Lets begin with this quote” Any deal with Iran must include a clear and unam­bigu­ous recog­ni­tion by Tehran of Israel’s right to exist”. Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu said.
What exact­ly would the world look like if America uses it mil­i­tary might to oblit­er­ate every coun­try or group of peo­ple who holler “death to America”?
Would there even be a world?
This has been the cen­tral argu­ment behind Netanyahu’s aggres­sive stance against Iran. That Iran does not rec­og­nize Israel’s right to exist.
Using that log­ic every pow­er­ful coun­try has the right to break less pow­er­ful coun­tries who dare have an oppos­ing world view.
The rea­son behind Netanyahu’s obses­sion with bring­ing Iran to it’s knees requires some scrutiny.
Israel has not adhered to any United Nation’s res­o­lu­tions, it has man­aged to thumb it’s nose at the world because of its pow­er­ful friends , The United States, England and France.
Netanyahu’s arro­gance, and his cheek­i­ness is well known, he is not afraid to open­ly defy his most pow­er­ful backer, despite President Obama’s oppo­si­tion to a war with Iran.
He is com­fort­able in the knowl­edge that there are more than enough lack­eys and shills in the con­gress bought and paid for with Jewish lob­by’s money.

Netanyahu is sin­gu­lar­ly focused on the destruc­tion of Iran not because Iran is guilty of any greater trans­gres­sion that Israel has not equaled or sur­passed. His goal is to have Iran so neutered that Israel will wield the only real pow­er in the region.
The biggest oppo­si­tion to Israel’s geo­graph­i­cal expan­sion in Palestine is hin­dered by Hamas and Hezbollah both allies and pro­teges of Iran.
Understanding the dynam­ics of this sce­nario is crit­i­cal to under­stand­ing exact­ly what exact­ly are the real burn­ing issues in that Region.
One does not have to set foot in the region to under­stand that at the heart of many con­flicts in the region is the Palestinian Israeli con­flict aid­ed and abet­ted by the United States and oth­er west­ern power.

Now lets not kid our­selves Iran is no Angel but nei­ther is Israel.
Israel is report­ed to poss­es in excess of 200 nuclear bombs.
What gives Israel the right to pos­sess Bombs Iran or any oth­er nation are not allowed to have because of the nuclear non-pro­lif­er­a­tion treaty?
No one wants a world with nuclear bombs in the hands of every nation.
However we heard the same argu­ments when the Indians and the Pakistani’s declared they had nuclear bombs.
All of that noise has now dis­s­a­peared, nei­ther Pakistan nor India has used Nuclear weapons to threat­en nor oblit­er­ate anyone.
Nuclear weapons are essen­tial­ly bar­gain­ing chips, sta­tus symbols.
Of course in the hand of bad actors they can make for real­ly bad situations.
The United States how­ev­er is the only nation to ever have used an atom­ic device.
This caused a mad rush by oth­er pow­ers, soon the Soviet Union France and England announced they were nuclear armed as well, China , India , and Pakistan and some believe North Korea was to follow.
Each pow­er despite their fear­some arse­nal are mind­ful that the use of nuclear weapons on anoth­er coun­try will elic­it a mas­sive response from the oth­er coun­try or that coun­try’s protectors.

What’s impor­tant to note is that it is clear that the only pow­ers who should have nuclear weapons are Caucasian pow­ers. France, Britain,Russia, The United States.
Of course it was not exact­ly a cel­e­bra­tion when Asia joined the pres­ti­gious club.
China, India and Pakistan was to become mem­bers of that spe­cial group.
Nevertheless Israel was allowed to have the very weapons they are fight­ing tooth and nail to keep from the hands of oth­er nations.
The bomb must be kept from the hands of non-white peo­ple at all cost.

Mawuna Remarque KOUTONIN Monday, June 17th, 2013 at 9:47 pm. writing for Silicon Africa in an Articled titled  The Dark Truth About Why South Africa Destroyed Its Nuclear Weapons in 1990's.
Why would any country voluntarily dismantle its nuclear weapons which take years and billions to develop?South Africa is the only country which ever give up its nuclear dissuasion power. But Why? Did they dismantle the country’s nuclear weapons because they believed in a vision of an Africa free of nuclear weapons, as the press reported?

NO.

The white apartheid regime didn’t want a Black Nation to possess nuclear weapon, a dissuasive power in our contemporary world. Foreseeing a democratic South Africa where Black people will be in power, the white regime destroyed all the country’s main military facilities, ballistics missiles and dismantling all six complete nuclear weapons shortly after the release of Nelson Mandela from prison in 1990.

South Africa hastily joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and seven weeks later the country signed a Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

According to Greg Mills “South African authorities co-operated fully with the IAEA during the whole verification process, and were commended by the then director-general of the Agency in 1992, Dr. Hans Blix, for providing inspectors with unlimited access and data beyond those required by the Safeguards Agreement“ In less than 3 years all South Africa’s ballistic missiles were scrapped, its six nuclear weapons dismantled, and any remaining missile engines destroyed.

To prevent any future attempt by any upcoming South African administration to empower the country, the apartheid regime enacted the most self-restricting legislation in the form of the “Act on the Non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction” that makes provision for a South African Council for Non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction to control exports of dual-use materials, equipment and technology. While South African apartheid leaders’ actions were met with praise by the western medias and leaders, many saw this speedy destruction of  all the country main military infrastructures as a sign that the racist apartheid regime and many western countries didn’t want  the upcoming Black leaders to inherit such a powerful arsenal.

“The whole thing was dressed up as an honourable retreat from a nuclear Africa”said Frans Cronje, deputy CEO of the South African Institute of Race Relations, a Johannesburg-based think tank.

“A nuclear African state would be taken more seriously and would have a stronger leadership role – it forces people to take you seriously. In leadership terms, renouncing nuclear weapons does the opposite – it reduces your influence in foreign affairs and international politics. If renouncing nuclear weapons grows your influence, others would be falling over themselves to surrender their nuclear arsenals.” continued Frans Cronje While a racist, violent, and brutal oppression white apartheid regime was trusted to have and manage nuclear weapons, a Black and democratically elected regime was not trusted to  manage them. That historic decision was all about racism. Nothing else. South Africa would today be stronger on the international stage if it had retained a nuclear arsenal.

Mawuna Koutonin is a world peace activist who relentlessly works to empower people to express their full potential and pursue their dreams, regardless of their background. He is the Editior of SiliconAfrica.com, Founder of Goodbuzz.net, and Social activist for Africa Renaissance. Koutonin’s ultimate dream is to open a world-class human potential development school in Africa in 2017. If you are interested in learning more about this venture or Koutonin’s other projects, you can reach him directly by emailing at linkcrafter@gmail.com.

This cannot be lost on the United States nor any of the countries which found themselves in America's cross-hairs after America was done with them.
The list is long, Iran, Chile, Panama,Iraq, Nicaragua.
During the Cold War, both the State and Defense departments dubbed Mandela’s political party, the African National Congress, a terrorist group, and Mandela’s name remained on the U.S. terrorism watch list till 2008.

Presidents Carter and Reagan and Congress had all instituted sanctions against the white minority South African government because of its policy of racial apartheid. But in 1986, Reagan condemned Mandela’s group, the ANC, which was leading the black struggle against the apartheid regime, saying it engaged in "calculated terror ... the mining of roads, the bombings of public places, designed to bring about further repression." The terrorist designation finally proved too embarrassing for the U.S. government to ignore. In April 2008, during the last year of the George W. Bush administration, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told a Senate committee that her department had to issue waivers for ANC members to travel to the United States. "This is a country with which we now have excellent relations, South Africa, but it's frankly a rather embarrassing matter that I still have to waive in my own counterpart, the foreign minister of South Africa, not to mention the great leader Nelson Mandela," Rice said then.

Before Osama Bin Laden was public enemy #1, he was America's freedom fighter of the Mujaheddin Guerrilla group fighting America's proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
A Washington Post Article dated Dec. 2nd 2013. Titled "Why is the U.S. okay with Israel having nuclear weapons but not Iran"?
Columnist Max Fisher wrote.
"What Einstein, Oppenheimer and Teller, the three of them are Jews, made for the United States could also be done by scientists in Israel for their own people," Ben-Gurion wrote in 1956.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/12/02/why-is-the-u-s-okay-with-israel-having-nuclear-weapons-but-not-iran

 

Ben Gurion fundamentally believed that Israeli Jews were the architects of America's nuclear program. He believed they had a right and indeed a duty to do the same for Israel.
Pride, the very pride Iran feels in the development of it's own program. Israel gets to keep over 200 nuclear bombs , no one else in the region must have that right.
Hegemony and total domination is what Israel craves.
Iranian scientists have been murdered, Iran has had it's computer systems attacked yet Israel claims they want to live in peace , even as their agents murder Iranians on Iranian soil and the Mossad is actively engaged in cyber warfare against Iran.
Max Fisher's Article in the Washington Post make interesting read , even though it's slant is predictably Pro-Israel , it gives a small window into the truth of Israel's nuclear Arsenal which no one talks about.

 

With The basis for an agree­ment for a peace­ful Iranian nuclear pro­gram and a lift­ing of sanc­tions against that nation has been reached, EU for­eign pol­i­cy chief Federica Mogherini announced Thursday in Switzerland. 
President Obama took to the Airwaves to explain to the world the choic­es the world had in deal­ing with the issue of Iran’s nuclear program.
Before Obama could get to the micro­phone once a deal was reached Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz issued a state­ment point­ing to Iran’s alleged involve­ment in Yemen and talked about what he sees as Iran’s sup­posed spon­sor­ing of ter­ror in the region.
The details of a deal has not yet been reached ‚yet Israel has sig­naled that it mat­ters not what the details of any deal is they will be opposed to one.
In fact while teh frame-work for a deal was being worked on assid­u­ous­ly by major pow­ers Netanyahu was busy try­ing to scut­tle the pos­si­bil­i­ty of any deal.
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the world from the lofty perch of the United States House of Representatives.
But that was not all Israeli func­tionar­ies were busy try­ing to influ­ence world lead­ers on how to deal with the issue before them.
Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said Thursday that all options includ­ing mil­i­tary action were on the table in the face of the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Speaking to Israel Radio as crunch talks on Iran’s nuclear pro­gram con­tin­ued in Switzerland, Steinitz said Israel would seek to counter any threat through diplo­ma­cy and intel­li­gence but “if we have no choice we have no choice… the mil­i­tary option is on the table.”

Asked about pos­si­ble US objec­tions to Israeli mil­i­tary action, Steinitz point­ed to Israel’s uni­lat­er­al attack against the Osirak nuclear reac­tor in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 1981.

“That oper­a­tion was not car­ried out in agree­ment with the United States,” he said.

Steinitz, a close ally of Benjamin Netanyahu, said the Israeli leader had left no doubt as to the country’s response to nuclear-armed Iran.“The prime min­is­ter has said clear­ly that Israel will not allow Iran to become a nuclear pow­er,” Steinitz said.
http://​www​.time​sofis​rael​.com/​a​s​-​n​u​c​l​e​a​r​-​t​a​l​k​s​-​r​e​s​u​m​e​-​i​s​r​a​e​l​-​h​i​n​t​s​-​a​t​-​m​i​l​i​t​a​r​y​-​o​p​t​i​on/

Israel will con­tin­ue to work as a mole in under­min­ing the poten­tial of a work­ing deal between the west and Iran.
What Israel wants is mil­i­tary dec­i­ma­tion of the Islamic state of Iran.
If Israel can­not get America to do it there you have it they are now threat­en­ing they will do it them­selves, or at least try to.

Prof. James Petras Global Research, November 02, 2013.

“Pro-Israel Policy groups such as AIPAC work with unlim­it­ed fund­ing to divert US pol­i­cy in the region ( Middle East )” Jack Straw, Member of Parliament and for­mer Foreign Secretary of the British Labor Party. “The United States should drop a nuclear bomb on Iran to spur the coun­try to end its nuclear pro­gram” Sheldon Adelson, biggest donor to the Republican Party and major fundrais­er for pro-Israel polit­i­cal action com­mit­tees, speech at Yeshiva University, New York City, October 22, 2013.

Introduction

The ques­tion of war or peace with Iran rests with the poli­cies adopt­ed by the White House and the US Congress. The peace over­tures by new­ly elect­ed Iranian President Rohani have res­onat­ed favor­ably around the world, except with Israel and its Zionist acolytes in North America and Europe . The first nego­ti­at­ing ses­sion pro­ceed­ed with­out recrim­i­na­tion and result­ed in an opti­mistic assess­ment by both sides. Precisely because of the ini­tial favor­able response among the par­tic­i­pants, the Israeli gov­ern­ment esca­lat­ed its pro­pa­gan­da war against Iran . Its agents in the US Congress, the mass media and in the Executive branch moved to under­mine the peace process. What is at stake is Israel’s capac­i­ty to wage proxy wars using the US mil­i­tary and its NATO allies against any gov­ern­ment chal­leng­ing Israeli mil­i­tary suprema­cy in the Middle East, its vio­lent annex­a­tion of Palestinian ter­ri­to­ry and its abil­i­ty to attack any adver­sary with impunity.

To under­stand what is at stake in the cur­rent peace nego­ti­a­tions one must envi­sion the con­se­quences of fail­ure: Under Israeli pres­sure, the US announced that its ‘mil­i­tary option’ could be acti­vat­ed – result­ing in mis­sile strikes and a bomb­ing cam­paign against 76 mil­lion Iranians in order to destroy their gov­ern­ment and econ­o­my. Teheran could retal­i­ate against such aggres­sion by tar­get­ing US mil­i­tary bases in the region and Gulf oil instal­la­tions result­ing in a glob­al cri­sis. This is what Israel wants.

We will begin by exam­in­ing the con­text of Israel ’s mil­i­tary suprema­cy in the Middle East . We will then pro­ceed to ana­lyze Israel ’s incred­i­ble pow­er over the US polit­i­cal process and how it shapes the nego­ti­a­tion process today, with spe­cial empha­sis on Zionist pow­er in the US Congress.

The Context of Israeli Military Supremacy in the Middle East

Since the end of World War II , Israel has bombed, invad­ed and occu­pied more coun­tries in the Middle East and Africa than pre­vi­ous colo­nial pow­er, except the US . The list of Israel ’s vic­tims includes: Palestine , Syria , Lebanon , Egypt , Iraq , Jordan , Sudan and Yemen . If we include coun­tries where Israel has launched qua­si-clan­des­tine ter­ror­ist attacks and assas­si­na­tions, the list would be great­ly expand­ed to include a dozen coun­tries in Europe and Asia – includ­ing the US through its Zionist ter­ror network.

Israel ’s pro­jec­tion of mil­i­tary pow­er, its capac­i­ty for wag­ing offen­sive wars at will, is matched by its near-total impuni­ty. Despite their repeat­ed vio­la­tions of inter­na­tion­al law, includ­ing war crimes, Israel has nev­er been cen­sored at an inter­na­tion­al tri­bunal or sub­ject­ed to eco­nom­ic sanc­tions because the US gov­ern­ment uses its posi­tion to veto UN Security Council res­o­lu­tions and pres­sure its NATO-EU allies.

Israel’s mil­i­tary suprema­cy has less to do with the native tech­no-indus­tri­al ‘bril­liance’ of its war-mon­gers and more to do with the trans­fers and out­right theft of nuclear, chem­i­cal and bio­log­i­cal tech­nol­o­gy and weapons from the US (Grant Smith “Ten Explosive US Government Secrets of Israel” IRMEP). Overseas Zionists in the US and France have played a strate­gic (and trea­so­nous) role in steal­ing and ille­gal­ly ship­ping nuclear tech­nol­o­gy and weapon com­po­nents to Israel, accord­ing to an inves­ti­ga­tion by for­mer CIA Director Richard Helms.

Israel main­tains huge nuclear, chem­i­cal, and bio­log­i­cal weapon stock­piles refus­ing any access to inter­na­tion­al arms inspec­tors and is not oblig­ed to abide by the non-pro­lif­er­a­tion treaty, because of US diplo­mat­ic inter­ven­tion. Under pres­sure from the local ‘Zionist pow­er con­fig­u­ra­tion’ (ZPC), the US gov­ern­ment has blocked any action which might con­strain Israel ’s pro­duc­tion of weapons of mass destruc­tion. In fact the US con­tin­ues to pro­vide Israel with strate­gic weapons of mass destruc­tion for use against its neigh­bors – in vio­la­tion of inter­na­tion­al law.

US mil­i­tary aid and tech­nol­o­gy trans­fers to Israel exceed $100 bil­lion dol­lars over the past half cen­tu­ry. US diplo­mat­ic and mil­i­tary inter­ven­tion was cru­cial in res­cu­ing Israel from defeat dur­ing the 1973 war. US President Lyndon Johnson’s refusal to defend the unarmed intel­li­gence ship, the USS Liberty in 1967, after it had been bombed and napalmed by Israeli fight­er planes and war­ships in inter­na­tion­al waters, con­sti­tut­ed a tremen­dous vic­to­ry for Israel thanks to Johnson’s Zionist advis­ers. Because of its impuni­ty, even in killing American ser­vice­men, Israel has been giv­en a free hand to wage aggres­sive wars to dom­i­nate its neigh­bors, com­mit acts of ter­ror­ism and assas­si­nate its adver­saries through­out the world with­out fear of retaliation.

Israel ’s uncon­test­ed mil­i­tary supe­ri­or­i­ty has con­vert­ed sev­er­al of its neigh­bors to qua­si-client col­lab­o­ra­tors: Egypt and Jordan have served as de fac­to allies, along with the Gulf monar­chies, help­ing Israel repress the region’s nation­al­ist and pro-Palestinian move­ments.  

The most deci­sive fac­tor in the rise and con­sol­i­da­tion of Israel ’s pow­er in the Middle East has not been its mil­i­tary prowess but its polit­i­cal reach and influ­ence via its Zionist agents in the US . Washington ’s wars against Iraq and Libya , and its cur­rent sup­port of the mer­ce­nary assault against Syria , have destroyed three major sec­u­lar nation­al­ist oppo­nents of Israel ’s hege­mon­ic ambitions.

As Israel accu­mu­lates more pow­er in the region, expand­ing its col­o­niza­tion of Palestinian ter­ri­to­ry, it looks east­ward toward destroy­ing the last remain­ing obsta­cle to its colo­nial poli­cies: Iran .

For at least two decades, Israel has direct­ed its over­seas agents – (the ZPC) – to destroy the gov­ern­ment of Iran by desta­bi­liz­ing its soci­ety, assas­si­nat­ing its sci­en­tists, bomb­ing its mil­i­tary estab­lish­ments and lab­o­ra­to­ries and stran­gling its economy.

After the ZPC suc­cess­ful­ly pushed the US into war against Iraq in 2003 – lit­er­al­ly shred­ding its com­plex sec­u­lar soci­ety and killing over a mil­lion Iraqis – it turned its sights on destroy­ing Lebanon (Hezbollah) and the sec­u­lar gov­ern­ment of Syria as a way to iso­late Iran and pre­pare for an attack. While thou­sands of Lebanese civil­ians were slaugh­tered in 2006, Israel ’s attack of Lebanon failed, despite the sup­port of the US gov­ern­ment and the ZPC’s wild pro­pa­gan­da cam­paign. Hysterical at its fail­ure and to ‘com­pen­sate’ for its defeat at the hands of Hezbollah and to ‘boost morale’, Israel invad­ed and destroyed much of Gaza (2008÷9) – the world’s largest open air prison camp.

Lacking mil­i­tary capac­i­ty to attack Iran on its own, Israel direct­ed its agents to manip­u­late the US gov­ern­ment to start a war with Teheran. The mil­i­tarist lead­ers in Tel Aviv have unleashed their polit­i­cal assets (ZPC) through­out the US to work to destroy Iran – the last for­mi­da­ble adver­sary to Israel suprema­cy in the Middle East .

The Israeli-ZPC strat­e­gy is designed to set the stage for a US con­fronta­tion with Iran , using its agents in the Executive branch as well as its ongo­ing cor­rup­tion, bribery and con­trol of the US Congress. ZPC con­trol over the mass media enhances its pro­pa­gan­da cam­paign: Everyday the New York Times and the Washington Post pub­lish arti­cles and edi­to­ri­als pro­mot­ing Israel ’s war agen­da. The ZPC uses the US State Department to force oth­er NATO states to like­wise con­front Iran .

Israel’s Proxy War with Iran: US Political Pressure, Economic Sanctions and Military Threats

Alone, Israel’s ‘war’ with Iran would not amount to much more than its cyber sab­o­tage, the peri­od­i­cal assas­si­na­tions of Iranian sci­en­tists using its paid agents among Iranian ter­ror­ist groups and non-stop brow-beat­ing from Israeli politi­cians and their ‘amen crowd’. Outside of Israel , this cam­paign has had lit­tle impact on pub­lic opin­ion. Israel’s ‘was’ on Iran depends exclu­sive­ly on its capac­i­ty to manip­u­late US pol­i­cy using its local agents and groups who dom­i­nate the US Congress and through the appoint­ments of offi­cials in key posi­tions in the Departments of Treasury, Commerce, and Justice , and as Middle East ‘advi­sors’. Israel can­not orga­nize an effec­tive sanc­tion cam­paign against Iran ; nor could it influ­ence any major pow­er to abide by such a cam­paign. Only the US has that pow­er. Israel ’s dom­i­nance in the Middle East comes entire­ly from its capac­i­ty to mobi­lize its prox­ies in the United States who are assigned the task of secur­ing total sub­mis­sion to Israel ’s inter­ests from elect­ed and appoint­ed gov­ern­ment offi­cials – espe­cial­ly in regard to Israel ’s region­al adversaries.

Strategically placed, ‘dual US-Israeli cit­i­zens’ have used their US cit­i­zen­ship to secure high secu­ri­ty posi­tions in the Government direct­ly involved in poli­cies affect­ing Israel . As Israelis, their activ­i­ties are in line with the dic­tates of Tel Aviv. In the Bush admin­is­tra­tion (2001−2008) high placed ‘Israel Firsters’ dom­i­nat­ed the Pentagon (Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith), Middle East Security (Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross), the Vice President’s office (‘Scooter’ Libby), Treasury (Levey) and Homeland Security (Michael Chertoff). In the Obama admin­is­tra­tion the ‘Israel Firsters’ include Dennis Ross, Rahm Emanuel, David Cohen, Secretary of Treasury Jack “Jake the Snake” Lew, Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker and Michael Froman as Trade Representative among others.

Israel ’s Proxy Power with­in the Executive branch is matched by its dom­i­nance of the US Congress. Contrary to some crit­ics, Israel is nei­ther an ‘ally’ or ‘client’ of the US . Evidence of the gross asym­me­try of the rela­tion abounds over the past half cen­tu­ry. Because of these pow­er­ful prox­ies in Congress and the Executive branch, Israel has received over $100 bil­lion dol­lar trib­ute from the US over the past 30 years, or $3 bil­lion plus a year. The US Pentagon has trans­ferred the most up-to-date mil­i­tary tech­nol­o­gy and engaged in sev­er­al wars on Israel ’s behalf. The US Treasury has imposed sanc­tions against poten­tial­ly lucra­tive trad­ing and invest­ment part­ners in the Middle East ( Iran , Iraq and Syria ) depriv­ing US agri­cul­tur­al and man­u­fac­tur­ing exporters and oil com­pa­nies of over $500 bil­lion in rev­enues. The White House sac­ri­ficed the lives of over 4,400 US sol­diers in the Iraq War – a war pro­mot­ed by Israel ’s prox­ies at the behest of Israel ’s lead­ers. The State Department has reject­ed friend­ly and prof­itable rela­tions with over 1.5 bil­lion Muslims by back­ing the ille­gal set­tle­ment of over half mil­lion Jewish colonists on mil­i­tary-occu­pied Palestinian land in the West Bank and Jerusalem .

The strate­gic ques­tion is how and why this one-sided rela­tion between the US and Israel per­sists for so long, even as it goes counter to so many strate­gic and élite US inter­ests? The more imme­di­ate and press­ing ques­tion is how this his­tor­i­cal­ly lop­sided rela­tion effects con­tem­po­rary US-Iran sanc­tions and nuclear negotiations?

Iran and the Peace Negotiations

Undoubtedly the new­ly elect­ed Iranian President and his Foreign Minister are pre­pared to nego­ti­ate an end to hos­til­i­ties with the US by mak­ing major con­ces­sions ensur­ing the peace­ful use of nuclear ener­gy. They have stat­ed they are open to reduc­ing or even end­ing the pro­duc­tion of high­ly enriched ura­ni­um; reduc­ing the num­ber of cen­trifuges and even allow­ing intru­sive, unan­nounced inspec­tions, among oth­er promis­ing pro­pos­als. The Iranian gov­ern­ment pro­pos­es a roadmap with end goals as part of the ini­tial agree­ments. The European Union’s Foreign Secretary Lady Ashton has com­ment­ed favor­ably on the ini­tial meeting.

The US Administration has giv­en con­flict­ing sig­nals fol­low­ing the Iranian over­tures and the open­ing meet­ing. Some indi­vid­ual com­ments are guard­ed­ly pos­i­tive; oth­ers are less encour­ag­ing and rigid. Administration Zionists like Jack ‘Jake’ Lew, the Treasury Secretary, insists sanc­tions will remain until Iran meets all US (read ‘Israeli’) demands. The US Congress, bought and con­trolled by the ZPC, rejects the promis­ing Iranian over­tures and flex­i­bil­i­ty, insist­ing on mil­i­tary ‘options’ or the total dis­man­tling of Iran’s legal and peace­ful nuclear pro­gram – ZPC posi­tions designed to sab­o­tage the nego­ti­a­tions. To that end, Congress has passed new, more extreme, eco­nom­ic sanc­tions to stran­gle the Iran ’s oil economy.

How Israel’s Political Action Committees Control the US Congress and Prepare War with Iran

The Zionist Power Configuration uses its finan­cial fire­pow­er to dic­tate Congressional pol­i­cy on the Middle East and to ensure that the US Congress and Senate do not stray one iota from serv­ing Israel ’s inter­ests. The Zionist instru­ment used in the pur­chase of elect­ed offi­cials in the US is the polit­i­cal action com­mit­tee (PAC).

Thanks to a 2010 US Supreme Court deci­sion, Super PACs-linked to Israel spend enor­mous sums to elect or destroy can­di­dates – depend­ing on the candidate’s polit­i­cal work on behalf of Israel . As long as these funds do not go direct­ly to the can­di­date, these Super PACs do not have to reveal how much they spend or how it is spent. Conservative esti­mates of ZPC- linked direct and indi­rect funds to US leg­is­la­tors run close to $100 mil­lion dol­lars over the past 30-year. The ZPC chan­nels these funds to leg­isla­tive lead­ers and mem­bers of Congressional com­mit­tees deal­ing with for­eign pol­i­cy, espe­cial­ly sub-com­mit­tee chair­per­sons deal­ing with the Middle East . Unsurprisingly, the largest Congressional recip­i­ents of ZPC mon­ey are those who have aggres­sive­ly pro­mot­ed Israel ’s hard-line poli­cies. Elsewhere around the world, such large scale pay­offs for leg­isla­tive votes would be con­sid­ered bla­tant bribery and sub­ject to felony prosecution­ and impris­on­ment for both par­ties. In the US , the pur­chase and sale of a politician’s vote is called ‘lob­by­ing’ and is legal and open. The leg­isla­tive branch of the US gov­ern­ment has come to resem­ble a high-price broth­el or white slavers’ auc­tion – but with the lives of thou­sands at stake.

The ZPC has pur­chased the alliance of US Congress peo­ple and Senators on a mas­sive scale: Of 435 mem­bers of the US House of Representatives (sic), 219 have received pay­ments from the ZPC in exchange for their votes on behalf of the state of Israel . Corruption is even more ram­pant among the 100 US Senators, 94 of whom have accept­ed pro-Israel PAC and Super PAC mon­ey for their loy­al­ty to Israel . The ZPC show­ers mon­ey on both Republicans and Democrats, thus secur­ing incred­i­ble (in this era of Congressional dead­lock), near unan­i­mous (‘bipar­ti­san’) votes in favor of the ‘Jewish State’, includ­ing its war crimes, like the bomb­ing of Gaza and Lebanon as well as the annu­al $3 bil­lion dol­lar plus US tax-pay­er trib­ute to Tel Aviv. At least 50 US Senators have each col­lect­ed between $100 thou­sand and $1 mil­lion in ZPC mon­ey over the past decades . In exchange, they have vot­ed for over $100 bil­lion in trib­ute pay­ments to Israel … in addi­tion to oth­er ‘ser­vices and pay­ments’. The mem­bers of the US Congress are cheap­er: 25 leg­is­la­tors have received between $238,000 and $50,000, while the rest got peanuts. Regardless of the amount, the net result is the same: Congressional mem­ber pick up their script from their Zionist men­tors in the PACs, Super PACs and AIPAC and back all of Israel ’s wars in the Middle East and pro­mote US aggres­sion on behalf of Israel . 

The most out­spo­ken and influ­en­tial leg­is­la­tors get the biggest chunk of Zionist pay­ola: Senator Mark Kirk (Bombs over Teheran!) tops the ‘pigs at the trough’ list with $925,000 in ZPC pay­offs, fol­lowed by John McCain (Bombs over Damascus!) with $771,000, while Senators Mitch McConnell, Carl Levin, Robert Menendez, Richard Durban and oth­er Zionophilic politi­cos are not shy about hold­ing out their lit­tle beg­ging bowls when the pro-Israel PAC bag­men arrive! Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen tops the ‘House’ list with $238,000 for her 100% pro-Israel record as well as for being more war-mon­ger­ing than even Netanyahu! Eric Cantor got $209,000 for cham­pi­oning ‘wars for Israel ’ with American lives while cut­ting Social Security pay­ments to US seniors in order to increase mil­i­tary aid to Tel Aviv. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, got $144,000 for ‘whip­ping the few wob­bly’ Democrats back into Israel ’s ‘camp’. House Majority Leader John Boehner was paid $130,000 to do the same among the Republicans.

The ZPC has spent huge amounts to pun­ish and destroy a dozen or so dis­si­dent leg­is­la­tors who had stood up to Israel ’s wars and grotesque human rights record. The ZPC has poured mil­lions into indi­vid­ual cam­paigns, not only financ­ing oppo­si­tion can­di­dates who pledged alle­giance to the Israel but mount­ing scur­rilous char­ac­ter assas­si­na­tions of Israel’s crit­ics in office. These cam­paigns have been mount­ed in the most obscure parts of the US , includ­ing in major­i­ty African-American dis­tricts, where local Zionist inter­ests and influ­ence are oth­er­wise absolute­ly nil.

There are no com­pa­ra­ble PACs, Super PACs, par­ty lead­ers, or civic orga­ni­za­tion that can con­test the pow­er of Israel ’s Fifth Column. According to doc­u­ments archived by the coura­geous researcher, Grant Smith of IRMEP, when it comes to Israel , the US Justice Department has adamant­ly refused to enforce its own fed­er­al laws requir­ing the pros­e­cu­tion of US cit­i­zens who fail to reg­is­ter as for­eign agents while work­ing for a for­eign coun­try – at least since 1963. On the oth­er hand, the ZPC, through the so-call ‘Anti-Defamation League’, has suc­cess­ful­ly pres­sured the Justice Department, the FBI and NSA to inves­ti­gate and pros­e­cute law-abid­ing, patri­ot­ic US cit­i­zens crit­i­cal of Israel ’s land grabs in Palestine and the Zionist cor­rup­tors of the US polit­i­cal sys­tem on behalf of their for­eign master.

The cor­rup­tion and degra­da­tion of US democ­ra­cy is made pos­si­ble by the equal­ly com­pro­mised and cor­rupt­ed ‘respectable press’. Media crit­ic, Steve Lendman, has point­ed out the direct link between Israel and the mass media in his inves­ti­ga­tion of the New York Times. The lead­ing (‘fair and bal­anced’) jour­nal­ists report­ing on Israel have strong fam­i­ly and polit­i­cal ties to that coun­try and their arti­cles have been lit­tle more than pro­pa­gan­da. Times reporter Ethan Bronner, whose son served in the Israel Defense Forces, is a long-time apol­o­gist for the Zionist state. Times reporter Isabel Kershner, whose ‘writ­ing’ seem to come straight out of the Israeli Foreign Office, is mar­ried to Hirsh Goodman an advis­er to the Netanyahu régime on ‘secu­ri­ty affairs’. The Times bureau chief in Jerusalem, Jodi Rudoren, lives com­fort­ably in the ances­tral home of a Palestinian fam­i­ly dis­pos­sessed from that ancient city.

The Times unflinch­ing pro-Israel pos­ture pro­vides a polit­i­cal cov­er and jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for the cor­rupt­ed US politi­cians as they beat the war drums for Israel . It is no sur­prise that the New York Times, like the Washington Post, is deeply engaged in dis­parag­ing and denounc­ing the cur­rent US-Iran nego­ti­a­tions – and pro­vid­ing ample space for the one-sided rhetoric of Israeli politi­cians and their US mouth­pieces, while stu­dious­ly exclud­ing the more ratio­nal, pro-rap­proche­ment voic­es of expe­ri­enced for­mer US diplo­mats, war-weary mil­i­tary lead­ers and rep­re­sen­ta­tives of the US busi­ness and aca­d­e­m­ic communities.

To under­stand Congress’ hos­til­i­ty to the nuclear nego­ti­a­tions with Iran and their efforts to scut­tle them through the impo­si­tion of ridicu­lous new sanc­tions, it is impor­tant to get to the source of the prob­lem, name­ly the state­ments of key Israeli politi­cians, who set the line of march for their US proxies.

In late October, 2013, Former Israeli Defense Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin spoke of ‘hav­ing to choose between ‘the bomb’ or the bomb­ing’ – a mes­sage which imme­di­ate­ly res­onat­ed with the 52 Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (Daily Alert, October 24, 2013). On October 22, 2013, Israel ’s Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz, called for harsh new sanc­tions on Iran and insist­ed that the US use them as lever­age to demand that Iran agree to entire­ly aban­don its peace­ful nuclear ener­gy and enrich­ment pro­gram. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon affirmed that ‘ Israel will not accept any deal that allows Iran to enrich ura­ni­um’. It is Israel ’s posi­tion to threat­en war (via the US ) if Iran does not sub­mit to uncon­di­tion­al sur­ren­der of its nuclear pro­gram. This defines the posi­tion of all the major pro-Israel PACs, Super PACs and AIPAC. They in turn pro­ceed to dic­tate pol­i­cy to their ‘lick-spit­tles’ in the US Congress. As a result, Congress pass­es even more extreme eco­nom­ic sanc­tions on Iran in order to sab­o­tage the ongo­ing negotiations. 

Those who have received the biggest Zionist pay-offs from the pro-Israel PACs are the most vocif­er­ous: Senator Mark Kirk ($925,379), author of a pre­vi­ous sanc­tions bill, demands that Iran end its entire nuclear and bal­lis­tic mis­sile pro­gram (!) and declared that the US Senate “should imme­di­ate­ly move for­ward with a new round of eco­nom­ic sanc­tions tar­get­ing all remain­ing Iranian gov­ern­ment rev­enue and reserves” (Financial Times, 10/​18/​13, p. 6). The US House of Representatives (sic) has already passed a bill sharply lim­it­ing Iran ’s abil­i­ty to sell its main export, oil. Once again, the Israel- ZPC – Congressional axis seeks to impose Israel ’s war agen­da on the American peo­ple! In late October 2013, Secretary of State Kerry was ‘grilled’ for 7 hours by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu with the craven Kerry promis­ing to pro­mote Israel ’s agen­da on dis­man­tling Iran ’s nuclear enrich­ment program.

To counter the cam­paign to stran­gle Iran ’s oil econ­o­my, pro­mot­ed by Israel ’s flunkeys in the Congress, the Iranian gov­ern­ment has offered gen­er­ous con­tracts to the US and EU oil com­pa­nies (Financial Times 10/​29/​2013, p 1). Existing nation­al­ist pro­vi­sions are being removed. Under the new terms, for­eign com­pa­nies book reserves or take equi­ty stakes in Iranian projects. Iran hopes to attract at least $100 bil­lion dol­lars in invest­ments over the next three years. This sta­ble coun­try boasts the world’s largest gas and the fourth largest oil reserves. Because of the cur­rent US ( Israel )-imposed sanc­tions, pro­duc­tion has fall­en from 3.5 mil­lion bar­rels per day in 2011 to 2.58 mil­lion bar­rels per day in 2013. The ques­tion is whether ‘Big Oil’, the giant US and EU com­pa­nies have to pow­er to chal­lenge the ZPC-stran­gle­hold over US-EU sanc­tion pol­i­cy. So far, the ZPC has dom­i­nat­ed this crit­i­cal pol­i­cy and mar­gin­al­ized ‘Big Oil’ using threats, black­mail and coer­cion against US pol­i­cy­mak­ers. This has effec­tive­ly shut out US com­pa­nies from the lucra­tive Iranian market.

Conclusion

As the US and the 5 oth­er coun­tries attempt to nego­ti­ate with Iran , they face enor­mous obsta­cles over­com­ing Israel ’s pow­er over the US Congress. Over past decades Israel ’s agents have bought the loy­al­ties of the vast major­i­ty of Congress peo­ple, train­ing them to rec­og­nize and obey the whis­tles, sig­nals and script from the war mon­gers in Tel Aviv.

This ‘Axis of War’, has inflict­ed enor­mous dam­age on the world result­ing in the deaths of mil­lions of vic­tims of US wars in the Middle East, Southwest Asia and North Africa . The gross cor­rup­tion and wide­ly rec­og­nized bank­rupt­cy of the US leg­isla­tive sys­tem is due to its slav­ish sub­mis­sion to a for­eign pow­er. What remains in Washington is a debased vas­sal state despised by its own cit­i­zens. If the ZPC con­trolled Congress suc­ceeds once again in destroy­ing the nego­ti­a­tions between the US and Iran via new war-like res­o­lu­tions, we, the American peo­ple, will have to pay an enor­mous price in lives and treasure. 

The time to act is now. It is time to stand up and expose the role played by the Israeli PACs, Super PACs and the 52 Major American Jewish Organization in cor­rupt­ing Congress and turn­ing “our” elect­ed rep­re­sen­ta­tives into flunkeys for Israel’s wars. There has been a deaf­en­ing silence from our not­ed crit­ics –few alter­na­tive media crit­ics have attacked Israel ’s pow­er over the US Congress. The evi­dence is open­ly avail­able, the crimes are unde­ni­able. The American peo­ple need real polit­i­cal lead­ers with the courage to root out the cor­rupt­ed and cor­rup­tors and force their elect­ed mem­bers in the House and Senate to rep­re­sent the inter­est of the American people.

It’s impor­tant that there be an under­stand­ing of what the dri­vers are in this con­flict between Iran and Israel’s obses­sion with the destruc­tion of the Iranian people.

Indiana’s Republican Governor Mike Pence is now the recip­i­ent of the full force and pow­er of Homosexual pow­er and influence.
Governor Pence who recent­ly signed the Religious Freedom Act imme­di­ate­ly came under with­er­ing crit­i­cism from the Gay com­mu­ni­ty , Some in the Civil Rights com­mu­ni­ty and shock­ing­ly the busi­ness community.
Governor Pence said then quote: “We’re not going to change the law,” Indiana Gov. Mike Pence flat­ly said on ABC’s “This Week,” about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which Pence says is meant to pre­vent the gov­ern­ment from imping­ing on a person’s reli­gious beliefs. “I was proud to sign it into law.”
Faced with scathing back­lash from the pow­er­ful Gay lob­by and their friends, Governor Pence announced he would like to see new Legislation which will fix the Bill he just signed into law.
“Wow”
The back­lash from the busi­ness com­mu­ni­ty was even more impactful.
Walmart came out against the law imme­di­ate­ly, a sim­i­lar ver­sion of the law was await­ing Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson’s signature.
Hutchinson also a Republican,had indi­cat­ed he would sign the bill.
The rip­ple effect was evi­dent Immediately after Walmart came out against the Law, Asa Hutchinson back-tracked say­ing he would not sign the bill await­ing his sig­na­ture in it’s cur­rent form.
Such is the pow­er of homo­sex­u­als and their pals.

How pow­er­ful it would be if pow­er-bro­kers like Walmart came out against insti­tu­tion­al­ized Racism and big­otry which has exist­ed in this coun­try for over four hun­dred years and still exists, rais­ing it’s ugly head daily.
How is it pos­si­ble that Racism has been able to sur­vive and thrive par­tic­u­lar­ly in the South and heart­land of America, while any­one stand­ing on chris­t­ian prin­ci­ples in these same states are forced to beat a hasty retreat from gays and their supporters?
He who con­trol the mon­ey con­trols the message.
Homosexuals con­trol both.
Walmart has ben­e­fit­ed great­ly from the black com­mu­ni­ty’s unwill­ing­ness and inabil­i­ty to cure it’s insa­tiable desire to spend.
The black com­mu­ni­ty which is slat­ed to spend between 1.3 and 1.5 tril­lion dol­lars on goods and ser­vices this year will undoubt­ed­ly be spend­ing a huge chunk of that in Walmart stores all across America.
Yet despite the con­stant killing of young unarmed black men by police,even in Walmart stores,Walmart has nev­er had a kind word or word of sup­port for the black community.
Walmart has been con­spic­u­ous­ly silent. Venturing only a pre­pared one line state­ment they pull from a dusty drawer.

This makes Walmart a fraud and a phony.
Walmart own­ers were nev­er know to be strong cor­po­rate cit­i­zens. Walmart’s sup­port for the LGBT cause, which by the way is against chris­t­ian prin­ci­ples, may only be con­strued as self-serving.
What of the right of peo­ple to say I do not want to do this because of my reli­gious belief?
Don’t they have a right to say no?
Why are elect­ed offi­cials allow­ing them­selves to be cowed by com­pa­nies like Walmart which have selec­tive self-right­eous ideas of civ­il rights?

Where is the chris­t­ian church on this issue?
This is not an issue of dis­crim­i­nat­ing against homosexuals.
It is a bill which defends the right of peo­ple to stand on their reli­gious beliefs with­out fear of crim­i­nal pros­e­cu­tion by Government.
The next step in this debate is that Christian Ministers will be per­se­cut­ed and pros­e­cut­ed for refus­ing to per­form homo­sex­u­al mar­riages in their Churches.
Oregon’s Sweet cakes by Melissa have already paid that price.
Don’t be fooled by the lies, it is a crawl­ing-peg road to per­se­cu­tion of Christians.
Governors and oth­er elect­ed offi­cials are ter­ri­fied of the con­se­quences of stand­ing on their chris­t­ian principles.
So they capit­u­late to the demon­ic forces of sodomy.
If America was built on chris­t­ian prin­ci­ples, why have America dis­card­ed those principles?
Most impor­tant­ly When did she?

Critical to Andrew Holness’s sur­vival as leader of Jamaica’s Opposition Jamaica Labor Party, is the fact that twen­ty of the JLP’s 21 MPs took part in the poll at the par­ty’s Belmont Road head­quar­ters in Kingston, with Holness being the only one with­out a vote. The result of the bal­lots showed that he had the sup­port of approx­i­mate­ly two-thirds of the MPs. Thirteen of the MPs sup­port­ed him remain­ing as their leader, while sev­en were opposed.
It is now time for the labor par­ty to unite and devel­op strat­e­gy on the best way for­ward for our country.
Those opposed to his lead­er­ship must now shut up sit down or find anoth­er party.
The labor par­ty as an enti­ty have been through these grow­ing pains before.
So too have the People’s National Party.

It was­n’t too long ago the nation was engrossed with the Spectacle of the Peter Phillips chal­lenge to Portia Simpson Miller’s lead­er­ship of that Party.
Unfortunately for Peter Phillips, Portia the pop­ulist had the back­ing of the par­ty’s old guard from the Michael Manley/​Percival Patterson wing

What dis­senters and detrac­tors of Andrew Holness’s lead­er­ship must now look at, is the rapid dis­patch with which the PNP fused around the lead­er­ship of Portia and once again became one party.
One par­ty which effec­tive­ly won a deci­sive victory.
As I wrote recent­ly pet­ty jeal­ousies and ego has been the JLP’s achilles heel, this has severe­ly affect­ed the par­ty’s abil­i­ty to win elections.
The time for that to end is now.

Those with­ing the par­ty who are con­sumed with their own agen­da must now sub­mit to his lead­er­ship or go join the PNP. It isn’t as if some haven’t already done so.
Of note is the incon­ve­nient lit­tle fact that Audley Shaw was absent from the Gospel event spon­sored by Evrald Warmington in Old Harbor St Catherine.
It may very well be that there were exten­u­at­ing cir­cum­stances which made it impos­si­ble for him to attend. 
However the optics were ter­ri­ble, par­tic­u­lar­ly at a time when Holness’s lead­er­ship was in question.
It is time now for Audley Shaw and oth­ers to be sup­port­ive of the leader of the par­ty or step aside.
The par­ty is big­ger than any one per­son or group of people.

It is time for the par­ty of Bustamante, Donald Sangster, and Hugh Lawson Shearer and Robert Lightbourne to step to the fore and offer lead­er­ship to our people. 
Leadership which will edu­cate our young people.
Take care of those who can­not take care of themselves.
Put our coun­try on a path to eco­nom­ic sustainability.
Develop strate­gies which will once again make the pri­vate sec­tor the engine of growth as opposed to bor­row­ing and mas­sive taxation.
Develop and main­tain our infra­struc­ture with a view to reduc­ing and elim­i­nat­ing urban sprawl.
Stop the whole­sale divest­ment of our coun­try’s vital assets.
Putting ade­quate laws in place which will reduce lawlessness,making our coun­try once again a place where peo­ple want to vis­it , invest in and a place where Jamaicans can be hap­py to call home.

These are some of the press­ing needs of our small nation.
The labor par­ty will not fix every­thing in one fell-swoop but it will indi­cate to the world that Jamaica is once again open for business.

“We’re not going to change the law,” Indiana Gov. Mike Pence flat­ly said on ABC’s “This Week,” about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which Pence says is meant to pre­vent the gov­ern­ment from imping­ing on a person’s reli­gious beliefs. “I was proud to sign it into law.”

SO WHAT EXACTLY IS THE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT?
In brief this is what the Act is.
The new law will pro­hib­it a gov­ern­men­tal enti­ty from sub­stan­tial­ly bur­den­ing a person’s reli­gious beliefs, unless that enti­ty can prove it’s rely­ing on the least restric­tive means pos­si­ble to fur­ther a com­pelling gov­ern­men­tal inter­est. It’s mod­eled off of the fed­er­al Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which gained noto­ri­ety in the Supreme Court’s con­tro­ver­sial Hobby Lobby rul­ing last year. That deci­sion found that close­ly-held cor­po­ra­tions wouldn’t have to com­ply with the Affordable Care Act’s con­tra­cep­tion man­date if the own­ers had a sin­cere­ly-held reli­gious objec­tion to birth con­trol.NBCNEWS.
Supporters say RFRA is designed to pro­tect people’s reli­gious beliefs from unnec­es­sary gov­ern­ment intrusion.
Opponents argue the mea­sure serves as a license to dis­crim­i­nate, par­tic­u­lar­ly against LGBT peo­ple on reli­gious grounds.
There is prece­dent which sup­ports both sides of the divide.
Until the Federal Government stepped in and changed sep­a­rate but equal, it was the law of the land. 

Blacks drank at sep­a­rate drink­ing foun­tains, ate at the back of the restau­rant, if at all, and rode at the back of the bus.
Conversely with the break-neck pace with which the gay agen­da has tak­en cen­ter stage, peo­ple opposed to the gay lifestyle find them­selves at odds with the laws in some states as well as in the court of pop­u­lar opinion.

Feb.4^th 2015:  An Oregon bak­ery will have to pay a gay cou­ple up to $150,000 for refus­ing to bake them a wed­ding cake two years ago, gov­ern­ment offi­cials announced Monday. The Sweet Cakes by Melissa bak­ery in Gresham caught heat in January 2013 when Laurel Bowman said the shop refused to make a cake for her and her fiancée, cit­ing reli­gious objec­tions. Bowman said the co-own­er, Aaron Klein, called the gay mar­riage “an abom­i­na­tion unto the lord,” KGW report­ed. Bowman filed a dis­crim­i­na­tion com­plaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries months lat­er, and the group said on Monday it was rul­ing against the bak​ery​.Now the bak­ers could pay up to $75,000 each to Bowman and her fiancée, with the final amount to be deter­mined in March. The Bureau of Labor said in a state­ment that it pro­vides some exemp­tions in such cas­es for reli­gious groups, but the bak­ery didn’t count as one just because of its own­ers’ beliefs.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/oregon-bakery-pay-gay-couple-refused-cake-article‑1.2103577

But Pence push­es back against the accu­sa­tion that the reli­gious free­dom mea­sure would open the door to discrimination.“This bill is not about dis­crim­i­na­tion, and if I thought it legal­ized dis­crim­i­na­tion in any way in Indiana, I would have vetoed it,” he said. “In fact, it does not even apply to dis­putes between pri­vate par­ties unless gov­ern­ment action is involved. For more than twen­ty years, the fed­er­al Religious Freedom Restoration Act has nev­er under­mined our nation’s anti-dis­crim­i­na­tion laws, and it will not in Indiana.”
On this part of the state­ment Pence is cor­rect,” it does not even apply to dis­putes between pri­vate par­ties unless gov­ern­ment action is involved”
The Federal statute does not yet penal­ize pri­vate par­ties, what the Governor is say­ing is that as a busi­ness own­er I can refuse ser­vice to some­one if I chose to. As along as I do not tell the cus­tomer it’ is because of his/​her spe­cial cir­cum­stance , race, reli­gion, sex­u­al ori­en­ta­tion, col­or or oth­er defin­ing char­ac­ter­is­tics why I refused him/​her service.
Unfortunately, it is peo­ple who have stood on their reli­gious prin­ci­ple who are being per­se­cut­ed and pros­e­cut­ed on behalf of the LGBT com­mu­ni­ty as the Oregon cou­ple has been.

The issue of Discrimination in this con­text seem to need redefining.
Each per­son is guar­an­teed cer­tain free­doms under the con­sti­tu­tion, that includes gays and les­bians. But does that mean that their rights are guar­an­teed at the expense of mine?
Seem so, if the Oregon case is any­thing to go by.
In the Oregon case the Government threw out any con­sid­er­a­tion for the bak­ers right not to work for peo­ple who engage in a lifestyle they abhor, and sup­plant­ed them with the rights of the plaintiff.

So who is right?
A Minister of the Gospel (who is not a char­la­tan sold out to the dic­tates of the world) who decides on prin­ci­ple “I will not mar­ry a LGBT cou­ple”, what then does the state do, fine him, imprison him or worse”?
Isn’t that Religious per­se­cu­tion? The very rea­son we are told the pil­grims ran away from England.
Isn’t that dis­crim­i­na­tion against his fun­da­men­tal reli­gious belief?
It absolute­ly is, yet it appears that is the way this issue is heading.
 Brooke Tucker, staff attor­ney at the ACLU of Michigan, told msnbc last December. “For the land­lord who vio­lates the Fair Housing Act, a lot of times it’s the gov­ern­ment who goes after him. The gov­ern­ment takes a lot of steps to pro­tect peo­ple from dis­crim­i­na­tion by oth­ers, and that’s some­thing that could be severe­ly impact­ed by this bill.”
All of this is true, but this was not the case with Oregon’s sweet-cakes by Melissa. That com­pa­ny was a small busi­ness, owned by two small business-owners .
Why did the Government step in and tram­ple on their right not to pro­vide ser­vice to the gay cou­ple as is their reli­gious belief?

The LGBT com­mu­ni­ty and it’s sup­port­ers have man­aged to effec­tive­ly tie their cru­sade for legit­i­ma­cy to the civ­il rights struggle.
Nothing is wrong with any group demand­ing to be treat­ed fair­ly. What is objec­tion­able is when oth­ers are forced to acqui­esce to the dic­tates of such groups, or are made pari­ahs for dissenting.
Isn’t the gay com­mu­ni­ty more than guilty of the same dis­crim­i­na­tion and char­ac­ter assas­si­na­tion it claims it is exposed to?
They argue they have no con­trol over who they love.
Many in the evan­gel­i­cal com­mu­ni­ty , par­tic­u­lar­ly many black church­es are offend­ed that gays and les­bians have hitched their wag­ons to the civ­il rights struggle.
LGBT prac­ti­tion­ers, their sup­port­ers and oth­ers who want to gain recog­ni­tion, accep­tance and fame from this cause, have effec­tive­ly dis­tort­ed, and in some cas­es negat­ed the hun­dreds of years of injus­tice done to blacks in America.
Even so, some reports have indi­cat­ed there is a grow­ing accep­tance of the gay lifestyle even with­in the black church. Those reports may well be from gays with­in the church.
Others believe that the church has com­pro­mised it’s prin­ci­ples in order to get along, as well as not to incur the wrath of the LGBT com­mu­ni­ty, which may result in the church los­ing it’s tax-exempt status.
Either way, the church has capit­u­lat­ed to the dis­tor­tion that the two issues are intrin­si­cal­ly the same.

Even as gay pro­po­nents argue they have no choice regard­ing their sex­u­al­i­ty, many with­in that com­mu­ni­ty are active­ly using sci­ence to alter and change their gender.
One can­not change one’s race.
Racial seg­re­ga­tion has many ille­git­i­mate chil­dren in America , this issue being one of them.
Was there no issue of racial seg­re­ga­tion and the abhor­rent ills asso­ci­at­ed with that prac­tice, this debate would have been moot.
In fact it may not have exist­ed at all.
Indiana’s Governor Mike Pence and oth­er con­ser­v­a­tives would have legs to stand on when they make the argu­ments about peo­ple’s fun­da­men­tal rights to stand on their reli­gious principles.
But we have seen the ugly side of dis­crim­i­na­tion, as such, a large cross sec­tion of the coun­try made up of peo­ple with dif­fer­ent pecu­liar­i­ties are unit­ed in oppo­si­tion to Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
As a chris­t­ian who love Homosexuals and all peo­ple, I believe we have all sinned and come short of the glo­ry of God.
The church has a respon­si­bil­i­ty to wel­come all peo­ple, as Christ Jesus the head of the Christian church did.
I have to fol­low the teach­ings of Christ which instruct me to love the sin­ner but hate sin. Therefore it is un-Christ-like to preach/​teach that you may come as a sin­ner and remain thus.

The real ques­tion is whether any­one act­ing in a pri­vate capac­i­ty have the right to say,” as a result of my reli­gious beliefs I have to decline serv­ing you”. It is a thorny ques­tion which requires seri­ous soul searching.
As a black chris­t­ian that may very well be my belief, do I sup­port pas­tors who mar­ry gays against bib­li­cal teachings?
No !!!
When con­flat­ed how­ev­er with race, does a white per­son have a right to refuse me ser­vice in his/​her busi­ness establishment?
I would cry discrimination!!!
So where is the line drawn? Who decide where it stops?
Can we even remove Government from this issue with­out slid­ing back into seg­re­gat­ed drink­ing foun­tains and seg­re­gat­ed restau­rants, hotels, schools and buses.

There needs to be seri­ous dis­course on this sub­ject. We should nev­er allow our­selves to go back to seg­re­ga­tion and wan­ton dis­crim­i­na­tion, yet we must guard against impos­ing on the indi­vid­u­al’s right of dis­sent. The right to say “no I do not want to be forced to bake you a cake”, or “no I do not want to mar­ry you , it is against my reli­gion to do so”.
Those rights are sacro­sanct and should nev­er be open to inter­pre­ta­tion by any gov­ern­ment. Those rights are inalien­able rights giv­en us by God Almighty , not to be tri­fled with by government.

In just over a month ‚vot­ers in Richmond coun­ty Staten Island will go to the polls to elect a new rep­re­sen­ta­tive for New York’s 11^th con­gres­sion­al district.
This will be a spe­cial elec­tion to replace dis­graced felon and for­mer Republican Michael Grimm who has plead guilty to a Federal Indictment and awaits sentencing.
Despite being under Federal indict­ment Staten Islanders re-elect­ed Grimm before he was forced to step aside.
Residents of Staten Island are large­ly white and conservative.
The bor­ough is home to a huge num­ber of New York City’s Firefighters and cops.
Staten Island is heav­i­ly repub­li­can and is now derid­ed as the deep south of New York City.

The two men com­pet­ing for the seat once held by Grimm are, Republican Persecutor Daniel Donovan Jr who mis/​handled the Eric Garner case depend­ing on your per­spec­tive, and Democrat Vincent Gentile, a for­mer pros­e­cu­tor him­self and a local leg­is­la­tor. The spe­cial elec­tion is sched­uled for May 5.

In a shock­ing dis­play of pol­i­tics with­ing the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem a Staten Island Judge denied the release of sealed records in the grand jury inves­ti­ga­tion of Garner’s death. This can only be con­strued to be an attempt by the judge to use his office to aid the Republican in secur­ing the seat.

Those famil­iar with the chok­ing death of Eric Garner by rogue cop Daniel Pantaleo will recall inter­est­ed par­ties want­ed no part of Donavan han­dling the case. The Garner fam­i­ly and black activists argued Donovan was par­tial and undu­ly def­er­en­tial to cops.
Donovan’s father was a cop who alleged­ly lost his life to a black assailant.
In his defense Donovan has claimed the loss of his father has not influ­enced his abil­i­ty to be fair.
Those who have seen his career are adamant that he is deeply in the pock­ets of cops and has no inter­est in jus­tice for the black community.

No one knows what is said in grand jury pro­ceed­ings except the peo­ple who are active play­ers in the process.
If Donovan was telling the truth that he would han­dle the case as he would any oth­er, why are they col­lud­ing to hide the facts of that grand jury?
Doesn’t the peo­ple of New York have a right to know?
Doesn’t the Garner fam­i­ly have a right to know that their ser­vant, the pros­e­cu­tor Daniel Donovan did due dili­gence in try­ing to secure jus­tice for them?
Or is it fair to con­clude that Donovan did not do dil­li­gence at all?
Did Donovan seek jus­tice for the Garner fam­i­ly or was he the lawyer ensur­ing that Daniel Pantaleo did not have to answer to crim­i­nal charges for chok­ing the life out of Eric Garner.

There is no ambi­gu­i­ty in this event. Donovan used the peo­ple’s office the way Southern cops, pros­e­cu­tors and judges have against black peo­ple for hun­dreds of years.
What hap­pened on Staten Island should out­rage every­one includ­ing the state Governor.
However it does­n’t, because the Governor of the state is a self serv­ing oppor­tunist whose only care is for his own survival.
Shockingly, what hap­pened to Eric Garner and the Garner fam­i­ly was once though only hap­pened in the deep south.
Interestingly that same crim­i­nal col­lu­sion between cop, pros­e­cu­tor, jurors and judge just hap­pened on the south­ern tip of New York State and no one cares.
So while the white Republican vot­ers of the deep south of New York had their goons kill Eric Garner for alleged­ly sell­ing un-taxed cig­a­rettes, they were quite com­fort­able at the same time with re-elect­ing a com­mon felon to congress.
Additionally their pros­e­cu­tor short-cir­cuit­ed the process to get a killer cop off the hook, while a friend­ly judge uses the pow­er of his office to seal the records, effec­tive­ly ensur­ing his immoral and uneth­i­cal actions does not affect his abil­i­ty to get elect­ed to the US congress..
“Welcome to America”.

I can­not recall an instance when an American Administration would be engaged in del­i­cate talks on the world stage while the Congress is doing every­thing in it’s pow­er to derail and scut­tle the out­come of those negotiations.
I will defer to con­sti­tu­tion­al experts and his­to­ri­ans on this however.
As Secretary of Sate John Kerry and oth­er west­ern nations engages in del­i­cate nego­ti­a­tions with Iran sur­round­ing what the west says is Iran’s dri­ve to be a nuclear pow­er, the United States Republican led con­gress is active­ly arrayed against the Administration on the specifics of a deal which has not even been worked out yet.
This means Republicans do not want a deal with Iran. To dri­ve that point home they have threat­ened to attach more crip­pling sanc­tions to those already in effect against the Islamic Republic.
It is not out of the ordi­nary that the con­gress of one par­ty finds itself at odds with the admin­is­tra­tion of the oth­er par­ty which con­trols the exec­u­tive branch.
What is unprece­dent­ed is that the speak­er of the House John Boehner is work­ing hand in hand with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu to scut­tle a deal being nego­ti­at­ed by the United States and oth­er pow­er­ful west­ern allies.

This means the Republican con­gress has cast it’s lot with a for­eign pow­er against it’s own country.
Having Netanyahu address Congress is not out of the ordinary.
Having Netanyahu address con­gress in oppo­si­tion to the President’s agen­da is unprecedented.
Sending a let­ter to Iran to tell author­i­ties there that what­ev­er deal they arrive at will be struck down as soon as the pres­i­dent leaves office is trea­so­nous to some.

Despite those mis-steps the Republican con­gress is active­ly engaged in sub­vert­ing a deal with Iran, on behalf of Israel.
The United States of America has one com­man­der ‑in-chief at a time.
It is the Executive branch’s duty to nego­ti­ate agree­ments such as they one it is engaged in with Iran.
Congress also have a role to play in rat­i­fy­ing some agreements.
Trying to sub­vert an agree­ment even before one is reached is vir­gin territory.
Trying to do so on behalf of a for­eign pow­er is … well you decide.…
Netanyahu does not want peace with Israel’s neigh­bors. Israel is nei­ther a democ­ra­cy nor a real American ally. Despite the lies being told about Israels com­mit­ment to main­tain­ing it’s sup­posed close rela­tion­ship with America.
Israel’s com­mit­ment is based on the bil­lions of American dol­lars which flows to it annually.
Israel’s com­mit­ment is based on America’s con­tin­ued obsti­na­cy in block­ing United Nations action which would pun­ish it for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It’s a con­ve­nient arrange­ment which ben­e­fits Israeli’s and no one else.

Netanyahu con­tin­ue to use the argu­ment that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map. What he does­n’t tell the world is that those com­ments came from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the for­mer pres­i­dent of Iran.

The Iranians have con­sis­tent­ly main­tained they have no inten­tion of start­ing a war with Israel, or any­one else for that matter.
They have con­sis­tent­ly point­ed to the fact that it is the nuclear-armed Israel which has been engaged in naked aggres­sion against it’s neigh­bors and not them.
It must be con­strued that Netanyahu does not want peace but ulti­mate­ly wants to see America engaged in an ille­gal war with the Iranian people.
Netanyahu’s aims is to see a neu­tral­ized Iran. Neutralized with America’s mil­i­tary might, blood and money.
A dec­i­mat­ed Iran gives Israel the hege­mon­ic dom­i­nance it craves in the region. This is not a new con­cept for Israel. Since the rise of the Islamic Republic out of the ash­es and con­trol of the cor­rupt Sha an America pawn, Israel’s lead­ers from Ariel Sharon to Benjamin Netanyahu want­ed Iran dec­i­mat­ed and emas­cu­lat­ed. Israel has been forced to reck­on with Hezbollah and Hamas which they allege are fund­ed and trained by Iran. Remove Iran from the equa­tion and the pow­er of Hezbollah and Hamas goes.

Israel is free to con­tin­ue it’s occu­pa­tion and dom­i­na­tion of the Palestinians while it takes more and more of their land.
That is the rea­son Benjamin Netanyahu wants to use Republicans to kill any poten­tial deal with Iran, regard­less of what’s in the deal.
What he wants is blan­ket bomb­ing or crip­pling sanc­tions which destroys Iran.
Only America has the pow­er to do one or both.
Obama will do neither.
A deal is bad for Israel on both counts, that is why he is using the Republican con­gress to try to kill any deal, regard­less of whats in the deal.

In light of the recent crash of a German-Wings air­plane alleged­ly by the Co-Pilot in the French Alps, there is increased talk about plac­ing a Flight atten­dant in the cock­pit in the event one of the Pilots needs to leave for any reason.
I’m just a lit­tle curi­ous about that strategy>
(1)How exact­ly will a flight atten­dant stop a trained pilot from crash­ing an air­plane if he/​she choos­es to?
(2) If the pilot decides to crash the air­plane and places the plane in a nose-dive how will any­one stop that action? yes there would be a strug­gle if the atten­dant real­izes it. Considering that atten­dants are not trained pilots and would not read­i­ly know the nuances of flight pat­terns, includ­ing change of alti­tude as the one in the Alps which Authorities said was a con­trolled descent.
(3) Even if you over­come the lat­ter , you are still deal­ing with anoth­er human being with human emo­tions, so you have just mul­ti­plied the prob­lem instead of solv­ing it.

It was­n’t long ago the idea of locked cock­pit was front and cen­ter as the solu­tion to the prob­lem of pas­sen­gers broach­ing the cock­pit after September 11^th, 2001.
One expert pilot on CNN admit­ted that the Industry did not fore­see this becom­ing an issue., the ques­tion of the per­son in the cock­pit being the per­son to fear,.
Of course they did not see this becom­ing an issue, this is symp­to­matic of how they go about arriv­ing at solu­tions to prob­lems, they react in knee-jerk fashion.

The human ele­ment is always going to present uncer­tain­ty issues, so too will the ques­tion now being debat­ed of hav­ing peo­ple on the ground take over land­ing an air­craft in the event there is an issue of the kind which occurred in the French Alps.
Of course that too will have a mag­ni­tude of issues which could neg­a­tive­ly impact pas­sen­ger safe­ty, includ­ing the men­tal state of the person/​s so autho­rized to com­man­deer the air­craft from the ground.
The fact is that like every­thing else , air trav­el has uncer­tain­ty. Authorities can do their lev­el best to fix prob­lem as they occur, or try to head them off by con­tin­ued evaluation.
Despite this, fix­ing one prob­lem inad­ver­tent­ly cre­ates others.
Like every­thing else, the air­line indus­try will con­tin­ue to use the whack-a-mole-con­cept of smack­ing prob­lems as they pop up.
Nothing is infal­li­ble, unless we can get into the brain space of all actors and stay there, prob­lems like these are here to stay.
Why do I have a feel­ing we are head­ing into ter­ri­to­ry where they con­trol the mind of not just pilots ‚but every­one who boards an airplane?
Hmmm.….

Members of the par­lia­men­tary oppo­si­tion JLP are sched­uled to meet on Monday to deter­mine the fate of Opposition Leader Andrew Holness.
At issue is the Constitutional Court’s rul­ing last month that Holness act­ed uncon­sti­tu­tion­al­ly when he used undat­ed, unsigned res­ig­na­tion let­ters to oust Tufton and Williams from the Senate.
The Gleaner reports sev­er­al heat­ed meet­ings have been con­vened with a view to deter­min­ing Holiness’s fate.

Sounds like deja-vu?
Well it is.
At a time when the small nation of 2.8 mil­lion is in a eco­nom­ic nose-dive, it appears that the Jamaica Labor Party has once again allowed self­ish­ness, per­son­al jeal­ousies and pet­ti­ness to get in the way of offer­ing the coun­try a cohe­sive and unit­ed par­ty as an alter­na­tive to the office-worn, out of ideas, klep­to­ma­ni­ac PNP which now forms the Government.
Over the last three decades many observers have argued that the rea­son the Jamaican elec­torate have con­sis­tent­ly cho­sen the PNP to form the Government is because the JLP has not been able to com­mu­ni­cate with the aver­age man on the street.
That the­o­ry seem to be at odds with what tru­ly ails the par­ty of Bustamante.
The par­ty just seem unable to get out of it’s own way.

Many Jamaicans want to see a change from the cor­rup­tion and graft which char­ac­ter­ize the coun­try’s Political Administration under Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller and her band of thieves.
Many of us feel a kind of empa­thy for her know­ing she had great­ness thrust upon her.
The prob­lem is that many who want to see a bet­ter Jamaica can­not cast a vote toward that end.
It is up to the vot­ers liv­ing on the Island to chose their leaders.
Unfortunately for them the JLP seem hell-bent on once again giv­ing them a choice between the PNP and well.….….…..the PNP.

More than enough vot­ers are con­tent to return the PNP to pow­er, rather than try to fig­ure out the mess which seem to be the JLP.