Posts

Rudy Giuliani and Marco Rubio on the dangers of Iran and Islam

Rudy Giuliani asks, “What is wrong with him [Obama]”? Rudy Giuliani on President Obama’s Policies on Islamism and Iran, Part 1 of 2 – Published on Feb 13, 2015. At times screaming with rage, Rudy Giuliani excoriates Barack Obama for his weak and feckless policies toward the global threats of radical Islam and a nuclear-armed Iran. This speech was delivered at the Iranian-American Community symposium “Countering Islamic Fundamentalism, and a Nuclear-Iran”:

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) states that we need to make sure that the term “Never Again!” is more than a mere slogan. U.S. Senator Marco Rubio – Senate Floor Speech – February 12, 2015:

RELATED ARTICLES:

U.S. ambassador to Denmark: Jihadi was “a Dane, born and bred in Denmark”

Islamic State: “Great reward” for killing Coptic Christians

Two More Jihadis Charged in Islamic Slaughter in Copenhagen Shooting

White House Refuses to Call 21 BEHEADING Victims Christians while Egypt launches airstrikes on Islamic State targets in Libya for savage beheading of Christians killed for their faith

EU Diplomats: Obama is agreeing to allow Iran to Increase Number of Centrifuges

Obama is trying to align the U.S. with the interests of Iran. Obama must change course and align U.S. policy with the interests of our traditional allies in the region–Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates if we are to defeat ISIS.

Instead of creating a coalition of Arab States to confront ISIS Obama is about to give Iran (a Radical Terrorist Islamic State)  the wherewithal to build an arsenal of nuclear weapons in exchange for a promise to help fight ISIS. Cleverly Iran is holding back on confronting ISIS in exchange for nuclear weapons which will be a direct threat to the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates among others.

The reason Obama is unable to a create a strong Arab coalition to fight ISIS is that the Arab States (above mentioned)  including Egypt don’t trust Obama. These traditional allies have been ignored if favor of his attempt to realign the U.S. with the interests of Iran. Each of our traditional allies know that a nuclear Iran will ultimately give rise to nuclear proliferation and Armageddon.

If Obama takes immediate steps to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program there is little doubt a substantial coalition of Arab allies and Egypt would be achievable with U.S. leadership to confront ISIS.  Instead Obama is allowing Iran to create nuclear weapons based on a promise to fight ISIS.

Iran knows, currently ISIS more of a threat to the other Arab Sunni States than it is to Iran. In reality Iran and ISIS have a common goal to destroy other traditional Sunni States particularly Saudi Arabia which controls oil prices.

EU Diplomats: U.S. and Iran Moving Closer to Nuclear Deal

European diplomats have told Israeli officials in recent days that the U.S. and Iran are moving closer to an agreement that would increase the number of centrifuges that Iran would be permitted to keep. In exchange, the Iranians would bring their influence to bear to ensure quiet in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, Israel Army Radio reported Tuesday.
European diplomats said the U.S. in recent weeks has made significant concessions, permitting Tehran to operate 6,500 centrifuges while lifting sanctions. In fact, the Europeans are opposed to the proposed linkage between the nuclear issue and other geopolitical matters.

(Jerusalem Post)

Bomb Iran?

Today’s show is a veritable potpourri of interesting stories and experiences of The United West team as they return from a successful trip to the nation’s Capitol, Washington DC.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslim cab driver from Virginia added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists List

Pakistan Muslim leader: “Blasphemy is a Zionists’ plot to disturb peace”

Tennessee church website hacked: “i love isis & Jihad”

Brooklyn imam: “Let us admit…that we, the Muslims, are time bombs…The majority of us Muslims hate the Christians”

Muslim Brotherhood calls for “long, uncompromising jihad” days after meeting with State Department officials

VIDEO: Iran Truth Squad on Obama’s misguided Iran policy

President Obama, in his January 20th State of the Union address, stated: “…for the first time in a decade, we’ve halted the progress of its [Iran’s] nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material.”

This assertion is false. Iran continues to pursue its nuclear program unabated, constituting a paramount national security threat to the United States and its allies. The Center for Security Policy held a panel discussion on the true state of the Iranian threat, and what Congress must do to prevent Tehran’s realization of its nuclear ambitions.

Panel members included:

  • Dr. Andrew Bostom, Author, Iran’s Final Solution for Israel: The Legacy of Jihad and Shi’ite Islamic Jew-Hatred in Iran
  • Clare Lopez, Vice President for Research and Analysis, Center for Security Policy; former CIA operations officer
  • Fred Fleitz, Senior Fellow, Center for Security Policy; former Senior Professional Staff Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; former Chief of Staff to then-Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton; former CIA analyst
  • With remarks by: Rep. Trent Franks (Arizona, 8th District) (invited), Member, House Armed Services Committee; Chairman, House EMP Caucus

ABOUT THE CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY

About the Center for Security Policy. The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic State jihadis screaming “Allahu akbar” behead man for “insulting Allah”

White House: Taliban not a terrorist group

Obama State Department hosts Muslim Brotherhood leaders

Video: Robert Spencer on Sun TV on Islamic law and the Islamic State’s hostage demands

U.S.’ Nuclear Weapons Policy Puts Country At Great Risk

While China and Russia are upgrading their nuclear weapons inventory and are going forward with advance nuclear weapons research, and while Iran is developing nuclear weapons, the Executive Branch has been degrading America’s once superior and advanced nuclear weapons technology capability. The once most powerful U.S. nuclear weapons research facility in the world is rapidly falling behind Russia and China. Please read the below article by VADM Robert R. Monroe, USN (Ret).

Sandia Lab0ratory scientists have ceased doing exploratory and research work to avoid technology surprise by other nuclear powers, and work on new smaller and more effective design nuclear weapons has ceased all together. The U.S.‘s unilateral cessation of safe underground testing has prevented scientist from testing our aging nuclear weapons, and allowing the United States with the ability to replace them with modern smaller, more effective, and safer weapons—it leaves the Republic at the mercy of the Chinese and the Russians who have no such limitations and are progressing rapidly.

“Peace through Strength”, a policy that the endorsed Combat Veterans For Congress support, could be achieved by having a modern and more effective nuclear weapons inventory. That policy has been shouted down by leftist and Socialist supporters of the Obama administration in the U.S. Congress.

The endorsed Combat Veterans For Congress who are running for election in 2014 will fight to reverse the current U.S. Nuclear Weapons policy that is putting the nation at great risk–please give them your support.

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
September 12, 2014

U.S.’ Nuclear Weapons Policy Puts Country At Great Risk

By ROBERT R. MONROE

At the dawn of the nuclear era, when America created its nuclear weapons laboratories (Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia), one of their primary missions was to avoid technological surprise.

The labs were charged to conduct advanced nuclear weapons research, development and testing of all types so that no adversary could ever take us unawares by producing some new and dangerous types of nuclear weapons.

The labs performed this mission superbly throughout World War II and the five decades of the Cold War. For over half a century our nuclear weapons and related advanced technological capabilities were supreme in the world.

But since 1992, the U.S. government — executive branch and Congress — has actively prevented the labs from doing work of this type. For 23 years Democrats and Republicans, using laws, regulations and denials of funding, progressively restricted the labs from taking any of these needed actions.

Lab scientists have not been able to even think about new weapons, exploratory work has ceased to exist and the high-priority mission of avoiding technological surprise has been closed down.

These grave mistakes resulted from the simplistic belief that they would help prevent nuclear proliferation. Wiser voices, making the obvious point that true national security — and effective prevention of nuclear proliferation — lay in nuclear weapons strength, were shouted down.
This two-decade rampage has resulted in a staggering list of national disabilities:

  • Most damaging is President Bush’s unilateral 1992 moratorium on underground nuclear testing. It bars the labs from essential testing of our overage nuclear stockpile, prevents development of relevant replacement weapons, denies our scientists use of the scientific method (the basis of all advancement) and leaves us at the mercy of Russia, China and other adversaries.
  • From 1993-2003 Congress explicitly made it illegal to carry out any research or development on low-yield nuclear weapons, which are vital to deter today’s grave new nuclear threats. This established the wrong mindset in a generation of lab scientists which still exists.
  • In 1989 the executive branch shut down the nation’s only facility to produce plutonium pits — the hearts of nuclear weapons — making us the only nuclear weapons state in the world unable to produce nuclear arms. Since then, executive branch fumbling and congressional denials have combined to prevent replacement of this absolutely essential production facility. If a decision were made today, it would still be 10 to 15 years before pit production could start.
  • In 1996 President Clinton signed the extremely damaging Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which denies nuclear weapons testing for all time. The Senate emphatically rejected ratification in 1999, but several adverse effects of the signing remain and President Obama is determined to get it ratified. The CTBT has an overpoweringly adverse effect on the labs.
  • In 2003 the executive branch belatedly proposed three important new nuclear weapons programs. The Advanced Concepts Initiative would have enabled the labs to commence research and development on advanced nukes. The Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator program would have met the mushrooming threat of hard, deeply buried targets. The Enhanced Test Readiness program would have enabled the president, in a national emergency, to conduct an underground test within one to two years, rather than the current three to five. Congress delayed, then killed, all three programs.
  • In 2005 the Reliable Replacement Warhead program was proposed. Because it had no new military capabilities, it gained fragile bipartisan support. However, Congress soon backwatered on it, and Obama killed it in 2009 as not befitting his “world without nuclear weapons” vision.
  • The 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, which established the overall nuclear policy of the current administration, provided the blueprint for U.S. nuclear weakness, a stark reversal from the role of U.S. nuclear weapons strength that had been established and maintained by 12 Presidents (six Democrats, six Republicans) throughout the prior seven decades.
  • The urgently needed modernization program for the labs and America’s nuclear weapons infrastructure, formally agreed to by Obama in return for Senate approval of New START treaty ratification in 2010, has been progressively dismantled by both branches ever since.

These eight actions — and many others — by our national leadership have emasculated the labs’ ability to protect us from technological surprise in nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, for two decades Russia has been following exactly the opposite course. Its nuclear weapons labs have focused on low-yield weapons research, design, testing and production. It’s pursued advanced concepts, fifth-generation weapons and greater use of fusion and less of fission (possibly achieving pure fusion).

Such weapons might well emit only neutrons and gamma rays, and their tactics of use would be ones we’ve never seen. Furthermore, Russia’s new strategy calls for early use of nuclear weapons in all conflicts, large and small.

America’s current nuclear weapons course is one of grave risk. Our policy documents emphasize that “nuclear stability” must be our goal, yet the technological surprise we are encouraging by our actions is the antithesis of stability. We must return to a policy of nuclear strength.

ABOUT ROBERT R. MONROE

Robert R. Monroe is a retired Navy Vice Admiral and former director of the Defense Nuclear Agency.

Red Dawn? They have nukes!

The following commentary on events on the Korean peninsula are from the Heritage Foundation:

North Korea on the Edge

Yesterday, North Korean officials warned foreigners in South Korea to leave that country. Today, the foreign ministers of the Group of Eight (G8) countries—the United States, Britain, Russia, Japan, Canada, France, Germany, and Italy—are meeting in London to discuss North Korea’s threats.

Americans are taking notice. CNN reports that “more than four in 10” Americans in a new poll say “they see the reclusive nation as an immediate threat to the United States…That’s up 13 percentage points in less than a month.”

Heritage’s experts have been following the threats closely—in fact, senior research fellow Bruce Klingner, formerly the CIA branch chief for Korea, warned of the growing risk of a clashin late March.

VIDEO: Watch North Korea experts explain where these threats are coming from

Klingner says in his latest paper this week that the escalating threats are new and “more dangerous”:

Perhaps most worrisome is that the regime’s threat du jour is occurring so rapidly. In the past, Pyongyang would issue a threat and then allow Washington and its allies time to respond, preferably by offering benefits to buy its way back to the status quo ante. The current rapid-fire threats conflict with previous North Korean behavior and reduce the potential for de-escalating the crisis.

A few things to note:

North Korea is capable of firing missiles. 

Heritage’s Michaela Dodge warns that “North Korea can already hit Hawaii, parts of Alaska, and California. It can also hit U.S. forward-deployed troops in South Korea, Japan, and Guam…While the Obama Administration does not believe that North Korea is capable of hitting the U.S. with a nuclear weapon, the U.S. has a history of underestimating North Korea’s ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programs.”

The U.S. has already responded to the threats—but more commitment to missile defense is needed.

The United States has sent nuclear-capable B-2 and B-52 bombers, F-22 fighters, and Aegis destroyers to South Korea. The Obama Administration reversed just a few of its harmful cuts to missile defense, now that the President realizes those defenses might be needed. But at the same time, the Administration has cut half a billion dollars from missile defense. This is the wrong direction to take.

Diplomacy doesn’t work with Kim Jong-un. 

Klingner recommends tough sanctions against North Korea and others violating U.N. resolutions. The U.S. should “resist the siren song” of engaging North Korea in talks, while backing up our allies with a sustained show of force.

We can’t afford to be wrong. As Klingner says:

North Korea is easy to ridicule…Its leader could well play the villain in a James Bond or Austin Powers movie. Self-appointed ambassador Dennis Rodman’s visit affirmed the image of the reclusive regime as the ultimate reality show. As such, the tendency has been to dismiss all North Korean threats as bluster. That would be a mistake.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

UPDATE: They have nukes!

FIRST TARGET: JAPAN

Florida Nuclear Plant Nearly Melts Down

Marimer Matos from Courthouse News Service reports, “Florida Power & Light fired a safety officer for shutting down a dangerously leaking nuclear reactor, because it cost $6 million to repair, the man claims in court.”

“Mark W. Hicks sued Florida Power & Light Co. in Port St. Lucie County Court, alleging whistleblower violations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, libel and fraud,” according to Matos.

“It was clear to Hicks that there was great potential peril, as a reactor which loses too much nuclear reactor coolant has a potential of causing core damage, which could ultimately lead to a nuclear meltdown at the power plant, putting the entire civilian population, which would be in proximity to the reactor, in danger,” the complaint states.

Matos reports, “In fact, the same type of coolant leak that Hicks observed at the St. Lucie power plant [pictured above] was what caused the partial nuclear core meltdown on March 28, 1979, known as the Three Mile Island Accident, in Middletown, Pennsylvania, which was the worst nuclear accident in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant history …”

“At the time of the incident, Hicks was following the plant safety procedures outlined in FPL’s Technical Specification § 6.8, and from his own general safety knowledge regarding the procedures required to reduce the safety concern.”

Hicks adds: “Following protocol, Hicks reported to the head of the Nuclear Power Division of FPL and the Executive Vice President of FPL Manoochehr Nazar, who then shockingly and recklessly insisted that Hicks start up the reactor.”

“Despite Hicks’ evaluation of the situation, the obvious safety concerns, and the clear legal requirements which dictated that Hicks and FPL shut down the reactor, Nazar ordered Hicks to sign off on starting up the reactor without repairing the valves,” reports Matos.

“Nazar took the position he did, to startup the reactor, strictly from a position of greed. The bottom line is that he was willing to risk the health, well being, and even the lives of the citizens of Florida to avoid the loss of revenue, while the reactor was being repaired,” states Hicks.

The Port St. Lucie  plant, pictured above, was built in 1976 and contains two nuclear reactors in separate containment buildings. St. Lucie Plant, Units 1 and 2 are located near Jensen Beach, FL (10 MI SE of Ft. Pierce, FL) in NRC Region II; Operator: Florida Power & Light Co.; More information on the NRC facility page link here and at this link.

Read more at Courthouse News Service.

RELATED COLUMNS:

St. Lucie Nuclear Plant not in danger of Japan-like meltdown, experts say

Man sues St. Lucie nuclear plant over job loss, claiming he was whistle-blower

Higher Gas Prices Add to Economic Slump

Courtesy of the Heritage Foundation:

Unemployment is at 8.3 percent. The economy is sputtering at 1.5 percent growth. Food prices are rising due to drought conditions across the country. And gas prices are up again, pinching Americans’ summer budgets. It is past time for the President and Congress to pursue smart policies that would put us on a path to relief.

According to AAA’s Fuel Gauge Report, the current national average for regular is $3.66 per gallon. That’s up 28 cents per gallon from a month ago, and July had its biggest price jump since AAA started tracking prices in 2000. To see the average for Florida click here.

There are many factors affecting prices that we cannot control—worldwide tensions, especially in the Middle East, can drive up oil prices. Global demand, especially from China and India’s rapidly growing economies, continues upward.

But after three years of adding regulatory hurdles and blocking exploratory access and development, President Obama’s policies are helping keep prices higher than necessary.

If the President truly wanted to lower gas prices, he would work to increase supply. But when given the opportunity, he has done the opposite. He turned down the Keystone XL pipeline, which would bring up to 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Canada. His Administration has made it even harder for companies to explore and extract domestic energy resources by canceling, delaying, or withdrawing a number of lease sales for exploration and development. Meanwhile, huge swaths of federal lands have been put off limits for energy exploration.

Domestic refinery outages have had a recent impact on gas prices. Two of the factors holding back domestic energy production are regulatory red tape and litigation—and these, we can do something about. As Heritage’s Nicolas Loris notes:

Environmental activists delay new energy projects by filing endless administrative appeals and lawsuits. Creating a manageable time frame for permitting and for groups or individuals to contest energy plans would keep potentially cost-effective ventures from being tied up for years in litigation while allowing the public and interested parties to voice opposition or support for these projects.

We don’t have to stand still. Congress could alleviate the energy crunch in 10 different ways by taking action on things we can control, like restrictions on oil shale development and offshore drilling.

One of the most common objections is that increasing domestic oil production takes too long and would not impact the market for at least a decade. The longer people make this argument, however, the longer it will take. The sooner we make investments in domestic energy, the sooner those benefits will be realized. And with some serious reforms, some of this oil can reach the market in much less than a decade.

Gas prices aren’t under the control of any one President. But Americans shouldn’t settle for policies that restrict oil exploration, refining, and production and artificially drive prices higher.

MORE FROM THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION:

High Gas Prices: Obama’s Half-Truths vs. Reality

President Obama’s 10 Worst Energy Policies