Forum: What Will Be The End Result Of The Iran Nuclear Deal?

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What Will Be The End Result Of The Iran Nuclear Deal?

The Independent Sentinel : Iran will continue to work on nuclear weaponry and intercontinental ballistic missiles during the term of the faux deal. They will threaten and menace their neighbors, the U.S. and anyone who travels through the Straits of Hormuz throughout the ten year period.

When the waiting period ends, they will be a nuclear state and we will all be afraid. A nuclear arms race will begin in the Middle East if the deal goes through. ISIS will continue to grow and they want nuclear weapons also.

Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has already said Iran is anxious to start selling nuclear material and they have allied with some seriously bad players - Syria, Russia, and North Korea to name three.

Obama is a traitor for promoting this deal. We won't have any sanctions to fall back on.

This is a serious mess for the next president.


Don Surber : IntraMuslim Nuclear War.


The Noisy Room : Iran will get nukes... Obama will ensure it. After the deal is done, a full-blown nuclear arms race will erupt in the Middle East. Iran will profit financially and militarily. They will use their military strength with nukes as a form of extortion to get what they want across the
globe.

They will further ally with Russia, China and North Korea militarily. Eventually, they will use nukes against their enemies in the Middle East, Israel and the United States. They will use the Axis of Evil (Iran, Russia and China) as cover and World War III will kick into high gear. Iran will close off the Straits of Hormuz and oil prices will skyrocket as war spreads. Iran will also seize geographic territory as they spread their military might further. War, death and apocalyptic scenarios will ensue to usher in the 12th Imam.


 JoshuaPundit : In the end, I don't think it matters.

The Iranians have consistently accused the Obama team of misrepresenting what was agreed to since November of 2013, so there are still huge gaps between what Iran and the P5+1 see as the so called interim agreement. Virtually nothing we were told by John Kerry back in 2013 has proven to be true, and whenever the Iranians have challenged Obama's team on it, the result has been to either back down to the Ayatollah's demands or extend the deadline for more talks, with a handsome cash bonus to the Iranian regime for the privilege of their presence.Actually it's been revealed that Iran's nuclear stockpile has actually grown during the talks by 20%!  Aside from that,all  that's been achieved is that Iran got billions in badly needed economic relief and a year and a half of time to continue working on its missiles and its nuclear weapons program.Even the verification we were promised to sell this is a farce. The Iranians have made it clear that they won't allow snap IAEA inspections or any inspections at all of military sites like Parchin or Fordow.

Any deal that gets made will be toothless. whether it goes through congress or this president  pushes it through the UN. And even if there is no deal, the sanctions regime is over anyway. Countries and businesses are lining up to do business with Iran.

An American military response is out  as well. President Obama needs the Iranians to do the dirty work on the ground in Iraq to clean up the problem he caused by creating ISIS. And his Iranian-born consigliere Valerie Jarrett wouldn't allow it, nor would I trust a feral incompetent like our president to carry it out properly as C in C.

So that leaves several options for the future. The Israelis, to whom this is an existential matter may decide to take matters into their own hands, with or without help from the Saudis and the Emirates, whom have been beefing up their military after realizing what sort of man is in the White House. There are reports out there that Israeli PM Netanyahu wanted to do this in 2010, but that former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and former IDF chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi, whom are associated with Israel's Labor Party,  both refused to cooperate and that no less than former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton leaked intel on a coming attack to the Iranians. But Israel  now has a different government and very different people in those positions instead of Dagan and Ashkenazi.

Of course, a strike by Israel on Iran's nuclear facilitates will give Barack Obama what he's wanted from Day One, an excuse to end the American/Israeli relationship to the degree he's able to, at least while he's president. The Israeli may very well decide that it's worth it at this point.

A second scenario involves ISIS. Take away our air support for the Shi'ites and ISIS is a legitimate check to Iran's ambitions. Add an ittifaaqiyya (alliance) between ISIS,the Emirates and the Saudis (not at all implausible) and then throw the KSA's attack helicopters and F-22s into the mix,  the playing field gets even more even. The Saudis even have their own missiles. That carnage could stalemate like the Iraq/Iran War in the1980's and go on for years.

If Iran does actually strike the U.S. , they will almost certainly use one of their terrorist proxies to  try to mask their own involvement. If that occurs, and I certainly hope it doesn't, the people of the United States whom voted Barack Hussein Obama into office have no one to blame but themselves.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason: As the June 30th deadline approaches the U. S. has lost any economic leverage by lifting sanctions, making Iran stronger and more emboldened. The U. S. continues to give concessions throughout these negotiations while Iran gives nothing. Nothing is going to change Iran’s core ideology. They remain state sponsors of terrorism and intent on the destruction of Israel. Iran is playing a long game while President Obama is desperate for a nuclear treaty before the end of his term. I don’t believe any treaty coming out of the Obama administration will be strong enough in limiting Iran’s nuclear ambitions to be ratified by the Senate.

The Glittering Eye : I think the Iranians are going to do whatever it is that they're going to do regardless of agreements. I think the idea that the regime can be expected to honor an agreement or that they won't have undeclared nuclear development is laughable.

Ask Marion : Just a day after Iran agreed to limit its nuclear program in exchange for lighter economic sanctions, the difference in the moods on the streets of Tehran and Jerusalem couldn't have been starker. The temporary deal with the P5 +1 countries will give Iran access to billions in revenues as the United States, Great Britain, China, Russia, France and Germany suspend their sanctions on various items, including gold and petrochemical exports. Good idea? Probably not, if the end game is to stop enrichment! Netanyahu adamantly distrusts Iran, and rightly so, and decried the agreement as a "historic mistake" after it was announced.

We are dealing with people who are completely untrustworthy. This is a regime that murders their own people, creates mayhem and chaos throughout the middle east, throughout the whole world, and is the largest sponsor of terrorism.

This just opens the door wider for the possibility of nuclear war in the middle east, if not WWIII.

David Gerstman: If a deal is made it will be a disaster. President Obama has shown no inclination to hold Iran to any obligation. When Iran, for example, used a forbidden advanced centrifuge during the course of the Joint Plan of Action, the Obama administration didn't call it a violation. It called it a mistake. To add insult to injury Obama and his administration then insisted that Iran obeyed the terms of the Joint Plan of Action and this proved the deal's critics wrong. (There were other violations. This was the clearest.)

There is so much else wrong with this deal. Not the least of which is the freeing up of billions that will allow Iran to increase the financing its terrorist proxies.

However there is one person who may yet save Obama from making this deal, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.There is nothing I've seen that suggests that he's interested in a deal. The deal announced in Lausanne wasn't a deal (and it was two days past the deadline) it was an agreement to keep negotiating. Khamenei loves the "limited, targeted" billions in sanctions relief that he's receiving. But he still hates America. I believe that he views a deal with the Great Satan is against his religion. I think that there won't be a deal on June 30 or on January 20, 2017. Obama's too invested to admit failure. So we'll continue to have a muddled series of negotiations over the next two years. There will be announcements of progress, but they will always be less than a full agreement.Because Khamenei doesn't want one.

Wolf Howling : Iran's theocracy sees their primary purpose as being the export of their bastardized version of Khomeinist T'welver Islam around the world. To that end, they are supporting terrorism and chaos world-wide, from South America to Africa to the Middle East. Soon, Iran will likely control Syria, Iraq and Yemen to the same extent that they control Lebanon and to the same degree that they influence Hamas in Gaza. Iran's theocracy have shown over the past thirty five years that they are implacable enemies of the West, in particular the U.S. and Israel, and that they are quite willing to wade through rivers of blood to achieve their goals.

Pretending that giving Iran a nuclear arsenal will moderate their theocracy is sheer suicidal fantasy. War with this regime, as they reach the brink of a nuclear arsenal, is inevitable. The only question is whether we engage in it sooner, when we can be assured of victory at a relatively nominal cost, or whether that war, after Obama's suicidal proposed nuclear deal, comes fifteen to thirty years down the road, when Iran has had the opportunity to greatly increase it's military capability and has a significant nuclear arsenal. I see little difference between the triumphalism, expansionism and amorality of Iran's theocracy today and the triumphalism, expansionism and amorality of Hitler's Third Reich circa 1937 but for one critical difference. Iran's theocracy does not operate according to the Western standards of rationality -- something that Obama and virtually the entire left seem unable to grasp. The concept of Mutually Assured Destruction is not a defense against Iran's use of nuclear weapons, it is an inducement. Theirs is a regime more dangerous than Hitler's.

By waiting until Germany had rearmed, war against Hitler cost tens of millions of lives and ruined the economy of Western Europe for decades afterwards. And of course, Germany only had conventional weapons at its disposal. A nuclear armed Iran poses an existential threat to every country, including America, within range of its ballistic missiles. And that does not even begin to consider the threat to the U.S. and the entire world from nuclear proliferation throughout the deeply unstable Middle East. All it would take would be one EMP to devastate half the United States. All it would take would be three or four dirty bombs to shut down our major ports and gut our economy.

We can only hope that Congress stops this insanity before Obama inks a deal, and then that the next President has the stones to begin dealing with Iran's theocracy. The window for doing that at minimal cost in blood and gold is closing fast, even if Obama's suicidal deal is not inked.

Well, there you have it!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it... or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter... ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Jew Hatred, Cellphones And Boycotts

 

Orange Telecom is a huge French company involved in the global telecom market. Among its global partners is an Israeli company called Partner Communications, which provides Orange with a piece of the lucrative Israeli cellphone market in exchange for being allowed to use Orange's name.

 

A couple of days ago, the company's CEO, Stephane Richard, speaking at a news conference in Egypt made it very clear that he wanted to sever ties with Israel to join the BDS movement, saying he would "sever ties tomorrow" except for the danger of getting sued for violation of contract.

“Believe me I would cancel the contract tomorrow if I could,” Richard said. His comments were reported by the Daily News Egypt. The reasons he gave for doing business in Israel were that Orange could not cancel without being sued by Partner Communications.

"I know that it is a sensitive issue here in Egypt, but not only in Egypt... We want to be one of the trustful partners of all Arab countries."

In answers to questions about Orange's profit from the Israeli market being a factor, he claimed that that "the interest for us is certainly not a financial interest."

"If you take those amounts on one side and on the other side the time that we spend to explain this, to try to find a solution and the consequences that we have to manage here but also in France, believe me it's a very bad deal."

Mais oui...the consequences of explaining to possible customers in the Arab world and in France that they do business with the Jews! Pauvre Monsieur Richard...

Needless to say, the Israelis did not exactly appreciate his remarks, and asked for clarifications.

And they got them, with suspicious speed. Today, Orange unilaterally cancelled its contract with Partner, essentially telling the Israeli company 'sue me.'

Did I mention that the French government has a 25% stake in Orange Telecom? That, of course, is the heart of the matter. A big factor in the Socialist Hollande government winning the last French presidential election was their carrying the Muslim vote almost in a solid bloc. Without that support and the support of the anti-Israel Left, there's no way Hollande and the Socialists win.

Underlining this, French Ambassador to the U.S. Gerard Araud suddenly went public and defended Orange Telecom's illegal actions 'because of the settlements and the occupation.'

Of course, Ambassador Araud didn't mention what sovereign country Judea and Samaria belonged to when Israel 'occupied' their territory, but such matters apparently escape sophisticated Europeans like him. What matters is that diplomats don't make public statements like this unless their government okays it. And companies don't make illegal moves like this exposing them to litigation unless a 25% stakeholder goes along with it.

This is a reflection of the current state of affairs in France. In spite of all the platitudes denouncing anti-semitism, Jews continue to be assaulted in France with distressing regularity even in neighborhoods formerly considered safe and property is routinely vandalized, while the French government has responded by actually reducing security for the country's Jewish communities and institutions.

The only major French politician who seems to be serious about protecting France's Jews is Marine Le Pen of the National Front. The current government is not.

France is also rumored to be working closely with Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to draft a UN resolution recognizing a Palestinian State on the pre 1967 lines that includes dividing Jerusalem and creating half a million Jewish refugees.

The French government has simply chosen sides in this war.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, in a statement, "I call on the French government to publicly denounce the despicable statement and miserable actions of a company that is under partial French government ownership.”

Israeli-American media mogul Haim Saban, who holds a controlling share of Partner Communications, accused Orange Telecom of reacting to pressure from anti-Semitic groups.

“Partner is an Israeli firm in every sense. We signed a contract with them and we are considering our steps in the wake of their statement,” Saban told Ynet.

Orange “conceded to pressures from all sorts of anti-Semitic bodies,” he was quoted as saying on Channel 2. “In each generation they rise up to destroy us — we are strong and we will be united and fight them.”

The interesting part of that remark is that Saban is en route to Las Vegas, Nevada to meet with others who have to muscle to do just that.

A group of Jewish billionaires like Saban and Sheldon Adelson are meeting to create a strategy on combating Israel boycott efforts.

Adelson himself had some pithy things to say about the matter. The French government “de facto owns Orange,” he said. “The French government should speak out and dissociate itself from the head of Orange in France.”

Adelson also criticized the Israeli government -and rightfully so, in my opinion - for not setting up and funding an organization to fight anti-Israel boycotts and attempts to delegitimize Israel.

The way forward is pretty easy to define.

Right now, less than 2 percent of the agricultural and industrial products Israel exports to the EU originate in Judea and Samaria, while Israel as a whole imports far more from the EU than the EU buys from Israel (about $26.7 vs. $18.3 billion). Moreover, most of what Israel imports from the EU could easily be replaced by new imports from Asia, Australia and the United States.

So Europe stands to lose a lot more than Israel from ridiculous boycotts, and most of the EU knows it. What's really needed is a good object example to drive the lesson home.

Saban, Adelson and their group could start by advertising online and in major media advising Israel's friends, Jewish and non-Jewish, to boycott everything French..its wines, brandies and liqueurs, its cheeses, its perfumes, its electronics, fashions, everything. They could publish a 'do not patronize' list of French products, and encourage Israel's supporters not to visit France and spend money there. This would be devastatingly effective in America.

Israelis could be assisted in participating by the government of Israel insisting that all French goods imported to Israel, even goods partially manufactured in France or with French components be clearly and prominently labeled as such.

At the same time, Orange Telecom should be aggressively pursued in court for breach of contract and for damages to Partner Communication. I'm certain Haim Saban is already laying the groundwork for that.

That's the best way to destroy the BDS movement and governments leaning towards institutionalizing it. Make France the example of the high price that entails, not just with Israel but with its friends around the world.

 

Crossposted at the Times of Israel

The Council Has Spoken! Our Watcher's Council Results

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

""No solution can be reached with terror except by striking it with an iron fist." " - Syrian Leader Basher Assad

Peace is purchased from strength. It's not purchased from weakness or unilateral retreats. - Benyamin Netanyahu


"You don't despair about something like the Middle East, you just do the best you can."- PJ O'Rourke

"Above all, it is not decency or goodness of gentleness that impresses the Middle East, but strength."
- Meir Kahane





This week's winning essay by a hair is Joshuapundit's Syria Splits Apart As Assad Digs In Against ISIS . While the main focus of attention for the media these days is on Iraq, interesting things are going on in Syria that could shape the Middle East for some time, and this was my take on it.Here's a slice:

 

While a lot of attention is being paid to ISIS's successes in Iraq, few people have been watching the changes going on in Syria.

As I predicted just shy of three years ago, Syria, a made up country to begin with appears to be fracturing pretty much along the lines I saw back then.

Assad's hold on Syria depended on two things - how long the carnage could continue on one side or the other before it reached the point of no return and how long the Russians, Hezbollah and Iran would continue to support him. That point has apparently been reached with a quarter of a million deaths and the reduction of Assad's army from its beginning strength at 300,000 to something like 175,000 men from Assad's regular army, pro-regime Syrian militias and foreign fighters mostly from Hezbollah and Iran.

He simply no longer has the forces necessary to hold all of Syria. And his allies are gradually moving on.

The latest gain for ISIS was their successful offensive on the ancient city of Palmyra in Eastern Syria,which gave them a strategic path to assaults on the regime's key cities of Homs and Hama. If they're successful, they would literally cut off Damascus from the rest of Assad's territory.

The victory by Isis was celebrated Old School style:

Islamic State militants have executed at least 400 mostly women and children in Syria’s ancient city of Palmyra

Eye-witnesses have reported the streets are strewn with bodies – the latest victims of the Islamic State’s unrelenting savagery – on the same day photographs of captured Syrian soldiers have emerged.

It follows the killing of nearly 300 pro-government troops two days after they captured the city, now symbolised by a black ISIS flag flying above an ancient citadel.

As an added bonus, ISIS freed a large number of jihadis held in Palmyra's notorious Tadmur Prison.

What Assad is hoping for now is that he has enough troops to hold on to his strategic corridor in North and west Syria..Damascus, Homs and Hama and the coast areas of Latakia and Tartus, key cities where the majority of Alawites, Assad's Shi'ite oriented sect live.

What he's doing is attempting a strategic withdrawal into territory his forces are better able to hold,something his allies are likely insisting on because their own commitments are becoming strained.

For the Russians, supplying Assad with the tools of the trade has become an expensive proposition, one Russia has increasing difficulty meeting. Putin is still selling Assad ammunition and other supplies, but the Russians have cut way back on the more expensive toys like attack helicopters and are taking a wait and see attitude.

As Hezbollah's casualties have increased in Syria, its leader Sheik Nasrallah has come under massive pressure to cut back on the number of troops being sent to Syria from Lebanon. Hezbollah troops are still fighting in Qalamoun along the Lebanese border,one of the few areas where the Assad regime is taking the offensive, but massive casualties incurred during Assad's failed offensive in February on Aleppo have taken their toll.

This all puts a great deal of pressure on Iran. Aside from the financial cost, the strategic cost is huge. As Assad is forced into a defensive redoubt, the Shi'te bloc Iran thought it was creating from Tehran to Beirut is increasingly unlikely, especially with the pressure ISIS is putting on Iran's Shi'ite allies in Iraq. They will undoubtedly have to commit a lot more resources, human and otherwise just to keep Assad holding on.

For Basher Assad, his task will be to hold on to Damascus, the highways between Damascus and Beruit and Damascus and Homs, as well as the coast cities like Latakia and Tartous. With his reduced supply lines and less territory to defend, Assad has a decent shot at hanging on, especially since his part of Syria would contain about half of the country's population.


More at the link, including an interesting update on ISIS's latest moves.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Western Journalism – Why The Mass Media Are Silent On The Largest Human Rights Disaster Of Our Time submitted by Joshuapundit. It features a must-see video by Ray Ibrahim that explains exactly why the mass media are keeping quiet.

Here are this week’s full results. Only Don Surber was unable to vote this week, but was not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners

• *First place with 3 2/3 votes!-Joshuapundit-Syria Splits Apart As Assad Digs In Against ISIS


• Second place with 3 1/3 votes –Bookworm Room – Gender identity: Who are you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes? *UPDATED*


• Third place with 1 2/3 votes –Don Surber – Carly Goes Reagan


• Fourth place with 1 vote –The Razor – Here vs There


• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Ask Marion – New Polls: Palin Slams Bush and Clinton


• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote –The Noisy Room – Cities on Fire: Phoenix


• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –The Independent Sentinel – Future Democratic Voters Flooding Into the U.S.


• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –The Right Planet – Oleg Atbashian: What Surprised Me in America: An Immigrant’s Account of the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly


• Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote –The Glittering Eye -The Swiss Do It Again"

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 2 2/3 votes! –Western Journalism – Why The Mass Media Are Silent On The Largest Human Rights Disaster Of Our Time submitted by Joshuapundit


• Second place with 1 1/3 votes –Politically Short – Assassinating The American Spirit Of Independence submitted by The Right Planet


• Third place *t* with 1 vote – Andrew Malcolm – Obama warns global warming could maybe make hurricanes worse, if we had any submitted by Don Surber


• Third place *t* with 1 vote –Walt Heyer/Public Discourse-"Sex Change" Surgery: What Bruce Jenner, Diane Sawyer, and You Should Know submitted by Bookworm Room


• Third place *t* with 1 vote –Gay Patriot –Leftists Stand Up for Freedom of Certain Religions submitted by Rhymes With Right


• Third place *t* with 1 vote – The American Interest –How We're Failing in the Middle East submitted by The Razor


• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes -Mark Steyn –The Dull Thud of a New Yorker Towel Snap submitted by The Noisy Room


• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes -Orin Kerr/The Volokh Conspiracy – "If I understand the history correctly…" submitted by The Glittering Eye


• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes -David French/NRO -Brice 'Caitlyn' Jennings needs Our Prayers submitted by Nice Deb


• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes -Dave Huber/ The College Fix –Anti-Semitism, Free Speech, and Progressivism" submitted by The Wstcher


• Fourth place *t* with 2/3 votes - Robert Tracinski/The Federalist – 7 Way To Roll Back The Welfare State submitted by The Watcher


• Fifth place with 1/3 vote -Reclaim Our Republic -Hillary a ‘money-hungry hypocrite’, Bill ‘showing early signs of dementia’- Trial Set for RICO claims against Clintons submitted by Ask Marion


• Fifth place with 1/3 vote -Victory Girls–Executive Fiat: DOJ’s Loretta Lynch to Release ‘More Than a Dozen’ New Gun Control Regs submitted by VA Right!

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Obama’s Cynical Synagogue Speech

 

by David Gerstman

President Obama’s speech a week and a half ago at Washington D.C. synagogue Adas Israel was alternatively promoted as both an opportunity to address the scourge of anti-semitism, and a chance to reach out to American Jews. The speech did nothing to advance either goal and was tone-deaf to any Jews, or Americans for that matter, who don’t buy into the president’s foreign policy.
As far as his reaching out, the president simply rehashed all of his administration’s arguments about closing off Iran’s paths to a nuclear weapon. He offered nothing new. Of course, he said that the deal he’s trying to make with Iran will make Israel safer. He made a point of saying that he shares the goal with Israel of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons; but he said it with no real conviction. He was just repeating a talking point. Repeating all of his talking points isn’t going to convince someone who doesn’t already agree with him.

Notably, he repeated his 2012 line about having Israel’s back. But with Israel’s political establishment – Isaac Herzog is no less skeptical of the emerging deal than Benjamin Netanyahu is – doubting the efficacy of the ongoing diplomacy, that claim hardly seems credible. He says that he welcomes debate, but the night before Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Congress, Obama gave an interview to Reuters attempting to undercut Netanyahu’s arguments.


Instead of addressing reservations with the deal, Obama simply repeated his own arguments. Again that’s not how you convince doubters.

The same dynamic was at work when he discussed the peace process.

And it is precisely because I care so deeply about the state of Israel — it’s precisely because, yes, I have high expectations for Israel the same way I have high expectations for the United States of America — that I feel a responsibility to speak out honestly about what I think will lead to long-term security and to the preservation of a true democracy in the Jewish homeland. (Applause.) And I believe that’s two states for two peoples, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. (Applause.) Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people on their land, as well. (Applause.)

Now, I want to emphasize — that’s not easy. The Palestinians are not the easiest of partners. (Laughter.) The neighborhood is dangerous. And we cannot expect Israel to take existential risks with their security so that any deal that takes place has to take into account the genuine dangers of terrorism and hostility.

But what’s been noticeable about President Obama’s approach to the peace process since he’s been president is that because he has such “high expectations” of Israel, he only expects efforts from Israel. He’s asked nothing of the Palestinians. (This conceit prompted Eli Lake to ask why Obama couldn’t care a little bit less about Israel.)

Last year Israel’s former peace negotiator Tzipi Livni told an interviewer that last year’s American-sponsored peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians were torpedoed by Mahmoud Abbas, who refused to accept an American-sponsored framework that Netanyahu reluctantly accepted. When that happened there were no administration leaks about how Abbas was missing a historic opportunity or questions about his commitment to peace. And there was certainly no public haranguing of the Palestinian leader. Is there any reason to expect that when President Obama decides its time to start a new peace process he won’t demand some upfront concessions by Netanyahu to convince the Palestinians to negotiate?

In other words, whether addressing Iran or the Israeli-Palestinian issue, Obama offered no reason for a skeptic to change his mind. So his purpose was clearly not outreach.

And what about anti-semitism? Obama’s mentions of anti-semitism were general. He spoke of it as a “scourge,” but didn’t address a single specific instance of official anti-semitism. Why not? In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg earlier in the week Goldberg asked him about the official anti-semitism of Iran, so it isn’t like Obama could claim ignorance of the issue. Robert Wistrich, perhaps the world’s top authority on anti-semitism, passed away a few days before Obama spoke, but Obama didn’t mention his name.

Neither of the purported reasons for Obama’s talk were addressed (seriously) by the president. As Michael Doran noted, in A Letter to My  Liberal Jewish Friends, published last week in Mosaic Magazine, Obama was speaking specifically to the “liberal Jewish community.” You could say he was preaching to the choir, making sure that one of his most loyal constituencies doesn’t stray. The pre-speech PR was misdirection, to make the president appear conciliatory and magnanimous. The speech itself was motivated by cynical self-interest.

Doran goes through the various reasons the president chose to speak as he did at the synagogue, but in the end he comes down to what was Obama’s likely calculation.

The president’s sophistry demonstrates a simple but profound truth: his commitment to the progressive values of tikkun olam is governed by its own “red lines,” and is entirely utilitarian. Which again raises the question: what was his purpose in stressing this shared progressive commitment in his address to you, and what was his purpose in subtly reminding you of the costs of failing to abide by its terms?

The answer, I hope, is obvious. On June 30, Obama will likely conclude a nuclear deal with Iran. This will spark a faceoff with Congress, which has already declared its opposition to the deal. Congress will inevitably pass a vote of disapproval, which Obama will inevitably veto. In order to defend that veto from a congressional override, however, he must line up 34 Senators—all Democrats. This calls in turn for a preemptive ideological campaign to foster liberal solidarity—for which your support is key. If the president can convince the liberal Jewish community, on the basis of “shared values,” to shun any suspicion of alignment with congressional Republicans or Benjamin Netanyahu, he will have an easier time batting down Congress’s opposition to the deal with Iran.

I think Doran is correct. Obama knows that a deal with Iran is not popular. He also knows that despite the limits that Corker-Menendez puts on him, it still means that a future nuclear deal with Iran will stand if the Senate cannot override his veto, even if Congress is not convinced that he made a good deal and initially votes the deal down.

As more news stories like Tuesday’s that Iran has increased its enriched uranium by 20% since the Joint Plan of Action was agreed even as Obama and his administration insist that Iran has abided by its terms, skepticism of the deal will only increase.

So as Doran pointed out, President Obama was asking his hardest core supporters to stand by him and ensure that minority who will support his bad deal with Iran will be a big enough minority to ensure that the deal stands.

crossposted at Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

Our Weasel Of The Week!!

Once again, It's time to present this week's statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!

Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they’ve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week's nominees were all disgusting but one of them stood out as an almost unanimous choice. The envelope please....




The Monster Who Tortured And Abused This Dog


Don Surber: The known-only-to-God-and-the-Devil expletive who did this. The bastard.

Ah, but he's not only known to G-d and the devil anymore, but to the world.



This man (and I use the term loosely) is William Leonard Dodson, of Charleston, South Carolina's northside Chicora Cherokee neighborhood and he's  in much better conditions than he left a helpless animal.

Caitlyn, a 15-month old Staffordshire Bull Terrier mix was left chained up with her muzzle taped tightly shut with electrical tape. That meant the dog was left in intense pain for what authorities estimate was 48 hours without being able to eat or drink, and her ability to cool herself was impaired.

The dog eventually broke free and was found on a neighbor's porch, who turned her into the local animal shelter for treatment. Because her teeth were clamped down by the tape on to her tongue and the blood flow was cut off, a large part of it may have to be amputated, affecting her ability to drink or cool herself normally by panting for the rest of her life.

In fact, it was one of Dodson's neighbors who turned him in:

Court documents allege Dodson purchased the dog, which was known as "Diamond" at the time, for $20 on May 25. A witness who said she sold him the dog told investigators Dodson approached the woman who sold him the dog and said he had taped the dog's face with electrical tape because she would not stop barking. The witness said Dodson was laughing about the claim, court documents state.

Dodson also reportedly told the witness he had chained the dog in his front yard but that the dog had broken free and escaped, the affidavit states.

The dog was found the following day, Wednesday morning, on someone's doorstep with electrical tape wrapped around her muzzle.

A medical report from Veterinary Emergency Care described the dog's muzzle as "markedly swollen with evidence of tape around its muzzle," and its tongue as "significantly swollen, significantly bruised, discolored (dark purple) and oozing blood," court documents state.

After this story broke, donations for Caitlyn's treatment poured in from as far away as Mexico, Ireland, Australia, Guatemala, England, Germany, New Zealand, the Czech Republic, Canada, Belgium, Scotland, Indonesia, Estonia, the Philippines, Iceland, Hungary and Japan as well as from many people in the United States. If she heals, Caitlyn has a waiting list of fifty people who have applied to adopt her.

Dodson was was issued a $50,000 surety bond Tuesday by Magistrate Priscilla Baldwin and told he had to surrender a second dog he has at his residence. He's been charged with felony animal cruelty, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years and/or a $5,000 fine.

As one Council member remarked, Dodson isn't quite Weasel material being simply cruel and sadistic. That's true, but while it's stretching it a bit, there more than a bit of weasel in treating a dog like this and then giggling about how clever you are and how this was going to teach the dog a lesson. You see, one thing Weasels have in common..they're largely amoral.And I'd be willing to bet better than even money that Dodson doesn't even think what he did was wrong.

You see, Dodson is a career criminal, with extensive convictions for drug and weapons violations:

At the time of his arrest Monday, Dodson was on probation for a weapons conviction and out of jail on bail on a more recent drug and gun charge.

Dodson was convicted in May 2013 of possession of a firearm by a convicted violent felon, sentenced to six years and put on probation, according to a criminal background check with the State Law Enforcement Division.

Dodson was arrested again this March and charged with possession of cocaine and unlawful carrying of a weapon, according to SLED. He was released from the Charleston County jail on $110,000 bail.

I'm sure these are just the latest highlights in a long career.

There's been a lot said about how 'warehousing criminals' is both expensive for society and morally wrong. So quite a few criminals simply get released early, or plea bargain to a shocking degree and get probation or sharply reduced penalties for lesser charges.

There is a fiscal argument there, but it falls apart when you consider the high cost, human and financial of repeat offenses, which are typically more egregious and deadly than prior ones.

The reason for that is because prison time is increasingly less of a deterrent these days, and not taken overly seriously by the William Leonard Dawsons of the world. Even the death penalty is hardly a deterrent these days when it consists of a painless drug cocktail administered after decades of appeals ad delays..if the death penalty is even applied at all.

No, I'm not advocating daily whipping or drawing and quartering murderers. But making prison a lot less pleasant and a lot more of a place to stay out of and bringing back the traditional methods of executions with limits on appeals might have an amazing effect of society and even encourage the William Leonard Dawsons to think twice.

Mr. Dawson isn't here to get his Weasel, which is fine by me. I will see to it that it's delivered to The Charleston Animal Society for him to pick up there. Being that it's the South, a place where many traditional values hold forth, I have a feeling some of the members might take the opportunity to make their feelings known about this to Mr. Dawson in a personal way if he shows up to obtain it. At any rate, I would hope so.

Well, there it is! 

Check back next Tuesday to see who next week's nominees for Weasel of the Week are!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum, and  remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Watcher's Council Nominations - Hard Left Turn Edition!

As Peter Wehner notes in Commentary, The Democrat Party has essentially become the party of the Far Left.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is running on positions that would have been considered art of the Leftist fringe only an election or two ago, and she has little choice even if she wanted to 'triangulate' because of how far the Democrat's mainstream has moved.

Her competition - former Maryland Governor Martin O' Malley and avowed socialist Senator Bernie Sanders are running to her left, as are well as Democrat heroes (and non-candidates so far) Elizabeth Warren and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.

The reception they're receiving in Democrat strongholds is an indication of exactly how far Left the party is now aligned. And the primaries seem to be headed for a hard sprint in that direction to win over that constituency.

Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:

The Council In Action!!

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton over at The Noisy Room was the main attraction as part of a fascinating panel on the Muslim Brotherhood over at blogtalk radio, and it can be heard here.

Tom White of VA Right continues to be the blogger to consult on Virginia politics. Here he is on the Tom Fredericks program on AM 820,the top rated show in his area:




This week, The Pirate's Cove, Blazing Cat Fur , Gates Of Vienna and Seraphic Secret earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning

Simple, no?

It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let's see what we have for you this week....

Council Submissions

• Joshuapundit-Syria Splits Apart As Assad Digs In Against ISIS


• Don Surber – Carly Goes Reagan


• The Noisy Room – Cities on Fire: Phoenix


• Bookworm Room – Gender identity: Who are you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes? *UPDATED*


• Ask Marion – New Polls: Palin Slams Bush and Clinton


• The Right Planet – Oleg Atbashian: What Surprised Me in America: An Immigrant’s Account of the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly


• GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – Jütland


• The Glittering Eye -The Swiss Do It Again"


• Rhymes With Right – RE: Bruce Jenner


• VA Right! - Senate Candidate Dunnavant (VA-12) DENIES McEachin’s Story Says Janis and McEachin Working Together Against Her.


• The Razor – Here vs There


• Nice Deb – Obama Worried a Terrorist Attack Could Happen if Senate Delays Renewal of Patriot Act


• The Independent Sentinel – Future Democratic Voters Flooding Into the U.S.

Honorable Mentions

• The Pirate's Cove - NY Times: Say, What If Every Other Country Put A Tariff On Imports From Non “Climate Club” Countries?


• Blazing Cat Fur - Toronto Public Library: Ann Coulter “Offensive”, Hitler Not So Much…


• Gates Of Vienna - The Man Who Would Be Caliph


• Seraphic Secret - Palestinian Authority Teaches Jew-Hatred to Children

Non-Council Submissions

• Western Journalism – Why The Mass Media Are Silent On The Largest Human Rights Disaster Of Our Time submitted by Joshuapundit


• Andrew Malcolm – Obama warns global warming could maybe make hurricanes worse, if we had any submitted by Don Surber


• Mark Steyn –The Dull Thud of a /New Yorker/ Towel Snap submitted by The Noisy Room


• Walt Heyer/Public Discourse-"Sex Change" Surgery: What Bruce Jenner, Diane Sawyer, and You Should Know submitted by Bookworm Room


• Reclaim Our Republic -Hillary a ‘money-hungry hypocrite’, Bill ‘showing early signs of dementia’- Trial Set for RICO claims against Clintons submitted by Ask Marion


• Politically Short – Assassinating The American Spirit Of Independence submitted by The Right Planet


• New York Times Book Review – Gaza: Killing Civilians Gets Easier for Israel submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD


• Orin Kerr/The Volokh Conspiracy – "If I understand the history correctly…" submitted by The Glittering Eye


• Gay Patriot –Leftists Stand Up for Freedom of Certain Religions submitted by Rhymes With Right


• Victory Girls–Executive Fiat: DOJ’s Loretta Lynch to Release ‘More Than a Dozen’ New Gun Control Regs submitted by VA Right!


• The American Interest –How We're Failing in the Middle East submitted by The Razor


• David French/NRO -Brice 'Caitlyn' Jennings needs Our Prayers submitted by Nice Deb


• Dave Huber/ The College Fix –Anti-Semitism, Free Speech, and Progressivism" submitted by The Wstcher


• Robert Tracinski/The Federalist – 7 Way To Roll Back The Welfare State submitted by The Watcher


• PC Magazine – 6 Features Disappearing in Windows 10 (and How to Replace Them) submitted by The Watcher

Enjoy! And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..'cause we're cool like that!And don't forget to tune in Friday for the results!

Our Weasel Of The Week Nominations!!

It's time once again for the Watcher's Council's 'Weasel Of The Week' nominations, where we pick our choices to compete for the award of the famed Golden Weasel to a public figure who particularly deserves to be slimed and mocked for his or her dastardly deeds during the week. Every Tuesday morning, tune in for the Weasel of the Week nominations!

Here are this weeks' nominees....

 
The Monster Who Tortured And Abused This Dog


Don Surber: The known-only-to-God-and-the-Devil expletive who did this. The bastard.

UPDATE: The monster's been caught.


 
 Racialist Cop Hater and Baltimore City Attorney Marilyn Mosby!!

 The Noisy Room : I nominate for Weasel of the Week, Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby for pulling an Anthony Weiner and claiming her Twitter account was hacked after two controversial tweets were “favorited” by a personal Twitter account belonging to her. The first tweet referred to the officers charged in the death of Freddie Gray as “those 6 THUG cops” and the other praised Mosby and claimed she “INFURIATES a certain kind of white person.” Her office is now claiming that these acts were conducted by some shadowy hacker. It's amazing to me that these politicians can't behave on social media and when they get caught, they always blame some nefarious nerd for their bad behavior.

From The Blaze:

“Both Mosby’s official Twitter account and her personal account were hacked,” the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office reportedly told “The Kelly File” on Wednesday. “We do not know how long it’s been going on, we are working with Twitter.”
Mosby revealed on May 23 that her official government Twitter account had been hacked, but did not mention her personal account being compromised. Further, the tweets in question were favorited by her personal account weeks before her government account was reportedly hacked.

How convenient that only two Tweets were hacked on a Twitter account that wasn't reported hacked at all - I'm sure it's just a massive coincidence that the two Tweets are highly racist, offensive and just so happen to paint her as the cop-hater and grand-stander she really is. She's just the kind of weasel Progressive that Obama hearts.

 
Secretary Of State John Kerry - Did You know He Served In Vietnam?

Virginia Right! : John Kerry took a break from negotiations with Iran on a nuclear deal to have a little fun in the world of competitive cycling. The rigors of the Tour de France circuit are pretty daunting. And Kerry is 71 years old. et he decided to risk his health and limb on a bicycle.

And he broke his hip or leg. Apparently the hip replacement surgery he had a while back is pretty close to the break.

So first and foremost, he is an idiot.

But more importantly, Iran now miraculously has more time to refine nuclear material while the talks are on hold.

So, did John Kerry break his hip on purpose to help Iran develop the bomb? Of course not! His leg isn't really broken. He is faking it. (Ok. That is for my conspiracy theory friends.)

I am sure he broke his leg. And it was nothing more than complete stupidity. But it does throw a monkey wrench in the Iran talks and gives them what they need most - more time.

And as if that were not enough, Kerry had his doctor flown to Europe and accompany him on his return flight to the US for treatment. In a military transport jet that usually carries 100 soldiers.

Kerry probably added 2 degrees to global warming on his trip back home.

The Daily Mail reports:

"A US military C-17 transport aircraft that usually carries at least 100 troops flew to Geneva Airport to pick up Secretary of State John Kerry and fly him to Boston where he'll be treated for a broken leg.

The Air Force plane touched down in Switzerland on Monday after taking off from a US base in Ramstein, Germany, and then heading to Massachusetts after collecting the 71-year-old politician.

Kerry tweeted out 'big thanks' to his well-wishers and said he looked forward to getting his leg set and getting back to work at the State Department. "

 
 Noo Yawk Dummy-crat, 2nd Amendment Hater  and Insurance Company Prostitute   Carolyn B. Maloney!!

 JoshuaPundit : The thing about weasels is that they love to disguise their self-serving evil as virtue, as something 'everybody knows' and 'every decent person supports.'  When you hear that coming out of someone's mouth, it's a dead giveaway you're talking to a totalitarian lovin' prog fascist.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney has a bill she's submitting in the House that would require Americans who choose to avail themselves of the freedoms given to them by the 2nd Amendment to  purchase mandatory liability insurance. 

“We require insurance to own a car, but no such requirement exists for guns," Maloney said in a statement. "The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade, but gun fatalities continue to rise.”

Maloney said auto insurance carriers incentivize drivers to take precautions to reduce accidents, but no such incentives exist for firearm owners.

Of course, aside from being unconstitutional, there are two outright lies in that statement. First, there's no insurance requirement to own and drive a car. While most people buy it, especially if they have a vehicle of some value,  Every state in the union allows a cash bond to be  posted by a prospective car owner  in lieu of insurance. And there is no requirement to obtain insurance when you buy a vehicle. That's why most policies include uninsured motorist coverage.

And gun fatalities aren't rising. They've been falling for some time, and are down 49% from 1993.

Ah, but here's where the real weasel touch comes in. Guess who Ms. Maloney's biggest campaign contributors are? 

Why yes! It's the insurance companies, who stand to make a nice chunk o' change if this idiocy went through. 

The bill is almost certainly headed nowhere, but this way, Ms. Maloney cans say she tried to her donors. And may I add that this legislation, like most gun control  merda taurorum is racist and  elitest as well, since it discriminates against minorities and the poor whom need to defend themselves? Sounds wonderful, doesn't it, from a privileged congress weasel with the best security money can buy - courtesy of the U.S, tax payers she wants to disarm so badly.

   Well, there it is. What a despicable group of  Weasels...ANY OF THEM COULD WIN! Check back Thursday to see which Weasel walks off with the statuette of shame!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum.

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Forum:What Effect Will The Busload Of GOP Candidates Have On 2016?

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What Effect Will The Busload Of GOP Candidates Have On 2016?


Ask Marion : I’d say the biggest immediate issue with nearly 20 Republican presidential primary candidates is logistics. Where do you put them all for the first couple of debates, before the numbers thin? How do you fit them all on one stage in the first debate set for August? Do you leave some out, including current and former governors and senators? Or do you hold two different debates in one night — with nine or ten candidates in one hour, and another nine or ten the next? And would either of those approaches be fair? Those were all questions after an earlier suggestion that Republicans might cap the first debate to nine… to twelve participants, which would mean that some prominent names might be excluded. The National Journal reports that the Republican National Committee (RNC) is now walking back the talk about a cap.

On the flip side, the Republican bench is deep and wide giving America some real choices while the Democrat Party has Hillary… yesterday’s politician, equally old and problematic Elizabeth Warren, old self-avowed socialist Bernie Sanders and a couple stragglers.

I say the greater issues for the GOP are:

The Republicans’ lack cohesiveness and a strategy, plus they have let the Dems get far ahead of them in the use of technology, however often underhanded, in getting out the vote!

Plus the Republican Establishment, who runs the RNC, favors the moderates and ignores some of the candidates that would be the true answers to America’s problems and just might be the dark horse winners. They along with the progressive media have even convinced some staunch conservatives not to follow their heart out of fear.

In today’s climate, the 2016 elections, especially after the GOP’s landslide in 2014, should be theirs, if those obstacles can be surmounted and if the base gets out to vote.

 Virginia Right! : We have a massive field of candidates already ranging from very good to very bad (in my not so humble opinion).

Having such a large number of candidates can be cumbersome, but it is good to get the ideas out all across the party spectrum. As Jeb Bush struggles in every category but money, it lets the Republicans who watch these things closely know that money may not be the deciding factor.

After 8 years of national devastation by Democrats, the last thing voters are clamoring for is another dynasty. Especially a Bush dynasty.

One of the most dramatic effects of the large field is the effect on the polls. The liberal press is positively awash in glory as Hillary tops pretty much every Republican in their "head to head" polling. But remember, these are the same pollsters that called the UK elections too close to call and completely missed the blowout for the Conservative party and let's not forget the abysmal results of the last US election where the polls showed Democrats doing much better than they actually did.

Now toss in the huge Republican field and there is absolutely no way any "head to head" polling will produce any meaningful results. Few people are really paying attention at this point, and the responses cannot be trusted. Many Republicans will pick Hillary in a poll over a Republican candidate that is not to their liking. I'd probably pick Hillary in a poll over Lindsey Graham or Chris Christie. But I wouldn't vote for her on election day.

And we now have O'Malley entering the race along with elderly Socialist kook Bernie Sanders. So far, the Democrats have only had Hillery to pick from. If nothing else, O'Malley will provide some of the Democrat on Democrat mud slinging that has been the mainstay of the GOP so far.

It is much too early to get too worked up on the large field. We are still 18 months away. The cannibalism has just begun. And the dialog will be interesting and enlightening as time goes by.


 JoshuaPundit : Ah hah hah hah!!! The Stupid Party strikes again. This is absolutely the Left's dream come true.

20 or so candidates, all kissing up to the legacy media for space, all fighting tooth and nail like a pack of wild dogs for the same donor money, all saying things it will be impossible for the average low information voter to keep track of,, and ultimately boring quite a few of them. The Democrats will appear focused and centered by comparison, especially with the media helping them,



 And of course, all providing oppo research,nasty quotes  and video loops free of charge to the Democrats on whomever survives the massacre. Since most of them label themselves as conservatives, one beneficiary will likely be Jeb Bush. This is exactly how we wound up with John McCain and Mitt Romney.

There are really only two possible bright spots I see. Hopefully we'll be down to 3 or so serious candidates by the end of 2015. And two, if this many clowns are vying to be ringmaster of the circus, the real polls they've commissioned as opposed to the propaganda fed to the peasants by the media must be a lot more favorable to a Republican in the White House than we're being lead to believe.

The Glittering Eye : The large Republican field tells us several things. Keep in mind that every U. S. senator at least at some point imagines him or herself a president-in-waiting. One of the things that the large field tells us is that there are a lot of youngish but very senior Republican senator and governors or ex-governors. That's sometimes referred to as a "deep bench" but I think that's overly kind.

The other thing that it tells us is that today's Republican Party, although much more ideological than it used to be, still brings together some pretty disparate elements. Social conservatives, libertarians, and the "Republican establishment" (to the extent that there is a Republican establishment any more). That would yield a minimum of three candidates if each candidate represented only one of those elements. But they don't. They represent combinations of those elements plus a few others so it shouldn't be surprising that there are a lot of candidates.

As an outsider the advice I'd offer is to heed Reagan's old Eleventh Commandment: thou shalt not speak ill of they fellow Republican. They should keep their sights trained on the president, Hillary Clinton, and the Democrats. Speaking ill of Republicans is the press's job.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason: : What is a Republican? Looking at the cast of candidates and potential candidates running for president on the GOP ticket, very few can be considered true Republicans. Traditionally, a Republican is someone who supports free market capitalism, limited federal government, conservative social values, a strong military, and above all respects the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.

Who among the current candidates can be counted as a true Republican? I believe this is what is hurting the party, and not necessarily the number of candidates. The big government progressives who call themselves Republicans are hurting the base and the party platform. Libertarian Rand Paul has the Young Republicans’ support for all the wrong reasons. It is becoming more and more difficult for the average voter to know where a candidate stands and that they can be trusted to keep their campaign promises once elected.

Sadly, I expect the number of candidates will hurt the party leading up to the presidential election in 2016, dividing Republican voters based on the issues most important to them. I also believe this will help propel Jeb Bush to the top of the list as the candidates drop out and throw their support, and money, behind him.

Wolf Howling : What a deep bench the Republicans are fielding this year, with sixteen people declared or expected to declare soon. It is an embarrassment of riches, and the amazing thing is that most of them are serious candidates who could in fact gain the nomination. There are just a few - Donald Trump, Chris Christie and Lindsey Graham - who, in my view, likely stand no chance. This deep field stands in direct contrast to the Democrat field of one tired old scandal ridden lady.

The problem for Republicans will be to quickly winnow the field. Inevitably, some who are worthy of consideration are going to get shafted because of limitations on who will be able to appear at the initial debates. But still, by the time the later rounds of the primaries arrive, we should have several strong candidates who have distinguished themselves from the pack. I think this is good for the party. It adds a real element of drama to the race, and that should capture national attention and most of the headlines as the primary season unfolds.

Bookworm Room: Considering how often the mainstream media cuts conservative voices out of the debate, there's something to be said for having a wide variety of conservatives advocating their particular brand of conservativism, from Rand Paul's loopy libertarianism (I prefer the Charles Murray variety myself) to Mike Huckabee's old-fashioned southern Democrat demagoguery dressed up as conservativism, each of them adds something.

My fear, of course, is that Americans, rather than listening to the candidates, will tune out the tumult of voices -- especially after the mainstream media gets done pillorying them as racists, homophobes, misogynists, warmongers, wacko birds, and whatever other labels it can stick on people who believe in the Constitution and believe in a constitutional America. My hope is that the most articulate voices among the crowd, such as Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, or Carly Fiorina, even if they don't prevail in the primaries, are able to turn voters on to the virtues of a true constitutional republic.

My other fear is that the big money in politics (including Left-wing groups intent upon making mischief), will keep Jeb's candidacy afloat long enough for disaffected, confused, or disgusted voters to go for a familiar name.

Bottom line: Win or lose, these candidates have the potential to be good. They also create an irresistible target for the MSM, which will treat the Republican primary like a turkey shoot -- and unfortunately, the establishment Republicans, like the pledges in Animal House, will bend over and show the target on their craven backsides:





GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD :Most likely solidify the message.

Also put an especial emphasis on Nat'l Security and Foreign Policy. Iowa will tell the tale - a culling if ye will - getting the top tier cats on the top tier. For now - the more the merrier!

Well, there you have it!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it... or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter... ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Islamophobia?? Diet Coke?? You Decide

Tahera Ahmad is a Muslim associate college chaplain at Northwestern University, in Illinois.Here is her FaceBook page entry describing what allegedly happened to her on a United Airlines flight (hat tip Memeorandum):

I am sitting on a United airlines flight in the air 30,000ft above and I am in tears of humiliation from discrimination. The flight attendant asked me what I would like to drink and I requested a can of diet coke. She brought me a can that was open so I requested an unopened can due to hygienic reasons. She said no one has consumed from the drink, but I requested an unopened can. She responded, "Well I'm sorry I just can't give you an unopened can so no diet coke for you." She then brought the man sitting next to me a can of UNOPENED beer. So I asked her again why she refused to give me an UNOPENED can of diet coke. She said, "We are unauthorized to give unopened cans to people because they may use it as a WEAPON on the plane." So I told her that she was clearly discriminating against me because she gave the man next to me an unopened can of beer. She looked at his can, quickly grabbed it and opened it and said, "it's so you don't use it as a weapon." Apphauled at her behavior I asked people around me if they witnessed this discriminatory and disgusting behavior and the man sitting in an aisle across from me yelled out to me, "you Moslem , you need to shut the F** up." I said, "what?!" He then leaned over from his seat, looked me straight in the eyes and said, "yes you know you would use it as a WEAPON so shut the f**k up." I felt the hate in his voice and his raging eyes. I can't help but cry on this plane because I thought people would defend me and say something. Some people just shook their heads in dismay.

"Tears of humiliation" over a can of Diet Coke? I have to admit that while that seems a little histrionic to me, a little too conveniently outraged, she's entitled to her own feelings and emotions.

But there are a couple of things about her account I find interesting.

First of all, I've never seen one instance on an airline of someone bringing a passenger a previously opened beverage can. The normal procedure is either (a) to open a midget soft drink can on front of you and pour the contents into a cup with ice or (b)to place the cup with ice on your tray, open the midget can in front of you and then leave it on your tray for you to pour yourself. The reason's obvious - they don't want any passenger cutting themselves opening an unopened can, disrupting the cabin service routine and suing the airline.

The stuff about them being a weapon? Have you seen how small these cans are? Maybe in munchkin land in the Wizard of Oz, but not on my planet unless they were filled with explosives, something unlikely considering the already stringent precautions.

Now, I also note that this happened on a United flight.

I would not fly on United ever unless I literally had no choice. In my experience, they are one of the worst airlines going.You see, United is employee owned and heavily unionized, so there's very little beyond the most basic minimum accountability on anything for their employees, and for the most part that quaint art known as customer service is rarely if ever practiced. The last time I had anything to do with United was several years ago when my son was flying home from Chicago as an unaccompanied minor, which I paid extra for. Somehow, they 'lost' him, which I wasn't told by the good people at United. No, they left it as a happy surprise for me to find out when his flight landed and he wasn't on it.

After being told twice snidely that they were 'making inquiries' about my young son stranded at O'Hare,  I lost it, loudly in the middle of a crowded terminal with a lot of potential United ticket buyers looking on. It took a major public rage fit at top volume on my part and a phone call to them from my lawyer for them to suddenly 'complete their inquiries,' find my son and put him on the next flight home.

The point I'm making here is that Ms. Ahmad might have had an altercation with one of United's flight attendants, but it might have had nothing to do with Islam. United says that the flight attendant 'tried several times' to fulfill Ms. Ahmad's drink request. Perhaps she didn't see the can being opened somehow, and her emotive  complaining about it might have ticked off the flight attendant, especially a United one. Anyone who flies knows that upsetting the flight crew can definitely earn you some retaliation. Or the flight attendant might have simply been having a bad day and after several attempts to please Ms. Ahmad simply told her whatever came to mind to shut her up and ignored her afterwards, leaving her with her 'tears of humiliation.'.

With all due respect, I frankly have difficulty believing the next part about anther passenger cursing her out and using religious  slurs. Her narration simply sounds too pat, too much straight out of CAIR's ridiculous 'flying while Muslim' storybook. Given what they throw people off of airplanes for these days, I'd want some unbiased witnesses before I credited this.In reality, it might have been someone telling her to shut up so he could enjoy the in-flight movie or get some rest, especially if she was sobbing her little heart out over a cup of diet coke.

I also wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't Ms,Ahmad's first high profile grievance. Or if a look back at some of her past statements reveals that she isn't particularly tolerant herself.

Needless to say, this incident is being trumpeted by CAIR and the other usual suspects as the reason to jump start a Muslim boycott of United.That could either hurt United or actually get them some additional business. I've already seen most of the joke ad slogans, so feel free to come up with yours.

I would end by saying this. No one deserves to be treated badly simply because of their faith but I also think that Muslims need to look at it from the other side of the telescope as well.

Before 9/11, flying was a lot more fun than it is now.  Because both the Bush and Obama administrations for various reasons have avoided security steps like profiling, all of us, Muslims included, have had to put up with a number of increasingly annoying regulations and personal indignities, including invasive TSA patdowns and expensive scanner screens that don't work.

Since then, we've also had underwear bombers, shoe bombers, imams on a plane who didn't need them demanding seat extenders (which actually can used as weapons) and acting in ways guaranteed to raise the suspicions  of their fellow passengers, and  a number of plots to blow up airliners, some of which came pretty close to succeeding. 

We've had the spectacle of Islamist groups like CAIR,   MPAC, and others telling Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement and the FBI in fighting domestic terrorism, something many Muslims have thankfully ignored.
                            


We've also discovered something else as a society in spite of numerous attempts to whitewash it. While the majority of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world are  happy to live peaceful lives,  there are a significant number whom aren't, and whom see Islamist terrorism as a fully justified activity of jihad, as a holy act sanctified by their religion. And they are by no means a fringe element. 

It would be contrary to human nature for Americans whom aren't Muslim not to look upon those whom are with some degree if apprehension and suspicion, especially on a plane. And that's something I think Muslims ought to take into consideration when they consider how they behave on an airliner and whether it's really a good idea to ramp up tension in the crew or the passengers.

Actually, I think that's true of everyone. But in view of recent history, perhaps thoughtful Muslims need to address that with special sensitivity.

UPDATE: As I suspected, Ms. Ahmad has a history of grievance mongering and intolerance of others.  And I haven't even bothered yet looking into what I'm almost certain are some interesting posts and remarks on Israel ...