"The Pips Have Started to Squeak" (video)

Commentator Hugo Gurdin on the Iranian regime:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcaeQfltk2o

Bibi – Hero Of The Free World – & The Petty People

"He’s a hero not only of the Jewish People, but of people everywhere who feel themselves part of the free world, people who oppose the horrors that Islamic State is inflicting and Iran’s nuclear plans...."

So, and rightly,  Sara Netanyahu has said of her husband, in an interview with Naomi Ragen, to be carried in full by the Jerusalem Post at the weekend.

Superb, simply superb, and typically so, was the speech, punctuated by frequent sustained thunderous applause, that The Hero delivered yesterday before Congress (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRf1cdw4IAY):

As Isi Leibler predicted in the interview he gave to Mark Golub that I posted yesterday, Bibi began by acknowledging the good things that (the insultingly absent) Barack Obama has done for Israel.

He continued, inter alia, in a speech worthy of Churchill taking on the Appeasers during the Devil's Decade:

 '....  Iran’s regime is not merely a Jewish problem, any more than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. The six million Jews murdered by the Nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in World War Two. So, too, Iran’s regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also the peace of the entire world. To understand just how dangerous Iran would be with nuclear weapons, we must fully understand the nature of the regime.

The people of Iran are very talented people. They’re heirs to one of the world’s great civilizations. But in 1979, they were hijacked by religious zealots — religious zealots who imposed on them immediately a dark and brutal dictatorship.

That year, the zealots drafted a constitution, a new one for Iran. It directed the revolutionary guards not only to protect Iran’s borders, but also to fulfill the ideological mission of jihad. The regime’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, exhorted his followers to “export the revolution throughout the world.”

I’m standing here in Washington, DC and the difference is so stark. America’s founding document promises life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Iran’s founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad. And as states are collapsing across the Middle East, Iran is charging into the void to do just that.

Iran’s goons in Gaza, its lackeys in Lebanon, its revolutionary guards on the Golan Heights are clutching Israel with three tentacles of terror. Backed by Iran, Assad is slaughtering Syrians. Back by Iran, Shiite militias are rampaging through Iraq. Back by Iran, Houthis are seizing control of Yemen, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the Red Sea. Along with the Straits of Hormuz, that would give Iran a second choke-point on the world’s oil supply.

Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That’s just last week, while they’re having nuclear talks with the United States. But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran’s attacks against the United States have been anything but mock. And the targets have been all too real.

Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, DC.

In the Middle East, Iran now dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa. And if Iran’s aggression is left unchecked, more will surely follow.

So, at a time when many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations.

We must all stand together to stop Iran’s march of conquest, subjugation and terror.

Now, two years ago, we were told to give President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif a chance to bring change and moderation to Iran. Some change! Some moderation!

Rouhani’s government hangs gays, persecutes Christians, jails journalists and executes even more prisoners than before.

Last year, the same Zarif who charms Western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh. Imad Mughniyeh is the terrorist mastermind who spilled more American blood than any other terrorist besides Osama bin Laden. I’d like to see someone ask him a question about that.

Iran’s regime is as radical as ever, its cries of “Death to America,” that same America that it calls the “Great Satan,” as loud as ever.

Now, this shouldn’t be surprising, because the ideology of Iran’s revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that’s why this regime will always be an enemy of America.

Don’t be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America.

Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the region and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire.

In this deadly game of thrones, there’s no place for America or for Israel, no place for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don’t share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone.

So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy.

The difference is that ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember — I’ll say it one more time — the greatest dangers facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can’t let that happen.

But that, my friends, is exactly what could happen, if the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran. That deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. It would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons, lots of them.

Let me explain why. While the final deal has not yet been signed, certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record. You don’t need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. You can Google it.

Absent a dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran.

The first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short break-out time to the bomb. Break-out time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb.

According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected, but not destroyed.

Because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largely intact, Iran’s break-out time would be very short — about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel’s.

And if — if Iran’s work on advanced centrifuges, faster and faster centrifuges, is not stopped, that break-out time could still be shorter, a lot shorter.

True, certain restrictions would be imposed on Iran’s nuclear program and Iran’s adherence to those restrictions would be supervised by international inspectors. But here’s the problem. You see, inspectors document violations; they don’t stop them.

Inspectors knew when North Korea broke to the bomb, but that didn’t stop anything. North Korea turned off the cameras, kicked out the inspectors. Within a few years, it got the bomb.

Now, we’re warned that within five years North Korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs.

Like North Korea, Iran, too, has defied international inspectors. It’s done that on at least three separate occasions — 2005, 2006, 2010. Like North Korea, Iran broke the locks, shut off the cameras.

Now, I know this is not gonna come a shock — as a shock to any of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, it also plays a pretty good game of hide-and-cheat with them.

The UN’s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught — caught twice, not once, twice — operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn’t even know existed.

Right now, Iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we don’t know about, the U.S. and Israel. As the former head of inspections for the IAEA said in 2013, he said, “If there’s no undeclared installation today in Iran, it will be the first time in 20 years that it doesn’t have one.” Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. And that’s why the first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. That concession creates a real danger that Iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal.

But the second major concession creates an even greater danger that Iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. Because virtually all the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade.

Now, a decade may seem like a long time in political life, but it’s the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It’s a blink of an eye in the life of our children. We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran’s nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could product many, many nuclear bombs.

Iran’s Supreme Leader says that openly. He says, Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount — 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.

My long-time friend, John Kerry, Secretary of State, confirmed last week that Iran could legitimately possess that massive centrifuge capacity when the deal expires.

Now I want you to think about that. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy.

And by the way, if Iran’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program is not part of the deal, and so far, Iran refuses to even put it on the negotiating table. Well, Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reach corners of the earth, including to every part of the United States.

So you see, my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb; it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.

So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse?

Well, I disagree. I don’t believe that Iran’s radical regime will change for the better after this deal. This regime has been in power for 36 years, and its voracious appetite for aggression grows with each passing year. This deal would wet appetite — would only wet Iran’s appetite for more.

Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it’s under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which to fund more terrorism?

Why should Iran’s radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both world’s: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?

This is a question that everyone asks in our region. Israel’s neighbors — Iran’s neighbors know that Iran will become even more aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled and it’s been given a clear path to the bomb.

And many of these neighbors say they’ll respond by racing to get nuclear weapons of their own. So this deal won’t change Iran for the better; it will only change the Middle East for the worse. A deal that’s supposed to prevent nuclear proliferation would instead spark a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the planet.

This deal won’t be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox.

If anyone thinks — if anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road, we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare.

Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve come here today to tell you we don’t have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don’t have to gamble with our future and with our children’s future.

We can insist that restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.

Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second…

Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world.

And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state.

If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires.

If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn’t change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted.

If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country....'

[Emphasis added; read the entire speech here]

Little wonder that the speech prompted a score of standing ovations.

Little wonder that very many of those who have Israel's interests at heart are hoping that Bibi will still be Israel's prime minister following the forthcoming election. (Example here)

But of course there are always the petty people who put partisan rivalries ahead of what should be a common cause:

(See here)

As well as the leftist as-a-Jews and renegades who seem to deny the real and present danger:

And who denounce not only the Hero of the Free World but others determined to keep the free world free.

Jewish hard leftists.  What a frightful strange breed they are.

Reminders Of The Death Culture (includes videos)

Israeli columnist Dror Eytan was obviously seeking no kudos from the Ha'aretz set or the Obama administration when he wrote inter alia  last week:

 'What has the death culture that surrounds us sought to sell in the past hundred years? Look around: there are no Jews in Iraq and no “territories” in Syria, and nevertheless the angels of death gleefully slaughter each other. No science and no industry and no inventions that will benefit humanity. Just death, and it’s wrapped in a thick layer of damned political correctness that has distorted our thought process....

If we don’t realize that the executioners who pack the condemned into cattle trucks and lay them by the dozens or hundreds in ditches and put them to death amid devilish ululations, and if we don’t get that this bunch is operating on our borders, and that its successes encourage our own local death culture, we will have to pay heavier prices in the future.

We must employ full force against the emissaries of the death culture, those who aid them, their military and civilian infrastructure, their sources of funding, their families, their clans, and anyone who knows something but just nods his head and keeps quiet. We know the argument that keeps us emasculated: “It will only increase tension and give an incentive to terror and strengthen the cycle of bloodshed.” Not at all. The culture of death doesn’t need incentives—it kills and murders and kidnaps, because that's what it is....

.... In the eyes of our neighbors and some parts of the world we are all people who stole a land that wasn’t theirs. This blood libel is spread every day by anti-Semites and haters of Israel, as well as by useful idiots among us....

Various conquerors and nomads from the four ends of the earth have arrived in this country. But since we Jews were exiled, no other sovereign entity has sprung up in this land. What would this country be if it weren't for the Jews? What would Jerusalem be without the Jews? The groups of strangers never wanted to compromise with the Jews who survived extermination and came home after a long exile. Even today they refuse to compromise and seek to oust us from the entire country. From Tel Aviv, too.... The fight for Israel is our fight for life....'

American Jewish leaders have expressed firm support for Operation Protective Edge, Israel's current initiative against that antisemitic genocidal Hamas.  As they observe:

'....Millions of Israelis are spending a sleepless night as sirens go off across the country in response to the constant barrage of missiles fired from Hamas-controlled Gaza, targeting the civilian population. No country would or should tolerate such a horrific onslaught as the one emanating from Gaza, which is controlled by the terrorist Hamas organization. The government of Prime Minister Netanyahu has shown great restraint seeking to avoid an all-out war and the civilian casualties that would entail. They have engaged in limited strikes against missile-launchers, storage facilities and manufacturing locations. Hamas has exploited this to expand the scope and range of its rocket attacks.  This puts the lie to the assertion that Hamas has changed and it remains a bloodthirsty terrorist entity. If there is to be any hope of a peaceful resolution of the conflict, it is imperative that President Abbas end the so-called unity government and disassociate in every respect from Hamas....'

The evil that characterises Hamas is seen in the following Palestine Media Watch video, which appeared on Al-Aqsa TV yesterday (9 July, and begins

'Zionists, wait and see stabbing attacks everywhere.
Wait for suicide attacks on every bus, café and street':

And then there is this footage showing how Hamas rockets are fired from civilian areas in Gaza, deliberately putting Gazan civilians in danger from Israeli fire:

And here's how Hamas targets its own people by encouraging Gazans to make themselves into human shields, knowing that despite the IDF's best intentions some will inevitably become casualties, and that much of the international community will condemn Israel for a "disproportionate response":

But even as the conflict between Israel and Hamas rages, another threat continues to loom.

Analysts Ali Alfoneh and Reuel Marc Gerecht, at the end of a  most useful pen portrait of Iranian president Hassan Rouhani, have this to say:

'Those who argue that Rouhani has abandoned the nuclear ambitions that he has so proudly defended and advanced would be well advised to consider more closely the cleric’s words, deeds, associations, and pride. Most probably Rouhani wants the nuke as much as any officer in the Revolutionary Guard or Saeed Jalili, the one-legged, shrine-loving war veteran who so enjoyed ignoring and belittling European and American diplomats as Ahmadinejad’s nuclear negotiator. Rouhani just wants to be cleverer about how the regime becomes a nuclear state. The deal that he has likely cut with the supreme leader is a variation on what Rouhani believes he tried with the West after the clandestine nuclear program was revealed by an opposition group in 2002: temporary concessions on those things that no longer need further research, no concessions at all in areas requiring further work. To get the sanctions lifted—and Rouhani is convinced that once they start coming down, they are unlikely to go back up—the Islamic Republic should slow its nuclear program without diminishing its capacity to produce a bomb and the ballistic missiles to deliver it. 

This time round, this approach may work with the West. It may not work at home. Although Khamenei has solidly backed Rouhani’s diplomatic offensive, referring to the need for “heroic flexibility” when confronting the enemy, his support is undoubtedly conditional. The supreme leader is surely aware that Rouhani’s nuclear memoir is, among other things, a criticism of his preferred confrontational approach during Ahmadinejad’s presidency. And Khamenei today doesn’t give the impression that he considers 2005-2013 wasted time. For cause: The nuclear program’s greatest technical and industrial advances have been made in the last eight years. True, sanctions have mounted; the supreme leader may believe they were unavoidable. And Rouhani has to worry that the Guard Corps’s longstanding distaste for him and small appetite for concessions may derail his diplomatic efforts to test Western resolve and unity. In addition, the Corps has grown enormously powerful under the sanctions regime because its resources are vast and privileged: As private Iranian businesses have withered and foreign firms have fled, the Guard Corps has moved in. Khamenei has approved or acquiesced to the Guard’s economic expansionism because it is, as it proved in smashing the massive pro-democracy Green Movement in 2009, indispensable to his rule. 

Western observers of Iran often see the antagonism between Rouhani and the Revolutionary Guard Corps primarily as a test of wills over the nuclear program; it isn’t. It’s a struggle about the nature of the regime and the revolution. Rouhani’s politics aren’t reformist; they are revanchist. He wants his class—the first-generation, upper-tier revolutionary managers who made the republic under Rafsanjani—to again have the high ground. He wants educated civilians—primarily clerics—to determine the destiny of the Islamic Revolution, not coarse militiamen who, in his eyes, lost the great war against Saddam Hussein. Rouhani has conspicuously dumped guardsmen from his cabinet and provincial governments. He and his men have publicly attacked the Corps for trying to destroy private enterprise and exposed “private” firms that are really Revolutionary Guard front companies feeding on public finances. It’s unclear, however, whether Rouhani will have any better luck this time confronting the Guard than he did earlier. He may if the supreme leader believes that his praetorians have gone too far. But the odds aren’t in Rouhani’s favor. Khamenei knows—because his praetorians keep publicly reminding him—that the Corps is the guarantor of his rule and the revolution. 

President Obama is in a peculiar situation: He has hooked his diplomacy onto a cleric who can claim to have been a founding father of Iran’s theocracy and its nuclear-weapons program. Rouhani has arduously and vengefully worked to see the revolution succeed. He treated with the devil (the Reagan administration) to get what the republic desperately needed during the Iran-Iraq war. He appears willing to do so again to ensure the regime’s continuing dominion. Whether or not Rouhani has any intention of trading away his nuclear legacy for a better economy, he’s clearly shown that he was an attentive student to his mentors. President Obama may not appreciate the fact that his Iranian “moderate” is the same “moderate” Oliver North dealt with. Rouhani surely does. Persian humor is built on irony and a mordant appreciation for an unpleasant Middle Eastern truth: Nice guys finish last—if they even finish at all.'

AIPAC has not forgotten what's at stake, issuing this stark warning:

"If You Saw Iran Achieve Nuclear Weapons ... That Changes The Planet As We Know It..."

Says Israeli prime ministerial spokesman Mark Regev here in identifying Iran's nuclear ambitions as the foremost immediate threat facing Israel:

".... If you saw Iran achieve nuclear weapons, that changes history, that changes the planet as we know it. Israel is only the Little Satan.  In the crazy warped ideology of the Iranian regime we are only the Little Satan.  The Big Satan is the United States (their words, not mine) and Europe is the middle-sized Satan. This is a very radical extremist regime."

Meanwhile Iranian MPs have condemned a resolution by the European Parliament last week that accused Iran of "continued, systemic violation of fundamental rights" and claimed that the election  which voted Hassan Rouhani into the country's presidency "not held according to the democratic standards valued by the EU".

(Some of the continuing human rights violations by Iran have been recently described here and  here and here)

Iranian Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif has blamed the resolution on Israeli influence and warns:

"The government will not allow any parliamentary delegation from Europe to travel to Iran on the conditions included in this European Parliament’s resolution.

The European Parliament is not in a position and does not have the moral authority to be able to express views about the situation in other countries.

Europeans must know that the great and civilized Iranian nation seeks interaction with other countries based on mutual respect and an equal footing, and will not accept insulting and interfering attitude by any movement and country."

To quote a report on Iran's propaganda satellite  news channel PressTV:

'Iran has credible information that pro-Israeli lobbies are making great efforts and raising false issues to sabotage "Iran’s positive and constructive negotiations with the P5+1 group" on the country’s nuclear energy program, he added.

The Iranian minister, however, noted that the Israeli regime’s plots would fail in light of the prudence, foresight and vigilance of all negotiating countries.

Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council – Russia, China, France, Britain and the US – plus Germany are in talks with the purpose of sealing a final deal on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear energy program.

The two sides reached an interim deal on November 24, 2013, in the Swiss city of Geneva to set the stage for the full settlement of the dispute over Iran’s program. The deal took effect on January 20 '

Incidentally, talking of Iran, that peripatetic priest, the anti-Israel Stephen Sizer, who appears from time to time on its satellite channel (incidentally, see this item!), is winging his way there yet again. 

"Iran Will Turn Tel Aviv & Haifa into Ashes"; "Death to America!" (videos)

While one of Press TV's tame western 9/11 troofers, American Kevin Barrett, spews out some more vomitous stuff against "the Zionist Entity" on that notorious propaganda channel, two videos from Memri.org prove the sweetness and light that emanates from Teheran.
In this top video, simulated footage on Iranian TV of what the mad mullahs say will happen if "the Zionist regime" takes pre-emptive defensive action against attacks Iran: "Iran will turn Tel Aviv and Haifa into ashes"; also shown is a mock Iranian strike on an American aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf, the USS Abraham Lincoln:

And here's an ayatollah waxing lyrical about the envisioned fate of America, to much acclaim from his audience:

The Emergency Committee for Israel on Stopping a Nuclear Iran

As seen here, William Kristol, Chairman of the Washington-based Emergency Committee for Israel, has issued the following statement on the withdrawal of Democratic support for a vote on the Senate Iran sanctions bill:

"We commend 42 Senators for their strong letter demanding a vote on S. 1881, the bipartisan Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act, which has been cosponsored by more than half of the Senate. The bill is simple and reasonable. It would reimpose existing sanctions suspended under the interim agreement if Iran cheats; it would ensure that a final agreement requires Iran to dismantle its illicit nuclear infrastructure; and it promises to impose additional economic sanctions in the future should Iran fail to agree to a final deal that dismantles its nuclear infrastructure.

As the Senators put it in their letter to the Majority Leader, 'Now we have come to a crossroads. Will the Senate allow Iran to keep its illicit nuclear infrastructure in place, rebuild its teetering economy and ultimately develop nuclear weapons at some point in the future?'

The answer to this question must be no. The Senate should act now to deliver that answer. It would be nice if there were universal bipartisan support for acting now to stop a nuclear Iran. But there apparently is not. And it would be terrible if history's judgment on the pro-Israel community was that it made a fetish of bipartisanship -- and got a nuclear Iran."

Meanwhile, remember my post here about two Iranian naval vessels on the move?  Well, the official Iranian news agency reports that Admiral Afshin Rezavee Haddad, who commands that country's Northern Navy Fleet, has said that the two vessels (a destroyer and a helicopter-carrying supply ship)  have now entered the Atlantic Ocean and will travel close to the USA's maritime borders ...  (See more here)

And Iran's Press TV has been crowing about the BDS Movement; the comments below their video and article demonstrates yet again the malevolence of western Israel-haters including some in Australia.

But not a word from the Israel-haters about Iran's many and continuing abuses of human rights, including the rape of virgins awaiting execution and the recent barbaric hanging of a young poet (see here)

On Obama's Watch, A Sinister Iranian Nautical Mission?

From the blog of a retired United States Navy officer:

"They’ve been saying they were going to do it, and now they’re on the way.  A pair of Iranian navy ships, the frigate Sabalan and supply ship Kharg, left Bandar Abbas [on Tuesday] morning headed for the Atlantic Ocean.

It has been inevitable that the Iranian navy would make good on its promise to deploy to the Atlantic.  Its ships made a voyage to China in 2013, and have been conducting extended patrols in the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea since late 2008.  An Atlantic expedition has been by no means beyond Iran’s capabilities for some time now.

....But it’s a measure of Iran’s seriousness about her geopolitical plans.  And she has other ways of reaching into the Western hemisphere, from her patronage of Hezbollah, which is all over Latin America, to her joint project with Venezuela to put a missile site off the coast of Maracaibo.

A senior Iranian official, who was recently appointed to one of the highest consultative positions with the Iranian government, was the man responsible for approving the 1994 attack on the Jewish center in Buenos Aires in which 85 people were killed.  Nothing has changed in Iran’s radical posture; sending warships to the Western hemisphere is not a way of trying to be more like the status-quo powers, but is rather a way of showing what a radical, Shia Islamist power can do.

.... [I]f sanctions had not just been loosened on Iran, she wouldn’t have the wherewithal to make this naval expedition to visit her radical pals in Central America."

Read the entire article, with map, here; also here


There's speculation in some quarters (hat tip: LBD) that the supply ship Kharg, which has in the past carried supplies to Sudan and Syria (thought to be Iranian-manufactured materiel), and which, being a naval ship cannot be intercepted on the high seas as arms-laden civilian vessels can, may be bound for Venezuela, where Iran has a drone facility.

It was reported in 2010 that, according to Western intelligence sources,  

'Iran is planning to place medium-range missiles on Venezuelan soil, based on western information sources ...[A]n agreement between the two countries was signed during the last visit of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to Tehran on October19, 2010. The previously undisclosed contract provides for the establishment of a jointly operated military base in Venezuela, and the joint development of ground-to-ground missiles....

....Venezuela has agreed to allow Iran to establish a military base manned by Iranian missile officers, soldiers of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Venezuelan missile officers. In addition, Iran has given permission for the missiles to be used in case of an "emergency". In return, the agreement states that Venezuela can use these facilities for "national needs" – radically increasing the threat to neighbors like Colombia.... 

....Venezuela has also become the country through which Iran intends to bypass UN sanctions.... According to a study recently released by the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London, Iran is presently aiming to perfect the already existing solid-fuel, medium-range missile that can carry a nuke to hit regional targets, such as Israel. If a missile base can be opened in Venezuela, many US cities will be able to be reached from there even with short-medium range missiles....

....Iran is soon going to have a nuclear weapon, and there are no signs that UN sanctions will in any way deter the Ayatollah's regime from completing its nuclear program. We know that Iran already has missiles that can carry an atomic warhead over Israel and over the Arabian Peninsula. Now we learn that Iran is planning to build a missile base close to the US borders. How longer do we have to wait before the Obama administration begins to understand threats?'

How long, indeed?

First, The Chill Factor (Is it hitting Obama?); Then, Some Warmth

Middle East analyst Elliott Abrams, writes, of an incident that deserves to become more widely reported:

"President Obama has a full court press under way to stop Congress from passing new sanctions legislation that could–could, not will–impose sanctions on Iran one year from now if negotiations break down or Iran cheats. The idea seems to be that passage of the bill would signal mistrust of Iran, or would break the spell of sincerity being cast at the negotiating table.

But what is Iran doing while the president woos legislators? Laughing at us all. Yesterday, Iran’s foreign minister–one of the reputed moderates in the Rouhani camp–was in Beirut and laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh [1962-2008; read all about him here].

Mughniyeh was the Hezbollah terrorist who had killed more Americans than any other man until the attack on 9/11. Mughniyeh was involved in bombing the Marine barracks in Beirut, the bombings of US embassies, the torture and killing of CIA station chief William Buckley in Beirut, the hijacking of TWA 847 and the murder of Navy diver Robert Stethem–among other acts of terror. He was also indicted in Argentina for the bombing of the Israeli embassy and Jewish community center in Buenos Aires.

So what does the urbane Zarif do when in Beirut? He lays a wreath at Mughniyeh’s grave ..."

(Read more here and here)

Having just read Elliot Abrams's article, which sends (as it should) a chill into the pro-Israel heart, I'm grateful to reader Ian G of the the Almond Rod blog, for alerting me to the existence of this video.  It appears on his blog, but I can't resist also posting it here.  As Ian wrote to me:

"This is not a heavily political story. It's quite sunny - literally! But it counters some of the myths, lies and prejudices that have grown up around Israel I think the video is worth watching."

Yes, it is sunny, as warming as the present sweltering heatwave in south-east Australia!

"Congress Should Make It Clear That It Does Not Support This Deal"

I spotted this cartoon on Bruce's blog, and thought it very apt.

Meanwhile, the Washington, DC-based Emergency Committee for Israel has given a short stark warning:

"The Geneva Agreement is a defeat for the United States and the West. It fails to uphold even the minimum demand of repeated U.N. Security Council resolutions that Iran must stop enriching uranium. For the next six months, the centrifuges will not be dismantled and will continue to spin, uranium will be enriched, the 20 percent enriched uranium will stay in Iran, and a reactor designed to produce bomb-ready plutonium will remain just months away from completion. Iran will continue its march to nuclear weapons, with perhaps a brief pause in some parts of the program -- but it will be a pause that refreshes, since Iran will be rewarded right away with significant sanctions relief, with the additional likelihood that the rest of the sanctions regime will begin to crumble.

Congress should make clear that it does not support this deal. Congress should make clear that just because the Obama administration seems to have taken all our options off the table, our allies need not follow us down this futile path of accommodating the Iranian regime's nuclear ambitions. In particular, Congress should make clear the United States will support Israel if Israel decides she must act to prevent a regime dedicated to her destruction from acquiring the means to do so." (Emphasis added]

For "Czechoslovakia" Read "Israel"

The dirty deal of appeasement has of course been done, and the Israel-haters are gloating. 

The great Melanie Phillips closes a characteristicly insightful, and in this case chilling, article on the West's myopic stupidity ("It's 1938 all over again") thus:

"....Rouhani is in any event not the main guy. The west was negotiating with a mere puppet. The only person who matters in Iran is the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei.

....Khamenei’s regime remains committed to wiping Israel ‘off the page of history’ because of the regime’s deranged, psychopathic hatred of Jews whom it regards as not human at all but, in Khamenei’s recent words, like ‘rabid dogs’.

....The fact that the US, UK and EU casually dismissed such chilling words suggests that they are similarly indifferent to what history tells us is the terrible fate that follows from such words, unless those who utter them are stopped.

But wait.

After the deal was signed, the White House said that

‘Israel has ‘good reason to be skeptical about Iran’s intentions…’

Think about that for a moment. Being ‘sceptical about Iran’s intentions’ means you think it is lying about those intentions. If the White House thinks Israel has good reason to believe Iran is lying, it follows that the White House must also think Iran is lying. If the White House thinks Iran is lying, how could it have done this ‘confidence building’ deal and part-lifted the sanctions regime imposed upon this lying, west-attacking, Jew-hating regime?...."

Read her entire article here
As reported here in a pseudonymous article by a former CIA operative in Iran's Revolutionary Guard (see also here):

'As the world’s 5+1 powers resumed nuclear negotiations with Iran in Geneva on Wednesday, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei attacked Israel and the U.S., saying the Islamic regime is using those negotiations as a gimmick to get stronger.

(An aspiring MEP, she's the leader of the Welsh Greens)

Khamenei, in a speech to thousands of commanders of the Basij militia, which has been suppressing millions of Iranians seeking freedom from the mullahs’ rule, referred to the negotiations and said: “Some have translated [Iran’s] ‘heroic flexibility’ [in] stepping back from goals and values of the Islamic regime [to achieve a nuclear settlement] and some enemies based on this have claimed retreat by the Islamic Republic....

“The ‘heroic flexibility’ means an artistic maneuver and the use of different tactics to reach different goals and ideals of the Islamic regime,” he said. Stalling tactics for more than a decade have allowed Iran to greatly enhance its nuclear capability, allowing to mobilize as a fully-armed nuclear nation within weeks.

Khamenei had previously supported the negotiations by the regime’s new government under President Hassan Rouhani and talked of “heroic flexibility,” implying that the regime will give up some ability of its nuclear program....

“The holy Quran necessitates this decree for all prophets, faithful and the ordinary people where all of us must answer in the face of our covenant to God,” Khamenei said. “[B]ased on the clear decree in the Quran, this covenant [is] to stand against the enemy in the fronts of military, political and economy and also not back down from the enemy.”

Khamenei called Israel a “rabid dog,” “unclean,” “illegitimate” and “a bastard.”

“The Zionist regime is destined to destruction, because this miserable regime was imposed [on the Middle East] based upon force, and no imposed phenomenon can last,” he said....'

Obama's Hazardous Iran Deal: The Emergency Committee for Israel speaks out

As reported here with accompanying video,

'America has proposed a short-term nuclear agreement with Iran at a meeting in Geneva which would allow Tehran to continue enriching uranium at low levels, according to an aide briefed on the talks.

The goal is to freeze Iran’s nuclear programme for perhaps six months in order to create a breathing space for a comprehensive agreement to be negotiated.

John Kerry, the US secretary of state, will travel to Switzerland on Friday to join the talks, fuelling hopes a historic deal may be in sight.

Mr Kerry will go to Geneva “in an effort to help narrow differences in negotiations”, said a senior State Department official.

But Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, warned on Thursday that any deal which failed to stop Iran from enriching uranium would be a “mistake of historic proportions”.... ' 

See also here.

Warns the Washington-based Emergency Committee for Israel:

"This looks to be a very bad deal. The Iranian regime would obtain major sanctions relief in exchange for token and superficial concessions that neither freeze nor set back its nuclear weapons program. The deal would vitiate nearly a decade of UN Security Council resolutions demanding the full cessation of enrichment by Iran. The deal would allow Iran to continue enrichment, to continue construction of its plutonium reactor, and to continue building centrifuges that will shorten the regime's breakout time to becoming a nuclear weapons state. Furthermore, such an interim deal would invite Iran to drag out talks while enrichment proceeds, which is something President Rouhani has boasted of doing in the past.

We oppose such a deal, which would make war and nuclear proliferation in the Middle East more likely and would undermine U.S. security by making the world a more dangerous place. Friends and enemies alike would now be convinced that the administration’s past guarantees were empty promises, its past red lines written in disappearing ink. If the administration announces such a deal, Congress should take all appropriate measures to oppose it and ratchet up sanctions. And Congress should also make it clear that the United States will stand with our ally, Israel, if she judges it necessary to act to prevent the Iranian regime from acquiring nuclear weapons."

How hollow now seem Obama's remarks in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in March last year:

".... I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff....  I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say. Let me describe very specifically why this is important to us.

In addition to the profound threat that it poses to Israel, one of our strongest allies in the world; in addition to the outrageous language that has been directed toward Israel by the leaders of the Iranian government -- if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, this would run completely contrary to my policies of nonproliferation. The risks of an Iranian nuclear weapon falling into the hands of terrorist organizations are profound. It is almost certain that other players in the region would feel it necessary to get their own nuclear weapons. So now you have the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region in the world, one that is rife with unstable governments and sectarian tensions. And it would also provide Iran the additional capability to sponsor and protect its proxies in carrying out terrorist attacks, because they are less fearful of retaliation...."

Meanwhile, as reported here, in Teheran a video has been aired simulating a nuclear attack on Israel:

Melanie Phillips Booed & Taunted For Telling The Truth About Iran (video)

Watch this segment from the BBC's Question Time this week, in which Marvellous Melanie cops flak from fellow-panellist Boris Johnson for telling the truth about Iran, and is booed and subjected to derisive laughter from clowns, ostriches, ignoramuses and fellow-travellers in the (as usual carefully selected) studio audience.

(Hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog)

And see Melanie Phillips's impressive article here written in the aftermath of the incident.

"The Greatest Threat To Peace In The World Today Is The Iranian Regime": Shimon Peres (video)

Addressing the European Parliament, the Israeli president implores the European Union, and indeed the international community generally, to treat Hezbollah as the Iranian proxy terrorist threat that it is, and reaffirms his support for a Two State Solution:

(JewishNewsOne video)

Mitt Romney's Foreign Policy Adviser On Israel & The Middle East (video)

The USA's former UN ambassador John Bolton tells interviewer Lee Lazerson on Jewish Life Television that Romney's concern for Israel's security is both emotional and tangible ("The US-Israel relationship is going to be a cornerstone of his foreign policy"), talks of the significance of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and Obama's credibility problem when his record on the Middle East is examined.  Bolton goes on to discuss the dangerous current situation in that region generally and the consequent challenge for the United States and Israel. Regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions: "It's certainly not for peaceful use.... This has been a weaponisation programme from the beginning ..."  He also discusses Israel's options ...

And here's Bibi, rightly asking a pertinent question regarding Iran:

For more on that see here

Iran's Nuclear Threat To The West (videos) (updated; includes Bibi's warning)

Below is a happy little video uploaded a few days ago.

And here's something of more immediate relevance to Israel. As Bibi warns:

Incidentally, in case you haven't seen the video elsewhere, here is UN Watch's Hillel Neuer talking at the UN Human Rights Council in July about the Iranian regime's promotion of antisemitism:

 

"Now, in this chamber we just heard Iran declare itself opposed to incitement to racism.

Yet at an international conference in Tehran, part of the U.N. campaign against drug trafficking, Iranian Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi shocked diplomats, as well as many Iranians present, by saying that the Talmud, a central text of Judaism, was responsible for the spread of illegal drugs around the world.

He also made other accusations against Jews and Judaism, echoing those used by Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

Can anyone here think of another country whose leaders openly incite to racism at international conferences?

We welcome the denunciation of Mr. Rahimi’s remarks by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and today’s statement by Yury Fedotov, the head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, expressing dismay and concern during his meeting in Vienna with an Iranian diplomat.

But U.N. member states must speak out as well. To those who know what racism means, I ask: How can Iran be allowed to host the Non Aligned Movement Center for Human Rights and Cultural Diversity?

Is not the state advocacy of religious and racial hatred the very opposite of human rights and cultural diversity?

Will the victims of prejudice allow one of their own members to do the same?"

"The Time Has Come For The Disappearance Of The West & The Zionist Regime": Iranian Parliament's Speaker

At a conference in Teheran comemmorating the birth of Shia Islam's Twelfth Imam, Ali Larijani, speaker of the Iranian Majlis or National Consultative Assembly, has declared:

"Today, the time has come for the disappearance of the West and the Zionist regime (Israel) - which are two dark spots in the present era - from the face of the universe."

See more (and a video) here

Last week, as reported here,

'Iran conducted a series of test launches of domestically-produced medium- and long-range ballistic missiles. Iranian officials said the tests targeted replications of "trans-regional powers."

Iran's more advanced homegrown missiles are capable of hitting most parts of Israel, and it was at first assumed that the Jewish state was the target of the exercise.

But Revolutionary Guards General Amir Ali Hajizadeh revealed that the exercise was intended as a warning to both Israel and American forces in the region. Iran's Fars news agency reported that the dummy target bases were modeled after American bases in the Middle East, while Hajizadeh said the exercise clearly demonstrated that any Israeli military action against Iran's nuclear facilities would result in a catastrophic response.

"If they (Israel) take any action, they will hand us an excuse to wipe them off the face of the earth," Hajizadeh was quoted as saying by Iran's IRNA news agency.

The general added that the target bases were modeled on American bases as a deterrent to US forces getting involved should Israel decided to strike Iran.

It is also worth noting that the missile exercise was dubbed "Great Prophet 7," a clear Islamic religious reference. While Western diplomats insist that ultimately Iran will behave pragmatically and not try to annihilate Israel, those more familiar with the region note that Iran's real rulers, the ayatollahs, make their decisions based primarily on radical religious beliefs and tenets, not pragmatism. They view the destruction of Israel as a religious duty and prophetic necessity.'

John Bolton's opinion of this development can be heard here