Stanley Zir
Obama's got our back?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By Stanley Zir
March 6, 2012

PREFACE

The President said today (3/4/12), "Stop all this loose talk of war, because it's driving up the price of oil. We would probably oblige if we believed in his good intentions. But the truth is, Obama lingers while Iran continues to increase her nuclear capabilities. That is why we must not remain silent: We must pressure this President to take immediate action to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed, terrorist state. It is not we who are driving up the price of oil; it is the President, because he refuses to confront Iran and end its nuclear and oil stranglehold over us.

Yesterday, because of time constraints, I sent out an unedited communication before Obama made his speech at AIPAC. I did this because I did not want to miss the opportunity to make it clear that President Obama could not pull the wool over the eyes of an ordinary citizen. It was all too obvious what the President would say at AIPAC, because his actions speak louder than the words he uses to deceive us. Below is the fully-edited version.

ESSAY

How will AIPAC receive the "Sanction-Dialogue Peddler from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave" when he arrives on Sunday? Iran is advancing; Israel warns Iran; Obama warns Israel. Whom will you back, AIPAC?

We must stop President Obama from playing Russian roulette with Israel's life; left unimpeded, he will dismantle America's identity as the Leader of the Free World. If he forces Israel to face Iran alone, he will hand over the ultimate victory to Islam. The greatest enemy to freedom, Iran, will have tested and broken America's spirit. Who will then be left to prevent the globalization of a tyrannical One World Order if America's identity as the advocate for freedom were to be vanquished?

Yesterday (3/3/12), Obama employed the ultimate weapon to stop Israel from attacking Iran even if she felt she had no other choice. And, in so doing, he shamed America. Using the power and authority afforded him as our President and Leader of the Free World, and realizing that Netanyahu was going to take action (and that this is an election year and he needs the Jewish vote), he haughtily declared to Iran, "I don't bluff." Thus, while the "choir" cheers Obama's alleged commitment to world peace and security, Obama uses his Osama bin Laden-slayer status to foil Netanyahu. What can Netanyahu say when Obama warns him that a pre-emptive attack on Iran would do more harm than good?

If Netanyahu decides that the time to attack Iran is now, and doesn't follow Obama's lead, he would look as though he is overtly challenging the authority of the President and not acting in the best interest of the U.S. Thus, Israel cannot say the President is not being forthright. Like any petty dictator, Obama has implied that he dare not be questioned or challenged (even though facts may prove otherwise), and that Israel will face severe consequences if she goes it alone.

With Iran being a screwdriver's turn from securing a nuclear-armed state, Obama continues to stall. He is about to relinquish our superpower status to the Iranian madman, and We the People must fight back now. Why should we blindly trust this President? He is an elected official; he is not our king. Unless he can back his words with actions, we dare not trust this man in the White House.

We must call Congress en masse and demand that Obama protect our nation; we cannot let him sell us downriver, no matter what Israel decides to do. This is a global issue — an attack on the entire free world, not just on Israel. We must not allow our President to make our nation Sharia-compliant and give ULTIMATE VICTORY TO ISLAM.

America is the Defender of Freedom in this world; she is not a tyranny-compliant nation. Americans don't bow to dictators or take our marching orders from the United Nations. The business of this nation is to rid the world of tyrannical enterprises, not prop them up and make them partners for peace.

America is under an imminent threat: either we take up the business of this nation, or we will be put out of business by our enemies. Obama must go beyond his "I don't bluff" bluff, call Iran's bluff, and say to Iran, as any responsible leader who is committed to protecting our Constitution would have demanded years ago:

"Iran, either you start dismantling your nuclear facilities within thirty days and be open to inspection to prove you're in agreement, or, if you hinder us, we will launch an immediate strike on your nuclear war machines on behalf of civilization and everything we have worked for in order to remain free."

The idea that Obama offers Iran the right to have nuclear facilities if they just sign a peace agreement is an act of insanity. Even if there is regime change, we can never be sure that the next Iranian regime would not also embrace a constitution whose laws subjugate the human spirit in Allah's name.

Overcoming Obama's Misinformation Campaign

Obama says it is out of his reach to bring the price of oil down, that he cannot do anything — but why would we trust a President who is determined to bring America down? Contrary to what Obama says, it is in the best interest of the United States to attack Iran's nuclear facilities now because we are slowly being bled to death by indecision. It is the fear that we will attack Iran that drives the price of oil up, and the fear that they will close the straits of Hormuz, along with the fear that they will stop shipping oil to Europe. Added to this, Obama is not willing to drill (even if we do drill it would be a few years before we get the oil); and even speculation that we're drilling for oil which might bring down its price will now be too little too late.

The price of oil will go down to acceptable levels once the evil of Ahmadinejad is contained. Then we will gain the time we need to develop an effective energy policy on the home front. If our economy is to survive in the short term, we must put an end to the ongoing threat we face from skyrocketing oil prices if we dare hold Ahmadinejad's feet to the fire. By immediately attacking and destroying Iran's nuclear war machine, the source of power that Ahmadinejad wields over us and our economy will be neutralized.

Thus there is only one way to end the Iranian nuclear nightmare. There is a saying, "Cut off the head of the snake and the body will expire." Only with an emergency procedure that delivers a payload of destruction directly to the heart of Iran's nuclear facilities can we eliminate the hub in the wheel of an emerging nuclear terrorist empire, whose success can embolden the OPEC nations to follow suit.

The attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure will send the clearest message to those nations in the region that would consider following in Iran's footsteps — that deterrence is not an empty threat when it comes to actively plotting the extermination of the Jewish people and the downfall of America.

Ultimately, the psychological fallout that would result from an attack on Iran will undermine the perceived invincibility of the Iranian and OPEC cooperatives. No longer will they be able to manipulate the price of crude with impunity, for we have made it clear that speculating in oil-extortion or nuclear-blackmail is a risky business when dealing with America and the free world.

The truth is that Israel and America will thrive, because the world will regain its confidence in protecting free-market economies from the assault of government-controlled fascist societies once the evil of Iran is contained.

On the other hand, failure to confront Iran and destroy her nuclear infrastructure will destroy what is needed to ensure a strong, stable economy at home. The formula for prosperity for our nation has remained constant through the best and worst of times. The only thing that makes our dollar the universal currency is perception. It is the world's belief that America's unyielding stance against fascism at home and abroad that has kept the free markets and the entrepreneurial spirit alive. It is that and that alone which makes our dollar strong under any circumstances.

That is why we must protect America from the assault from those who falsely claim we cannot afford to actively engage fascism when it raises its ugly head; they claim we must be strong at home and get our own financial house in order first in order to be strong abroad. The ramifications of this misstep would be devastating. Are they suggesting that Americans quietly prepare for our own conquest and death? When we compromise our core values, we would be overrun by the demands of tyrannies and fascists — which will then finish us financially no matter what steps we take to address the debt issue. Having the courage to stand against the absolute power of tyranny is the shortest route to free our nation from Iran's oil stranglehold and get America out from under the debt created by Obama's domestic policies.

Ahmadinejad's scare tactics have been nothing but a manufactured threat, designed to prevent us from taking action. His warnings of a third world war and skyrocketing prices to bring about a global economic meltdown are absurd scare tactics.

Do you really believe that after an attack on Iran, she would be able to keep the Straits of Hormuz closed for more than four or five days? Russia, China, Europe and America need the oil! They're not going to risk an economic global meltdown in order to placate Iran. In any case, Iran has only six 1986-vintage destroyers and men on attack vessels — no match for a navy of any major country.

Although the Obama administration is still trying to convince us that he has the best interest of Israel and America at heart, the facts prove otherwise.

November 21, 2011 — The Senate passed a resolution, 100-to-zero (co-sponsored by Mark Kirk, R-IL, and Robert Menendez, D-NJ), to impose sanctions on Iran's central bank and any country that does business with Iran. But Obama, for fear of antagonizing Iran, China and Russia, ignored the will of the Senate and watered-down the sanctions until they were ineffective. Obama's rejection of this bipartisan bill was unconscionable. Could 100 Senators be wrong?

January 11, 2012 — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly condemned the car bomb attack that killed Iran's nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan. (His wife admitted he was working to annihilate Israel.) Now that Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan is gone, he doesn't get the chance to kill us, and we should be rejoicing. Rather, Hillary Clinton commiserated with Ahmadinejad.

January 11, 2012 — Hillary Clinton's reaction to the recent news that Iran had begun enriching uranium at the Fordow facility near Qom, was that she called on Iran to return to the negotiating table with the U.N. Security Council to find a solution that would include Iran's peaceful use of nuclear energy. Another stall tactic by our Administration, and there is no way that Ahmadinejad would agree to negotiations. Of course he would consent to peaceful use of nuclear energy — he gave that as his stated purpose. This Administration must think like Ahmadinejad, that the Iranians can pull the wool over the eyes of the American people.

January 13, 2012 — There is general agreement that the Obama Administration appears to be pivoting toward a policy of containment (i.e., Iran will get the nuclear bomb, but we can contain their use of it). The basis for this concern arose from the administration's refusal to impose stricter sanctions against Iran, which was proposed by the Senate. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), fearful that Obama will adopt a containment policy, plans to introduce a Senate resolution that declares a containment policy unacceptable, for it would not stop Iran from using a nuclear weapon. Therefore, obtaining a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.

January 14, 2012 — Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak presented Israel's red line: from the moment most of the uranium is enriched at a protected site, Iran will have achieved a strategic advantage and Israel will have lost her option of a military strike. And already, Olli Heinonen, former Director-General of IAEA, has admitted that Iran is building a stockpile of 20-percent enriched uranium at a protected site, that could, within weeks, be further purified to the 90-percent necessary for weapons grade. WITHIN WEEKS!

Obama has a red line too, where Iran is progressed to the point of developing a nuclear warhead rather than making do with nuclear capability. Progressed in developing a nuclear warhead? You don't need a Ph.D. in foreign affairs to understand Obama's foreign policy is more beneficial to Iran than to America and Israel.

January 12, 2012 — Obama sent 9,000 troops to coordinate a defense exercise with Israel.

January 14, 2012 — Obama cancelled a large, joint U.S.-Israeli military drill, scheduled to take place in the coming months, due to budgetary constraints. The drill, called "Austere Challenge 2," was supposed to be the largest ever held between the two countries — a drill that would test multiple Israeli and U.S. air defense systems against incoming missiles and rockets. Israel has deployed the Arrow system, jointly developed with and funded by the U.S., designed to intercept Iranian missiles.

January 19, 2012 — U.S. Joint Chief of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey arrived in Israel to obtain assurances that she won't strike Iran. On whose side is the President of the United States? Should we fear Ahmadinejad, or Obama's foreign policy that enables an enemy to advance fearlessly?

In minutes, Obama will take the stage at AIPAC to convince us that he has the best interests of Israel and America at heart. He will claim that Dempsey is right, that it would be harmful to attack Iran because sanctions are beginning to work. He will assure them that Iran will not be permitted to cross the line of no return, a line that he alone has chosen that no doubt will lead to Iran's becoming a nuclear-armed terrorist state.

But what we have to consider are the actions that America must take when facing the threat of a nuclear armed Iran, regardless of Israel's position, or any other nation's position, because this is an imminent threat to the United States of America and civilization at large. This is a watershed event where a victory for freedom or Islam lies in the balance.

The question is not whether America should HELP Israel attack Iran. It is not Israel's mission to fight a global threat for the rest of the world. The question is whether America will assume her position as the Leader of the Free World and LEAD the attack on Iran, which will protect Israel and the West.

But so many of you who are fighting Sharia have remained silent on this point. Do you not understand that by remaining silent and not challenging Obama to fulfill his Presidential obligation to defend our Constitution from an imminent threat, that YOU have already waved the white flag of surrender, giving Islam power over yourselves and our nation? You have become Sharia-compliant!

On Tuesday, March 6, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich will address AIPAC. These candidates say they would stop Iran from becoming a nuclear terrorist state when they are President, but how? 2013 is too late. We need a dog in the hunt NOW!

The question is which of these three candidates can wage a Presidential campaign as though he were the President, to rally our citizens to demand Obama take action now — because there is no one in the White House who will protect our nation. The candidate who can rally our citizens this way is the candidate worthy of being the President of the United States of America. Isn't this the campaign President Reagan embraced when he was running for office that stopped America from becoming a second-rate power under the Carter administration?

When there is an aggressive plan by those who would end our freedoms, our plan must be that much more aggressive to stop them. If we want to continue having this country worth fighting for, we must demand an end to sanctions and call for the immediate destruction of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. If not, we will forfeit our mission and our destiny as the nation to unite all nations in the fight to end the scourge of global tyranny. This is America's manifest destiny!

How could it be otherwise? Being at cross-purposes, neither force can long co-exist with the other. One system sustains freedom, and the other, submission. One achieves peace and unity through a democratic and Constitutional balance of power, while the other accomplishes a mockery of these virtues through the absolute subjugation of the individual human spirit to the will of the most ruthless contender for power.

In our quest to keep the light of freedom from being extinguished, why do we not consider it our badge of honor to be called the "world's policeman"? America is not in the business of nation building, but in putting out of business those nations whose constitutions honor the subjugation of humankind.

It is the lack of belief in who we are as Americans and the purpose of our existence in the world that is stopping us from achieving victory over global tyranny, and sending the man in the White House packing in 2013.

Thank you,

Stanley Zir

Contact: Click here

Website: Click here

© Stanley Zir

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Stanley Zir

Stanley Zir has dedicated his life's work to two issues: (1) combating forces that undermine the unique freedoms held by American citizens, and (2) the importance of the safety, security and survival of Israel. As founder of several websites, he is unafraid to spotlight incongruity, illegalities and treason in government power plays.... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Stanley Zir: Click here

More by this author