Beware of Obama's Stage Shows in Support of His Iran Deal - Watch for His Ventriloquist's Dummies

revised 8-24-2015

Barack Obama's political career has been marked by putting on shows to win over the public plus artful rhetoric and purple prose to mesmerize those who may have trouble thinking for themselves. Obama's great rhetorical, oratorical and thespian talents have allowed him to consolidate a hard core of devoted supporters who may have been educated in American universities but never learned to think for themselves. And are largely lacking in information. Obama and his staff rely on appeals to emotion and lofty values in order to promote his often harmful policies. They succeeded a great deal. Which is a great pity. Because they have swindled the American people in many ways. Just think of: If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

Even more threatening than Obama's medical care program that lessens medical care for more people than are helped by it is his Iran deal. I don't want to go into detail about the lack of independent, outside verification of Iran's nuclear facilities, the Iranian violation of their commitments to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the 10 to 15 year expiration term of the restrictions supposedly imposed by the deal [that is, if Iran doesn't cheat and get a  bomb beforehand], the 100 to 150 million dollars that Iran will get to pursue its bloody mischief in other Middle Eastern countries (not only Israel, but Libya, Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Iraq) and other important defects in deal. Since rational and knowledgeable and reasonable people recognize the problem with the deal, the problem becomes how to stop it and what techniques Obama will use to push it through. Watch  what Obama does as if he were a magician. What does he do with his left hand while pointing into the distance with his right hand??:

Kyle Shideler warns that Obama will stage shows in order to play on the public's emotions and have the people support a deal that is against their own interests. His article is entitled:

Americans Should Be Wary of Carefully Managed Productions Supporting Iran Deal

Kyle Shideler | Aug 19, 2015 [townhall.com]

Recently, three-dozen retired flag and general officers endorsed the Obama administration’s controversial Iran Deal. The Washington Free Beaconreported that former Rear Admiral James “Jamie” Barnett, an employee of the law firm and lobbying group Venable LLP, organized the letter.

Barnett, who took credit for producing the letter, told the Free Beacon that the White House played no role, despite that Barnett’s letter says, “I am working with the White House on a letter for retired General Officers and Flag Officers to sign, supporting the U.S.-Iran accord on nuclear armament.“

Adm. Barnett’s support for the deal is not necessarily surprising. Barnett has repeatedly taken public positions on military or national security related issues that align closely with those of the Obama White House, including opposition to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” in favor of changes to DOD’s Transgender policy, and applauding the use of national security as a reason to support school lunch changes proposed by First Lady Michelle Obama. In his capacity as a Venable employee, Barnett also worked a high profile case on sexual abuse in the military during a period at a moment when the White House was seized with the topic.

Barnett solicited signatures for the letter from his Venable work email, but denies that his employer played any role in the letter.

Given that Barnett had denied what appears to be obvious White House involvement, his other denial seems worthy of further investigation as well. Is there reason to believe that the firm has an interest in ending Iran sanctions?

Most immediately apparent is Venable’s close association with the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans (PAAIA), an Iranian-American group, with its own political PAC. PAAIA is listed as one of Venable’s Non Profit Clients. PAAIA isopenly working in favor of the Iran Deal, and signed a joint statement with the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), a group with long-established ties to the Iranian regime. One of PAAIA’s “Founding Donors” was Venable Partner Robert S. Babayi.

Babayi is also the co-founder of the Iranian American Bar Association (IABA). Venable held presentations for the IABA on Iranian Americans living in or doing business in Iran and Iran sanctions laws. In March of 2010, IABA screened the anti-Guantanamo Bay detention facility movie “The Response” which was executive produced by Venable LLP. Venable represented Egyptian detainees at Guantanamo (the subject of the film), and Babayi’s email is listed as the RSVP email.

Babayi apparently left Venable to become Managing Director of Vector IP, a boutique Patent law firm in June 2014. Babayi is also a U.S. Advisory Team member for IBridges, an organization that works to promote High Tech entrepreneurship in Iran.

Venable may also have other interests in Iran . . . . [for full text go here]

 - - - - - - - - - - - -

After making the horrendous and fateful Munich Pact with the Nazi Hitler, UK prime minister Neville Chamberlain came back to Britain saying: peace with honour. . . . peace for our time. Obama stopped making what seemed to most people an outlandish promise of peace emerging from his Iran deal. Now he puts it differently. He claims that the only alternative to his Iran deal is war and that a better deal is not and was not possible. Perhaps he is implying that his Iran deal represents something between war and peace. A cold peace or a cold war perhaps, or maybe just a lot of limited wars that Iran will initiate against its neighbors in the Middle East but not against the United States. Meanwhile, Obama is insinuating that the opponents of his deal are warmongers and he openly said at American University in Washington, DC, that the only country that had openly commented on the deal but had not praised it was Israel. Literally that might be true if we only consider official declarations by rulers, top officials and foreign ministries. But the insinuation was that Israel was a warmongering power that might not know its own best interest. In fact, many Arab powers, including Saudi Arabia, have been very strongly opposed to the deal but fear to challenge the White House. Obama knew that when he made his speech but he considered it useful to insinuate that only Israel opposed the deal. Indeed, Saudi Arabia went so far in opposing Obama's long obvious efforts to appease Iran and leave it with its nuclear program as to allow Anwar Eshki, a former general, to appear jointly with Dore Gold, now the director-general of Israel's foreign ministry, before the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington in order to show the common Israeli-Saudi opposition to the weak nuclear deal taking shape.

- - - - - - - - - -

To get some idea of how Obama thinks, consider the words of Don Juan in Molière's play of that name [here/ici]

A Peace Agreement Is Not Necessarily Peace

Here's another fraud of the "peace process." It is the notion, widely disseminated and advocated by Western politicians, diplomats, journalopropagandists, and other peacemongers, that an agreement --in particular one called a "peace agreement"-- means peace, represents peace, will lead to peace, and so on. Agreements and accords can just as easily lead to war, even peace accords can lead to war. So if President Bush Junior can bring about an "agreement" between Israel and the "palestinian authority," most likely by twisting craven Olmert's arm, that most likely will not mean peace or bring peace. It will simply be an agreement that can improve the strategic situation of the Arab enemies of Israel, especially if Israel gives up strategic territory, such as the north-south Judea-Samaria mountain ridge [גב ההר] for the sake of a "peace agreement." In that case, a "peace accord" will surely lead to more war, to more rockets falling on Israeli cities, and so on.

For example, look at the Munich Accord of October 1938. It was touted by British PM Neville Chamberlain as "peace in our time. . . peace with honor" With Czechoslovakia strategically weakened by having given up the mountainous Sudetenland, mainly populated by ethnic Germans who were Czech citizens, Hitler invaded and occupied the rump --the remainder-- of Czechoslovakia in March of 1939. Yet Britain and France did not much protest this invasion. It was not until Hitler's Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, in cooperation with the Communist USSR, that Britain and France decided formally thatHitler was an enemy. But they did little about it. The period between the invasion of Poland in 9-1939 and the invasion of France in June 1940, less than a year later, is called the Phoney War [la drole de guerre]. This is because little was done to fight the Nazis or get ready to fight them in that period. By the way, at that time, Communists in the parliaments of France and Britain were opposed to any measures of military defense by their countries. This contributed to the French defeat in 1940. Before we forget, Poland and France both had full diplomatic relations with Germany before they were attacked and invaded in 1939 and 1940 respectively.

Other falsehoods of the misnamed "peace process" are
1) the notion of a "palestinian people" which in fact never existed in history, and even now does not exist. Whereas the PLO charter [see Article I particularly], which supposedly guides the palestinian authority, claims that the "palestinian Arab people" is part of the Arab nation and Palestine is part of the Great Arab Fatherland [call it Homeland, if you don't want to acknowledge the Nazi nature of the PLO], the Hamas on the other hand, believes in the Islamic nation, al-Ummah al-Islamiyyah. In fact, neither the PLO/PA nor the Hamas and its satellites like Islamic Jihad are really interested in a "palestinian" state alongside Israel. They ultimately want a great Arab state --the PLO/PA-- or an great Islamic state ruled by a new caliph --Hamas.
2) the "peace process" is really leading towards peace and is meant to lead towards peace. Shmuel Trigano, quoted in an earlier post here, points out that what is really going on is more of a war process [processus de guerre]. See the earlier post of 15 December 2007.
3) a corollary of 2) is the falsehood of the trustworthy, scientific nature of the "peace process." By calling it a "process," the mindbenders are insinuating that the "peace process" somehow has the trustworthy inevitability of an industrial process or a technical process.
4) That there is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict which must be solved. However, the other Arab states are nearly all enemies of Israel as are many many Muslim states. Consider Pakistan and Malaysia. Both Pakistan and Malaysia oppress and persecute the non-Muslim minorities in those countries. Just in recent years the civil rights of non-Muslims in Malaysia, mostly Chinese and Indians [Hindus & Sikhs], have been further cut away and these people have been more and more subject to Muslim Shari`ah law with all that implies [dhimmi status].
5) While the Organization of the Islamic Conference and most of its member states openly avow their hostility to Israel, the EU and several of its member states individually and other Western states, give billions of dollars every year to the PA, supposedly to build up its economy. In fact, much of the money goes to corrupt leaders at or near the top or to finance terrorist operations, and/or to pay the PA "security services" [arafat created more than dozen of them, so none would get so strong as to be able to challenge his supremacy], and/or to pay for the PA schools that slander Jews every day and incite hatred for them [that is, us Jews] and pay for the PA electronic media that do the same, etc. So, objectively speaking, many Western states and the EU are also hostile to Israel, perhaps more hypocritically than the Arabs.

In view of the above, let's honestly admit that Shmuel Trigano is right. We are facing a war process, not a peace process.
- - - - - - - -
Coming: More on the falsehoods of the "peace process," peace follies, propaganda, Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, & the Land of Israel, Jewish history, etc.