Tuesday, November 12, 2013


About those talks in Geneva and who walked away from what -- Secretary Kerry says the Iranians walked away from the deal on the table, but the French are claiming that they are the ones who balked because the Iranians weren't being required to put much skin in the game. But we have this report at TruNews that seems to indicate that the French were deeply concerned (and perhaps convinced) that Benjamin Netanyahu would order a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities because the Geneva deal didn't require much from the Iranians, and what was on the table was, in France's estimation, a "Fool's Bargain."

‘Israel will attack Iran if you sign the deal, French MP told Fabius’

France warns of a "Fool's Bargain" with Iran Deal

Arutz Sheva is reporting that at least one U.S. analyst says America (i.e. President Obama) is ignoring its allies in the Middle East in an effort to get a deal, any deal, from the Iranians, thus raising the specter of an arms race in the troubled region. Secretary Kerry has pushed back against such claims saying that the U.S. is not ignoring allies, believes it is taking the right course with Iran, is not rushing into just any deal, is not "blind," is not "stupid," and there are no "rifts" among those involved in the talks. And there we have it again -- the word "rifts."

Analysis: US Rushing Iran Deal, Selling Out Allies

Kerry Sees Iran Nuclear Deal in Months; Will Protect Allies

Kerry: United States not 'blind' or 'stupid' in Iran talks

Understandably, Israel is watching any talks with Iran with a wary eye. JPost is indicating that the conditions Iran would have to meet that were actually brought to the table in Geneva differed significantly from the conditions Secretary Kerry indicated to Benjamin Netanyahu.

Israel surprised by US course of action on Iran, officials say

Israel Hayom is reporting that "Israel is furious that the scope of sanctions relief offered to Iran is far more substantial than it was led to believe by the Americans."

'US capitulated' on Iran deal, Jerusalem says

Debka is reporting that John Kerry is in Dubai on an interesting mission -- to "split up the broad opposition to Barack Obama's policy."

The pushback against a nuclear deal between the six powers and Iran in Geneva Friday, Nov. 8 had many partners. Europe, Saudi Arabia, the Arab Emirates and Israel have bonded together against the Obama administration’s plans to mend US fences with Tehran in general and leave Iran with its nuclear components intact.

Secretary of State John Kerry landed in the United Arab Emirate Monday, Nov. 11, for an effort to break up that bond and split up the broad opposition to Barack Obama’s policy. . . .

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry show no inclination to meet America’s allies’ widespread demands to tone down their proposal, which essentially permits Iran to retain all the components for assembling a nuclear bomb, while enjoying a generous reward in sanctions relief for a six-month freeze.

This is stunning! There is a unified front AGAINST President Obama and what he is trying to do for the Iranians, and Kerry is trying to break up that unified front. Conventional wisdom would indicate that when MANY are against the course you are taking, one should step back and re-evaluate to see if you are missing something. But not President Obama. It is a well-known secret that he is narcissistic, which means it is difficult for him to believe he is wrong on a decision. Therefore, chances are low that he will step back and re-evaluate his decision-making paradigm.  Kerry stopping over in Dubai is indication that Obama intends to stay the course.

Kerry bids from Abu Dhabi to break up unique broad front which tripped up US-Iran nuclear deal

The conditions Obama are imposing upon Israel are so treacherous that Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum is calling it as he sees it.

If I might paraphrase the U.S. position: "First, sit by quietly as we reach an accord with Tehran that freezes but does not dismantle its nuclear buildup. Second, stop the illegitimate residential construction on the West Bank or the Palestinian Authority will, with American acquiescence, start a third intifada."

Pipes even quotes Naftali Bennett concerning President Obama's gestures toward Iran.

Economy and Commerce Minister Naftali Bennett was even more direct, even raising the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb destroying New York City:

These critical days in November will be remembered for years to come. The Free World stands before a fork in the road with a clear choice: Either stand strong and insist Iran dismantles its nuclear-weapons program, or surrender, cave in and allow Iran to retain its 18,500 centrifuges. Years from now, when an Islamic terrorist blows up a suitcase in New York, or when Iran launches a nuclear missile at Rome or Tel Aviv, it will have happened only because a Bad Deal was made during these defining moments (emphasis mine).

Obama turns on Israel

In a strange twist of agreement, an Iranian general is agreeing with Bennett.

Mohsen Rafiqdoost, a former minister of the Guards and a long-time regime official engaged in buying arms on the black market, also talked of Israel’s destruction in an interview with Basij News. He praised Hassan Tehrani Moghadam, the brain behind Iran’s ballistic program who was assassinated in 2011, for designing missiles through reverse engineering and predicted that achievement will enable Iran to obliterate Israel.

Iran general: No doubt Israel and America will be attacked

Bennett says that should a missile be launched at Tel Aviv, the world should remember that it happened because of the "Bad Deal" that the Americans negotiated with Iran. Back in March when President Obama went to Israel I wrote a post asking, "Will the New Madrid rumble?" In that post I referenced several prophetic words from individuals who believe that when the U.S. forces Israel to divide Jerusalem, then the U.S. will be divided along the New Madrid. One of those prophetic words was from a man named Savaraj who spoke of believing the Lord showed him missiles hitting Tel Aviv because Israel's "friend" came with a deal that was, in the end, a political trap, and that Benjamin Netanyahu would be desperately hoping that his friend would not betray him, but he does. These talks with the Iranians may very well end up being the deal that results in a "political trap" for Israel.

Will the New Madrid Rumble?

This past July, Ayelet Shaked, a member of Israel's Knesset, wrote an open letter to John Kerry about the pressure from President Obama to release prisoners as part of the peace process. These prisoners, in many instances, had taken part in terrorist attacks or murder of Israeli citizens. Obama and Kerry were unmoved, and the prisoners were released. Now, another member of the Knesset has written an open letter to John Kerry, this time accusing him of being a "dishonest broker" in the peace deal. In her letter she speaks of why it is unrealistic to remove IDF soldiers from the West Bank, or what we have noted on this blog is the Jordan "rift" valley.

MK's blast Kerry as a 'dishonest broker'

Dr. Haim Shine, writing an op-ed piece for Israel Hayom, notes that several former Israeli officials "recklessly launched a coordinated campaign against Netanyahu by spurring on and providing cover for irresponsible media outlets. From morning through night, they sowed fear among the Israeli public about the expected consequences of an attack on Iran. They portrayed the prime minister as a warmonger and tried to delegitimize the elected government. Today, however, it is clear how ludicrous their claims were. When Netanyahu stood on the U.N. podium in 2012 and drew an illustration of Iran's nuclear progress, many in Israel and around the world chuckled. They refused to believe that, as the world dragged its feet, Iran was building the infrastructure to produce a doomsday weapon.

Shine goes on to explain that Iran has made a "devilish move" that has suckered the U.S. and the European states right into their plans, and Netanyahu was right to have been beating the drum so consistently on the motives of Iran. In the end, it appears that Israel will have to take care of its own as it appears that the U.S. and Europe will not.

Netanyahu was right, our fate is in our hands

Times of Israel notes that "there are four possible deals that may be reached during the next round of talks in Geneva" on the 20th, and "the difference between reasonable and bad resides in the details." The article lays out the four possible scenarios and what each one means for Israel.

The devil is in the nuclear details

JPost concludes that the talks in Geneva shows that Israel is at the "do-or-die" moment -- to strike or not to strike.

Zero Hour: Israel must now choose between attack and enslavement

Surely prayer must be lifted constantly on behalf of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu for the decisions they must make regarding their security, and for our own President, who seems determined to do what seems right in his own eyes.