Showing posts with label iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label iran. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 13, 2024



Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

Trump trounced Harris and the next morning, she conceded. Now, all that was left was for Dems to do grieve. Except for the small matter of sitting down to Thanksgiving dinner with their Trump-happy relatives in just a little over 3 weeks—less at the time of this writing. Should Harris voters be expected to sit across the table from their cretinous MAGA cousins?

Not at all, explained Yale-affiliated psychiatrist Dr. Amanda Calhoun to MSNBC’s Joy Reid. “If you are going to a situation where you have family members, where you have close friends who you know have voted in ways that are against you . . . against your livelihood . . . it's completely fine to not be around those people and to tell them why.”


Calhoun’s advice, I’d venture to say, runs contrary to what most of us were taught by our mothers; namely that is courteous to set aside political differences at the holiday table for the sake of preserving family harmony. We can agree to disagree, because presidents come and go but family is family until death do you part. We spend time with family at the holidays not because they are entitled to our presence, but because it’s a tradition we value and cherish as a society.

In Israel, of course, there is no such November 28th conundrum to worry about. For one thing, most of those celebrating Thanksgiving in Israel are expat Americans. They left their families behind to make Aliyah, so there’s no one to argue with at table.

Then again, Thanksgiving is something expat Americans mostly celebrate for the sake of the food: turkey, stuffing, yams, gravy, cranberry sauce, and pie. And guess what? Sitting down to eat that meal will be pure pleasure not only because of the food and the lack of argumentative relatives, but because Donald J. Trump won—which means that this year, the only arguing around Israeli Thanksgiving tables will be over who gets the wishbone.

With our stateside cousins of course, it is a different story. We spend time with them only virtually in fits and starts. That makes it a little easier to avoid tense subjects. And if ever there was a tense subject it was this election, with most American Jews wildly at odds with their Israeli counterparts.

Our cousins care about the hostages, but not as much as they care about domestic issues, for example reproductive rights. They care about Iran, but they care about abortion more; they have been told that Donald J. Trump will take away their rights to their own bodies. Kamala Harris told them so.

Joy Reid told them so.

In Israel, we understand our Jewish cousins in America have domestic priorities. But we have trouble understanding how they feel about geopolitics. We don’t like to think that they are ignorant, but do they know they voted for a woman who helped fund October 7 and all that has happened in its wake?

Israelis are hyper-aware of these geopolitics. So much so that in the run up to the election, all of us were tense. I was tense. My neighbors were tense. We all knew that Israel’s enemies were watching and waiting to see who would win the election. My personal fear was that if Harris won, Hamas would take it as a green light to shoot all the remaining living hostages dead.

I did not dare tempt evil by voicing my fears, but now, in retrospect, I can talk about it because it didn’t happen—Harris lost. But it was rough. In the run-up to the election I could literally see those executions playing out in my mind’s eye. Over and over again.  It was hard to hold down food. Hard to breathe.

I don’t know if I was alone in experiencing these visions—but I know my feelings of dread and terror were not exclusive to me. Everyone around me felt the same way and we were all quietly speaking about it to each other. The election was the Sword of Damocles hanging over not just the hostages’ heads, but all our heads. This was something more than politics.

And it is that “something more” that makes it so difficult to be polite as we were taught, and set aside differences for the sake of family.

I know what you’re thinking. What’s the difference, Harris lost. But you see, it’s the vote that counts. It’s the vote that hurt and cut so deeply.

It’s hard to square it in our heads, how “family” could vote for Harris, someone who sends money to Iran and ties Israel’s hands. Someone who bears responsibility for the fact that the Jewish people are no longer safe anywhere in the world.

Many of us have a very hard time with this. We think of what happened on October 7, of the hostages and of the hundreds of soldiers who have been killed since, beautiful young people, older reservists with wives and children, and we can’t bring ourselves to agree to disagree and move on. It’s just too hard. We can’t look the other way and call it “only politics.”

I myself think back to certain lovely childhood memories from back when I was a toddler, and I don’t know what to do. We are family and yet this "family" prioritizes something other than me, my family here, and our people. They prioritized something other than the hundreds of Israeli soldiers who died defending our people—something other than the hundreds of thousands of Israelis who can’t go home to their homes in the north. 

How can I look the other way?

They put us all at risk.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, June 26, 2024


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

John Kirby, though someone I don’t like, is a darned sight better at presiding over a White House presser than is, for instance, KJP. That’s about the best I have to say about him. But the way he sneered at Fox News Chief Legal Correspondent, Journalist Shannon Bream, in an April interview, literally turned my stomach.

Ugh.  It was like he was saying, “Listen little Lady, you stay in your corner, and let the big boys handle this.”

Well, like I said, this was back in April, but the subject of that interview, covert US support for Iran, remains relevant to our current news cycle, with Israel looking at a face-off with the evil Iranian proxy, Hezbollah. Biden’s support of Iran was relevant too,  in November, when I wrote about the money trail that led to October 7. It irritated me, the way the Biden administration kept saying that Iran can’t possibly use its own money to fund its war machine. I hear that stuff and say out loud, squinting my eyes at my computer screen, “You know darned well that money is fungible, you blankety blank blank.”

Fungible. It’s not that difficult a concept. When one anticipates money coming in, they risk taking it from somewhere else. Some not of my religion might call this “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”

You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand any of this, right? Yet here was Shannon Bream, a lawyer, polite, refined, asking a reasonable question, and all John Kirby does is sneer and leer at her. You can practically hear Kirby rolling his eyes.

Here's how the conversation went:

Shannon Bream: There are a number of critics, most of them on the GOP side of the Hill, who say, “We shouldn’t be in this position.”

That there are things that were done by this administration, that let Iran think it had an opening here, or others that want to go after Israel. Senator Marsha Blackburn among those, posting on X last night, she says,

“Under President Trump, Iran was broke.

“President Biden gifted them billions of dollars and then naively said, ‘Don’t.’

“‘Don’t.’ is not a foreign policy.” 

Shannon Bream: You know the conversations about unfreezing assets, about waivers on sanctions . . .

John Kirby: Yeah, Yeah. (laughs)

Shannon Bream: Could this administration [have been] tougher on Iran?

John Kirby: (shakes head) It’s hard to look at what President Biden has done with respect to Iran and . . .

Shannon Bream: (interrupts) but we’re also leaving sanctions.

John Kirby: . . . say that he hasn’t been tough on Iran, that we haven’t put pressure on them, that we haven’t—an additional 500 sanctions, additional resources in the region and let’s take a look at that ballistic missiles—okay, so they launched more than 100 ballistic missiles, and how many got through? And the reason they didn’t get through is because President Biden made sure that we pre-position forces in the region to help Israel—will shoot them down—so this vaunted ballistic missile program of theirs, last night (stutters) didn’t turn out to be so vaunted last night.

Shannon Bream: (interrupts) But why not support something that would have stopped that program or at least contained it in some way, so it’s not launching at Israel, so that we aren’t having to get involved defensively?

John Kirby: Again, Shannon, let’s look at the sanctions we put in place with Iran, the resources in the region ... it’s hard to take a look at what President Biden has done and say that we’ve somehow gone soft on Iran. It was the previous administration that promised, that promised to get us out of the Iran Deal and now Iran is so much dramatically closer to a potential nuclear weapon capability than they were before, uh, before, uh, before Mr. Trump was elected. (sneers)

Shannon Bream: Is it not fair to say though, that there have been moves by this administration that have opened up cash and other opportunities for them which we know are fungible, in ways that are not helping the Iranian people (Kirby laughs) but are benefitting the elites and people there who chant “Death to America.” And “Death to Israel.”

John Kirby: You and I have had this fungibility argument, eh, (stutters) before em, um, I obviously take a different issue, uh, take an issue with that characterization. The (gestures), the sanctions relief that has come about. . .  or it’s not even sanctions relief, but eh, (stutters) the eh, eh, additional funds which have been made available to Iran, due to the sanctions relief program that the Trump administration put in place. (shakes head) It can only be used for humanitarian goods; it doesn’t go to the regime. And the idea that the regime was somehow . . . felt like they were freed up to support these proxies because of that it just doesn’t comport with the facts that they have been supporting these proxies for many, many years.

Shannon Bream: And it comports with their language though, saying, we will use this money in the way that we want to use it.

John Kirby: They can’t (shakes head, laughs, sneers). They can’t! They physically can’t do that. 

It’s upsetting. Bream is pretty, but that doesn’t mean she is empty-headed. Rather she is fiercely smart, and a lawyer to boot, and should not be treated with so little regard. I was sickened by his insulting manner toward a lady, and an intelligent one, at that.

Aside from this, Kirby never answered her question—never managed to explain why the fact that money is fungible is something to dismiss. Why would Iran not take advantage the fact that money is fungible to build its war machine? Bream has a good question, and deserves a good answer from this administration. We all do.

But there is no good answer. The Biden administration knowingly assisted Iran in building up its nuclear arsenal, and also gave Iran the power to fuel the October 7 massacre, and the volcano about to erupt in Northern Israel and Lebanon. Shannon Bream knows this, and so does Kirby—every time he stutters, you know he’s concealing something. In spite of this, John Kirby treats Shannon Bream as though she were a simpleton. This was profoundly disturbing to me, both as a woman and as a human being.

The silky words tripping off Kirby’s tongue, brought to my mind nothing so much as the snake who used cunning words to goad Eve on to eat the apple.

In this case the snake was just another Biden hack who’d sold his soul to the highest bidder.

I think Bream did a great job of exposing Kirby for what he is, for anyone who saw the interview and noted his demeaning manner toward his host, Bream. I cannot see how any woman, Democrat or Republican, can sit through that interview and not see how slimy he is. 

And now, as June comes to a close, the United States has let slip, by way of US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Charles Brown, that America will not be helping Israel fight Iran/Hezbollah this time around, not necessarily because America doesn’t want to, but because, it claims, the US doesn’t have the capability.

“From our perspective,” said Charles Brown, “based on where our forces are, the short-range between Lebanon and Israel, it’s harder for us to be able to support them in the same way we did back in April.”

In other words, those over 100 ballistic missiles Kirby referenced back in April were one thing, but not this. “Sorry,” says America to Israel. “We can’t help you with this one. Now, you’re on your own.”

Here is the logical—the only—answer to Bream’s question, solid proof that money is always fungible, even in the case of Iran. The lifting of sanctions by the Biden administration has directly led to the current existential threat to Israel and, one might add, to Lebanon.

The Biden administration has enabled Iran, all the while doing what it can to stymie Israel. The president feeds the enemy with fungible funds while starving his ally of promised weaponry and other assistance.

Some speak of a coming world war, while people like Kirby, continue to sneer and laugh and lie to intelligent people like Shannon Bream, who see right through them. At some point, John Kirby’s act will grow old—he was never meant to be anything but mid-level management. Not to worry—they’ll find a use for Kirby somewhere. Like I said, he gives a mean White House presser.

Or perhaps they can bury him in mounds of paperwork behind a desk, hidden away from public view.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, April 15, 2024

Downed Iranian missile in the Dead Sea


From Naharnet:
Hezbollah has congratulated Tehran on its attack on Israel, saying it "achieved" its military objectives.

"Hezbollah presents its congratulations... to the leadership" of Iran and its people for the "unprecedented" attack on Israel, the powerful Lebanese group said in a statement.

Hezbollah also praised Tehran's "brave and wise decision to respond firmly to the Zionist attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus".

The Islamic republic launched more than 300 drones and missiles towards Israel from late Saturday, Israel's military said.

It achieved military objectives? How, exactly?

 The answer is the same as the answer to this question posed by a supposed expert, Richard Haass, on Twitter/X (and later in a more extensive interview in Politico):

At first glance reported Iranian attacks on Israel violate Napoleon's dictum "Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake."  This will change the narrative and create new support for Israel.  All of which raises the question: Why did Iran widen the war at this moment?

People, even supposed "experts," still think that Middle Easterners think like Westerners. They project their own logic onto people whom they have little in common with. 

Iran's objective wasn't military. It was psychic. It needed to restore its "honor."

Just reading Iranian media shows this. They are congratulating themselves on the few missiles that made it through Israel's defenses. And now they are bragging that Israel's defenses are not "impenetrable," which no one ever said.

Honor is the coin of the realm in the Middle East. And honor, almost by definition, includes lying in order to avoid shame. 

Iran has to claim victory. Even if Israel has stopped 100% of the projectiles, today's headlines in Iranian media would be about the amount of effort and time and money Israel spent, how it relied on other allies and couldn't defend itself alone, how this was one of the biggest attacks in history. They would be trying to ascribe honor to themselves and shame to Israel. 

Facts don't matter.  The results were of little importance, as long as Iran can twist facts to claim victory.

Just like Egypt in 1973. Just like Hamas in all previous Gaza wars. The facts don't matter because honor is the point, military victory is secondary.

The entire Middle East  conflict is an attempt by Middle Eastern Muslims to erase the shame of a small number of weak, dhimmi Jews defeating them in 1948 and 1967.  If you want a root cause, that's it. 

People who do not understand the importance of honor and shame to Israel's enemies cannot possibly be Middle East experts. 

Once you understand the honor/shame dynamic, you realize that the only real solution is Israeli victory that cannot be denied. This is why Muslims are deferential to Christian-majority Europe - because they lost to them, definitively. That is the reason Bahrain and the UAE wanted peace - they realized Israel isn't going anywhere. 

Undisputed Israeli strength is the only peace plan that makes sense. Unless you want another Holocaust.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 


An Israeli newspaper summed up the Iranian "Operation Truthful Promise" as "The Iranian lion roared like a cat."

As we get more information, we learn that the attack was in most ways larger than anything Russia has mounted against Ukraine. 

The extent of the attack was one of the largest seen in modern warfare. Russia's opening "shock and awe" barrage on the first day of the invasion of Ukraine, on February 24, 2022, included between 160 and 200 cruise missiles and ballistic missiles - against a country more than 20 times the area of Israel.

Russia first used Iranian-made Shahad drones in conjunction with a missile attack on October 10, 2022, a barrage aimed at Ukraine's infrastructure,. This  included a total of 84 missiles and 24 UAVs. Only about half of the Russian missiles were intercepted. 
This compares to 185 drones, 110 ballistic missiles and 30 cruise missiles launched by Iran towards Israel.

Iranian media is claiming a "clean victory," saying that their ballistic missiles landed exactly where they were intended.

So that means they wanted to create an easily repairable crater on a runway in the desert and on a road.


The attack shows that the ballistic missiles are the most difficult to defend against, since several made it through.  That doesn't detract from the amazing achievements of blocking them. The videos of missile intercepts in space, probably from an Arrow-3, are spectacular:



A surprising number of Iranian missiles failed, either exploding in Iran or en route.
Iran’s missile technology is to a great extent based on Soviet and North Korean know-how.

U.S. officials told The Wall Street Journal that half of the ballistic missiles that Iran launched either failed to launch or fell from the sky before reaching their targets.
Here's video of one that landed in Iran, this single missile causing more damage there than all the projectiles did in Israel combined:



As the Institute for the Study of War notes, however, Israel cannot afford to be complacent. The claimed "99%" intercept rate is somewhat exaggerated - it was probably closer to 97% or 98% - and the several that did make it through could have caused great damage had they hit populated areas:

Iran’s ability to penetrate Israeli air defenses with even a small number of large ballistic missiles presents serious security concerns for Israel. The only Iranian missiles that got through hit an Israeli military base, limiting the damage, but a future strike in which several ballistic missiles penetrate Israeli air defenses and hit Tel Aviv or Haifa could cause significant civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure, including ports and energy. Russian strikes on Ukraine have demonstrated that even a small number of precise strikes against key nodes in energy or other infrastructure can cause disproportionate effects. Israel and its partners should not emerge from this successful defense with any sense of complacency.
In 2022 Iran announced, to much fanfare, that it had manufactured hypersonic missiles than could not be stopped by known interceptors. They also claimed to have upgraded those missiles last year.  Iran is now claiming that every hypersonic missile it shot at Israel successfully hit their targets. 

It is unclear whether any of the missiles launched were indeed what would be considered hypersonic - meaning, traveling at greater than Mach-5 speeds while maintaining maneuverability. Regular ballistic missiles hit hypersonic speeds as they descend from space but that does not make them hypersonic missiles, which are usually defined as either hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs) and hypersonic cruise missiles (HCMs). Iran's so-called hypersonic missiles are medium range ballistic missiles with limited maneuverability. It is not clear at this time whether any of the missiles that made it through were the Fattah-1 or Fattah 2 "hypersonic" missiles of Iran. 

What is clear is that Israel would not be able to rely on allies being able to help them stop all future similar attacks, especially without so much advanced warning. The simple math of being able to overwhelm Israeli defenses, which are much more expensive than the projectiles being shot are, remains an issue as it does in Gaza or Lebanon. 

Saying that Israel should regard this as a victory is short-sighted. As others have pointed out, surviving someone shooting at you many times because of your bulletproof vest is not a victory. The shooter can reload and only needs one bullet to make it through. Israel cannot afford to remain in a purely defensive posture forever, especially as Iran has proven that it is now willing to directly attack Israel.

The question is not if, but when. 






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, November 22, 2023




Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

                                                                     --1--

If it were you, my child, husband, brother, sister, mother, grandmother, grandfather, aunt, uncle, grandchild, friend. If it were you I would fight like hell to set you free, to bring you home and into my arms. Safe.

Then we would deal with the aftermath. The nightmares, the poisoned minds of the children raised to hate themselves and what they came from. The massive, multi-level trauma of it all, from beginning to the something that will never end.

Still, from a distance so far away that I don’t want to see it, I know that procuring your release has broader implications. You are a Hamas bargaining chip, or rather an Iran bargaining chip for use with Joe Biden, along with a cascade of other evil actors across the globe who will use human beings—use you—to get what they want. Hamas randomly keeps you alive—if you are alive—to get concessions; to retrench and regain strength to hurt the Jewish people; to score a victory; to wound Israel and live to kill, maim, and destroy more Jews another day.

                                                                    --2--

Every day since October 7th, we have heard Israeli officials say, all the hostages or no ceasefire. It was  clear from the start—Israel had been quite clear from the start.  Or rather, the objective was clear until it wasn’t, and Israel began to speak of a “partial ceasefire,” when just to speak of this even in a fuzzy sort of way, already put Israel. at a distinct disadvantage. It must be said and taken into account, that while the hostage deal may save the lives of some of the hostages, it will put an untold number of other lives at risk, for example, just now, our dear Israeli soldiers. To breathe life into Hamas is to wreak havoc with the future. This Amalek must be stopped. Hamas must be obliterated, completely.

Ain breira. There is no choice. It's all or nothing. There is no other way. All the hostages or no ceasefire, partial or otherwise. Israel must hold firm, because a deal with Hamas is Obama’s deal, Biden’s deal, a deal with the devil, Iran. For Hamas, this deal translates to Jews ceding victory and paying the jizya, even unto releasing 300 felons back onto the streets of their natural hate-infested society.

We have certainly learned something here: the going rate for a handful of Jews is 300 felons for Hamas to parade as trophies. "How stupid is the Jew?” you might hear from the laughing crowd as they watch the 300 go by, and slap each other on the back. "They turn Gaza into rubble, then cry to us, 'You won!'"



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, November 15, 2023


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

The United States has approved a whopping $14 billion military aid package for Israel and has also sent troops and aircraft carriers to the region. But the hand that giveth, also taketh away. A month before the savage Hamas attack of October 7, widely believed to be financed by Iran, Biden unfroze $6b in Iranian revenues. Now Biden has approved a sanctions waiver that will put $10b into Iran’s coffers. This leads to the question: If Biden frees up $16b for Iran, and gives Israel $14b, don’t these gifts kind of cancel each other out—or worse?

Biden freed up money for Iran in September, and in October we had Iranian proxy attacks in Israel. Now Biden gives aid to Israel to defend itself from the Iranian proxy, but frees up more money for Iran. The president gets away with this by swearing that the money can only be used for humanitarian purposes.  

The president said the same thing about his aid to Gaza. It’s only for humanitarian aid. Neither of these assurances are worth a damn. Hamas literally runs humanitarian aid in Gaza. The money goes straight to Hamas. The unfrozen funds for Iran, will similarly not go to fund humanitarian aid, but will go straight to the terror machine.

It’s true that the Biden administration put a “pause” on unfreezing the original $6b ransom payment to Iran due to Republican criticism. But with this $10b coming in, as Hillary might say, What difference does it make? Iran is still getting way more than it was slated to receive in the first place, thanks to the generous hand of Joe Biden. The question is why? Why is Biden freeing up ever larger amounts of cash for Iran?

Speaking to the Washington Free Beacon, Richard Goldberg, a sanctions expert who previously served on the White House National Security Council, said, "The world is living in a post-Oct. 7 world, but the White House is still running an Oct. 6 policy toward Iran. Why should Iran have any access to more than $10 billion after sponsoring one of the worst terrorist attacks against American citizens and the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust? It would make more sense to freeze all of these accounts and keep every penny out of Tehran's hands."

It would make sense to freeze the funds only if protecting the Jews was chief among your aims. This lack of desire to secure the safety Israeli Jews was also evidenced by Biden agreeing to send weapons to protect Israelis living in Judea and Samaria, only so long as no guns went to the people who need them, Israeli civilians:

The guns are critical to Israel’s defense as it faces down the most significant threat in decades. With the military engaged in an assault on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, Jewish civilians in dangerous areas like the West Bank are being trained and equipped to defend themselves against potential attacks.
On an emotional level, it feels as though Biden doesn’t want me, a dual Israeli American citizen, to have protection. He is not on my side. On the other hand, he does seem to like the terror-sponsoring, nuclear bomb-producing mullahs. 

How do we know? He keeps giving them money in creative ways, such as lifting sanctions on Iranian revenues or putting stipulations on how the money is to be spent so as to forestall criticism. Biden knows that Iran doesn’t play by the rules, especially where money is concerned, and yet he frees up their funds even directly after they slaughter us.

Then, there is Biden’s insistence that Israel allow for “humanitarian pauses” which of course, allow Hamas to rearm and retrench, increasing the danger to Israel and to Israeli soldiers. Like a lot of Israeli Americans, my sons serve in the IDF. They are also American citizens and Biden is endangering them with these pauses. How is this at all humanitarian? Biden allows the “innocent people of Gaza” who voted for and overwhelmingly support Hamas, have time to flee, at the same time as he puts MY children in harm’s way? Biden giveth and he taketh away. And somehow it’s always the Jews who lose out.  

So, we have billions of American aid flowing to Israel, but also to Iran. And we also have billions of American aid flowing to Hamas in Gaza. The $106 billion national security aid package that Biden presented to Congress in October includes $9b for humanitarian aid, and while some of that may go to Ukraine or Israel, the White House acknowledges that it’s largely for Gaza, and that means it will inevitably end up in Hamas’ hot little hands.

Sending aid to Gaza is, by the way, illegal, according to Prof. Avi Bell:

Any country providing aid to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip indirectly supports Hamas, thereby breaking United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, explained Prof. Avi Bell of Bar-Ilan University's Faculty of Law.

He said the resolution, which was adopted by the UN Security Council in 2001 and is therefore legally binding, includes several duties states have to fight terrorist organizations, one of which is to not provide any form of support – active or passive, direct or indirect.

"As long as we have a degree of certainty that some of the aid [entering from Egypt to Gaza via the Rafah crossing] is being diverted to Hamas – and we do have that certainty – then all the states of the world must refrain from providing this indirect support to Hamas," Bell said.

We are, of course, certain that humanitarian aid is being diverted to Hamas. The IDF provided 300 liters of fuel to Shifa hospital and Hamas took it. Just swooped down and seized it to “fuel” its terror machine. Well, actually Hamas didn’t just swoop down and seize that fuel. First the Hamas terrorists blocked the hospital from receiving the fuel, and then the Hamas terrorists seized the fuel for their own “use.”

It is, by the way, also illegal for Israel to be giving aid to Gaza, knowing it goes to Hamas, and that’s been happening ever since there was a Hamas. But this is a different story. Israel is pressured by corrupt leaders like Joe Biden—Israel is fighting for its life and cannot say no to Biden’s demands. Also, Israel is held to a different moral standard. Because Jews.

Take what happened with Shifa Hospital. The White House let Israel know, in no uncertain terms that it did not want to see fighting there (emphasis added):

“The United States does not want to see firefights in hospitals where innocent people, patients receiving medical care, are caught in the crossfire. And we’ve had active consultations with the Israel Defense Forces on this,” [said US National Security Advisor Jake] Sullivan.

We know what happened with that one, don’t we?

The White House on Tuesday said it had its own intelligence that Hamas was using Gaza's largest hospital Al Shifa to run its military operations, and probably to store weapons, saying those actions constituted a war crime.

"We have information that confirms that Hamas is using that particular hospital for a command and control mode" and probably to store weapons, national security spokesperson John Kirby told reporters aboard Air Force One. "That is a war crime."

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

That was Shifa Hospital. But we also know what happened at Rantisi Hospital.


Today, in response to bitter criticism of Biden by an American Israeli, I heard my Israeli-born neighbor gently chide him, saying “We have to say thank you to America.”

But do we? Really?

Biden gives Israel money, but he gives it to Iran as well. He gives aid to Israel, but also to Gaza, ergo Hamas. Should we say thank you to America for giving aid and succor to those who perpetrated the single worst massacre on the Jewish people since the Holocaust and who, even now, have Jews in their sights?

What in the name of God is happening here, and why aren’t the people in the rallies demanding accountability?

With one hand, the president of the United States facilitates Iranian and Hamas terror, while simultaneously tying Israel’s hands with the other. The Jews are expendable, he reasons. Give Iran a little nip to take the edge off. And it won’t hurt his creds with Rashida, et al.

But it all has to have a veneer of respectful support for and generosity toward Israel, to appease the other side, as well. It’s a balancing act, but Joe’s been doing this for half his life. He’s a career politician. A hack. The emperor in new clothes.

It’s all a political balancing act: Biden giveth and Biden taketh away. He’ll give us guns, but we can’t use them. He gives money to Iran to take Jewish lives.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 



Wednesday, November 08, 2023



Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

Rallies have figured large in the wake of October 7th. Not in Israel, mind you. In Israel, we are too busy to hold rallies. We prefer to rally around each other.

Outside of Israel, things are different. There, the rally has become an important vehicle for expressing solidarity; for taking sides, and in some cases, for whipping up the masses to kill Jews. 

The rally is many things, but what, in fact, does the rally really achieve for those of us on the side of Israel? It’s all a numbers game, and their numbers will always be larger: There are more of them than us.

Does it matter? Of course it does. The rally is a kind of test; a chance to choose good or evil, though it’s not always cut and dried. There are the sheeple who passively allow themselves to be swayed by the crowd; they just want to fit in. On the other hand, there is true evil, the thugs, and the academics who say they are exhilarated by what happened to the Jews—and the people who tear down posters of Jewish babies held hostage in Gaza.

Evil takes other forms, sometimes in the guise of a Jew who will tell you that as Jew, they say it’s okay to commit atrocities as long as you know the context—as long as you know the history. . .

 . . . or the woman who shouts “I’m a rabbi and I demand a ceasefire!” These Jews are sick, sicker, sickest and the very definition of the banality of evil.  

It must be said that sometimes, and here there is only one phrase, crude as it is, to describe the phenomenon: the rally is a pissing contest. Sometimes the participants scuffle or worse. 


Sometimes someone hits an elderly Jew over the head with a megaphone and kills him, and the police can’t decide if it’s murder.

It’s not all bad, though. There are Jews, pure of heart, who flock to rallies to express anguish and cry out for justice, “Justice, justice, you shall pursue.”

That’s very nice. But as I told my relatives on the eve of October 11, “From experience, all of you should stay close to home. I wouldn't go to shul or to rallies. It's not worth the risk, even with beefed up security. Personal safety is more important, and it's bad to be in crowded places. . . Don't be lulled into thinking you're far away and safe. I mean it. Please just stay safe. The rallies don't help us anyway, IMHO.”

The response? “This was an attack on all of us.”

That’s true. I’m glad their eyes are open. But it doesn’t help us in the aftermath. There’s a war, and it is those of us in Israel who must fight it.

What would help us would be unceasing rallies at the White House, protesting Biden’s aid to Iran and Hamas, and his demands for a ceasefire. Short of that, rallies are pretty useless. They may make you feel good, and give you a feeling of communal bonding, but that’s not a good enough reason to get together when it isn’t safe out there for Jews and lovers of justice and light.

***
Our IDF soldiers need ceramic vests to keep them safe as they fight Hamas. We have started a crowdfunding campaign to purchase these vests for my son's platoon:  Ceramic Vests for IDF Soldiers.

Even a small donation would be greatly appreciated--each vest costs approximately $520.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, November 01, 2023


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

How much money has the United States given to Iran over the years, either as outright gifts, or through the lifting of sanctions and unfreezing Iranian assets and revenues? The exact amount may be impossible to determine, but the thawing of $6b in Iranian revenues a month before the Hamas atrocities in Israel, obligates us to look closer and ask hard questions. How much money are we talking about? Was the latest thaw a greenlight to Iran to do as it wished with Israel? Which presidents gave money to Iran and why did so many Jewish Americans vote for them?

A recent Newsweek “fact check” article attempts to pin down the exact amount of money that flowed to Iran from the Obama administration. The article is slanted, focused on the irrelevant fact that at least much of the money was not a gift because it already belonged to Iran, and stressing that conditions had been placed on how the money could be spent (emphasis added):

As tensions simmer, conservative commentators shared claims that President Barack Obama's administration had given $150 billion to Iran, effectively, they argued, funding Hamas.

A post on X by Jack Posobiec, posted on October 16, 2023, referenced a Charlie Kirk tweet from September 11, 2015, which stated "Iran funds Hamas. Hamas kills Americans and Jews. Now we give Iran $150 billion. Where do you think that money will go? #IranDeal"

Posobiec wrote "Charlie warned us and now people are mad at him."

Kirk, founder of conservative student group Turning Point USA, was likely referring to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which granted Iran access to frozen assets.

This was not funding given to Iran. The amount quoted refers to foreign assets that belonged to Iran and were frozen by sanctions imposed to impede its nuclear program. The JCPOA was also an international agreement between Iran and a number of major world powers, including the U.S.

Despite the facts of this "fact-checking" article, there’s always a workaround. Two things can be true at one and the same time. Perhaps the thawed Iranian foreign assets could not be used to fund terror, but there was zero reason to imagine that a similar amount of money could not be drawn from elsewhere, for example from schools, hospitals, and government subsidies for healthcare to fund the Iranian terror machine. Then all Iran has to do is use its unfrozen assets to make up the difference, and voilà—no thawed assets were used to fund Iranian terror!

The Iranian windfall may not have paid for nuclear weapons production or to sponsor its proxy Hamas, but it might as well have done so, because here is another fact: Money can always be shifted around to balance a budget and make things work. That’s because money is fungible:

Back in 2015, Charlie Kirk, as cited by Newsweek, said the United States, under President Obama, gave Iran $150b. How did Kirk arrive at this figure? Does he have some kind of inside track? Nope. Kirk was only repeating the words from the man himself, Barack Obama:

How much these assets were worth has not been released, but $150 billion is the highest estimate provided by U.S. officials. The figure was mentioned in passing by Obama in an interview with The Atlantic in 2015, when questioned where the money could end up.

"The question is, if Iran has $150 billion parked outside the country, does the IRGC automatically get $150 billion?" Obama said.

Was the $150b referenced by Obama meant as an exaggerated hypothetical? It seems unlikely. If this astronomical sum had been far off the mark of the thawed Iranian foreign assets, surely the former president would have added context. He might have said, for example, “Not that the Iranian revenues we freed came to anything near that amount.”

Newsweek goes on to offer the reader other estimates for the Obama-thawed Iranian funds beginning with the far lower figures cited by a corrupt Iranian bank official:

In 2015, the former governor of Iran's central bank, Valiollah Seif, said in a state television address that the value of the frozen assets had been exaggerated.

Seif was sentenced in 2021 to 10 years in prison on corruption charges, reported Reuters.

The former official said that there were $29 billion of unlockable assets: $23 billion in foreign exchange that belonged to the bank and $6 billion of the Tehran government's money, The Times of Israel and Arabic news channel Al Arabiya reported in July 2015. The $29 billion Seif quoted was also reported by The New York Times.

Further figures are cited from a variety of sources to suggest that we are, indeed, speaking of much lower sums, which anyway, cannot be accessed by Iran, and certainly not for the purpose of funding terror:

Voice of America reported in January 2016, after the deal was signed, quotes from Seif saying Iran had gained access to $32 billion in assets.

Then U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told Congress in July 2015 that Iran gained access to $56 billion via the agreement, a fact check by PolitiFact in 2018 noted.

In an August 2015 written testimony, Adam J. Szubin, then-acting Under Secretary of Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, said that while estimates suggested the Central Bank of Iran had foreign exchange assets between $100 billion to $125 billion, the usable "liquid assets" after sanctions were lifted would be around $50 billion.

Newsweek wraps things up by telling us unequivocally that the U.S. did not give Iran $150b in 2015, and anyway, the not-a-gift was at no cost to the American people:

False.

The U.S. did not "give" $150 billion to Iran in 2015. In 2015, as part of an international deal with Iran called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran agreed to cut back on nuclear enrichment programs in exchange for the unfreezing of its own assets.

The U.S. taxpayer paid nothing toward this, as might be implied by the post, and the value of the assets was said by some, including the U.S. Treasury, to be less than $150 billion.

Even should we stipulate that the non-gift to Iran was far less than $150b, Newsweek leaves out a most salient, and quite relevant fact. In addition to thawing Iranian revenues, Obama gave Iran $1.8 billion in cash, from The Hill, back in 2020:

Iran is indeed a dangerous terrorist state that not only has a powerful standing army, air force, navy and advanced weapons systems — including ballistic missiles and a growing space program — but also controls multiple proxy terrorist organizations responsible for killing and injuring hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children.

Included on that list of victims are thousands of American military personnel and contractors.

These were facts that former President Obama knew when he deliberately chose a policy of appeasement and cash payoffs instead of strength and accountability as the way to deal with Iran.

President Trump spelled this out in no uncertain terms on Wednesday when he addressed the nation while seeking to dial down the imminent threat Iran may pose to our nation, the Middle East and the world.

Said the president in part, “Iran’s hostilities substantially increased after the foolish Iran nuclear deal was signed in 2013 and they were given $150 billion, not to mention $1.8 billion in cash. … Then, Iran went on a terror spree, funded by the money from the deal and created hell in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq. The missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for with the funds made available by the last administration.”

As we have seen and heard, some — especially Democrats, their allies in the media and Obama supporters — chose to challenge or quibble with Trump’s statement. That said, [author Douglas Mackinnon] spoke with a former senior intelligence official who said that much of the $1.8 billion cash payoff from the Obama administration was used explicitly to fund terrorism as an additional “screw you” from the leaders of Iran — including Soleimani —  to the United States. The rest of the money, [Mackinnon’s] source believes, ended up in the bank accounts of corrupt Iranian leaders and terrorists.

This money was not not-a-gift Iranian monies thawed, but an actual gift, or rather, according to Mackinnon, a payoff Obama thought he could hide from the public (emphasis added):

The cash payment authorized by Obama is one of the most disgraceful and shameful “negotiations” in the history of our nation. It was a payment the Obama White House first denied, then ignored and then grudgingly acknowledged.

We paid in cash, but not U.S. currency. Wary of using U.S. bills for a variety of reasons involving concealment, the Obama White House had the money converted to untraceable Euros, Swiss francs, and other foreign currencies. More troubling than those initial denials and deceptions was the fact that $400 million of that all-cash payment was used to pay a ransom to the government of Iran for the release of four American prisoners, in violation of standing U.S. policy.

In a pathetic attempt to hide behind semantics, the Obama administration finally did acknowledge that $400 million was delayed as “leverage” until the Americans were allowed to leave Iran.

While the Obama White House hid from the true definition of the word “leverage,” Iran’s state-run media was more than happy to brag that Iran had just forced the United States to pay a ransom.

Thawing Iranian revenues is one thing, even to the tune of $150b, but from where, you might reasonably ask, did Obama get $1.8b in cash? Was this gift on the taxpayer’s dime? Mackinnon gives us the skinny:

What many Americans don’t realize is that the Obama White House took the ransom money from something called the “Judgment Fund,” which is administered by the Treasury. That little-known account is entirely paid for by American taxpayers and was set up in such a way that Obama could bypass congressional approval to pay the cash to Iran.

Those who continually praise and defend Obama often describe him as “brilliant.” There is no doubt the former president is an intelligent person, certainly bright enough to realize — and admit, at least to himself — that the cash he turned over to the murderous regime leading Iran to ruin was not used for altruistic purposes.

Any honest assessment would conclude that at least part of that secretive, massive payment was used to finance terrorist attacks against Americans, our allies and innocent civilians . . .

 . . . For that reason, Obama should apologize for the thousands wounded and killed in terrorist attacks since Iran took possession of that tainted cash. That is his debt to pay.

In 2021, CNN reduced the amount of the Obama cash gift to Iran from $1.8b to “about $1.7b”. We also learn that in 2021, there was a $7b thaw in the works, suspiciously close to the $6b that President Biden unfroze in September:

Then-President Barack Obama faced steep opposition from Republicans when it was revealed that his administration had transferred about $1.7 billion to Iran in early 2016 . . .

 . . . Pro-Iranian media reported last weekend that the US had agreed to unfreeze $7 billion in Iranian funds and arrange a prisoner swap as part of the negotiations, but the State Department rejected the prisoner swap reports as false and a senior official told reporters on Thursday that those responsible for the leak were guilty of “unspeakable cruelty.” The department did not weigh in on the reports that the US would unfreeze funds, but a source briefed on the talks said the $7 billion figure was incorrect.

The White House is at the same time facing pressure to tread cautiously from Israel, which sent a delegation to Washington last week to discuss, among other things, the ongoing Iran deal talks. In a brief meeting with Biden last week, Israeli top intelligence official Yossi Cohen reiterated what Israel has been saying publicly, said one person familiar with the meeting: namely, that it believes Iran cannot be trusted and that the US should not return to the nuclear deal.

Biden reiterated his commitment to the US-Israel relationship, the person said, and reassured Cohen that the US views a return to the deal only as a jumping-off point for further discussions about lengthening and strengthening its terms, to ultimately include limits on other areas of Iran’s malign behavior in the region.

Going back to the issue of irrelevant facts and the echo chamber, the Newsweek article cited earlier managed to side-step the issue of Obama’s $1.8b cash payments to Iran. It did so by pushing a flurry of irrelevant facts on the reader: that the 2015 money was not a gift; that it was nowhere near $150b, and the money was not used to directly fund terror. A US News article piles on further irrelevant facts to obscure the truth, this time regarding the recent $6b in Iranian revenues thawed by Biden one month before the October 7 Hamas terror attack.

We are told that no one serious believes the $6b was used for the attack on Israel (so what—money is fungible); the attack was long in the planning (so what—they planned it a long time ago but needed the money to make it happen); and there is “no evidence” that Iran funded the attack because Iran denies responsibility (as if Iran were a trustworthy source to be believed in regard to whether or not it funded Hamas):

No serious observer believes the money ordered released by the administration – accumulated oil revenue withheld from Tehran under a Trump administration financial restriction – was used for that purpose. Iran is known to play a major role in funding, supporting and training the militant group and has for decades, but U.S. officials have said early intelligence does not indicate Iran helped Hamas plan, train or otherwise carry out the assault and added that it appeared to have taken some senior Iranian leaders by surprise. While a Hamas spokesman told the BBC that Iran did assist in the attack, officials in Tehran have denied responsibility while praising the outcome. So any direct link remains tenuous.

With regard to the money, planning of the sophisticated operation appears to have been underway for far longer than the funds were available to Iran, for one thing. For another, Treasury Department controls mandate that the funds cannot be drawn down by Iran for anything other than humanitarian needs provided by third-party vendors. But mostly – as the administration’s one-note response emphasizes at every turn – the most obvious indication it wasn’t used for the attack was because Iran hasn’t yet touched the money after it was sent from South Korea to a bank in Qatar.

“None of the funds that have gone to Qatar have actually been spent or accessed in any way,” Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said on Thursday, speaking from Tel Aviv, where he met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as part of a multi-country diplomatic deployment across the Middle East.

Instead of focusing on the $1.8b cash payment (or $1.7b as CNN would have it), Mark Langfan, in 2020, did the math for us on the $150b figure cited by Obama in the Atlantic interview. At the same time, Langfan appears to place the onus for this dirty “deal” on then Vice President Biden (emphasis added):

Despite the fact that VP Biden knew that the Defense Department had already conclusively found by July 9, 2015 that Iran had directly murdered a minimum 500 US soldiers with Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) in Iraq over the past seven years, a mere five days later, on July 14, 2015, VP Biden cheerled the Iran Nuclear deal that handed Iran $150 Billion dollars.

Do the math. That means that in 2015, VP Biden paid Iran $300 million for each US soldier Iran murdered.

The echo chamber is slimy. It tells us about thawed Iranian revenues, but it doesn’t tell us about the large cash gift or that the American taxpayer paid ransom to Iran. Instead, the echo chamber peppers us with irrelevant facts, smug in the belief that wool can be pulled over the eyes of the American public. The tactic has demonstrated its efficacy over the years, with Americans amplifying whatever irrelevant talking points they are supplied. Is it a case of intellectual laziness or are they simply too trusting?

Richard Goldberg, senior advisor to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), and Rep. Darrell Issa, instead of irrelevancies, offer us a shocking piece of information. The recent $6b not-a-gift to Iran was only the tip of the iceberg and it’s far worse than Obama with his sneaky $1.8b cash payment. As it turns out, Biden enriched Iran by more than $50b and he did it via backchannels to avoid public scrutiny:

In May, White House Middle East Coordinator Brett McGurk secretly traveled to Oman to pass a message along to Iran: America will pay the Ayatollah’s price to keep Tehran from producing weapons-grade uranium. Later that month, the Sultan of Oman traveled to Iran to broker the deal while the governor of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI) — an institution subject to U.S. sanctions for its role in terror financing — unexpectedly departed for Washington.

In June, leaks to Israeli media revealed the extraordinary concessions Biden made to the Ayatollah: Iran would “stop the process of enriching uranium to high levels” in exchange for sanctions relief.

The Biden administration then issued a sanctions waiver to provide Iran with at least $10 billion frozen in Iraq – and allow the money to be deposited in Iranian bank accounts in Oman.

Unnamed officials would soon admit the U.S. had already stopped enforcing oil sanctions on Iran – tacitly approving a million barrel per day increase in exports from Iran to China and generating tens of billions in annualized revenue. By the time the administration authorized the much-discussed $6 billion from South Korea, a full-blown appeasement and enrichment effort towards Iran had been underway for months.

In effect, explain the authors, the $6b in thawed Iranian revenues was a smokescreen for a far greater cash infusion from yet another dirty president (emphasis added):

[Fixating] only on the $6 billion obscures how Biden has financed Iran’s nuclear protection racket, emboldened its murderous regime, and enabled the mullahs to focus their resources on destroying Israel, the one country conducting operations to stop Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons.

The Biden message sent to the ayatollah is that the U.S. fears escalation and will pay any price to avoid a direct confrontation. That was a green light for Iran to activate its terror subsidiaries and commence the kind of barbaric slaughter we witnessed [on October 7th].

To add insult to injury, Biden is even now strengthening the Iranian terror machine:

While Biden’s words condemn Hamas’ heinous crimes against humanity, he continues to enrich Hamas’ parent company, Iran. And while Biden is correctly giving Israel the time, space, and resources it needs to prepare for Hamas’ destruction, he’s simultaneously giving Iran the time, space, and resources it needs to rebuild that which Israel destroys.

Having discussed the thawed, not-a-gift Iranian revenues, it makes sense to then explore how the re-imposition of sanctions by President Trump in 2018, drastically drained Iran of resources to fund its terror activities. In 2020, Lindsay Graham and Morgan Ortagus outlined Iran’s dire economic situation, and described how the lifting of sanctions by President Biden would represent a $90b bailout to Iran (emphasis added):

The JCPOA infused Iran with cash. Right before the United States reimposed sanctions in 2018, Iran’s central bank controlled more than $120 billion in foreign exchange reserves. U.S. sanctions locked tens of those billions away in escrow accounts, and financial pressure forced Iran to draw down the accounts that remained open. After only two years of the maximum pressure campaign, Iran was down to a meager $4 billion in reserves. Meanwhile, U.S. energy sanctions cut Iran’s oil exports by more than 2 million barrels per day, depriving the regime of $70 billion that typically funds its budget.

The massive reversal of fortunes left Iran with barely any economic options, and the regime was forced to cut payments to its regional terror proxies. While Iran fended off collapse, much of the rest of the Middle East breathed a sigh of relief. Several countries in the region made historic peace with one another. Progress made by the Abraham Accords—which were struck in August 2020 by Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States—were contagious.

Alliances with Iran threaten to undo much of the progress made.

Right away, the regime could receive a payday of around $90 billion the moment Biden ends sanctions. After all, U.S. sanctions tied up $40 billion of oil and condensate sales in Asia and the Middle East while another $50 billion in funds remain inaccessible to the regime. Meanwhile, the restoration of the JCPOA would likely reinvigorate Iran’s oil exports, adding nearly $50 billion per year to the regime’s coffers at today’s market rate. Other economic sanctions would be lifted as well, bolstering the regime’s metals and petrochemicals sectors that are crucial to funding the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) foreign adventures. Iran’s economy will start to grow again, and it will not take any time for the suitcases of cash to find their way to Hamas or Hezbollah.

Those billions of dollars would go a long way for the leading state sponsor of terrorism. Iran’s entire military budget has been reduced to less than $20 billion a year. But historically, Iran spent more than $16 billion supporting allies in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen since 2012 and sent $700 million a year to Hezbollah.

There’s not much need for speculation regarding what Iran would use its sanctions relief for. Instead, just look to six years ago. Instead of spending funds on cancer research or infrastructure like promised, the regime’s defense budget reached record highs. The IRGC spread mayhem and death across the region, and the same thing could happen again.

Only this time, under the terms of the original JCPOA, nuclear restrictions on Iran are almost up. Within the decade, Iran will have no cap on nuclear enrichment quantity or quality, no cap on the number of centrifuge sophistication, no ban on the import and export of ballistic missiles, and the expiration of more than a dozen other prohibitions.

In 2022, Nikki Haley criticized Biden’s intention to lift the sanctions. But Haley goes further, offering a tie-in between the thawed Iranian money and Biden’s support to the PA and Hamas regimes (emphasis added): 

Haley [criticized] Biden’s recent trip to the Middle East, including Israel, where he announced a $300 million cash infusion to the Palestinian government. The Free Beacon exclusively reported last week that a large portion of this cash is funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, known as UNRWA, which has a history of inciting violence against Jews.

"The money has no conditions, no strings, nothing. The Palestinians can keep stoking hatred of Israel," Haley said of the renewed funding. "They can keep paying the families of terrorists, which encourages more suicide bombings. Basically, the Palestinians can use America’s money to attack America’s ally. It’s a disgrace."

In examining the events of October 7, it is important here, to consider the role played in the atrocities by Rob Malley, the recently-suspended envoy to Iran who allegedly mishandled classified material (emphasis added):

“Rob Malley deserves extensive scrutiny — yesterday, today and tomorrow,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told [the New York Post] after the Wall Street Journal reported that officers of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps planned and signed off on this weekend’s atrocity that killed at least 900.

“These reports could not be more concerning, and they hint at what could be the worst State Department scandal since Alger Hiss,” Issa added.

“Malley and others created an incredibly permissive environment for Hamas, for Iran, to do all these things,” added Gabriel Noronha, a former special adviser on Iran at the State Department.

Noronha, who served under former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, said Malley and his negotiating team “purposefully funneled billions of dollars to [Iran] through lack of sanctions enforcement and provision of sanctions relief that has given them somewhere between $50 [billion] and $80 billion over the last two and a half years.”

A senior House Republican aide told The Post that the cash influx followed an even more generous payout of $1.7 billion that the Obama administration made to Iran in 2016, eventually contributing to Saturday’s attack that triggered the Jewish state’s first declaration of war in 50 years.

In 2022, Michael Rubin said that all told, thanks to Malley, the Biden administration planned to give Tehran, in total, twice the amount of Biden’s recent “non-gift” to Iran (emphasis added):

In May 2021, Malley was offering Iran relief equivalent to $7 billion, nearly equal to the budget of Iran’s entire conventional military for 2022. As Iranian negotiators stonewalled — they have not sat down with Malley or his team but instead insist on talking through intermediaries — Malley’s team upped the ante. Today, the Biden administration appears poised to provide Tehran with $12 billion, equivalent to a quarter of Iran’s total budget at the real exchange rate. This does not include, of course, the windfall Tehran seeks to gain from increased oil sales already augmented by lack of sanctions enforcement. This fund does not include off-budget spending, such as the oil revenue directly allocated to the Revolutionary Guards or the additional billions that Iran’s national oil company allocates for national stabilization and development but in actuality flows into Revolutionary Guards’ coffers.

Should Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei accept Malley’s offer, the regime will receive an infusion of over $20 billion over the following year, essentially doubling the Revolutionary Guard’s budget. To put that conservative estimate in perspective, a suicide belt costs just $1,500, and the bombing of the Hebrew University cafeteria that killed five Americans cost only $50,000.

Nor does the money now offered to Iran account for the billion-dollar ransoms that the Iranians expect for hostage releases. After all, ever since Jimmy Carter’s administration acquiesced to release Iranian funds in exchange for hostages and Ronald Reagan traded arms for hostages, the Iranian regime simply seizes new hostages to use as chits in their negotiations.

Lee Smith, writing for Tablet, describes how Malley brought an Iranian agent into the State Department and the Pentagon, where she served in sensitive positions related to United States defense (emphasis added):

The Biden administration’s now-suspended Iran envoy Robert Malley helped to fund, support, and direct an Iranian intelligence operation designed to influence the United States and allied governments, according to a trove of purloined Iranian government emails.

The emails, which were reported on by veteran Wall Street Journal correspondent Jay Solomon, writing in Semafor, and by Iran International, the London-based émigré opposition outlet which is the most widely read independent news source inside Iran, were published last week after being extensively verified over a period of several months by the two outlets. They showed that Malley had helped to infiltrate an Iranian agent of influence named Ariane Tabatabai into some of the most sensitive positions in the U.S. government—first at the State Department and now the Pentagon, where she has been serving as chief of staff for the assistant secretary of defense for special operations, Christopher Maier. . .

The contents of the emails are damning, showing a group of Iranian American academics being recruited by the Iranian regime, meeting together in foreign countries to receive instructions from top regime officials, and pledging their personal loyalty to the regime. They also show how these operatives used their Iranian heritage and Western academic positions to influence U.S. policy toward Iran, first as outside “experts” and then from high-level U.S. government posts. Both inside and outside of government, the efforts of members of this circle were repeatedly supported and advanced by Malley, who served as the U.S. government’s chief interlocutor with Iran under both the Obama and the Biden administrations. Malley is also the former head of the International Crisis Group (ICG), which directly paid and credentialed several key members of the regime’s influence operation.

What should we make of these efforts by Presidents Obama and Biden to enrich not only Iran, but the PA and Hamas regimes in the wake of the depraved Hamas massacre of October 7? For one thing, it clarifies for us that these men, and the men who work(ed) for them, are dirty almost beyond belief. Also: they really hate Israel.

However inconvenient it is to consider who put these men in office, we must talk about this. While American Jews are a miniscule percentage of the American voting public, a large majority of them voted for Obama and Biden. They put domestic issues like healthcare ahead of Israel. They failed to register the possible impact of the JCPOA on the Jewish people and on the world at large.

The world has undergone a drastic change in the short few weeks since October 7. Pogroms now threaten Jews in Russia and in France. American college campuses have never been more dangerous for Jewish students. We are on the verge of a world war. This state of affairs is due to the machinations of Obama, Biden, and all those who ever worked for them (and voted for them).

There is a lesson to be learned here: you don’t vote for the guy who wants to give money to Iran, echo chamber notwithstanding. It doesn’t matter whose money it is, or how they propose to get it to the mullahs. The stipulations they promise to put on that money also do not matter.

It is evil to make funds available to the evil, period.

On October 21, 2012, just before Obama was reelected, I reviewed Obama’s intentions to plow through with the JCPOA and what this might mean for the world, something perhaps akin to the horrors of the Holocaust, for lack of a better description. I then asked my readers a simple question: “If you could have saved the 6 million by pulling a different lever, would you have done so?”

Eleven years later, my question is no different, even though the alternative candidate is a man reviled by the majority of Jewish American voters. “If you could have saved the Jews who were massacred on October 7th by pulling a different lever, would you have done so?”

Jewish voting patterns. The middle column represents the percent of Jewish votes received by each candidate (screenshot from the Virtual Jewish Library)

This writer is not afraid to stipulate that Trump is an unpresidential ass. I don’t like his crassness and the way he insults his competition. I don’t like the way he speaks about the Jewish people, and I don’t like what he says about my prime minister. In spite of all this, I know that that there’s always a trade-off: Trump would never have given money to Iran, or unfrozen its revenues.

In fact, it was Trump who re-imposed the sanctions on Iran. The Iranian war machine was nearly bankrupt when Biden assumed office. The evidence leads to an obvious conclusion: Had Donald Trump won the election, the events of October 7th would not have occurred.

And I hate like hell that my prediction of a Holocaust came true. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive