Iran Won't Have a Nuclear Weapon. Period! --- speculation and fear noted.
On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:53:56 AM UTC-5, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > > > *Iran Won’t Have a Nuclear Weapon. Period!* > > Posted By *Roger L Simon* On April 20, 2014 > > [image: obama_iran_crossed_fingers_4-20-14-1] > > What happens when presidents lie? > > The American public has had plenty of experience with this in recent > years. Liar-president could be the new hyphenate occupation like > writer-producer or architect-contractor. Almost every president has shaded > things a bit, but three modern ones have been unabashed bull artists — > Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and, of course, Barack Obama. > > Clinton ultimately got a pass for his prevarications. Nixon didn’t. > Neither deserved one. But our current liar-president deserves one even > less, because his lies have been of substance, affecting policy. Nixon and > Clinton just lied in self-defense — normal human cowardice. > > Obama is something else again. He lies proactively and often reflexively. > By proactively I mean the obvious, such as “If you like your health plan, > you can keep your health plan. Period!” By reflexively I mean that > emotional no-man’s-land when someone says something they don’t *really*mean, > but they say it anyway because they think it sounds good or makes > them seem as if they are doing the right thing. > > The red line against Syrian chemical weapons is a perfect example. Did > Obama ever have any intention of following up on that? Who knows? (Not > only are most of those weapons still in Syria, the French say Assad may > still be using > them<http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hollande-France-has-information-that-Syrian-regime-still-using-chemical-weapons-349975> > > [1].) > > Does the president himself know he is lying? I am not sure. Obama would > not be the first person to think that pronouncing something made it so — > and he has spent his life from a very young age surrounded by people who > have not contradicted him. The implications of this are quite disturbing, > if you think about them. > > It’s a form of what shrinks call “magical thinking” and is an indication > of a disconnected personality. It is so, if you think so, as Pirandello > famously put it (alternatively translated as “Right you are, if you think > you are.”) > > But whatever the case, Obama’s lies have far greater impact than the other > presidents’ because almost no one across an increasingly fractious world > believes him anymore. What a relief that must be to the Iranians not to > have to pay attention to his huffing and puffing about sanctions or > whatever pathetic amount of saber-rattling, already pro forma, he might do. > The nuclear talks can now go on in the spirit to which the mullahs are > accustomed — a charade. Obama is one of them — he lies too. Everybody > lies. Hahaha. > > So they can produce a faux document, assuming we even get to read it, that > no one adheres to and move on. Does anyone expect otherwise? Could a man > who could not even be honest about the details of a health insurance plan > be trusted to negotiate the enrichment of uranium in a secretive country on > another continent governed by religious fanatics who have been hiding their > activities for decades and for whom deception is a way of life? > > What will Obama say if and when a dirty nuke explodes in one of our > shopping malls, thousands die and the global economy goes into free fall? > Maybe he will forget he ever said “Iran won’t have a nuclear weapon. > Period!” > > Okay, he never said “period” in this case. Everyone would have doubled > over in hysterical laughter. Maybe he’d just press that old reset button > with Russia and get Vladimir on the line to help solve things. > > Outrageous, isn’t it? It would be if it weren’t so tragic. But what is to > be done? > > Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies has an article > in the *Telegraph* – Why Washington needs to open its eyes to Iran’s > intentions<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10762426/Why-Washington-needs-to-open-its-eyes-to-Irans-intentions.html> > > [2] — in which he warns the administration to take the nuclear > discussions seriously and stay firm on sanctions. Mark, as usual, makes > sense, but at the same time admonishing the administration in April 2014 to > “open its eyes” on Iran seems a tad late, to put it mildly. > > After all, it was only a few years ago that Iranian democracy protestors > by the hundreds of thousands were marching in the streets of Tehran > shouting “Obama, Obama, are you with us — or are you with them?” I’m > pretty sure we all now know the answer to that one. > ------------------------------ > > Article printed from Roger L. Simon: *http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon > <http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon>* > > URL to article: > *http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2014/04/20/iran-wont-have-a-nuclear-weapon-period/ > > <http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2014/04/20/iran-wont-have-a-nuclear-weapon-period/>* > > URLs in this post: > > [1] using them: > *http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hollande-France-has-information-that-Syrian-regime-still-using-chemical-weapons-349975 > > <http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hollande-France-has-information-that-Syrian-regime-still-using-chemical-weapons-349975>* > > [2] Why Washington needs to open its eyes to Iran’s intentions: > *http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10762426/Why-Washington-needs-to-open-its-eyes-to-Irans-intentions.html > > <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10762426/Why-Washington-needs-to-open-its-eyes-to-Irans-intentions.html>* > > > > > __._,_.___ > > > Visit Your > Group<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdXAzMnZnBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEzOTgxMjcwNDc-> > > > > [image: Yahoo! > Groups]<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlazUwZmRoBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM5ODEyNzA0Nw--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of > Use<https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
