Greetings.

The last time you received a Blast e-mail was on Friday, January 30, 2015; the
hiatus was due to a desire to catch-up on non-political concerns that, candidly,
remain incomplete. Unremitting emergence of key-concerns has enhanced both
worriment about BHO and hope that Cruz will succeed him; those who have
noticed this electrical-silence have received an attachment of grist consisting of
90+ pages of raw-hyperlinks that, combined with more than 3K saved e-mails
would be provided in upcoming communicationsafter other matters have been
rectifiedin a thematic format.
The Iran-Bill is so vital, however, that this notification has been codified; you are
urged to scrutinize my 659-word essay, to decide independently that it is totally
correct, to recognize that no one else has succinctly summarized the salient
features of what has been occurring and what must be done (and why),
and then to act accordingly. Jerry Gordon has detailed the blow-by-blow, Ted Cruz
has explained his behavior (which distinguished him from Rubio, Paul and Graham),
and Richard Baehr noted why Dems are bowing to BHO instead of supporting Israel
and why this toothless bill helps Iran (which will undoubtedly be more favorable to
Iran than the latest State Department fairy tale about what was agreed to in
Lausanne).
Know that a friend critiqued it following publication in The American Thinker and
provided feedback from the journalistic perspective: [1]Use of the shorthand-term
nuke was discordant when addressing such a serious matter (preferring use of
nuclear arms), [2]Reference to the 1930s should have emphasized that the
contemporary situation is far worse (because we know of what happened in the
1940s), [3]Some phraseology was too qualified (such as the triad of softeningwords in the second graph). During colloquy, he advised that BHOs foreign policy
has not failed from his perspective for, inter alia, even if Iran follows North Koreas
model and nukes-up (recalling the Clinton/Albright bust), BHO will be able to claim
he had delayed the inevitable (a process that started last weekend when Biden said
Iran already has enough enriched uranium for a half-dozen bombs).
I felt that its having survived editing by recognized experts in Tel Aviv, Chicago and
Oakland sufficed but, to be sure, I have provided the above disclaimer. Also, I will
attempt to contact someone @ AIPAC, ASAP, to acquire a direct-quote regarding its
having contravened BB (another abbreviative rhetorical defect, BTW). What has not
been altered is a clear delineation of the precise identities of those who are
Israels true colleagues; the short-list is comprised of ZOA and
Cruz/Cotton.
It is remitted in-isolation because yall should PLEASE disseminate its contents
[beyond the ~1K recipients I can reach, half via Blast e-mail and half via
Facebook] and contact your congress-person. If it is true that the House Liberty
Caucus will be mobilized to oppose itas early as on Tuesdaythen action should
be swift if this juggernaut-disaster is to be forestalled.
Contact-feedback is desirable.

On Iran sanctions, no bill is better than a bad bill

By Robert B. Sklaroff
No amendments. No anguish. No bill.
Congress must not pass any Iran Nuke Bill, for it could promote what some feel is
Obamas alleged goal namely, making Iran into the Middle Easts hegemon.
Instead of pondering the improbable and/or reliving the tragic ignorance of the
1930s, there is a method by which President Obamas failed foreign policy
promulgated for more than a half-decade can be placed into a form of
receivership, even if he would profess that it has been successful.
Because of existing sanctions legislation, purposeful inaction should necessitate
that a component of this deal be submitted to Congress. Obama can waive
sanctions only if its determined to be necessary to the national interest; his
stated rationale would then be subject to litigation.
Therefore, those who perceive it as a treaty invoking the precedent of all prior
nuke-related agreements would mandate that it be ratified by two thirds of the
Senate (Article II, Section 2, 2), even as Obamas apologists claim he could sign of
on an executive order. Indeed, he has not ruled out issuing an executive order to
close Gitmo!
Lets call his bluf!
The trigger for this initiative was the bluster of Iranian foreign minister Mohammad
Javad Zarif, who claimed that Obama will have to stop implementing all the
sanctions, economic and financial sanctions that have been executive order and
congressional. However he does it, thats his problem.
Indeed, the left-leaning Politifact determined it to be mostly true that the next
president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and
future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time, because
a key portion of the 286-word [Cotton] letter says that the undersigned senators
will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not
approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between
President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei.
It is unnecessary to analyze the situation further, except to note that endorsement
of this unamended bill by the American Israel Public Afairs Committee (AIPAC)
violates that groups responsibility to advocate the position of the Israeli
government as Americas Pro-Israel Lobby. Proof positive of this flip-flop is what
happened a decade ago, when the JTA reported that there never was any doubt

that AIPAC would ofer some measure of support for the Gaza withdrawal, since the
lobby is committed to backing the policies of the Israeli government. Mark Levin
railed against AIPAC along similar lines on May 5 (podcast @ 47:49-49:13).
Thus, by ignoring PM Netanyahu and eschewing the gravamen of his State of the
World address, AIPAC has become compliant irrevocably to the Demsexposing
the myth of AIPAC power. In contrast, as per an exhaustive analysis by Ted
Belman on his Israpundit website and personal e-mail, the Zionist Organization of
America endorsed amending the bill. Again, among national pro-Israel advocates,
the Organizations president, Mort Klein, stands alone against the forces of evil.
The amendment process, admirable as it should be, may apparently be shortcircuited by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who doesnt want the Cotton-Rubio
initiative (requiring Iran to disclose the history of its nuclear program, to shutter all
its nuclear facilities, and to recognize Israels statehood) to be subject to a vote. His
supporters claim that this stunt constitutes a poison pill.
Uncertainty abounds, such as the potential for the U.N. Security Council to remove
sanctions independently. Danger abounds, noting the capacity of released billions
to grease Tehrans worldwide sponsorship of terrorism. Concern that a
constitutional crisis looms abounds, for any clash of powers of allegedly co-equal
branches may ultimately reach the SCOTUS in a fashion comparable to the current
litigation promulgated by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) against unilateral
Obamacare rule changes by the administration.
The alternative to standing firm is capitulation. Instead, as Netanyahu has
repeatedly argued, it is necessary to maintain if not to expand sanctions
until/unless a better deal has been reached. Clarity is mandatory; Congress must
not pass an Iran bill.
Dr. Sklaroff is a hematologist/oncologist and has served as a GOP
committee-person for more than two decades.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/05/on_iran_sanctions_no_bill_is_better_t
han_a_bad_bill.html#ixzz3ZaNvt6ez