‘Although candidate Donald Trump repeatedly criticized Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear agreement, his administration has twice decided to remain in the deal. It so certified to Congress, most recently in July, as required by law. Before the second certification, Trump asked repeatedly for alternatives to acquiescing yet again in a policy he clearly abhorred. But no such options were forthcoming, despite “a sharp series of exchanges” between the president and his advisers, as the New York Times and similar press reports characterized it.
Many outside the administration wondered how this was possible: Was Trump in control, or were his advisers? Defining a compelling rationale to exit Obama’s failed nuclear deal and elaborating a game plan to do so are quite easy. In fact, Steve Bannon asked me in late July to draw up just such a game plan for the president — the option he didn’t have — which I did.
Here it is. It is only five pages long, but like instant coffee, it can be readily expanded to a comprehensive, hundred-page playbook if the administration were to decide to leave the Iran agreement. There is no need to wait for the next certification deadline in October. Trump can and should free America from this execrable deal at the earliest opportunity.
I offer the paper now as a public service, since staff changes at the White House have made presenting it to President Trump impossible. Although he was once kind enough to tell me “come in and see me any time,” those days are now over.
If the president is never to see this option, so be it. But let it never be said that the option didn’t exist.’ https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10910/exit-iran-nuclear-deal
“The trouble began on Jan. 12, when 10 U.S. Navy sailors on two small boats evidently mistakenly strayed into Iranian waters in the Persian Gulf. Iran captured the American sailors (nine men, one woman) and held them overnight. This, as Sen. John McCain pointed out, was a violation of international law: ‘[S]overeign immune vessels like navy ships and boats do not lose their sovereign immune status when they are in distress at sea,’ the senator noted in a statement. Under international law, therefore, the sailors ‘are exempt from detention, boarding, or search. Their crews are not subject to detention or arrest.’”
“And the United States government’s response to this calumny? For one, the State Department denied that the Geneva Conventions applied to the captured sailors, because we are ‘not at war with Iran.’ That would come as a surprise to the family members of the scores of American military personnel who have been killed by Iranian explosives in Afghanistan and Iraq. And perhaps more appalling, Secretary of State John Kerry actually thanked Iran for its behavior here. ‘I want to express my gratitude to Iranian authorities for their cooperation in swiftly resolving this matter,’ Secretary Kerry said.”http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20160119/opinion/160119221
“A mantra repeated again and again is about the minority of jihadists and the majority of peace-loving Moslems. A recent National Review Online article challenges that. The author uses statistics to prove that assertion wrong. It is wrong and anyone, who just refused to hear-no-evil and see-no-evil, knows it.
The “good Moslem,” the peace-loving Moslem, is more upset with Donald Trump for saying Muslims can’t visit the United States than he is over the murdering of the people in San Bernadino. In this sense, the “good Moslems” should not focus on whether new Muslims can pass through the borders of the United States, but on the frightening behavior of their fellow adherents to Muslim doctrine. People in their right mind can see the contrast, the greater offense with societal shunning than the terrorism of their co-belligerents.
What you read right now is that Moslems all over the world are upset that Trump doesn’t want to let them come to the United States. Is anyone surprised that Moslems are upset about someone opposing Moslems? Really? What about the following headline? Moslems are upset they can’t come in, so we let them, and one of them blows up a thousand people! Will Moslems all over the world be opposing that? Will Moslem opposition even be a headline? Not at all. Let’s get some perspective here. The media is manipulating this because of their twisted worldview, to oppose Donald Trump for their preferred leftist candidate, and to create controversy.
Again, it’s not that I don’t want to live with Muslims. I would want them all around me so I could preach the gospel to them, but you’ve probably read at this point that the targets in San Bernadino were people like me, who might refute Islam. If you go to Syria or Iran or Iraq, you would expect to be killed for preaching the gospel. There is a place called the United States where the practice of preaching against false doctrine is still not to be threatened.” http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com.au/