Barack H. Obama's "Bizarre" Reaction to a Genocide-Minded Iran (And the Court Jew Who's Helping Him)

Here's Roger L. Simon on the subject (I've bolded the money para):

In the last week or so Obama has decided to ignore the putatively sanctioned Iranian missile tests -- the ones with "charming" admonitions for Israel to be wiped off the surface of the Earth emblazoned on the fuselage in Hebrew and Farsi -- and seemingly agreed to the ayatollah's demand that Iran should be allowed into our dollar system. A hundred and fifty billion evidently wasn't enough. 

Irony of irony, this latest financial sellout to Iran will be administered by Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew -- an orthodox Jew. (How does that man sleep?) Lew assured the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last July that “Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars through New York or hold correspondent account relationships with U.S. financial institutions, or enter into financing arrangements with U.S. banks.” That was then. This is now. 

Even when Obama, seemingly for propriety's sake, mildly criticizes Iran, it comes off as bizarre: “When they launch ballistic missiles with slogans calling for the destruction of Israel, that makes businesses nervous.” Businesses nervous? How about six million Israeli human beings? 

Which leads us back to that puzzling question. Why does this strange man -- our president -- do what he does?  Some say he is under the Svengali-like influence of Valerie Jarrett with her Iranian roots. Could be. But whatever influence Jarrett has, the results are deeper that we imagine and the work to be done to repair the damage more than we know...

But can the damage be repaired before the megalomaniacal twelvers drop a nuclear load on Israel (or, in their delightful parlance, "the Zionist entity")?

I have my doubts.

Update: Obama: Iran Not Following Spirit of Nuclear Deal

No kidding. Here's a newsflash for you, Mr. President: They aren't following the letter of deal either. In fact, you could say that what they're doing, as per usual, is following their own agenda, the one which sees Israel blasted to smithereens as a prelude to their occluded messiah's comeback.

Your Monthly Bangash

I do so look forward each month to the latest blast of Zionhass from the Grandiose Ayatollah's point man in Hogtown. Here are the first few paragraphs of his April bloviation:

There are two wars going on simultaneously against Muslims: the military war and propaganda war. The imperialists and Zionists not only occupy Muslim lands but they also want to control their minds by manipulating the use of language.

Imperialists and Zionists not only occupy other peoples’ lands militarily but they also want to control their minds and thinking. Issues are framed in such a way as to present the victims as aggressors, and vice versa.  The real aggressors — imperial America and Zionist Israel — are projected as paragons of virtue working to establish peace and security in the world even while they indulge in wanton killing of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent people.

The Zionist state of Israel can do no wrong. When it kills Palestinians, one hears the refrain, “Israel has the right to defend itself.” Do the Palestinians have any right to defend themselves, protect their families and lands from the marauding Zionists? Why are the people of Syria not allowed to defend themselves and their country and why are so many countries involved in overthrowing a legitimately elected government? The list goes on...

The Zionist state can do no wrong?

What planet is he living on?

WaPo Scribbler Clobbbers Trump for "Stereotyping" Iranians

Apparently there was an ethnic slur hidden inside Trump's claim that the nuke deal is a result of Obama and his people having been outsmarted by the Ayatollah:

Trump also echoed his frustration with the Iran nuclear deal, grumbling about how "terrible" it was for the Obama administration to help unlock $150 billion in frozen Iranian funds as part of a compromise on sanctions placed on the country. 

He then dabbled in a familiar ethnic stereotype, casting the result of many months of concerted international diplomacy as a clever Persian trick:

It was negotiated by people that are poor negotiators against great negotiators. Persians being great negotiators, okay? It’s one of those things. You might be Persian. But the Iranians, frankly, are great negotiators.

This is hardly the first time he has used such language. 

“The Persians are great negotiators,” Trump told CNN in July when Iran and world powers, including the United States, looked close to forging a pact on Tehran's nuclear program. “They are laughing at the stupidity of the deal we’re making on nuclear. We should double up and triple up the sanctions and have them come to us. They are making an amazing deal.” 

As WorldViews noted last year, the idea that "Persians are great negotiators," while seemingly flattering, is part of a centuries-old Western cliche of the wily Persian swindler who cannot be trusted. Trump is not alone in embracing this stereotype, especially in recent times.

If I'm not familiar with the centuries-old cliché, I highly doubt that Donald Trump, whose understanding of Middle East nuances should be considered shaky at best, knows about it. Occam's razor would suggest that "stereotyping" never entered into Trump's "grumbling," and that his caviling amounted to an assertion of the obvious--that America was outfoxed and defenestrated by Iran's duplicitous (i.e. taqiyyah-spewing) and eliminationist-minded leadership.



A "wily Persian swindler"? Nope. A fanatical, fork-tongued twelver.

The Great Divide: Which Side Are You On?

I think the following lines capture the gaping chasm that divides Jews in our time:

Caroline Glick talked about the terrifying crisis that Israel and World Jewry is in due in large part to Islamic fundamentalism.  She lamented the lack of support from many US Jews and she made the case that if Israel is weak, the situation for Jews around the world grows increasingly bad.  She said that the US Jewish community is in denial about the dangers we all face. Yossi Klein Halevi focused his remarks on the importance of strengthening the relationship between Jews and Muslims and how to develop and strengthen ties between the groups. Halevi described the unique Shalom Hartman Institute program he co-directs which brings Muslims to Israel to experience the country and learn its traditions and culture.

He wants to "strengthen the relationship between Jews and Muslims" by exposing them to Israeli culture?

Best of luck with that one, Yossi!

Personally, I think it's more important to try to ameliorate the Jews' pathological ignorance re Islam and all the "awesome" things it has to say about Jewry--which, after all, is at the root of Arab/Muslim rejectionism--than it is to entice a handful of Muslims to come and "experience" Israel.

But, hey, I guess that's the Glick in me talkin'.

Lorrie Goldstein to Justin Trudeau: Shun the UN Until It Shuns Its Egregious Jew-Hate

Now that the Liberals are back in power, Canada is seeking to heighten its profile at the UN via a seat on the Security Council. But since the UN is ground zero for global Jew 'n' Israel-hate, the Toronto Sun's Lorrie Goldstein implores our PM to give it a rest:

No doubt Trudeau and the Liberals would argue that having Canada take a more active role in the UN would ameliorate the Jew hatred within it. 

My view is the opposite. The UN is not worthy of Canada’s endorsement — beyond retaining our basic membership in the global body — until it rids itself of the millenniums-old plagues of Jew hatred and blood libel against the Jews. 

Barring Israel's sudden demise, that's likely to be an insurmountable challenge given that the UN's largest voting bloc is comprised of all the nations in the OIC, a body that amounts to a neo-caliphate.

Refuting Beinart's Blarney

A guest speaker at my synagogue today gave props to "progressive" pundit Peter Beinart. Here's the article I would send the speaker if I thought he was even remotely receptive to an opposing viewpoint:

The fight against BDS and anti-Semitism is one that ought to unite all supporters of Israel, whether they are supporters of the current government or its fiercest critics. But for some on the left, the pushback against a BDS movement that they claim, at least in some instances to oppose, makes them uncomfortable. Having made common cause in some cases with BDS activists, they find labeling their fellow leftists as anti-Semites to be a bridge too far for them. Thus, so-called “liberal Zionists,” such as writer Peter Beinart, have now stepped into the breach to denounce the effort to categorize anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism. 

Writing in Haaretz, Beinart claims that the argument in favor of this link is bogus. 

Beinart first claims that it is wrong to assert, as I have done, that anti-Zionism is a form of discrimination because opposition to the Jewish right to a homeland and self-defense is unique. He says that opposition to statehood for the Kurds or the Basques is not assumed to be a form of hate against those peoples. For the same reasons, he also says that opposing a state just because Jews might need one in order to protect themselves is also not bias because no one would consider critics of Kurdish or Basque secession from other nations is based on hatred. 

Next, he claims it is a misnomer to assume that all anti-Zionists want to abuse Jews because BDS groups welcome both individual Jews and anti-Zionist groups like Jewish Voices for Peace as allies. 

Third, he says that just because anti-Zionists want to dismantle Israel — as distinct from opposing states that have not yet been created — isn’t discriminatory because of the precedent of destroying the Afrikaner-dominated Republic of South Africa. 

Most importantly, he says that Israel’s policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians are inherently discriminatory, thus making at least some of the arguments of the Jewish state’s foes understandable if not justified. According to Beinart, who believes that Israel should be forced to give up the West Bank and Jerusalem to the Palestinians, it is the actions of the Netanyahu government that are justifying BDS and undermining the rationale for a Jewish and democratic state. 

He’s wrong on all counts...

Francois Hollande Dares to Mention the Unmentionable--"Islamic Terrorism"--and Promptly Gets Censored By the White House

Silly Francois failed to toe the Obama line (the one that amends reality to conform with its delusions).  

Ironically--but fittingly--the Obama toeing M.O. is fully in line with sharia (as well as Soviet) speech codes.

Hey, M. Hollande--this one's for you:

"Petition To Upgrade Palestine's Diplomatic Status In Canada"

Betcha didn't know there was one. Well, there is, and it's a small masterpiece of suck-uppery:

The Honourable Stéphane Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs, 

We would like to express our utmost delight for your leadership of this great country, which makes us fully confident in the returned status of Canada as a major player in the international arena for peace, and the defending of principals of human rights and international legitimacy. As Canadians of Arab origin, and Canadians interested in justice in the Middle East, we are eager to strengthen relations between our home-land Canada and our countries of origin.  

We are highly appreciative and supportive of your statements calling to achieve just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East. We look forward to Canada taking a constructive, unbiased and honest mediation.  

We, the undersigned, are asking you to take an active role in the implementation of a symbolic step to upgrade the diplomatic Palestinian representation in Canada to such a rank like: The General Delegation of Palestine, the Diplomatic Mission of Palestine, Diplomatic Representation of Palestine, including granting it the privileges and immunities enjoyed by other countries’ official representation in Canada.  

We thank you for your consideration of our request. Please accept our utmost respect and best wishes.

So far, more than 1,400 people have signed the sucker. Let's see if it has the desired effect.

Melanie Phillips Weighs in on the Jew-Hate of Our Time (And How the Brits Are Blind to It)

Phillips writes (my bolds):

In the past couple of weeks, the media has begun to pay attention to the contribution made by British and EU taxpayers to Palestinian Authority backing for terrorism. The British still don’t understand, though, that the UK and Europe have long funded and connived at not just Palestinian terrorism, but the incitement that causes it. 

They don’t understand that this incitement is based on antisemitism, not a dispute over land boundaries. 

They don’t understand that antisemitism is the signature motif of a deranged culture that should be treated as a pariah rather than excused, sanitized and rewarded, as Britain does with the Palestinians. 

They don’t understand that the antisemitic derangement that drives the Palestinians also drives the Muslim war against the West. 

They don’t understand that by indulging the lies, intimidation and moral inversion of Palestinian Jew-hatred, Britain and Europe have made it impossible to fight off the Islamist threat to themselves. 

They will only start to defend themselves properly when they start treating Israel as their indispensable ally rather than a cosmic foe.

Sadly, with leftist dogma in ascendance, that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Two Toronto Inventions That Are Full of Hot Air

1. Israeli Apartheid Week.

2. The Whoopie Cushion.

Obama's Low "Rent" Analysis of Islam Inspires Today's Song Parody

You can thank/blame Barack Hussein Obama, and his bone-headed insistence that Islam is not inherently violent, for this one:

One hundred sixty four violent verses of jee-had.
One hundred sixty four violent verses so clear.
One hundred sixty four violent verses of jee-had.
How do you measure, measure our fear?
In bombings, in shootings,
In knifings, in "Allahu Akbars."
In lies, in denials, in "Islamophobia!"
In one hundred sixty four violent verses of jee-had
How do you measure the words held so dear?
How about hate?
How about hate?
How about hate?
Measure in hate.