Why Bibi's Speech Matters

[Kathianne]

Iran and holding Obama responsible:

http://freebeacon.com/columns/why-bibis-speech-matters/


The emerging nuclear deal with Iran is indefensible. The White House knows it. That is why President Obama does not want to subject an agreement to congressional approval, why critics of the deal are dismissed as warmongers, and why the president, his secretary of state, and his national security adviser have spent several weeks demonizing the prime minister of Israel for having the temerity to accept an invitation by the U.S. Congress to deliver a speech on a subject of existential import for his small country. These tactics distract public attention. They turn a subject of enormous significance to American foreign policy into a petty personal drama. They prevent us from discussing what America is about to give away.

And America is about to give away a lot. This week the AP reported on what an agreement with Iran might look like (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_IRAN_NUCLEAR_TALKS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT): sanctions relief in exchange for promises to slow down Iranian centrifuges for 10 years. At which point the Iranians could manufacture a bomb—assuming they hadn’t produced one in secret. Iran would get international legitimacy, assurance that military intervention was not an option, and no limitations on its ICBM programs, its support for international terrorism, its enrichment of plutonium, its widespread human rights violations, and its campaign to subvert or co-opt Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria. Then it can announce itself as the first Shiite nuclear power.

...
The alternative to a bad deal is not a better deal or tougher sanctions, Obama says, but war (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2015/01/22/obama-presents-false-choice-on-iran-nuclear-deal): “Congress should be aware that if this diplomatic solution fails, then the risks and likelihood that this ends up being at some point a military confrontation is heightened, and Congress will have to own that as well, and that will have to be debated by the American people.” The opponents of a nuclear Iran aren’t sincere, Obama explained to Senate Democrats last month (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/16/us/politics/obama-and-senator-robert-menendez-spar-on-how-to-handle-iran.html), but are merely acting at the behest of their (Jewish) donors. Congress has no role to play in either approving of or enforcing a deal with Iran, John Kerry says, because any attempt to strengthen America’s hand or verify that Iran is in compliance would be like “throwing a grenade (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-kerry-warns-against-iran-sanctions-bill/)” into the meeting room.


...

Netanyahu’s speech on Tuesday matters precisely because it is a rebuke to the Obama mode of politics to which America has become numb. Netanyahu’s refusal to back down in the face of political and media pressure, his insistence in making his case directly and emphatically, is as much a statement as any of the technical and strategic and moral claims he will make in his speech. And by going to war against Bibi, the White House has inadvertently raised the stature of his address from a diplomatic courtesy to a global event.
Netanyahu’s commitment to warning America about a nuclear Iran has given him the opportunity to explain just how devoid of merit the prospective deal is. His speech is proof that Congress is a co-equal branch of government where substantive argument can triumph over vicious personal attacks and executive overreach and utopian aspirations. Of course Barack Obama can’t stand it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Iran and holding Obama responsible:

http://freebeacon.com/columns/why-bibis-speech-matters/




Netanyahu v Obama: An Israeli campaigning in America ...

www.economist.com/.../21642241-israels-prime-minister-...

The Economist
Feb 7, 2015 - Israel's prime minister takes his re-election bid to Congress ... to boost Shimon Peres's flagging campaign against Mr Netanyahu—in vain. Israeli politicians working Congress with their lobbies in the face of a recalcitrant ... Mr Obama's people have so far limited their latest criticism to irate private asides and ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama's offensive against Netanyahu backfires - The ...

www.washingtonpost.com/...obamas...against.../5f800...

The Washington Post
Feb 2, 2015 - His offensive against Netanyahu isn't working. ... The Obama administration is going all out to see that Israeli Prime Minister ... Haaretz that “President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price. ... Bush was in office to help conservatives oust Prime Minister Tony Blair?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Obama Campaign Team Arrives in Israel to Defeat ...

www.breitbart.com/.../obama-campaign-team-arrives-in-israel-to...

Breitbart

Jan 26, 2015 - The Obama White House has aggressively worked to defeat allied leaders it ... Former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the left wing Labor ... at Obama's invitation to lobby the U.S. Congress against adopting a new .... Because some people in the US, especially Congress) have a severe ethnocentrist ...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


State Department-Funded Group Bankrolling Anti-Bibi ...

freebeacon.com/.../state-department-funded...

The Washington Free Beacon

Jan 27, 2015 - Former national field director for President Obama's 2012 reelection campaign ... Taler said the group would be working with V15 on voter registration and ... up with V15 because Israel “need[s] a prime minister and a government who ... Abbas, whose government has encouraged attacks against Israelis.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Obama's Top Election Aide Working To Defeat Netanyahu ...

dailycaller.com/.../obamas-top-election-aide-now-worki...

The Daily Caller

Jan 27, 2015 - If Bird was working against Obama's wishes, it would threaten the future of his firm ... Obama has repeatedly snubbed Netanyahu — he has pushed Israel into ... “We believe that it's critical that the majority of Israelis who are .... worked for Obama's re-election is now working to defeat the prime minister. keep ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BREAKING: State Department Funded 'Obama Army' On ...

www.libertynews.com/.../breaking-state-department-funded-obama-army...


Jan 28, 2015 - The Obama Administration is working overtime to lash out at Congress for ... faulty considering Obama has met other foreign leaders near their re-election time. ... effort in Israel aimed at defeating Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. ... which little happened, it's time to change course and give people hope.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Obama sends 5-man team to Israel to defeat Netanyahu in ...


www.bizpacreview.com/.../obama-sends-5-man-team-to-israel-to-defeat-...

Jan 27, 2015 - If Obama has a singular talent, it's this: He knows what it takes to win an ... The man is evil personified working with terrorist. .... He would NEVER support MUSLIM TERRORISTS, who come against HIS CHOSEN PEOPLE, ISRAEL. ..... just to embarrass Israel's prime minister hoping hoping to hurt Bibi in the
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Obama wages a war against Bibi getting re-elected. He sends teams over there to aid Bibi's political opponent..
So who is paying for that?
Is the President to be allowed to do this to our strongest ally in that region Israel?
Exactly how does it help this nation's interests and security?
Who does this action help?--Iran!!!

Obama just completely tossed an ally to side with a muslim enemy nation--that's treason..
And to give nukes to that enemy to be used on that former ally!!!!-Tyr

[Kathianne]

The Obama wages a war against Bibi getting re-elected. He sends teams over there to aid Bibi's political opponent..
So who is paying for that?
Is the President to be allowed to do this to our strongest ally in that region Israel?
Exactly how does it help this nation's interests and security?
Who does this action help?--Iran!!!

Obama just completely tossed an ally to side with a muslim enemy nation--that's treason..
And to give nukes to that enemy to be used on that former ally!!!!-Tyr

How is that 'treason?'

Article 3, Section 3:


Section 3.Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

How is that 'treason?'

Article 3, Section 3:


Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.


Oath of office.. That is how my friend. That oath is either showcase dressing or it is not.
No way is it in this nation's best interests and security to give nukes to Iran.
Obama bats for another team..-Tyr

[sundaydriver]

If the thought of inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress is to impart new information on the Iran deal to Americans, I question that. It seems to me that we already have been informed by the media and officials from both sides what is in the deal and what the implications are. The good or bad of it is up to us to decide to implement it or not. Bibi can only plead his case and we've pretty much already heard his view.

As for BO & Bibi not getting along and BO would like nothing better than to see Bibi lose his reelection and works towards that goal. Think back to Bush the 41st and James Baker doing the same to Shamir when our ways of accomplishing goals were in opposites and Bush wanted someone else as Israeli PM to better work with.

[Kathianne]

Oath of office.. That is how my friend. That oath is either showcase dressing or it is not.
No way is it in this nation's best interests and security to give nukes to Iran.
Obama bats for another team..-Tyr

Here's where the problems lies Tyr, why treason charges are seldom filed, the founders recognized how trouble could be caused, when other charges couldn't be proven, to bring treason to bear. Thus, they as usual were very precise with their words and meanings.

Try reading this, it's from a right leaning source:

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/3/essays/119/treason

and/or this:

http://judiciallearningcenter.org/article-3-and-the-courts/

[DLT]

Iran and holding Obama responsible:

http://freebeacon.com/columns/why-bibis-speech-matters/

This is what you get when you elect an enemy of America as the CIC....not just to one term, but to two. Could we expect any less of a disaster? And as Barry doubles down on his mission of destruction now, we will see the gloves come off and the mask totally slip off....

finally.

That is....if we live long enough. I fear that ....before these next two years is over....our enemy without, in cahoots with our enemy within, will take full advantage of who and what has his finger restrained from that 'nuclear retaliation button'.

[DLT]

The Obama wages a war against Bibi getting re-elected. He sends teams over there to aid Bibi's political opponent..
So who is paying for that?
Is the President to be allowed to do this to our strongest ally in that region Israel?
Exactly how does it help this nation's interests and security?
Who does this action help?--Iran!!!

Obama just completely tossed an ally to side with a muslim enemy nation--that's treason..
And to give nukes to that enemy to be used on that former ally!!!!-Tyr

One could....if one were logical and ergo, were not a complete moron/typical leftie.....ask why the CIC has, as his closest advisor, an Iranian. But of course, those questions will NEVER be asked by lame/mainstream media presswhores. It's pretty obvious why these things are happening to the rest of us, though.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

One could....if one were logical and ergo, were not a complete moron/typical leftie.....ask why the CIC has, as his closest advisor, an Iranian. But of course, those questions will NEVER be asked by lame/mainstream media presswhores. It's pretty obvious why these things are happening to the rest of us, though.
Dead on accurate.. One could also ask why the Obama refused to give critical intel to Jordan and Egypt when they requested that intel to use to strike ISIS!!!

THAT REFUSAL is like if the Brits in ww2 ask us for intel to strike Germany with and we refused!!
Yet nobody of consequence is blasting Obama for that bit of treason either.

It clearly points to him batting for another team and that's treason!-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Here's where the problems lies Tyr, why treason charges are seldom filed, the founders recognized how trouble could be caused, when other charges couldn't be proven, to bring treason to bear. Thus, they as usual were very precise with their words and meanings.

Try reading this, it's from a right leaning source:

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/3/essays/119/treason

and/or this:

http://judiciallearningcenter.org/article-3-and-the-courts/



http://godfatherpolitics.com/15837/constitutional-law-professor-says-obama-guilty-treason/


Constitutional Law Professor Says Obama Guilty of Treason


Posted on June 9, 2014 by Dave Jolly Filed under Constitution, Corruption, Crime, Ethics, Law,

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/15837/constitutional-law-professor-says-obama-guilty-treason/#wCSI5tYWPGQYT3hm.99

Over the past couple of years, I have written numerous articles accusing President Barack Obama of treason.
Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/15837/constitutional-law-professor-says-obama-guilty-treason/#wCSI5tYWPGQYT3hm.99


My time is short , so offering this as a start. Got to run , the wife orders..lol

Remember Turley also expressed similar concerns on Obama's actions.. over a year ago and its only gotten worse since then. -Tyr

[DLT]

Dead on accurate.. One could also ask why the Obama refused to give critical intel to Jordan and Egypt when they requested that intel to use to strike ISIS!!!

THAT REFUSAL is like if the Brits in ww2 ask us for intel to strike Germany with and we refused!!
Yet nobody of consequence is blasting Obama for that bit of treason either.

It clearly points to him batting for another team and that's treason!-Tyr

Obama's allegiance lies with the Iranians and with the Muslime Brotherhood (as his infamous quote indicates he would).... and his intent was/is to change regimes in Syria to allow the MB to take over there, as well. Arming/funding and supporting anti-Assad rebels (now called ISIS) is part of that plan. What's worse....is we have congress critters that are supportive and behind this agenda. And I'm not just talking about DemocRats. Traitors are popping up all over now.

[Kathianne]

This is what you get when you elect an enemy of America as the CIC....not just to one term, but to two. Could we expect any less of a disaster? And as Barry doubles down on his mission of destruction now, we will see the gloves come off and the mask totally slip off....

finally.

That is....if we live long enough. I fear that ....before these next two years is over....our enemy without, in cahoots with our enemy within, will take full advantage of who and what has his finger restrained from that 'nuclear retaliation button'.

I agree that he seems to be doubling down since the election, which is why I posted the other thread about perhaps changing my mind regarding possibility of impeachment.

Don't blame me for Obama, I certainly didn't vote for him.

[Kathianne]

One could....if one were logical and ergo, were not a complete moron/typical leftie.....ask why the CIC has, as his closest advisor, an Iranian. But of course, those questions will NEVER be asked by lame/mainstream media presswhores. It's pretty obvious why these things are happening to the rest of us, though.

Agreed about Valarie Jarrett. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Jarrett)

[Kathianne]

My time is short , so offering this as a start. Got to run , the wife orders..lol

Remember Turley also expressed similar concerns on Obama's actions.. over a year ago and its only gotten worse since then. -Tyr

Interesting that you found that take, I have a feeling you won't be seeing a lot of agreement with him from other constitutional scholars. I'm not sure what a 'attorney concentrating on constitutional law' means? Is he licensed to practice before SCOTUS? I'll see what I can find.

Turley strongly argued that Obama is turning the office into an Imperial Presidency, of which he was and is correct. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Jonathan-Turley-Obama-presidency-power/2014/06/04/id/575014/

He testified before Congress and stated basically the same, implying that our system is changing, because Congress is giving up its powers. As they do just that, the executive is certainly able to curtail our rights.

Tyr, you and I don't disagree on that.

The only way to address the problem, one which has been escalating since the Civil War. Over the years Congress would fight back and reclaim some powers. Obama however has brought it to a whole new level. More worrisome to me is that since December he's more than been doubling down.

If in fact impeachment were being seriously considered though, it would have to be for abuse of power, (FBI/IRS); Failure to uphold his oath of office, (ICE/DOJ); etc. Not treason.

The president has broad powers and when it comes to being CIC in particular is basically is in total control, with the exception of funding.

I certainly understand being totally frustrated to the point of rage, but it doesn't help any discussion nor help others form coherent thoughts that may be used as arguments to send to our representatives-the only ones who could seriously curtail his imperialistic tendencies in a timely fashion. Hyperbole and expletives and shouting 'fact' and 'truth' just comes across as out of control as Obama, moreso since he strives to sound reasonable, though snarky.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Interesting that you found that take, I have a feeling you won't be seeing a lot of agreement with him from other constitutional scholars. I'm not sure what a 'attorney concentrating on constitutional law' means? Is he licensed to practice before SCOTUS? I'll see what I can find.

Turley strongly argued that Obama is turning the office into an Imperial Presidency, of which he was and is correct. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Jonathan-Turley-Obama-presidency-power/2014/06/04/id/575014/

He testified before Congress and stated basically the same, implying that our system is changing, because Congress is giving up its powers. As they do just that, the executive is certainly able to curtail our rights.

Tyr, you and I don't disagree on that.

The only way to address the problem, one which has been escalating since the Civil War. Over the years Congress would fight back and reclaim some powers. Obama however has brought it to a whole new level. More worrisome to me is that since December he's more than been doubling down.

If in fact impeachment were being seriously considered though, it would have to be for abuse of power, (FBI/IRS); Failure to uphold his oath of office, (ICE/DOJ); etc. Not treason.

The president has broad powers and when it comes to being CIC in particular is basically is in total control, with the exception of funding.

I certainly understand being totally frustrated to the point of rage, but it doesn't help any discussion nor help others form coherent thoughts that may be used as arguments to send to our representatives-the only ones who could seriously curtail his imperialistic tendencies in a timely fashion. Hyperbole and expletives and shouting 'fact' and 'truth' just comes across as out of control as Obama, moreso since he strives to sound reasonable, though snarky.


Batting for a foreign team makes it treason .
The Obama hates this nation but he was installed to execute a globalist agenda.
That agenda and his execution of it is treason.
Yes, he has several more solid examples to quote but I speak of his deliberate breaking of his oath of office and its implications--the major one is that he engages in treason to make the change he is ordered to make.
We may never agree on this but he is just a puppet. His strings are pulled by the Globalists. -Tyr

[Kathianne]

Batting for a foreign team makes it treason .
The Obama hates this nation but he was installed to execute a globalist agenda.
That agenda and his execution of it is treason.
Yes, he has several more solid examples to quote but I speak of his deliberate breaking of his oath of office and its implications--the major one is that he engages in treason to make the change he is ordered to make.
We may never agree on this but he is just a puppet. His strings are pulled by the Globalists. -Tyr

You may draw any conclusions you like about his 'batting for a foreign team,' Jefferson came quite close at times accusing Franklin of consorting with the English. Granted he wasn't president, there was only a loose confederation of states, but alas even then diplomats are quite out of the reach of the legislature, once approved. The CIC doesn't have even the ball and chain of a higher executive calling him back or his thinking.

That is why it would be nearly impossible to convict him of treason. Your thoughts, mine, even those of the Joint Chiefs or Congressional leaders won't cut it. There would have to be documents or witnesses to his 'selling out' the country.

I too can see the connections between Soros, Ford Foundation, foreign gifts, ambitions for something after the presidency, those don't create treason.

They also aren't 'facts' or 'truth' unless proved in some sort of trial.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You may draw any conclusions you like about his 'batting for a foreign team,' Jefferson came quite close at times accusing Franklin of consorting with the English. Granted he wasn't president, there was only a loose confederation of states, but alas even then diplomats are quite out of the reach of the legislature, once approved. The CIC doesn't have even the ball and chain of a higher executive calling him back or his thinking.

That is why it would be nearly impossible to convict him of treason. Your thoughts, mine, even those of the Joint Chiefs or Congressional leaders won't cut it. There would have to be documents or witnesses to his 'selling out' the country.

I too can see the connections between Soros, Ford Foundation, foreign gifts, ambitions for something after the presidency, those don't create treason.

They also aren't 'facts' or 'truth' unless proved in some sort of trial.

My friend, it is not my contention that I can prove his treason beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT as I am not a lawyer nor do I have access to the information and potential witnesses but I would bet my life against a damn dime he is as guilty as I charge!
He is a puppet for foreign interests and that is treason..
Can that be proven, my guess is yes perhaps years after he is no longer in charge to stop it. Will it ever be, my guess is no because this ball is destined to travel all the way down the hill.-Tyr

[Kathianne]

My friend, it is not my contention that I can prove his treason beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT as I am not a lawyer nor do I have access to the information and potential witnesses but I would bet my life against a damn dime he is as guilty as I charge!
He is a puppet for foreign interests and that is treason..
Can that be proven, my guess is yes perhaps years after he is no longer in charge to stop it. Will it ever be, my guess is no because this ball is destined to travel all the way down the hill.-Tyr

Good job of expressing why it's beyond frustrating! I guess all I'm asking is you to understand that you and a few others, are not the only ones feeling that way. That others choose not to use 'non-human' and other names, rather trying to discuss or at least in my thinking, trying to come up with some sort of rational way to address these issues either on influential outlets, letters to my representatives or perhaps working on one of the campaigns that should be signing up volunteers shortly.

It would really help me and the site if folks addressed the issues without YELLING! or making statements that tend to make them look much less intelligent than they are.

[aboutime]

This is not a joke. This has been verified, and proven to be accurate. Yet nobody seems willing
to accept this, for whatever reasons you choose.

I have NEVER lied on this forum. There are some who will insist this is BS. Go right ahead. But
you cannot CHANGE THE TRUTH.

ONE MORE TIME: http://icansayit.com/images/Musbrohoodmem.jpg

[LongTermGuy]

This is not a joke. This has been verified, and proven to be accurate. Yet nobody seems willing
to accept this, for whatever reasons you choose.

I have NEVER lied on this forum. There are some who will insist this is BS. Go right ahead. But
you cannot CHANGE THE TRUTH.

ONE MORE TIME: http://icansayit.com/images/Musbrohoodmem.jpg

*Oh...the Americans / Patriots ....are aware of the infestation....can America wait another 2 years before they are removed?


Oh...the Americans are aware....

[gabosaurus]

Perhaps Congress can invite the leader of ISIS to address them next. :rolleyes:

[Kathianne]

Perhaps Congress can invite the leader of ISIS to address them next. :rolleyes:

The President just meets with the Muslim Brotherhood in secret. :rolleyes:

[aboutime]

Perhaps Congress can invite the leader of ISIS to address them next. :rolleyes:



Wrong again gabby. Congress has NO NEED to invite the U.S. Leader of ISIS to address them.

He already repeated his annual speech at the STATE OF THE UNION on the 20th of January.

[aboutime]

Found this link that puts Hillary on the same Betrayal Level as Obama. Muslim Brotherhood Ties???

http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/03/exposed-hillary-clinton-foundations-muslim-brotherhood-connections/