “axis of evil” to have nuclear weapons. And it is American foreign policy to do nothing to stop it.

UPDATE: I hadn’t seen this but was sent to me by a friend. This is from Obama’s second inaugural:

And we must be a source of hope to the poor, the sick, the marginalized, the victims of prejudice–not out of mere charity, but because peace in our time requires the constant advance of those principles that our common creed describes: tolerance and opportunity; human dignity and justice.

The phase is possibly not accidental but intended as directly in your eye to everyone who would like to maintain our way if life. But if just there by the force of words and concepts, then in itself in betrays the cast of mind and the personal beliefs that lie behind it. It’s not even si vis pacem, para bellum. The President may himself be a fifth column. We give up our freedoms so that a bunch of layabouts can have free phones.