White House Irked By Netanyahu’s “Red Line” Speech, Reverts To Iran Diplomacy


America Continues to Provoke the Wrath of G-d

In the Midst of an Arrogance Attack Obama and Clinton

Let See their Genocidal Intention Toward Israel

The Muslim in Chief in the Wite House is Very Mad at Netanyahu
for Daring to Defend the Right of Israel to Fight for her Survival
in Front of the Evident Conspiracy existent between Obama and Iran

.

The Islamic Usurper

The Islamic Usurper Dictates to Israel

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton berated Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for the powerful presentation of his case for confronting Iran with Red Lines — instead of the thus far failed American diplomacy and weak sanctions — in his speech to the UN General Assembly Thursday, Sept. 27.

Neither of them released a statement from their conversation of an hour and a quarter one-on-one shortly after the irrefutable speech. Clinton made it clear that the arrogant Muslim Kenyan usurper of the White House Barack Obama would not tolerate the Israeli prime minister having a say in his Iran agenda.

Of course, what these two filthy mongrels (Obama and Clinton) forgot is that Mr. Netanyahu is the democratically-elected leader of a sovereign and totally  independent nation (yes, despite de wet dreams of many self-important Americans); and therefore it is Netanyahu — and no other! much less them — has the greatest saying in what concerns the national survival of israel.  In Israel we all have their number, and will not stand by their vain American imperial arrogance.

Muslim Obama — committed as he is to supporting the Islamic dream of world conquest and the destruction of Israel — assured that he would remain stuck to diplomacy regardless of Netanyahu’s warning that it was getting “late, very late” to stop a nuclear Iran.  Clinton accordingly announced a decision by “the world powers” to go into another round of nuclear negotiations with Iran, although after the breakdown of diplomacy in July, they expected an improved Iranian offer.

These so-called “world powers,” who speak so grandiloquently about freedom and democracy, have abrogated themselves the position of deciders of the course of history for all humanity, something that only belongs to G-d Almighty, B”H.  It will be lovely to see what will happen to them pretty soon.

Notorious anti-Semite EU foreign executive Catherine Ashton was directed to get in touch with Iran’s nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalilee for another attempt to set up talks, although when the two officials met in Istanbul on Sept. 18, they made no headway.

US steps early Friday Sept. 28 put the clock back five days to Monday when Obama dismissed Netanyahu’s advocacy of agreed Red Lines for warning Iran off its nuclear bomb program as “background noises” which he systematically blocked. This reversal came after White House and Israeli officials had begun discussing moving the critical timeline for that program to late spring, early summer 2013, instead of this year.

Addressing the UN General Assembly Thursday, Sept. 27  Israel Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu graphically depicted Israel’s Red Line for Iran. He held up a simple diagram showing that Iran had covered 70 percent of the distance to a nuclear bomb and must be stopped before it reached the critical stage next spring or early summer of 2013. He stressed that it is getting late, very late to stop a nuclear Iran. The best way, he said, is to lay down a clear Red Line on the most vulnerable element of its nuclear program: uranium enrichment. “I believe that if faced with a clear and credible red line, Iran will back down and may even disband its program,” he said.

Red Lines prevent wars, don’t start them and in fact deterred Iran from blocking the Strait of Hormuz. Israel and the US are in discussion over this issue, said Netanyahu. “I’m sure we can forge a way forward together.” He went on to accuse Iran of spreading terrorist networks in two dozen countries and turning Lebanon and Gaza into terror strongholds.

Hoping a nuclear-armed Iran will bring stability is like hoping a nuclear al Qaeda will bring world peace, the prime minister remarked. Some Washington sources are disclosing that the White House and Israel emissaries have come to an understanding that Israel will hold back from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites before the US election in November, while a special team set up by Usurper Obama completes a new paper setting out the end game for Iran. He put the team to work after concluding that negotiations with Iran had exhausted their usefulness. Gary Samore, top presidential adviser on nuclear proliferation, leads the team.

Netanyahu’s citing of late spring, early summer 2013, as the critical point on Iran’s path to a nuclear bomb appears to confirm that he has agreed to delay military action against Iran following negotiations with the White House on the next agreed steps. The prime minister was represented in those talks by Defense Minister Ehud Barak and National Security Adviser Yakov Amidror.

According to another view, which is current in Washington’s intelligence community, Israel was finally persuaded to delay by fresh intelligence [ most probably contrived ] presented by the Obama administration which showed that Israeli estimates were overly pessimistic in judging the timeline for Iran’s nuclear facilities to be buried in “immunity zones.” That timeline extended to spring 2013, leaving Israel five to six months up to April-May for ordering a military operation against those sites. However, we have learned that Israeli intelligence circles dispute their American colleagues’ estimate as “interesting” but inaccurate.  Netanyahu, in his speech, confirmed that Washington and Jerusalem were constantly exchanging views and evaluations on the state of Iran’s nuclear program. He also made the point that while intelligence services, American and Israeli alike, had remarkable aptitudes, their estimates on Iran were not foolproof. He was referring to the Pentagon dubious claim that when Iran was ready to build a bomb, American intelligence would know about it in good time.  But that does not mean that they will share the truth with Israel.

Trusting America has proven suicidal for many nations, among them Cuba where I was born, but also the prosperous pre-Ayatollah Iran, Nicaragua, and many others.  Bigoted America is only trustworthy for England, France and Germany; the rest should better be very careful.  Israel does not need America.  Reality is opposite to that:  America needs Israel, and HaShem will soon validate such a truism.

.

Source: DebkaFile

Advertisements

Netanyahu Draws Israel’s Red Line For Iran Amid A Secret Discussion With The US


The Attack Would Take Place Next Spring

My Prediction:  Obama Will Backtrack, Obama Will Betray Israel

Read Below the whole Text of Netanyahu’s Speech at the UN
As well as the Video of the Complete Speech

.

Netanyahu's red line shown to the UN

Netanyahu’s red line shown to the UN

Highlights of the Speech

Addressing the UN General Assembly Thursday, Sept. 27 Israel Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu graphically depicted Israel’s red line for Iran. He held up a simple diagram showing that Iran had covered 70 percent of the distance to a nuclear bomb and must be stopped before it reached the critical stage next spring or early summer. He stressed that it is getting late, very late to stop a nuclear Iran.

The best way, he said, is to lay down a clear red line on the most vulnerable element of its nuclear program: uranium enrichment. “I believe that if faced with a clear and credible red line, Iran will back down and may even disband its nuclear program,” he said.  Red lines prevent wars, don’t start them and in fact deterred Iran from blocking the Strait of Hormuz. Israel and the US are in discussion over this issue, said Netanyahu. “I’m sure we can forge a way forward together.

Netanyahu went on to accuse Iran of spreading terrorist networks in two dozen countries and turning Lebanon and Gaza into terror strongholds. Hoping a nuclear-armed Iran will bring stability is like hoping a nuclear al Qaeda will bring peace, the prime minister remarked. debkafile quotes some Washington sources as disclosing that the White House and Israel emissaries have come to an understanding that Israel will hold back from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites before the US election in November, while a special team led set up by Barack Obama completes a new paper setting out the end game for Iran. He put the team to work after concluding that negotiations with Iran had exhausted their usefulness and placed at its head Gary Samore, top presidential adviser on nuclear proliferation.

Netanyahu’s citing of late spring, early summer 2013, as the critical point on Iran’s path to a nuclear bomb appears to confirm that he has agreed to delay military action against Iran in negotiations with the White House. Our sources report that the prime minister was represented in those talks by Defense Minister Ehud Barak and National Security Adviser Yakov Amidror.

According to another view, which is current in Washington’s intelligence community, Israel was finally persuaded by fresh intelligence [ most probably contrived ] presented by the Obama administration which showed that Israeli estimates were overly pessimistic in judging the timeline for Iran’s nuclear facilities to be buried in “immunity zones.” That time line extended to spring 2013, leaving Israel five to six months up to April-May for ordering a military operation against those sites. However, we have learned, Israeli intelligence circles dispute their American colleagues’ estimate as “interesting” but inaccurate.

Netanyahu in his speech confirmed that Washington and Jerusalem were constantly exchanging views and evaluations on the state of Iran’s nuclear program. He also made the point that while intelligence services, American and Israeli alike, had remarkable aptitudes, their estimates on Iran were not foolproof.

.

Text of the Speech of Benjamin Netanyahu
at the UN on September 27, 2012

.

Obama the Muslim Donkey gets a History Lesson 101

.

.

Thank you very much Mr. President.

It’s a pleasure to see the General Assembly presided by the Ambassador from Israel, and it’s good to see all of you, distinguished delegates.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Three thousand years ago, King David reigned over the Jewish state in our eternal capital, Jerusalem. I say that to all those who proclaim that the Jewish state has no roots in our region and that it will soon disappear.

Throughout our history, the Jewish people have overcome all the tyrants who have sought our destruction. It’s their ideologies that have been discarded by history.

The people of Israel live on. We say in Hebrew Am Yisrael Chai, and the Jewish state will live forever.

The Jewish people have lived in the land of Israel for thousands of years. Even after most of our people were exiled from it, Jews continued to live in the land of Israel throughout the ages.  The masses of our people never gave up the dreamed of returning to our ancient homeland.

Defying the laws of history, we did just that. We ingathered the exiles, restored our independence and rebuilt our national life. The Jewish people have come home!

We will never be uprooted again!!!

Yesterday was Yom Kippur, the Holiest Day of the Jewish year.

Every year, for over three millennia, we have come together on this Day of reflection and Atonement. We take stock of our past. We pray for our future. We remember the sorrows of our persecution; we remember the great travails of our dispersion; we mourn the extermination of a third of our people — six million — in the Holocaust.

But at the end of Yom Kippur, we celebrate.

We celebrate the rebirth of Israel. We celebrate the heroism of our young men and women who have defended our people with the indomitable courage of Joshua, David, and the Maccabees of old. We celebrate the marvel of the flourishing modern Jewish state.

In Israel, we walk the same paths tread by our patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But we blaze new trails in science, technology, medicine, agriculture.

In Israel, the past and the future find common ground.

Unfortunately, that is not the case in many other countries. For today, a great battle is being waged between the modern and the medieval.

The forces of modernity seek a bright future in which the rights of all are protected, in which an ever-expanding digital library is available in the palm of every child, in which every life is sacred.

The forces of medievalism seek a world in which women and minorities are subjugated, in which knowledge is suppressed, in which not life but death is glorified.

These forces clash around the globe, but nowhere more starkly than in the Middle East.

Israel stands proudly with the forces of modernity. We protect the rights of all our citizens: men and women, Jews and Arabs, Muslims and Christians — all are equal before the law.

Israel is also making the world a better place: our scientists win Nobel Prizes. Our know-how is in every cell-phone and computer that you’re using. We prevent hunger by irrigating arid lands in Africa and Asia.

Recently, I was deeply moved when I visited Technion, one of our technological institutes in Haifa, and I saw a man paralyzed from the waist down climb up a flight of stairs, quite easily, with the aid of an Israeli invention.

And Israel’s exceptional creativity is matched by our people’s remarkable compassion. When disaster strikes anywhere in the world — in Haiti, Japan, India, Turkey Indonesia and elsewhere — Israeli doctors are among the first on the scene, performing life-saving surgeries.

In the past year, I lost both my father and my father-in-law. In the same hospital wards where they were treated, Israeli doctors were treating Palestinian Arabs. In fact, every year, thousands of Arabs from the Palestinian territories and Arabs from throughout the Middle East come to Israel to be treated in Israeli hospitals by Israeli doctors.

I know you’re not going to hear that from speakers around this podium, but that’s the truth. It’s important that you are aware of this truth.

It’s because Israel cherishes life, that Israel cherishes peace and seeks peace.

We seek to preserve our historic ties and our historic peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. We seek to forge a durable peace with the Palestinians.

President Abbas just spoke here.

I say to him and I say to you:

We won’t solve our conflict with libelous speeches at the UN. That’s not the way to solve it. We won’t solve our conflict with unilateral declarations of statehood.

We have to sit together, negotiate together, and reach a mutual compromise, in which a demilitarized Palestinian state recognizes the one and only Jewish State.

Israel wants to see a Middle East of progress and peace. We want to see the three great religions that sprang forth from our region — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — coexist in peace and in mutual respect.

Yet the medieval forces of radical Islam, whom you just saw storming the American embassies throughout the Middle East, they oppose this.

They seek supremacy over all Muslims. They are bent on world conquest. They want to destroy Israel, Europe, America. They want to extinguish freedom. They want to end the modern world.

Militant Islam has many branches – from the rulers of Iran with their Revolutionary Guards to Al Qaeda terrorists to the radical cells lurking in every part of the globe.

But despite their differences, they are all rooted in the same bitter soil of intolerance. That intolerance is directed first at their fellow Muslims, and then to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, secular people, anyone who doesn’t submit to their unforgiving creed.

They want to drag humanity back to an age of unquestioning dogma and unrelenting conflict.

I am sure of one thing. Ultimately they will fail. Ultimately, light will penetrate the darkness.

We’ve seen that happen before.

Some five hundred years ago, the printing press helped pry a cloistered Europe out of a dark age. Eventually, ignorance gave way to enlightenment.

So too, a cloistered Middle East will eventually yield to the irresistible power of freedom and technology. When this happens, our region will be guided not by fanaticism and conspiracy, but by reason and curiosity.

I think the relevant question is this:  It’s not whether this fanaticism will be defeated. It’s how many lives will be lost before it’s defeated.

We’ve seen that happen before too.

Some 70 years ago, the world saw another fanatic ideology bent on world conquest. It went down in flames. But not before it took millions of people with it. Those who opposed that fanaticism waited too long to act. In the end they triumphed, but at an horrific cost.

My friends, we cannot let that happen again.

At stake is not merely the future of my own country. At stake is the future of the world. Nothing could imperil our common future more than the arming of Iran with nuclear weapons.

To understand what the world would be like with a nuclear-armed Iran, just imagine the world with a nuclear-armed Al-Qaeda.

It makes no difference whether these lethal weapons are in the hands of the world’s most dangerous terrorist regime or the world’s most dangerous terrorist organization. They’re both fired by the same hatred; they’re both driven by the same lust for violence.

Just look at what the Iranian regime has done up till now, without nuclear weapons.

In 2009, they brutally put down mass protests for democracy in their own country. Today, their henchmen are participating in the slaughter of tens of thousands of Syrian civilians, including thousands of children, directly participating in this murder.

They abetted the killing of American soldiers in Iraq and continue to do so in Afghanistan. Before that, Iranian proxies killed hundreds of American troops in Beirut and in Saudi Arabia. They’ve turned Lebanon and Gaza into terror strongholds, embedding nearly 100,000 missiles and rockets in civilian areas. Thousands of these rockets and missiles have already been fired at Israeli communities by their terrorist proxies.

In the last year, they’ve spread their international terror networks to two dozen countries across five continents — from India and Thailand to Kenya and Bulgaria. They’ve even plotted to blow up a restaurant a few blocks from the White House in order to kill a diplomat.

And of course, Iran’s rulers repeatedly deny the Holocaust and call for Israel’s destruction almost on a daily basis, as they did again this week from the United Nations.

So I ask you, given this record of Iranian aggression without nuclear weapons, just imagine Iranian aggression with nuclear weapons. Imagine their long range missiles tipped with nuclear warheads, their terror networks armed with atomic bombs.

Who among you would feel safe in the Middle East? Who would be safe in Europe? Who would be safe in America? Who would be safe anywhere?

There are those who believe that a nuclear-armed Iran can be deterred like the Soviet Union.

That’s a very dangerous assumption.

Militant Jihadists behave very differently from secular Marxists. There were no Soviet suicide bombers. Yet Iran produces hordes of them.

Deterrence worked with the Soviets, because every time the Soviets faced a choice between their ideology and their survival, they chose their survival.

But deterrence may not work with the Iranians once they get nuclear weapons.

There’s a great scholar of the Middle East, Prof. Bernard Lewis, who put it best. He said that for the Ayatollahs of Iran, mutually assured destruction is not a deterrent, it’s an inducement.

Iran’s apocalyptic leaders believe that a medieval holy man will reappear in the wake of a devastating Holy War, thereby ensuring that their brand of radical Islam will rule the earth.

That’s not just what they believe. That’s what is actually guiding their policies and their actions.

Just listen to Ayatollah Rafsanjani who said, I quote:  “The use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything, however it would only harm the Islamic world.”

Rafsanjani said:  “It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.”

Not irrational !!

And that’s coming from one of the so-called “moderates” of Iran.

Shockingly, some people have begun to peddle the absurd notion that a nuclear-armed Iran would actually “stabilize” the Middle East.

Yeah, right.

That’s like saying a nuclear-armed Al-Qaeda would usher in an era of “universal peace.”

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I’ve been speaking about the need to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons for over 15 years.

I spoke about it in my first term in office as Prime Minister, and then I spoke about it when I left office. I spoke about it when it was fashionable, and I spoke about it when it wasn’t fashionable.

I speak about it now because the hour is getting late — very late!  I speak about it now because the Iranian nuclear calendar doesn’t take time out for anyone or for anything. I speak about it now because when it comes to the survival of my country, it’s not only my right to speak; it’s my duty to speak. And I believe that this is the duty of every responsible leader who wants to preserve world peace.

For nearly a decade, the international community has tried to stop the Iranian nuclear program with diplomacy.  That hasn’t worked.

Iran uses diplomatic negotiations as a means to buy time to advance its nuclear program.

For over seven years, the international community has tried sanctions with Iran. Under the leadership of President Obama, the international community has passed some of the strongest sanctions to date.

I want to thank the governments represented here that have joined in this effort. It’s had an effect. Oil exports have been curbed and the Iranian economy has been hit hard.

It’s had an effect on the economy, but we must face the truth. Sanctions have not stopped Iran’s nuclear program either.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, during the last year alone, Iran has doubled the number of centrifuges in its underground nuclear facility in Qom.

At this late hour, there is only one way to peacefully prevent Iran from getting atomic bombs. That’s by placing a clear Red Line on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Red Lines don’t lead to war;  Red Lines prevent war.

Look at NATO’s charter:  It made clear that an attack on one member country would be considered an attack on all.  NATO’s Red Line helped keep the peace in Europe for nearly half a century.

President Kennedy set a red line during the Cuban Missile Crisis.  That Red Line also prevented war and helped preserve the peace for decades.

In fact, it’s the failure to place Red Lines that has often invited aggression.

If the Western powers had drawn clear Red Lines during the 1930s, I believe they would have stopped Nazi aggression and World War II might have been avoided.

In 1990, if Saddam Hussein had been clearly told that his conquest of Kuwait would cross a Red Line, the first Gulf War might have been avoided.

Clear Red Lines have also worked with Iran.

Earlier this year, Iran threatened to close the Straits of Hormouz. The United States drew a clear Red Line and Iran backed off.

Red Lines could be drawn in different parts of Iran’s nuclear weapons program.  But to be credible, a Red Line must be drawn first and foremost in one vital part of their program: on Iran’s efforts to enrich uranium.  Now let me explain why:

Basically, any bomb consists of explosive material and a mechanism to ignite it.

The simplest example is gunpowder and a fuse. That is, you light the fuse and set off the gunpowder.

In the case of Iran’s plans to build a nuclear weapon, the gunpowder is enriched uranium.  The fuse is a nuclear detonator.

For Iran, amassing enough enriched uranium is far more difficult than producing the nuclear fuse.

For a country like Iran, it takes many, many years to enrich uranium for a bomb. That requires thousands of centrifuges spinning in tandem in very big industrial plants. Those Iranian plants are visible and they’re still vulnerable.

In contrast, Iran could produce the nuclear detonator – the fuse – in a lot less time, maybe under a year, maybe only a few months.

The detonator can be made in a small workshop the size of a classroom.  It may be very difficult to find and target that workshop, especially in Iran. That’s a country that’s bigger than France, Germany, Italy and Britain combined.

The same is true for the small facility in which they could assemble a warhead or a nuclear device that could be placed in a container ship. Chances are you won’t find that facility either.

So, in fact, the only way that you can credibly prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, is to prevent Iran from amassing enough enriched uranium for a bomb.

So, how much enriched uranium do you need for a bomb? And how close is Iran to getting it?

Let me show you. I brought a diagram for you. Here’s the diagram.

This is a bomb; this is a fuse.

In the case of Iran’s nuclear plans to build a bomb, this bomb has to be filled with enough enriched uranium. And Iran has to go through three stages.

The first stage:  they have to enrich enough of low enriched uranium.

The second stage:  they have to enrich enough medium enriched uranium.

And the third stage and final stage:  they have to enrich enough high enriched uranium for the first bomb.

Where’s Iran? Iran’s completed the first stage. It took them many years, but they completed it and they’re 70% of the way there.

Now they are well into the second stage. By next spring — at most by next summer at current enrichment rates — they will have finished the medium enrichment and move on to the final stage.

From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

What I told you now is not based on secret information. It’s not based on military intelligence. It’s based on public reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Anybody can read them. They’re online.

So if these are the facts — and they are — where should the Red Line be drawn?

The Red Line should be drawn right here.  Before Iran completes the second stage of nuclear enrichment necessary to make a bomb.

Before Iran gets to a point where it’s a few months away, or a few weeks away, from amassing enough enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon.

Each day, that point is getting closer. That’s why I speak today with such a sense of urgency. And that’s why everyone should have a sense of urgency.

Some who claim that even if Iran completes the enrichment process, even if it crosses that Red Line that I just drew, our intelligence agencies will know when and where Iran will make the fuse, assemble the bomb, and prepare the warhead.

Look, no one appreciates our intelligence agencies more than the Prime Minister of Israel.  All these leading intelligence agencies are superb, including ours. They’ve foiled many attacks. They’ve saved many lives.

But they are not foolproof.

For over two years, our intelligence agencies didn’t know that Iran was building a huge nuclear enrichment plant under a mountain.

Do we want to risk the security of the world on the assumption that we would find in time a small workshop in a country half the size of Europe?

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The relevant question is not when Iran will get the bomb. The relevant question is at what stage can we no longer stop Iran from getting the bomb.

The Red Line must be drawn on Iran’s nuclear enrichment program because these enrichment facilities are the only nuclear installations that we can definitely see and credibly target.

I believe that faced with a clear Red Line, Iran will back down.

This will give more time for sanctions and diplomacy to convince Iran to dismantle its nuclear weapons program altogether.

Two days ago, from this podium, President Obama reiterated that the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran cannot be contained.

I very much appreciate the President’s position as does everyone in my country. We share the goal of stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons program. This goal unites the people of Israel. It unites Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike and it is shared by important leaders throughout the world.

What I have said today will help ensure that this common goal is achieved.

Israel is in discussions with the United States over this issue, and I am confident that we can chart a path forward together.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The clash between modernity and medievalism need not be a clash between progress and tradition.

The traditions of the Jewish people go back thousands of years. They are the source of our collective values and the foundation of our national strength.

At the same time, the Jewish people have always looked towards the future. Throughout history, we have been at the forefront of efforts to expand liberty, promote equality, and advance human rights.

We champion these principles not despite of our traditions but because of them.

We heed the words of the Jewish prophets Isaiah, Amos, and Jeremiah to treat all with dignity and compassion, to pursue justice and cherish life and to pray and strive for peace.

These are the timeless Values of my people and these are the Jewish people’s greatest gift to mankind.

Let us commit ourselves today to defend these values so that we can defend our freedom and protect our common civilization.

Thank you.

.

Source 1: DebkaFile  —  Source 2: FreeRepublic

Finally Iran Admits It Deceived The West Over The Nuclear Program


“We Had no Choice,
Since the UN Watchdog Was Bent
on Making Accusations Stick,”
Says the Evil Head of Tehran’s
Atomic Energy Agency

So, the Question Now Is:  Is Iran Still Lying?

So Why Obama, Europe and the UN Insist
in Continuing Waiting For the Next Lie

Why?  Because they Want Iran to Destroy Israel

.

Iran deliberately provided false information about its nuclear program to Western investigators and the International Atomic Energy Agency, a senior Iranian official has confirmed.

Irani LiearIn an interview published in the London-based daily Al-Hayat on Thursday, Iranian Vice President Fereydoon Abbasi-Davani, who is also the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), said that misleading facts were used to protect his country’s nuclear program and to disguise some of the technical advances it has made.

He did not elaborate on what specific part of the program was lied about. Israel and much of the West believe Tehran has covered up efforts to build a nuclear weapon.

“Sometimes we pretended to be weaker than we really were, and sometimes we showed strength that was not really in our hands,” Abbasi-Davani said in the interview. “We had no choice.”

Abbasi-Davani complained that the attitude of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) officials sent to review the nature of his country’s nuclear program was that Iran was guilty unless proven otherwise.

The West was leveling accusations against Iran, and the IAEA was determined to corroborate those claims in the same way it was with Saddam Hussein in Iraq, he said.

On Monday, Abbasi-Davani charged that ”terrorists and saboteurs” might have infiltrated the IAEA in an effort to derail his nation’s atomic program. More specifically, he claimed, inspectors had arrived at the underground Fordo uranium enrichment facility on August 17, shortly after power lines were blown up.

“Does this visit have any connection to that detonation?” he asked.

Menashe Amir, an Iranian-born analyst for Israel Radio, said Iran, in claiming that its power supply at Fordo was sabotaged, and in saying it had to lie over its nuclear program because of IAEA bias, “is seeking to justify barring IAEA inspectors from the key nuclear facility at Parchin.”

The idea, he said, was to assert that the IAEA is compromised, and thus to avoid complying with its demands.

The IAEA — which has so far failed to gain access to the Parchin nuclear site, where it believes traces of nuclear tests can be found — called Tuesday for Iran to cooperate with inspectors.

A meeting on Tuesday between six world powers and Iran yielded no breakthroughs, even as leaders said they would continue to pursue diplomatic avenues and sanctions to convince Tehran to curb its nuclear program.

European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said the five UN Security Council nations and Germany, known as the P5+1, would discuss ways of breaking the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York next week, Reuters reported.

Meanwhile, Iran and the UN’s atomic watchdog, engaged in concurrent talks over access to nuclear sites, are reportedly aiming to meet next month to continue talks over the program, AFP reported, quoting diplomats close to the negotiations.

Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, though Israel and many Western powers dispute the claims. On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has reportedly agitated for a military strike — or at least the credible threat of such action — said the Islamic Republic was nearly 90% of the way toward bomb.

.

Source: TimesOfIsrael

Suddenly Obama Refuses to See Netanyahu, and so He Sharpens The Iran Dilemma


Obama Is Coming Out of the Closet
As The Anti-Israel Muslim HE IS

Imagine How It Will Be When He Gets Reelected
American Jews, Time Is Running Out
Make Aliyah Before I’ts Too Late

Do not miss my Article “America Is About To Betray Israel
to know the Consequence of this for Israel and America

UPDATE:  Reports claim Obama will be a guest on the David Letterman TV Show instead of meeting with Netanyahu.

[ It is becoming increasingly evident that Obama is a Muslim that hates Israel and all the Jews – even though he uses some self-hating Jews for the sake of deception.  I thought that we would see this open confrontational position a few days after the reelection of Obama; but the man, and his higher up handlers, are too desperate to cause the destruction of Israel, and later the rest of the World Jewry.  What he is doing is trying to destabilize Bibi’s government by denying credibility abroad and insuflating divisions in Israel. Will the American Jews finally “see the light.” It is difficult to think of it, but Obama is a Hitler-wannabe; after all we though that no one could ever surpass Haman, nakhon? ]

Prime Minister of Israel Binyamin Netanyahu and Obama

At odds and not talking

President Barack Obama’s refusal Tuesday Sept. 11 to see Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu because “the president’s schedule will not permit that,” left Jerusalem thunderstruck – and Washington too.

At one stroke, round after a round of delicate negotiations on Iran between the White House, Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem, the US National Security Council, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta collapsed.  They had aimed at an agreement on a starting point for the meeting that had been fixed between the two leaders for Sept. 28 in New York to bridge their differences over an attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

The pathetic king of Arrogance

By calling off the meeting, the US president has put paid to those hopes and publicly humiliated, again, the Israeli prime minister, turning the clock back to the nadir of their relations brought about by the comment by Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Aug. 30: “I don’t want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it” – meaning attack Iran.  [ As if attacking Iran was a criminal act.  Well, it is in the twisted mind of Muslims and anti-Semites. ]

By rebuffing Netanyahu, the president demonstrated that the top US soldier was not just talking off the cuff but representing the president’s final position on a possible Israel strike to preempt Iran’s nuclear program.

Tuesday, the US Defense Secretary said on Iran:

“If Iran decides to make a nuclear weapon, the US would have a little more than a year to stop it.”  He added that the United States has “pretty good intelligence.”

Panetta said on CBS’s “This Morning” program:

“It’s roughly about a year right now. A little more than a year.  And so … we think we will have the opportunity once we know that they’ve made that decision, take the action necessary to stop (Iran).”

Panetta said the United States has the capability to prevent Iran from building an atomic bomb.  He said:

“We have the forces in place to be able to not only defend ourselves, but to do what we have to do to try to stop them from developing nuclear weapons.”

Muslim Obama bows to the king of Sudi Arabia, who is the Islamic Keeper of the Ka'abah

Some optimists [ read ‘obtuse people’ ] in Jerusalem took these comments to indicate that the crisis had become manageable now that the Obama administration was finally prepared to discuss a timeline and red lines for holding Iran back from making a bomb. This hope was soon dashed by word that the US president would rather confront Israel than Iran.  The White House may also have been incensed by the orders given by Netanyahu and Barak to the IDF to keep going on preparations for attacking Iran alongside the forthcoming meeting between the two leaders.

Netanyahu’s comments to a news conference earlier Tuesday are unlikely to have salved angry administration spirits in Washington.  He said that with every passing day, Iran comes closer to a nuclear bomb, heedless of sanctions and diplomacy.

Netanyahu said on a note of frustration against the Obama administration and the rest of the world, as reported earlier Tuesday:

“The world tells Israel ‘wait, there’s still time’. And I say, “Wait for what? Wait until when?  Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.”

[ America thought that it was a very good idea attacking Iraq because there was a rumor that they had “weapons of mass destruction.”  And Saddam never said that he was gooing to “erase America out of the map,” as Iran has repeatedly proclaim that they would do.  Reaality is that most Goyim are of the mind that Jews only have two “human rights”:  to obey whatever we are told … and let others kill us easily.  Well, fat chance!  That will not happen – mind you, at any cost – ever again!  ]

The wrangling over Iran between the offices of the US President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Monday, has been reduced essentially to a battle for the agenda of their meeting in New York on Sept. 28: Netanyahu will be pressing for a US commitment to military action if Iran crosses still-to-be-agreed red lines, while the White House rejects red lines [ for Iran, but yes for Israel ] – or any other commitment for action – as neither necessary nor useful.

[ Of course, this engender of Evil, Obama, cynically expects that Israel accept the “red lines” he arrogantl and criminally try to impose upon us.  And expects Israel to sheepishly make the commitment to not attack Iran until after Obama’s reelection and we are utterly destroyed.  His Islamic Plan of commiting genocide against the Jews in Israel is now open for all to see. ]

Israel’s latest rebuttal came Monday, Sept. 10 from former Military Intelligence chief, Amos Yadlin, who argued that even without agreed red lines, Israel is quite capable of coping with its enemies without the United States.

[ Oy!  What an affront to the legendary haughty American arrogance!  Imagine that.  “How these Jews dare…  Who do they think they are?!  They are nothing, nothing without us.”  LOL. ]

The sparring appeared to have reached a point of no return, leaving Obama and Netanyahu nothing more to discuss.  However, just the opposite is true.  For both leaders their upcoming tête-à-tête is vital.  It is Obama’s last chance to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program before he faces the American voter on Nov. 6, while the prime minister will not forego any opportunity to harness the US to this attack. He needs to prove – not just to the anti-war camp ranged against him at home, but also to assure the military – which has been falsely reported as against an attack – that he bent over backward to procure US backing.  Netanyahu does not feel that even if he fails to talk Obama around (more likely than not), he has lost American support; he counts on the US Congress [ and many among the American people, although the American people does not cout to the agendas of their politicians ] to line up behind Israel’s case for cutting down a nuclear Iran which is sworn to destroy the Jewish state, as well as sections of the US public and media and some of he president’s Jewish backers, including contributors to his campaign chest.  Those are only some of the reasons why the last-ditch US-Israeli summit cannot be avoided and indeed may be pivotal – both for their participants’ personal political destinies, and for the Middle East at large.  Debkafile’s Washington and political sources disclose that their dialogue will have two levels according to current planning:

  1. In New York, Obama and Netanyahu will try and negotiate a common framework;
  2. At the Pentagon in Washington, defense chiefs Leon Panetta and Ehud Barak will be standing by to render any agreements reached in New York into practical, detailed plans which would then be referred back to the two leaders for endorsement.

The heated dispute between US and Israeli officials over “red lines” was therefore no more than sparring over each of the leaders’ starting-points for their New York dialogue and therefore their agenda and final understandings [ maybe ]. Behind the clash of swords, US and Israeli diplomats are working hard to negotiate an agreed starting point. They are putting just as much effort into preventing the row deteriorating into a total rupture before Sept. 28.

Netanyahu discussed another red line Monday when he interviewed [ the suspicious ] President Shimon Peres in Jerusalem, their first meeting in three months.  Although the Israeli presidency is a largely titular function, Peres [ shamelessly ] has elected himself senior spokesman for the opponents of an Israeli military operation against Iran.

While their advisers sought to establish agreed lines between them ahead of Netanyahu’s meeting with Obama, debkafile reports that the confrontation between the two Israeli politicians ended inconclusively, because Peres kept on demanding that the Prime Minister bend to the will of the White House.  [ Hmm, have you noticed how Shimon Peres always sides with the enemies of Israel, who look for our destruction?  Has he being blackmailed for the longest time, or is he just a dark-hearted Sabbatean traitor? ]

.

Source: Debkafile

The Antisemitic “International Community” Attacks Israel At Every Step


.

The International Furor Over a Small Settlement of Orthodox Jewish Pioneers and Patriots at Migron Threatens Democracy in the State of Israel

Now, HOW CAN Migron BE Part of “Palestinian” Territory
if 3,000 Years Ago  it WAS the Town of King Shaul,
the First King of Israel?!

.

Innocent Orthodox Jewish Girl in Migron, Israel
An Innocent Orthodox Jewish Child Ejected from her Home in the Jewish Village of Migron, Israel

The visit to Migron in the following U-Tube presentation by Maggid Dov Bar Leib is a portrayal of a small village of Jewish patriots and pioneers in the process of reclaiming the Land of Samaria and Judea. Here in the heartland of the biblical Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are the ancient lands of Samaria and Judea governed 3,000 years ago by Kings of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah.

This struggle to hold on to the homeland of Israel is only indicative of the struggle by the evil forces of darkness to drive out the last visible presence of G-d’s only Chosen People from the Land of Israel; the Capital of the G-d of Israel on Planet Earth.

Here is a cosmic battle of Evil against Goodness on Planet Earth that is most visible to all who can and want to see reality. The dark forces of evil that are engulfing the whole planet. By the way, if you think that you are immune, think again.

Soon G-d will punish all men with Fair and Just Judgment for how they choose to protect or seek to destroy the Orthodox Jewish of Israel — which is what is behind all this bruhaha with expelling the pioneering settlers in the Land of Israel. So, read carefully for as the fire of persecution is lit in Israel, the flame will be carried around the whole world.

We encourage you to take a guided tour through the tiny hamlet of homes in Migron with Maggid Dov Bar Leib. See the three slabs of concrete that has enraged the whole world, especially the murderous Arabs, in league with cowardly Europe and of the mega-hipocritical America, these last two entranced with their evil role as Edom, mere followers of that miserable power of darkness called the Vatican and, of course, the P2 Masonic Lodge in the Vatican who rules them all.

Yet the war is not about slabs of concrete on the ground. It is about the Sovereignty of the G-d of Israel who claims this small piece of land to be His Holy Land for his Chosen People. But the fact is that the evil forces of darkness opine otherwise, so they will continue to seek to take dominion over the entire planet.”

Jewish Village of Migron
The Jewish Village of Migron, Ethnically Cleansed of Jews

.

.

Now we invite you to read the article titled, “Column One: Migron’s Alarming Message”, written by Caroline B. Glick, an American-Israeli journalist for Makor Rishon and the deputy managing editor of ‘The Jerusalem Post’. She is also the Senior Fellow for Middle East Affairs of the Washington, D.C.- based Center for Security Policy.

Column One: Migron’s Alarming Message
By Carolyn B. Glick @ Jerusalem Post

“Migron residents will be tossed from their homes because AG Yehuda Weinstein and associates believe they are above the law. By Tuesday, 50 Israeli families will have been tossed out of their homes in their village of Migron, which is set for destruction. They will not be dispossessed because they unlawfully squatted on someone else’s property. The residents of Migron will be tossed from their homes – on the order of the Supreme Court – because Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein and his associates believe they are above the law. And due to this opinion, Weinstein and his associates refuse to recognize the sovereign authority of Israel’s government or to act in accordance with its lawful decisions.

The media have alternatively presented the story of Migron’s imminent destruction as a story about a power struggle between so-called settlers and the IDF, whose forces will be called upon to eject them from their homes; or as a struggle between the Israeli residents of Judea and Samaria and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu; or as a struggle between the radical leftists from “Peace” Now and its fellow foreign government-financed NGOs, and the residents of Judea and Samaria.

These portrayals are reasonable on the narrow level of day to day developments in the story of Migron’s struggle. But on a more fundamental level, the story of Migron and its pending destruction is the story of the power struggle between Israel’s unelected, radical legal fraternity represented by the attorney-general, the State Prosecution he directs and the Supreme Court on the one hand, and Israel’s elected governments – from the Right and from the Left – on the other.

Migron is the latest casualty of this struggle. The legal fraternity’s bid to wrest sovereign power of governance from Israel’s elected leadership threatens our democracy. In its continuous assault on governing authority, the legal fraternity renders it difficult if not, as a practical matter, impossible, for the government – any government – to govern.

It is important at the outset to recognize that there is a world of difference between the rule of law and the rule of lawyers. The fate of Migron, which was sealed on Wednesday with the decision of the Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, to remove all 50 families from their homes, is a legal atrocity.

Migron was founded in 1999 on 60 plots of land. In 2006, the blatantly treasonous and EU-funded “Peace” Now petitioned the High Court claiming to represent Arab “owners” of five out of the 60 plots of land. The traitors of “Peace” Now asked the court to require the state to explain why it hadn’t destroyed the town, which the group claimed was built on “stolen” land. Migron’s residents dispute this claim.

In responding to this petition, the State Attorney’s Office could have asked the court to allow the issue of ownership to be adjudicated by a lower court. Instead, the State Prosecution accepted as fact “Peace” Now’s unproven claim of private Arab ownership of the land. And, after numerous delays, in 2011 the court ruled that the village must be destroyed.

Following its victory in the Supreme Court, “Peace” Now sued the state for damages for the alleged Arab landlords, claiming that the presence of the community prevented the land’s owners from harvesting nonexistent olive trees. “Peace” Now abruptly canceled its lawsuit when the court asked for proof of ownership.

Migron Patriotic Residents
Migron Patriotic Residents Viewing the Recent Evacuation and Destructions of their Homes

For their part, Migron’s residents went through Jordanian land records and were able to find owners for only seven of the registered plots. And they managed to buy – at exorbitant cost – three of those plots. Recognizing that its claim that Migron was illegally built on private lands could no longer be justified, “Peace” Now changed its strategy. In the latest Supreme Court hearings, brought by Migron’s residents, the traitors of “Peace” Now claimed that the reason all the Israelis need to be ejected from their homes, and all the homes need to be destroyed, is that the village was built without proper permits.

Ahead of the court hearing last month, the government’s Ministerial Committee on Settlement convened to determine the government’s position on the new Migron petition. Led by Netanyahu, the ministers decided that the government’s position was to ask for a continuance in order to enable the lower courts to adjudicate the claims of ownership of the land.

Rather than follow the law and represent that position to the court, Weinstein instructed attorney Osnat Mandel from the State Prosecution to inform the court he did not accept the government’s decision, and ask for a continuance in order to give him time to force the government to change its position.

Addressing the court, Mandel said,

“The attorney- general believes that the ministerial committee’s position will raise legal difficulties. And since we’re requesting a continuance for undertaking the evacuation anyway [for unrelated reasons], he requests [time] to hold meetings with the elected leadership.”

On the face of it, Weinstein’s defiance of a legally binding government decision was unlawful. Certainly it would appear to be grounds for his immediate firing. But while shocking, Weinstein’s rank insubordination was not unique.

As relates to Israel’s legal rights in Judea and Samaria, Weinstein is guided not by the law but by the ideology of the far Left. This ideology received formal expression in a 2005 report on unauthorized Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria authored by former assistant state attorney Talia Sasson. The Sasson Report represented a wholesale renunciation of all Israeli claims to legal rights over Judea and Samaria. It was unhinged from both Israeli and international law. And it was embraced by the legal fraternity. After Sasson finished her report, she joined the post-Zionist Meretz Party. In 2009 she ran unsuccessfully for Knesset.

In an attempt to mitigate the damage Sasson’s report caused to Israel’s legal position in Judea and Samaria, in February Netanyahu commissioned retired Supreme Court justice Edmond Levy to lead a task force of distinguished jurists and present the government with a report setting out Israel’s legal rights to Judea and Samaria. Netanyahu asked Levy to also offer recommendations for implementing those rights in relation to the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.

Weinstein didn’t even wait for the Levy Commission to begin its work before he sent Netanyahu a letter informing him that the commission’s report would have no impact on his handling of issues related to Israel’s rights to the areas. And as his decision to ignore the legally constituted ministerial committee’s position on Migron made clear, Weinstein continues to behave as though he and his colleagues sit above Israel’s democratically elected representatives.

Many on the Right are urging Netanyahu to adopt the findings of the Levy Commission as official government policy. While such a move certainly can’t hurt, it is hard to see what difference it would make in practice. Weinstein has already pledged to defy the government. So even if the report is adopted, the government’s lawyers will refuse to defend its positions.  [ Isn’t it high time to fire all of them? ]

Weinstein is only able to behave as he does because he operates in an environment where the Supreme Court has usurped the power of Israel’s elected governments to determine state policy. [ Smells like a coup d’etat ]

At the same time that then-Supreme Court president Aharon Barak declared that “everything is justifiable,” the court gutted the requirement for legal standing. It has worked hand in glove with radical treasonous groups like “Peace” Now to dictate government policy. Through this collaboration, the court – not the government – determines Israel’s policies on everything from Israel’s legal position in Judea and Samaria to environmental issues, to the nature of Israel’s penal system, to homosexual unions, to education policy, to permissible military tactics in wartime.

In this environment of judicial tyranny, Weinstein can freely undercut governmental authority, because he knows that so long as his breach of trust pushes government policy to the Left, the Supreme Court will support his unlawful actions.

Aside from Migron, the most striking example of the legal fraternity’s recent collaboration to undercut governmental authority [and threaten the security of Israel] was its torpedoing of the government’s February 2011 appointment of Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant to serve as the IDF chief of staff. At the time, the court agreed to hear a petition submitted by the Green Movement demanding the cancellation of Galant’s appointment.

The Green Movement claimed Galant was unfit to lead the military because in the past he had committed an administrative infraction by wrongfully using state land adjacent to his homestead on Moshav Amikam. The Green Movement had no direct interest in Galant’s administrative infraction and therefore, if the Supreme Court followed even the lowest standards for standing, it should never have received a hearing.

Even with the forbearance of the court, the Green Movement’s ability to win the case was dubious at best. The Senior Appointments Committee had already vetted Galant’s candidacy, and approved it despite his misuse of state lands. But Weinstein had other plans.
Claiming he had “ethical difficulties” defending Galant’s lawful appointment, Weinstein refused to defend the government before the Supreme Court. Consequently, Weinstein compelled the government to force Galant to resign his commission and appoint someone else to serve as the IDF’s top commander.

Netanyahu has come under sharp criticism, particularly from his voters, for his refusal to stand up to Weinstein and his band of legal despots. And this makes sense. Netanyahu should have stood up to Weinstein in defense of Galant. And he should have denounced Weinstein last month for his unlawful defiance of the government on Migron. He should also stand up to Weinstein on the Levy Commission report, and just as a matter of policy, adopt its findings as the formal position of Israel’s government.
But even if he does these things, all they would serve to do is temporarily mitigate the frustration of his voters. They wouldn’t change the basic calculus of power. The fact is that today Netanyahu lacks the means to curb the legal fraternity’s abuse of power.
The [deceiving corporate] media staunchly defend every move the legal fraternity takes to usurp the powers of the government and the Knesset. Indeed, the media represents the legal brotherhood’s unlawful moves as supreme acts of selflessness on behalf of Israeli democracy and the rule of law.

Every potentially powerful critic of their behavior has found himself the subject of protracted criminal probes. This includes Netanyahu during his first term, Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman for the past decade, former justice ministers Tzachi Hanegbi and Haim Ramon, and Justice Minister Ya’akov Ne’eman during his first tenure in office.

The dispossessed residents of Migron are just the latest casualties of the legal fraternity’s campaign to force its radical agenda on an unwilling electorate.

f we wish to save Israel’s democratic system, the people of this country must stand up and demand that our representatives protect our right to be governed by those whom we elect and not by self-appointed clerks.
The only suitable response to Migron is a legislative overhaul of Israel’s legal system.”

Source: Destination Yisrael

Speaking of Isaac(s)


Even More Prophetic “Coincidences” with Hurricane Isaac

UN General Assembly Hurricane Isaac may be the last warning for America. Wondering how I figure that?  Well, I’ll tell you.  There might be nothing to it, but…

Isaac is, of course, the English form of the Hebrew Yitzchak which is the name of the second patriarch of the Jewish people – the son of Avraham Avinu.

It’s in Parshat Vayera (Breishit [Genesis] 18.1 – 22.24) that we read about Akeidat Yitzchak — The Binding of Isaac.  In 2012, we will read that parshah on the 3rd of November, the Shabbat before the US elections.

However, we read it another time … and that is on the second day of Rosh Hashanah.

Now, get this.  Remember this well-known Zohar on Parshat Vayera?  It says that,

In the 73rd year (of some Jewish century) all the kings of the world shall assemble in the great city of Rome. And the Holy One, blessed be He. will shower fire and hail and meteoric stones upon them, until they are wiped out from the world. And only those kings who did not go to Rome will remain in the world.

Some think “73” could refer to the year that begins on this coming Rosh HaShanah — the year 5773.  Well, guess what is scheduled on the 2nd day of Rosh Hashanah 5773 which falls on 18 September 2012?

On 18 September 2012, at 3 PM, The United Nations General Assembly begins at the United Nations Headquarters in New York.

That’s right.  In the 73rd year, most leaders of the world will be assembling in New York. Meanwhile we shall be reading the parshah from which this Zohar is derived.

Source: Tomer Devorah

What The U.N. Doesn’t Want You To Know


The Father of the U.N. was an American Communist

.

Soviet and UN Emblems

A young American diplomat was the leading force in the designing of the United Nations. He was secretary of the Dumbarten Oaks Conversations from August to October of 1944 where most of the preliminary planning for the U.N. was done. He was Roosevelt’s right-hand man in February of 1945 at Yalta where the postwar boundaries of Europe were drawn (Roosevelt was a dying man at the time. His death came only ten weeks later). At Yalta it was agreed that the Soviet Union would have three votes (one each for Russia, Ukraine, and Byelorussia) in the U.N. General Assembly, even though the United States had only one. At Yalta much of Europe was placed under the iron heel of communist rule. At Yalta, Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin appointed this young diplomatic shining star to be the first Secretary-general of the U.N. for the founding conference held in San Francisco,April/June of 1945.


Trygve Lie
All of this seemed well and good until three years later. Alger Hiss was exposed as a Communist spy and sent to prison. Only then did people understand why the emblem of the United Nations looked so much like the emblem of the Soviet Union. It now made sense that the Soviet Union, at Yalta, was given control over all of Eastern Europe. Then everyone understood how the Soviet Union managed to capture three votes in the U.N. General Assembly compared to one for the United States. Then it became clear why a secret deal had been struck stating that a communist would always hold the office of of head of the U.N. military.

The U.N. Charter was authored by a Communist, the first U.N. Secretary-general was a Communist, and the U.N., from the beginning, was designed to be a Union of World Socialist Republics.

On a recent tour of the U.N., not one mention was made of any of this by our guide. Hiss’ name was not mentioned one time. When pictures of the founding conference contained his picture, our U.N. guide avoided telling us who it was.

I’m sure everyone was taught about the United Nations and its importance in school, but I’m also sure that the above information was conveniently omitted from your textbooks!

.

Secret agreement: The U.N. military is to always be commanded by a Communist

One of the most important positions within the entire United Nations—if not the most important—is that of Undersecretary-general for Political and Security Council Affairs. Most Americans have never even heard of this position, much
less anything about the man who holds the job. The undersecretary-general for political and security council affairs has three main areas of responsibility. They are:

  • Control of all military and police functions of the United Nations peacekeeping forces.
  • Supervision of all disarmament moves on the part of member nations.
  • Control of all atomic energy ultimately entrusted to the United nations for peaceful and “other purposes.”

In view of the fact that these three functions may soon constitute the ultimate power of life and death over every human being on the face of the earth (once national disarmament is achieved and all military is under the control of the U.N.), there would appear to be some minor justification for us to be more than passingly curious over who wields this power. Since the United Nations was created in 1945 there have been fifteen men appointed to the position of undersecretary-general of political and security council affairs. Astonishingly, every single one of them has been a communist!

Communists appointed to the position of UN Undersecretary-General:

  1. Arkady Sobolev – USSR (1946-1949)
  2. Konstantin Zinchenko – USSR (1949-53)
  3. Ilya Tehernychev – Ygoslavia (1954-1957)
  4. Anatoly F. Dobrynin – USSR (1958-1960)
  5. Georgi Ptrovich Arkadev – USSR (1960-1962)
  6. Eugeny Dmiterievich Kiselev – USSR (1962-1963)
  7. Vladimir Pavolovich Suslov – USSR (1963-1963)
  8. Alexie E. Nesterenko – USSR (1965-1968)
  9. Leonid N. Kutakov – USSR (1968-1973)
  10. Arkady N. Shevchenko – USSR (1973-1978)
  11. Mikhail D. Sytenko – USSR (1978-1981)
  12. Viacheslav A. Ustinov – USSR (1981-1986)
  13. Uasiliy S. Safronchuk – USSR (1987-1992)
  14. Vladimir Petrovsky – Russia, former USSR (1992)
  15. James O. C. Jonah – Sierra Leone (Co-chairman)

Some observers feel that 15 Communists out of 15 appointees constitutes a trend of sorts. But whatever we call it, Trygve Lie, the first secretary-general of the United Nations, revealed that this pattern was no mere coincidence. In his book In the cause of Peace Lie wrote: “Mr. Vyshinsky (of the USSR) did not delay his approach. He was the first to inform me of an understanding which the Big Five had reached in London on the appointment of a Soviet national as assistant secretary-general for political and security council affairs…

“Mr. Stettinius (U.S Secretary of State) confirmed to me that he had agreed with the Soviet delegation in the matter…

“The preservation of international peace and security was the organization’s highest responsibility, and it was to entrusting the direction of the Secretariat department most concerned with this to a Soviet national that the Americans had agreed.” (From ‘The Fearful Master‘ by Edward Griffin)

Every U.N. Secretary-General has been a Socialist

No wonder someone said that the truth is stranger than fiction! This incredible saga of the United Nations just goes on and on. Perhaps the most revealing fact of all concerning the powers that control the United Nations is that every single Secretary-General since the U.N.’s formation has been a socialist.

Trygve Lie, from Norway, was the first elected head of the U.N. He was chosen by the 15-member U.N. Security Council and ratified by the U.N. General Assembly on February 1, 1946. Before that, at the age of 23, he had been appointed secretary in charge of administration of the Norwegian Labor Party. The socialist lawyer served as Minister of Justice until June 1939, when a Cabinet reorganization made him Minister of Commerce. In April 1945, Lie was chosen to head the Norwegian delegation to the United Nations Founding Conference at San Francisco. At the conference itself he was chosen chairman of Commission III which was charged with drafting the charter of the Security Council of the United Nations, “the organ…which would have the power to act against aggressors.”

Dag Hammarskjold, of Sweden, was elected Secretary-General of the United Nations on April 7, 1953. At the age of 30 years Hammarskjold had become Undersecretary of the Swedish Ministry of Finance. At the Ministry he worked under the Fabian Socialist economist Ernst Wigforss, whom he once said considered his second father. Sweden has long been the leading Socialist state of Western Europe, taxing its citizens at a 75% rate.

U Than, of Burma, was elected Secretary-General of the U.N. on November 30, 1962. According to Current Biography 1962, U Thant considered himself a democratic Socialist.

Kurt Waldheim, of Austria, took office as Secretary-General of the United Nations on January 1, 1972. Waldheim had been Austria’s U.N. ambassador from 1964 to 1968. When the Austrian Socialist party won the March 1970 elections, Waldheim again became Austria’s U.N. representative. After serving two terms as U.N. Secretary-General, Waldheim became the head of Austria. It was revealed that Waldheim had lied about his role while serving in the Nazi forces of Adolf Hitler. Facts that were made known resulted in Waldheim being banished from the United States, even though he was the head of Austria.

Javier Perez de Cuellar, became U.N. Secretary-general on December 15, 1981. In his address to the General Assembly after being sworn in, Perez de Cuellar called the disparity in wealth between rich and poor nations a violation of “the most fundamental human rights.” During his administration, some third-world spokesmen complained that Perez de Cuellar had not been sufficiently outspoken in promoting the massive transfer of resources from rich to poor nations on a global scale. (Wealth redistribution has always been the central plank in the platform of International Socialism). “I am a Third-World man,” the Secretary-General replied. “But first of all I am a representative of 157 countries. I have to act in a way so that I am not only the representative of the Third World.”

Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the former foreign minister of Egypt, became the first African to head the U.N. on January 1, 1992. “If I was offered the job (of Secretary-General) five years ago,” Ghali said, “I would have turned it down. The U.N. then was a dead horse, but after the end of the Cold War, the U.N. has a special position.” Politically, Boutros-Ghali was a member of the Arab Socialist Union.

Is it coincidence that one Communist and six Socialists have headed the United Nations since its birth in 1945? Does it seem strange at all that the driving message of the U.N., the message of wealth redistribution, is the central message of international Communism? Don’t you find it amazing that the United States has allowed the Soviet Union to have three votes to one for America in
the United Nations since 1945? With the supposed dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1992, each of the 15 member of the ex-Soviet Union now have a vote in the U.N. So now America is outvoted 15 to 1. Yet Russia retains the right to invade these states if they get out of line.

So what does all this mean? the plain truth is that the United Nations has been designed to be a communistic world government from its very beginning.

What will happen? The United Nations will obtain the world domination that it has been planning for since its beginning. Communism will achieve its dream of ruling the world, but only for a very short time.

Forbidden Knowledge