Skip to main content

Will Israel Survive The Obama-Blumenthal Regime?

The state of Israel must survive, and this is not a walk in the park. Israel is surrounded by noxious Arab powers that long for its utter destruction, the most ambitious of which is Iran, now on the path to becoming a nuclear tipped hegemonic power in the Middle East.

Once the enemy of the United States, Iran is a fierce and energetic enemy of both Israel and the United States, which it regards as “The Great Satan.” Since the fall of the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the country has become both more Islamic and belligerent. These two, a puritanical reform of Islam and an increase in theologically inspired violence, seem to walk arm and arm together in this sorry veil of tears.

A young and dutiful follower of the so-called “sword verse” in the fifth verse of the ninth sura (Surat at-Tawbah) of the Qur'an recently executed a priest in his church in Normandy, France, producing a curious silence among politicians here in the United States who believe there is no connection between the teachings of Mohammed, blessings be upon him, and such eruptions of violence and religious fervor.

"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare ambush for them each. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful"

It may be a slight error to say the Shah of Iran fell; he was gently pushed out of power during the Presidential administration of Jimmy Carter, which made straight the way of the Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ruhollah MĹ«savi Khomeini, the revolutionist who ushered in the Islamic Spring that since has served as a lash for the United States, Israel, much of Europe and the whole of Western civilization, which the vigorous and expansionist Iranian revolution intends to throw on the ash heap of history, Allah willing.

Following the arrival of the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran, the American Embassy there was stormed by revolutionists who captured and held hostage 52 American diplomats and citizens for 444 days until Mr. Carter was deposed by President Ronald Reagan, whereupon they were released, apparently without large payments being made to slake the vengeful thirst of Iranian revolutionists.

Mr. Carter said the hostages were "victims of terrorism and anarchy" and vowed, "The United States will not yield to blackmail.”

Thirty seven years later, under the administration of President Barack Obama, Mr. Carter’s view of both terrorism and blackmail have been revised. The revision, we are now discovering, occurred in two steps: 1) a massive, secret airlift of cash -- $400 million -- to Iran, and 2) a faux “treaty,” not formally signed by Iran and not authorized by the U.S. Congress, the terms of which may be unenforceable.

The $400 million secretly shipped to Iran “on wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane,” we learn from a newly published story in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). “The money represented the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran to resolve a decades-old dispute over a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.”

The “advance payment” is, some wide-awake Congresspersons believe, a ransom paid for the release of Americans being held by Iran. Following the ransom payment, Iran has seized other Americans, causing at least one U.S. Senator, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas to erupt. “This break with long-standing U.S. policy,” said Mr. Cotton, “put a price on the head of Americans, and has led Iran to continue its illegal seizures” of Americans.

Unlike Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Cotton opposed the private “treaty” adopted by Mr. Obama and Iranian revolutionists, all of whom no doubt have a clearer and more utilitarian view of the Qur’an’s ninth sura than does Mr. Obama, who was exposed to Islam during his formative years.

Mr. Blumenthal signed off, though not literally, on the broader and private Obama/Hillary Clinton/Iran unsigned agreement that had been opposed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a Churchillian address to the U.S. Congress. Mr. Blumenthal supported the ending of a successful Iranian embargo because, he said, stronger sanctions could in the future be applied to Iran if they drifted from the terms of un-treaty never submitted to him as a U.S. Congressman for authorization.

It therefore seems proper to ask Mr. Blumenthal, a reform Jew who may have more than a passing interest in the survival of Israel, what he thinks of the repeal of the Carter doctrine, or the Surat at-Tawbah cited above that governs Iranian foreign policy, and whether, in view of Iran’s continuing support of policies and terrorist entities that present an existential threat to the state of Israel, Mr. Blumenthal does now support the remarks made before the U.S. Congress by Mr. Netanyahu -- whose most recent campaign had been undermined by Obama operatives. Will he work to revisit the Obama/Clinton/Iran deal and reinstate sanctions? At the very least, should not the arrangements approved in secret negotiations between Iran and Mr. Obama operatives be submitted to the U.S. Congress and approved by a body constitutionally authorized to oversee TREATIES – which is what binding arrangements between the President and foreign powers are?   


The silence maintained by Mr. Blumenthal, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy and the remaining five members of Connecticut’s U.S. Congressional Delegation is deafening, and their cowardice appalling.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Murphy Thingy

It’s the New York Post, and so there are pictures. One shows Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy canoodling with “Courier Newsroom publisher Tara McGowan, 39, last Monday by the bar at the Red Hen, located just one mile north of Capitol Hill.”   The canoodle occurred one day or night prior to Murphy’s well-advertised absence from President Donald Trump’s recent Joint Address to Congress.   Murphy has said attendance at what was essentially a “campaign rally” involving the whole U.S. Congress – though Democrat congresspersons signaled their displeasure at the event by stonily sitting on their hands during the applause lines – was inconsistent with his dignity as a significant part of the permanent opposition to Trump.   Reaching for his moral Glock Murphy recently told the Hartford Courant that Democrat Party opposition to President Donald Trump should be unrelenting and unforgiving: “I think people won’t trust you if you run a campaign saying that if Donald Trump is ...

The PURA soap opera continues in Connecticut: Business eyeing the exit signs

The trouble at PURA and the two energy companies it oversees began – ages ago, it now seems – with the elevation of Marissa Gillett to the chairpersonship of Connecticut’s Public Utilities Regulation Authority.   Connecticut Commentary has previously weighed in on the controversy: PURA Pulls The Plug on November 20, 2019; The High Cost of Energy, Three Strikes and You’re Out? on December 21, 2024; PURA Head Butts the Economic Marketplace on January 3, 2025; Lamont Surprised at Suit Brought Against PURA on February 3, 2025; and Lamont’s Pillow Talk on February 22, 2025:   The melodrama full of pratfalls continues to unfold awkwardly.   It should come as no surprise that Gillett has changed the nature and practice of the state agency. She has targeted two of Connecticut’s energy facilitators – Eversource and Avangrid -- as having in the past overcharged the state for services rendered. Thanks to the Democrat controlled General Assembly, Connecticut is no l...

Lamont Surprised at Suit Brought Against PURA

Marissa P. Gillett, the state's chief utility regulator, watches Gov. Ned Lamont field questions about a new approach to regulation in April 2023. Credit: MARK PAZNIOKAS / CTMIRROR.ORG Concerning a suit brought by Eversource and Avangrid, Connecticut’s energy delivery agents, against Connecticut’s Public Utility Regulatory Agency (PURA), Governor Ned Lamont surprised most of the state’s political watchers by affecting surprise.   “Look,” Lamont told a Hartford Courant reporter shortly after the suit was filed, “I think it is incredibly unhelpful,” Lamont said. “Everyone is getting mad at the umpires.   Eversource is not getting everything they want and they are bringing suit. It was a surprise to me. Nobody notified me. I think we have to do a better job of working together.”   Lamont’s claim is far less plausible than the legal claim made by Eversource and Avangrid. The contretemps between Connecticut’s energy distributors and Marissa Gillett , Gov. Ned Lamont’s ...