Doc's Talk: What Price Oil, President Obama?

Saturday, March 17, 2012

What Price Oil, President Obama?

The question is whether America will assume her position as the Leader of the Free World and LEAD the attack on Iran, which will protect Israel and the West.
Stanley Zir, Never Again is Now
Stanley Zir is founder of Never Again is Now andVictorious America.com, "dedicated to the completion of America's destiny... in fulfilling Liberty's mandate: 'Our Eternal War on Tyranny'...."
►

The President of the US recently said, “Stop all this loose talk of war, because it’s driving up the price of oil. We would probably oblige if we believed in his good intentions. But the truth is, Obama lingers while Iran continues to increase her nuclear capabilities. That is why we must not remain silent: We must pressure this President to take immediate action to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed, terrorist state. It is not we who are driving up the price of oil; it is the President, because he refuses to confront Iran and end its nuclear and oil stranglehold over us. Obama says it is out of his reach to bring the price of oil down, that he cannot do anything. Contrary to what Obama says, it is in the best interest of the United States to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities now because we are slowly being bled to death by his indecision and uncertainty, and because most of the Arab nations are in disarray. It is the fear that we will attack Iran that drives the price of oil up, and the fear that they will close the Straits of Hormuz, along with the fear that they will stop shipping oil to Europe.

Added to this, Obama is not willing to drill (if we do drill, it would be a few years before we get the oil); and speculation that we’re drilling might bring down its price but it will be too little too late.

Yet, speculation does govern the price of goods. It is not a Wall Street invention, as Obama would have us believe. It happens every day in every market in the world – even in the bazaars of the Middle East. In other words, speculation, perception, and availability are what drive the price of goods, whether it be oil or perishables. But in major conflicts between nations, there is an extra factor: perceived weakness or strength of the warring parties is the major determining factor of fluctuating prices of essential commodities.

Thus we can surmise that the price of oil will go up initially, perhaps at an alarming rate, but down to acceptable levels in a few weeks once the evil of Ahmadinejad is contained. If our economy is to survive in the short term, we must put an end to the ongoing threat we face from skyrocketing oil prices if we dare hold Ahmadinejad’s feet to the fire. By immediately attacking and destroying Iran’s nuclear war machine, the source of power that Ahmadinejad wields over us and our economy will be neutralized.

Thus there is only one way to end the Iranian nuclear nightmare. There is a saying, “Cut off the head of the snake and the body will expire.” Only with an emergency procedure that delivers a payload of destruction directly to the heart of Iran's nuclear facilities can we eliminate the hub in the wheel of an emerging nuclear terrorist empire, whose success can embolden the OPEC nations to follow suit.

The attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will send the clearest message to those nations in the region that would consider following in Iran's footsteps - that deterrence is not an empty threat when it comes to actively plotting the extermination of the Jewish people and the downfall of America.

Ultimately, the psychological fallout that would result from an attack on Iran will undermine the perceived invincibility of the Iranian and OPEC cooperatives. No longer will they be able to manipulate the price of crude with impunity, for we have made it clear that speculating in oil-extortion or nuclear-blackmail is a risky business when dealing with America and the free world.

The truth is that Israel and America will thrive after the attack because the world will regain its confidence in protecting free-market economies from the assault of government-controlled fascist societies once the evil of Iran is contained.

On the other hand, failure to confront Iran and destroy her nuclear infrastructure will destroy what is needed to ensure a strong, stable economy at home. The formula for prosperity for our nation has remained constant through the best and worst of times. The only thing that makes our dollar the universal currency is perception. It is the world’s belief that America’s unyielding stance against fascism at home and abroad that has kept the free markets and the entrepreneurial spirit alive. It is that and that alone which makes our dollar strong under any circumstances.

That is why we must protect America from the assault from those who falsely claim we cannot afford to actively engage fascism when it raises its ugly head; they claim we must be strong at home and get our own financial house in order first in order to be strong abroad. The ramifications of this misstep would be devastating. Are they suggesting that Americans quietly prepare for our own conquest and death? When we compromise our core values, we would be overrun by the demands of tyrannies and fascists – which will then finish us financially no matter what steps we take to address the debt issue. Having the courage to stand against the absolute power of tyranny is the shortest route to free our nation from Iran's oil stranglehold and get America out from under the debt created by Obama’s domestic policies.

Ahmadinejad’s scare tactics have been nothing but a manufactured threat, designed to prevent us from taking action. His warnings of a third world war and skyrocketing prices to bring about a global economic meltdown are absurd scare tactics.

Do you really believe that after an attack on Iran, she would be able to keep the Straits of Hormuz closed for more than four or five days? Russia, China, Europe and America need the oil! They’re not going to risk an economic global meltdown in order to placate Iran. In any case, Iran has only six 1986-vintage destroyers and men on attack vessels – no match for a navy of any major country.

When there is an aggressive plan by those who would end our freedoms, our plan must be that much more aggressive to stop them. If we want to continue having a country worth fighting for, we must demand an end to sanctions and call for the immediate destruction of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

The question is not whether America should HELP Israel attack Iran. It is not Israel’s mission to fight a global threat for the rest of the world. The question is whether America will assume her position as the Leader of the Free World and LEAD the attack on Iran, which will protect Israel and the West. If not, we will forfeit our mission and our destiny as the nation to unite all nations in the fight to end the scourge of global tyranny.

How could it be otherwise? Being at cross-purposes, neither force can long co-exist with the other. One system sustains freedom, and the other, submission. One achieves peace and unity through a democratic and Constitutional balance of power, while the other accomplishes a mockery of these virtues through the absolute subjugation of the individual human spirit to the will of the most ruthless contender for power.

In our quest to keep the light of freedom from being extinguished, why do we not consider it our badge of honor to be called the “world’s policeman?” America is not in the business of nation building, but in putting out of business those nations whose constitutions honor the subjugation of humankind.

What is in the best Interest of the US? To immediately attack and destroy Iran's nuclear war machine.

Ted Belman
Jerusalem, Israel
972 (0)54 441 3252

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk