Follow by Email

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Thomas Friedman, "Oh, Brother! Big Brother Is Back": Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus

Yesterday, Obama threw Israel under the bus.

Obama's agreement with Khamenei provides significant sanctions relief to Iran, but does not roll back Iran's nuclear weapons development program. As acknowledged by David Sanger of The New York Times ( (my emphasis in red):

"The deal does not roll back the vast majority of the advances Iran has made in the past five years, which have drastically shortened what nuclear experts call its 'dash time' to a bomb — the minimum time it would take to build a weapon if Iran’s supreme leader or military decided to pursue that path.

Lengthening that period, so that the United States and its allies would have time to react, is the ultimate goal of President Obama’s negotiating team. It is also a major source of friction between the White House and two allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, which have made no secret of their belief that they are being sold down the river.

. . . .

Iran’s agreement to convert or dilute the fuel stocks that are closest to weapons grade, Mr. Obama said, means that the deal would 'cut off Iran’s most likely paths to a bomb.' But it would cut them off only temporarily, long enough to pursue negotiations without fear that Iran would use the time to inch closer to a weapons capability.

But the rollback he won for this first stage, according to American intelligence estimates, would slow Iran’s dash time by only a month to a few months."

Or stated otherwise, Iran gave up virtually nothing in exchange for sanctions relief.

How did this deal come about? In this regard, the cat is finally out of the bag. As reported by The Times of Israel (, secret negotiations were conducted between the US and Iran leading up to the Geneva agreement:

"The United States and Iran secretly engaged in a series of high-level, face-to-face talks over the past year, in a high-stakes diplomatic gamble by the Obama administration that paved the way for the historic deal sealed early Sunday in Geneva aimed at slowing Tehran’s nuclear program, The Associated Press has learned.

The discussions were kept hidden even from America’s closest friends, including its negotiating partners and Israel, until two months ago, and that may explain how the nuclear accord appeared to come together so quickly after years of stalemate and fierce hostility between Iran and the West.

. . . .

The talks were held in the Middle Eastern nation of Oman and elsewhere with only a tight circle of people in the know, the AP learned. Since March, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns and Jake Sullivan, Vice President Joe Biden’s top foreign policy adviser, have met at least five times with Iranian officials.

The last four clandestine meetings, held since Iran’s reform-minded President Hassan Rouhani was inaugurated in August, produced much of the agreement later formally hammered out in negotiations in Geneva among the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany and Iran, said three senior administration officials. All spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss by name the highly sensitive diplomatic effort."

Obama's description of the agreement? His announcement of the agreement yesterday ( avoided any mention of these secret negotiations. Obama began his speech by saying:

"Today, the US together with our close allies and partners, took an important first step toward a comprehensive solution that addresses our concerns with the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear program."

Obama lied. In fact, the agreement resulted from his secret negotiations with Khamenei, which began before the so-called "moderate" president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, took office on August 3, 2013.

It is remarkable how Obama can claim that this "important first step" was taken "together with our close allies and partners." China and Russian are America's allies and partners, while Israel is not? This introductory sentence truly reflects Obama's mindset.

Today, in a New York Times op-ed entitled "Oh, Brother! Big Brother Is Back" (, the head of Obama's foreign policy cheerleader squad, Thomas Friedman, is back with more baloney. Telling us of America's goals in pursuing a deal purportedly constraining Iran's nuclear weapons development program, Friedman writes:

"So, if Iran’s nuclear capabilities are curbed, we can live with that bet on evolutionary change — especially since it would likely facilitate an end to the U.S.-Iran cold war, which has hampered our cooperating on regional issues. Our allies, by contrast, do not trust Iran at all and therefore don’t believe in evolutionary change there. They want Iran stripped of all nuclear technology until there is regime change.

We can’t close that gap. We can only manage it by being very clear about our goals: to unleash politics inside Iran as much as possible, while leashing its nuclear program as tightly as possible, while continuing to protect our Arab and Israeli allies."

Hmm, Obama is seeking "to unleash politics inside Iran"? I suppose that's why he sat silently on the sidelines during Iran's Green Revolution in 2009.

Obama is seeking "evolutionary change" in Iran? Yeah, right, change in a country that hangs homosexuals, stones to death women, murders Baha'is, oppresses Kurds, tyrannizes Sunnis and Christians, shuts down newspapers, and imprisons opposition politicians and throws away the keys.

Perhaps 70 years ago, Roosevelt should have also sought to bring about "evolutionary change" in Nazi Germany.

What is it with Obama and "change"? Regrettably, this befuddled community organizer has only wrought chaos.


  1. Yes.
    And this former academic who received most of her training and significant part of her experience elsewhere knew it from the beginning of Obamania. Messianic movements tend to end up tragically.

  2. So we lighten the sanctions,and Tehran has another six months to keep advancing their program.
    .......Yeah,that's a great deal.NOT.
    Our government will put it's name to any healthcare plan,to any so called peace plan,with no clue of the consequences.

  3. Jeff, I don't know if you addressed this.
    If I understand it correctly, the US treasury in the summer of 2013 had started NOT to punish violators of the sanctions against Iran. How legal was it? Weren't sanctions approved by some body? (somebody?) and shouldn't they been formally/officially disapproved by the same body? (same somebody?). I am not a lawyer and I don't follow all the Washington deeds and misdeed closely.

  4. It's more of the "Yes, I can do it" mindset.
    Screw allies, screw long standing commitment, muffle your ears till you hear only what you want to hear.
    Obama is sure the world will comply with his will. He's surrounded by yes-men and women. And Friedman is his chief bleater.

  5. The hubris of Friedman is almost insurmountable. The man is blessed with such superior wisdom(!) Only a man of his ilk can reveal the hidden motivations behind these recent travails.

    As a prelude to employing airy "psychological" explanations for World politics, Friedman must in this case gingerly step over buried bodies, dodge hanged homosexuals, and presume silence to screams from Evan prison. In doing so he shows himself to be either unimaginably uncaring or doltish in the extreme (or as you have mentioned JG, merely Obama's cheerleader).

    And the inane language of his endeavor... I read the column prior to your comments JG and tripped over the same ill-constructed phrase "unleash politics." As my sister would say, "wowzers!” (can he “unleash” the forces of nature as well?) What a silly way to try to say (I think) "promote opposition to the theocratic dictatorship."

    But then again, with Team Obama-Friedman (aka Oh-Fruck), you just don't know -- since, as you adroitly point out he/they certainly had their chance in 2009. Having been complicit in that bit of infanticide via wanton neglect, odious-O / frivolous-F are left only to hope for this mysterious "evolutionary" change.

    What sheer nonsense -- all of it. I'd laugh if I weren't deathly afraid for Israel.