The Front Page Cover
"I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened"
.
Featuring:
The deal of the century ...
For Iran's rulers, who have won
their nuclear battle by other means
Clifford D. May
.
"Rise up together as one voice"
"Be careful where you stand"
~~~lll~~~
.
More Carry Permits, Fewer Murders 
It's long been a truism that more guns means less crime. That may seem like a paradox, but when criminals have to wonder if potential victims are armed, it decreases the likelihood they'll commit a crime. Now, according to a new report set to be released by the Crime Prevention Research Center, we learn that murder rates have fallen at the same time concealed carry permits have skyrocketed. We don't think that's a coincidence. Since 2007, the number of people with concealed carry permits has nearly tripled — from 4.6 million to 12.8 million. And 2014 enjoyed a 15.4% increase over 2013 in permit applications, while seven states don't even require a permit. According to The Washington Times, we can thank Barack nObama, in a manner of speaking: "Between 1999 to 2007, the number of permits increased by about 240,000 per year. But in the next four years, during Mr. nObama's first term in the White House, the number of new permits issued jumped to 850,000 per year. From 2011 to 2013, the number increased by 1.5 million, rising to 1.7 million last year." Meanwhile, both the murder rate and violent crime rate dropped 25%. That doesn't in any way belittle the tragic loss of life caused by bad guys with guns, but the solution isn't to take guns away from the law-abiding. -The Patriot Post
.
.
Transgender Nation In December 2010, Barack nObama signed the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the Pentagon policy (signed by Bill Clinton) prohibiting open homosexuals from serving in the military. Stay tuned, because the next victory for the Rainbow Mafia will be the end of the ban on transsexuals among the ranks of America's Armed Forces.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter released a statement on the policy Monday, saying, "The Defense Department's current regulations regarding transgender service members are outdated and are causing uncertainty that distracts commanders from our core missions. At a time when our troops have learned from experience that the most important qualification for service members should be whether they're able and willing to do their job, our officers and enlisted personnel are faced with certain rules that tell them the opposite. Moreover, we have transgender soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines — real, patriotic Americans — who I know are being hurt by an outdated, confusing, inconsistent approach that's contrary to our value of service and individual merit."
Not to paint with too broad a brush, but is that how Carter explains the traitorous actions of Pfc. Bradley Manning? He was convicted of espionage and is serving a 35-year sentence — as a "woman."
According to UCLA's Williams Institute, the military is full of transsexuals. Color us skeptical. Carter has ordered a review of the ban with the almost sure aim of eliminating it after six months, because, as he said, "[W]e must ensure that everyone who's able and willing to serve has the full and equal opportunity to do so, and we must treat all our people with the dignity and respect they deserve." -The Patriot Post
.
.
FIRST IN FOX NEWS FIRST: NEW POLL SHOWS HILLY WAY UNDER WATER IN SWING STATES
Pro-GOP group American Crossroads had pollsters Vox Populi survey voters in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, and Virginia. This month’s results found only 38 percent of voters had a favorable opinion of former Secretary of State Hilly Clinton, while 53 percent had an unfavorable view. Clinton trailed a generic Republican candidate by 8 points. Fifty-eight percent of respondents somewhat or strongly agreed that Clinton “will say or do anything” to be president. Additionally, 56 percent of respondents found her at least somewhat untrustworthy, and 37 percent thought she was definitely hiding something about the 2012 Benghazi attack with another 21 percent probably hiding something. -Fox News
Pro-GOP group American Crossroads had pollsters Vox Populi survey voters in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, and Virginia. This month’s results found only 38 percent of voters had a favorable opinion of former Secretary of State Hilly Clinton, while 53 percent had an unfavorable view. Clinton trailed a generic Republican candidate by 8 points. Fifty-eight percent of respondents somewhat or strongly agreed that Clinton “will say or do anything” to be president. Additionally, 56 percent of respondents found her at least somewhat untrustworthy, and 37 percent thought she was definitely hiding something about the 2012 Benghazi attack with another 21 percent probably hiding something. -Fox News
.
.
Clinton family friend attacks Hilly on bank breakup - Former classmate to both Clintons, economist Robert Reich goes after Hilly for her resistance to the Glass-Steagall Act. Reich posted a column on his website stating: “Hilly Clinton won’t propose reinstating a bank break-up law known as the Glass-Steagall …This is a big mistake. It’s a mistake politically because people who believe Hilly Clinton is still too close to Wall Street will not be reassured by her position on Glass-Steagall.” -Fox News
.
.
.
nOBAMA'S IRAN NUKE DEAL LIES
{Joseph Klein} ~ The United States and its five negotiating partners (Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom and Germany) reached an agreement July 14th on the final terms of a deal with Iran... under which Iran would curb its nuclear program for a period of time in return for sanctions relief. The agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (or JCPOA for short), will go into effect on what is called “Adoption Day” - the date 90 days after the endorsement of the JCPOA by the UN Security Council, or such earlier date as may be determined by mutual consent of the JCPOA participants. The Security Council is expected to act within days to endorse the deal. During his victory lap announcing that a final deal had been reached with Iran, President nObama warned that he would veto any congressional legislation blocking his legacy foreign policy achievement. The president declared that the agreement was "built on verification," not trust. In this regard, nObama claimed that international inspectors will have 24/7 access to Iran’s key nuclear facilities to ensure Iran is fulfilling its commitments. “[Inspectors] will have access to Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain – its uranium mines and mills, its conversion facility, and its centrifuge manufacturing and storage facilities,” he said. “This ensures that Iran will not be able to divert materials from known facilities to covert ones.” http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259469/obamas-iran-nuke-deal-lies-joseph-klein
.
American Ally Saudi Arabia is Also Trashing nObama's Iran Deal
{Jeff Dunetz} ~ Remember at the beginning of nObama's presidency when he made that huge out reach to the Muslim world? Based on their reaction the Iran deal an important part of that Muslim world, Saudi Arabia may want to reach back to the US president and smack him across the face... Amongst the mistakes the mainstream media has been making about the P5+1 deal with Iran is that the only U.S. opposition comes from Republicans (tell that to NJ Senator Menedez, a Democrat) and the only opposition outside of the U.S. comes from Bibi Netanyahu. The truth is the Israeli political system reminds me of a circular firing squad on a bad day. There are eleven parties with seats in the parliament (Knesset) and most of them think that Bibi Netanyahu is the devil. Yet every single party is against the Iran deal. Outside of Israel the Sunni gulf states hate the deal as much if not more than Israel. In Saudi Arabia the ruling monarchy fears Shia Iran will try to overturn its rulers. They stopped trusting the U.S. when Obama drew the red-line in Syria and then punted.
.
'Iran Was on the Verge of Giving Up Nuke Program'
{Yaakov Levi} ~ An Israeli official argued to Israel Radio on Thursday that with just a little more pressure, Iran would have given in completely on its nuclear program... But, the United States and its international partners failed by not being tough enough on Tehran, and conceding too many points too quickly. Iran, according to the official, was seriously “on the skids" - bankrupt to a degree far greater than Westerners realized. Nearly a decade of sanctions had taken its toll, and without a lifting of the sanctions, the government there realized it would soon be likely swept away by angry Iranians, who, leaders estimated, were desperate enough to rebel even given the country's repressive political system.
.
Hilly Clinton’s Lies Are Starting to Catch Up with Her
{Roger Aronoff} ~ The mainstream media appear eager to distract from the substantive issues raised by the email scandals continuing to plague Hilly Clinton’s presidential campaign... One example is the media’s focus on the timeline surrounding a Select Committee on Benghazi subpoena for her emails, and when those emails were deleted. As I recently argued, the media wish that these stories about Mrs. Clinton were not true. Most reporters cannot fathom, or will not acknowledge, that she routinely lies to the public about her activities—and those of the Clinton Foundation—while stonewalling both the press and the public. The repeated revelations that Mrs. Clinton has been lying are apparently affecting her standing in the polls. Politico is now reporting that in the past couple of months she has dropped from having the support of 60% of Democrats, to now having just 51%. And that is before Vice President loose lips Joe Biden enters the race, which many signs indicate may happen in the not-too-distant future.
.
IAF Strikes Terrorist Targets After Rocket Hits
{blog.standforisrael.org} ~ Rocket alert sirens rang out early Thursday morning in towns near the Gaza Strip after a missile was fired from the Palestinian territory... The air force struck the Gaza Strip hours later in response…The IDF said it wouldn’t tolerate any attempts to harm Israeli citizens and that it holds Hamas responsible.
.
nObama Gets Peevish at His Press Conference
{whitehousedossier.com} ~ This is really breaking my heart. President nObama got all upset when asked Wednesday at his press conference by Major Garrett of CBS News... why he was “content” to leave U.S. hostages in Iran as part of the nuclear deal... Major later admitted that he was trying to get under nObama’s skin a bit, which is what a reporter should do in order to elicit an unscripted response. Amazingly, for asking a direct question, even some of Major’s colleagues are apparently calling him disrespectful, like CNN’s Dana Bash. nObama is obviously sensitive about the topic, as he should be. Can you really negotiate a “deal” with another country that is holding your citizens hostage? It was certainly another sign of our desperation and perhaps contributed to the lousy deal we got.
.
TIME TO ARREST HILLY
{Joseph Klein} ~ Hilly Clinton led the charge in the nObama administration to go to war in Libya. Her objective was to overthrow the regime of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi... Not one to be deterred by opponents in the Pentagon and Congress to her reckless interventionist plans, Hilly decided to end-run them. Her State Department helped facilitate what Andrew P. Napolitano in his scathing article has called “Hilly’s secret war.” When the secret war began to backfire, as arms ended up in the hands of anti-American jihadists, Hilly Clinton and other senior members of the nObama administration engaged in lies, obstructions of congressional investigations and scapegoating to cover their tracks. An e-mail from Hilly Clinton’s deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, dated August 21, 2011, to one of Hilly Clinton’s close associates, Cheryl Mills, and to then State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, described Hilly’s central role involving Libya in these words: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259485/time-arrest-hillary-joseph-klein
.
nObama’s Own Adviser Just Admitted Something About Iran Deal
{Norvell Rose} ~ When the nObama administration has a self-serving story it wants to sell to the American public, it often trots out Susan Rice, the president’s national security adviser and generally dependable lockstep lieutenant... Yes, that Susan Rice — the nObama mouthpiece who infamously claimed on a handful of TV talk shows that the deadly Benghazi attack was prompted by an amateurish YouTube video. The same Susan Rice who stunningly declared that accused Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl served his country with “honor and distinction.” So, here now comes Ms. Rice with her latest attempt at a spin-to-win media appearance — this one in defense of President nObama’s Iran deal that’s drawing so much bipartisan fire. However, the nObama surrogate may have stepped in it while talking to Wolf Blitzer and his CNN viewers about the tens of billions of dollars Iran is slated to receive as a result of sanctions being lifted. Breitbart News reports that Rice admitted the Islamic regime in Iran may well spend some of the freed-up cash on beefing up its military and supporting terrorist operations in the Middle East. Rice, though, used the euphemism “bad behavior” instead of terrorism; just as her boss, nObama, has refused to utter the phrase “Islamic terrorism.” http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas-own-adviser-just-admitted-something-about-iran-deal-he-never-wanted-public/?utm_source=MailChimp&utm_medium=email&utm_content=top-story&utm_campaign=DailyEmail07.16.15
.
Heads in the Sand
{Matthew Continetti} ~ The last week has provided a sad but worthwhile opportunity to assess the global elite, the heads of state and government, the bankers and journalists and celebrities, as they worked overtime to preserve a veneer of progress and stability... From Athens to Beijing, D.C. to Vienna, the desire has been to avoid tough decisions, to prolong deliberation, to pretend as though dangerous emerging trends do not exist. To take action, to provoke, to choose, to commit, to fight, to admit reality would be far too disruptive, would cost too much, and would endanger the social positions our best and brightest have worked so mightily to attain. Better for them to wait things out. The Iran deal is a fabulous artifice, an intricately woven shawl that masks its real intent: the avoidance of military confrontation with Iran and the rise of Persian regional hegemony. “Either the issue of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation,” President nObama said at his press conference Thursday, “or it’s resolved through war. Those are the options.” He presented his diplomatic resolution as a fait accompli, as the best America could ever hope to do. If the deal favors Iran, which it unequivocally does— without so much as closing a nuclear facility this rogue regime gets cash, legitimacy, and an end to U.N. bans on sales of conventional weapons and ballistic missile technology—it is because Obama wanted desperately to pursue the diplomatic option and prove its validity. hanoi John Kerry, the Times notes, told his fellow diplomats that his experience in Vietnam made him committed “to using diplomacy to avoid the horrors of war.” And so he has avoided war, at least for now, and at least as far as the nObama administration is concerned. The wars sown by Iran in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, however, will continue indefinitely, and probably will be expanded as the ayatollah and his Revolutionary Guards enjoy their windfall. hanoi Kerry and nObama both understand that their patchwork agreement is only temporary, that Iran could cheat, that the possibility exists of waking up one day in the near future to an underground nuclear test at an undisclosed Iranian facility, that in the out years of the agreement Iran, armed and antagonistic, may rush to nuclear breakout. nObama can’t say his deal ends the threat of a nuclear Iran because it obviously does not; what he does say is that if Iran complies (there’s that if again) then at the end of a decade we’ll be “much more knowledgeable about what their capabilities are, much more knowledgeable about what their program is, and still in a position to take whatever actions we would take today.” http://freebeacon.com/columns/heads-in-the-sand/
.
Iran Bans U.S. Inspectors from All Nuclear Sites
{Adam Kredo} ~ U.S. and Iranian officials confirmed Thursday that no American nuclear inspectors will be permitted to enter the country’s contested nuclear site under the parameters of a deal reached with world powers this week, according to multiple statements by American and Iranian officials... Under the tenants of the final nuclear deal reached this week in Vienna, only countries with normal diplomatic relations with Iran will be permitted to participate in inspections teams organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The revelation of this caveat has attracted concern from some analysts who maintain that only American experts can be trusted to verify that Iran is not cheating on the deal and operating clandestine nuclear facilities. The admission is the latest in a series of apparent concessions made by the United States to Iran under the deal. Other portions of the agreement include a promise by the United States to help Iran combat nuclear sabotage and threats to its program. Now the real deal is coming out and its stupid and dangerous. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-bans-u-s-inspectors-from-all-nuclear-sites/
.
.
The deal of the century ...
For Iran's rulers, who have won
their nuclear battle by other means
Clifford D. May
.
. {jewishworldreview.com} ~ On Friday, large crowds in Tehran and other Iranian cities burned American flags and chanted "Death to America!" On Saturday, Iranian media outlets reported that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had instructed university students to "continue the struggle against arrogant powers" - with the United States at the top of that list. On Tuesday, President nObama announced a historic agreement between Iran and the United States.
.
It would be comforting to believe that the last of these developments mitigates the first two - that with an agreement in place, Iran's "struggle" to bring about America's demise will begin at least to lose steam. The truth is more likely the opposite. Mr. nObama has always seen diplomacy as an alternative to war. Iran's rulers, by contrast, have always regarded diplomacy as war by other means. Today, they believe they have achieved victory in a great battle. The evidence suggests they're correct.
.
Mr. nObama and other defenders of the deal claim that it "restricts Iran's nuclear program for more than a decade." Another way to say that: Under this agreement, in little more than a decade, all the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will disappear.
Mr. nObama and other defenders of the deal claim that it "restricts Iran's nuclear program for more than a decade." Another way to say that: Under this agreement, in little more than a decade, all the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will disappear.
.
It bears emphasizing: Iran's rulers remain the world's leading sponsors of terrorism (according to the U.S. State Department), responsible for killing and maiming thousands of Americans over the decades since Iran's Islamic Revolution. Their ambitions are hegemonic: They dream of a nuclear-armed Iranian empire powerful enough to threaten the very existence of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other Middle Eastern states aligned with the United States.
It bears emphasizing: Iran's rulers remain the world's leading sponsors of terrorism (according to the U.S. State Department), responsible for killing and maiming thousands of Americans over the decades since Iran's Islamic Revolution. Their ambitions are hegemonic: They dream of a nuclear-armed Iranian empire powerful enough to threaten the very existence of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other Middle Eastern states aligned with the United States.
.
Knowing the intentions of Iran's rulers, one can only be mystified as to why American and other Western leaders think they are doing their jobs by giving them a path to capabilities that match those intentions - asking them only to please drag their feet for a while.
Knowing the intentions of Iran's rulers, one can only be mystified as to why American and other Western leaders think they are doing their jobs by giving them a path to capabilities that match those intentions - asking them only to please drag their feet for a while.
.
And delaying Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability for a decade or so is the best-case scenario. I'm betting Iran's rulers will violate this agreement just as they have violated the United Nations Security Council resolutions put in place since 2006 and even the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) agreed to in November 2013. The Saudis are doubtless among those making the same bet - virtually guaranteeing accelerated nuclear proliferation over the years ahead.
And delaying Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability for a decade or so is the best-case scenario. I'm betting Iran's rulers will violate this agreement just as they have violated the United Nations Security Council resolutions put in place since 2006 and even the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) agreed to in November 2013. The Saudis are doubtless among those making the same bet - virtually guaranteeing accelerated nuclear proliferation over the years ahead.
.
Agreement defenders insist the sanctions can always be "snapped back." In fact, that will require a long and arduous process, one likely to be blocked by Russia and China, U.N. Security Council members that do not hide their desire to see America weakened and in retreat.
Agreement defenders insist the sanctions can always be "snapped back." In fact, that will require a long and arduous process, one likely to be blocked by Russia and China, U.N. Security Council members that do not hide their desire to see America weakened and in retreat.
.
A fine-tooth-comb reading of the text will take place over the days ahead, but it appears that American negotiators crossed not one of the "red lines" insisted upon by Ayatollah Khamenei while every red line drawn by Mr. nObama has been erased.
A fine-tooth-comb reading of the text will take place over the days ahead, but it appears that American negotiators crossed not one of the "red lines" insisted upon by Ayatollah Khamenei while every red line drawn by Mr. nObama has been erased.
.
For example, there will not be "go-anywhere-anytime" inspections, only "managed access" - with the emphasis, inevitably, on Iranians managing inspectors so as to limit their access. Iran will not be required to come clean on its past nuclear weapons development - the baseline effective monitoring would require. Iran's rulers are likely to get a "signing bonus" of tens of billions of dollars that they will be able to spend on their terrorist proxies.
For example, there will not be "go-anywhere-anytime" inspections, only "managed access" - with the emphasis, inevitably, on Iranians managing inspectors so as to limit their access. Iran will not be required to come clean on its past nuclear weapons development - the baseline effective monitoring would require. Iran's rulers are likely to get a "signing bonus" of tens of billions of dollars that they will be able to spend on their terrorist proxies.
.
And in recent days there was a new Iranian demand: that, over time, the United Nations Security Council's ban on Iran's import and export of advanced conventional weapons be lifted, allowing the regime to buy more and better weapons for its proxies, as well as next-generation cruise missiles that can be used against U.S. forces in the region. This, too, has been conceded.
And in recent days there was a new Iranian demand: that, over time, the United Nations Security Council's ban on Iran's import and export of advanced conventional weapons be lifted, allowing the regime to buy more and better weapons for its proxies, as well as next-generation cruise missiles that can be used against U.S. forces in the region. This, too, has been conceded.
.
What now? President nObama refused to submit this agreement as a treaty, which would have required approval by two-thirds of the Senate. But many members of Congress were adamant that they not be completely cut out of the most significant national security decision of this still-young but already-bloody century. They are to have 60 days to examine the agreement before registering their approval or disapproval.
What now? President nObama refused to submit this agreement as a treaty, which would have required approval by two-thirds of the Senate. But many members of Congress were adamant that they not be completely cut out of the most significant national security decision of this still-young but already-bloody century. They are to have 60 days to examine the agreement before registering their approval or disapproval.
.
It will require courage for Democrats to vote against an agreement that its supporters claim is the only alternative to war. Mr. nObama will accuse those not supporting him of disloyalty. Various left-wing groups will threaten primary challenges against Democrats who don't toe the line.
It will require courage for Democrats to vote against an agreement that its supporters claim is the only alternative to war. Mr. nObama will accuse those not supporting him of disloyalty. Various left-wing groups will threaten primary challenges against Democrats who don't toe the line.
.
And even if most members of Congress do vote to disapprove, President nObama is unlikely to be swayed by their advice and non-consent. Instead, expect him to issue a veto which would require a supermajority to overturn. After that, he's likely to take his "non-binding" agreement to the U.N. Security Council and ask that international body to make it "binding" on the United States.
And even if most members of Congress do vote to disapprove, President nObama is unlikely to be swayed by their advice and non-consent. Instead, expect him to issue a veto which would require a supermajority to overturn. After that, he's likely to take his "non-binding" agreement to the U.N. Security Council and ask that international body to make it "binding" on the United States.
.
Such a stunning surrender of American sovereignty will render commentators on the right apoplectic. Others will shrug their shoulders or perhaps even applaud the president for his commitment to "transnational progressivism."
Such a stunning surrender of American sovereignty will render commentators on the right apoplectic. Others will shrug their shoulders or perhaps even applaud the president for his commitment to "transnational progressivism."
.
As you read about this deal in the newspapers and hear about it on TV, note how seldom Iran is referred to by its full name: The Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran's rulers follow the teachings of its first "supreme leader," Ruhollah Khomeini who, in 1979, made clear that he was initiating a global revolution - what he called a jihad against America and its allies, a struggle meant to establish Islamic supremacy, a struggle meant to end with more than just America's flag in flames.
As you read about this deal in the newspapers and hear about it on TV, note how seldom Iran is referred to by its full name: The Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran's rulers follow the teachings of its first "supreme leader," Ruhollah Khomeini who, in 1979, made clear that he was initiating a global revolution - what he called a jihad against America and its allies, a struggle meant to establish Islamic supremacy, a struggle meant to end with more than just America's flag in flames.
.
Ayatollah Khomeini would be proud of his successors, committed revolutionaries and skilled diplomats who, through guile and determination, have out-negotiated the envoys of the "Great Satan," thereby preparing the ground for the many battles - not just diplomatic - yet to come.
Ayatollah Khomeini would be proud of his successors, committed revolutionaries and skilled diplomats who, through guile and determination, have out-negotiated the envoys of the "Great Satan," thereby preparing the ground for the many battles - not just diplomatic - yet to come.
.
Comments