WHEREAS most clear headed thinkers are hardly shocked…shocked…by the Islamist-in-Chief’s sell out to Iran’s hegemonic ambitions, the fact of the matter is that there are a few cogent explanations as to precisely what animates his treachery.

The above not only involves Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s betrayal of Israel – America’s ONLY reliable ally in the region – but western interests as a whole, most especially America’s. Simple, yet complicated, as that.

In effect, The Leader Of The Free World Aims For America’s And Israel’s Jugular – Their “Disarming”: The Benefits Accrued To Iran was written as a precursor to Obama’s traitorous behavior, with tracks laid out which defined his insidious path.

YET, now that the so called  “deal with the Islamic devil” is all but sealed – and aside from this Brotherhood expert’s banging on the same drum for over a year – few others, aside from Caroline Glick, got it right. Her analysis is more than righteous, it is a bulls eye – Jerusalem Post’s Glick: Iran Deal ‘Betrays’ US Allies:

The nuclear disarmament deal with Iran is “a heinous act of aggression by the United States against its allies in the Middle East and against its own national security,” says Caroline Glick, deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post.

“Iran has pledged to destroy the United States, it’s developing military bases throughout Central and South America for that explicit purpose, and Obama just approved a deal that all but guarantees that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons,” Glick told “The Steve Malzberg Show” on Newsmax TV…..a blow out video is a must view!

Like anything else of major import, there is always room for add-ons, and this time is no exception. To wit, full recognition of Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s fealty to the red/green alliance must be understood for what it is; an inherent/requisite basis to his actions. 

In the main, although it appears as if Russia’s Putin runs circles around the POTUS, this is hardly the case. For if this is indeed true, it would mean that their goals are diametrically opposed and Putin trumped Obama. NOTHING could be further from the truth!

So let’s just back track a bit, merely as a starting point to the root of the matter. The Radical-in-Chief & His Communist Hawaiian Roots: More Than Just An Exotic Locale is not meant as a trip down memory lane, but one which cements the Radical-in-Chief’s red alliance. Enter: his “relationship” with Putin, as well as with other red-imbued international players, including Obama’s main consigliere, Valerie Jarrett.

As a result, If It Looks Like A Socialist/Marxist/Communist Plan It Is: Peeking/Peeling Back Into Obama’s Looking Glass – Surrogates Too – Their Bomblets Waiting To Explode – and they are indeed explosive!

Now, as much as Putin has his hands full with a dangerous Islamist presence in outlying regions, the fact of the matter is that he dispatches them efficiently with brute force. NO quarrels on this end.

However, it is absolutely the case that Putin’s Russia has been working on replanting MAJOR Russian influence back into the Mid East, a goal ever since the Soviets were supplanted by the U.S., after the Suez war of late 1956. This is a historical fact. KNOW thy history well.

Russia’s goals are primarily economic concerns, with an eye towards reaping rewards for its burgeoning arms industry – their main financial arm. Hence, Putin’s mega deals with Iran and Syria (and now with Egypt, after Obama bitch- slapped Egypt’s military rulers), the incontestable butchers in the region. Of course, with this economic foothold, it underpins Russia’s equally intrinsic aim – to knock back the U.S. to less than super power status. 

As history unfolds, with a red-infused Obama in the White House, “flexibility” comes in many arenas. Recall their “hot mic” moment: President Obama made light Tuesday of the hot microphone moment he had the day earlier with Russian President Medvedev, where he said that after the November election, he’d have more “flexibility” on the issue of missile defense. 

Accordingly, Obama’s gyrations aside, leaving Russia to “police” the Mid East – once again – suits Obama and Putin equally, despite any smoke blown by either side. 

On its face, the U.S.’s inexorable departure from the Mid East not only knocks America down to “paper tiger” status, but, most significantly, it leaves Israel boxed in between a hostile, pro-Arab Russia and a nuclear armed Iran.

And, this is why, despite Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s Sunni roots – and with the Saudis (and others) up in arms about his abandonment of their interests too – the POTUS ignored Iran’s freedom fighters, back in 2009, and gave a heads up to the mullahs to continue as is. It was also the chief reason why his “red line” in Syria was nothing short of hooey and phooey, despite the fact that Assad’s regime has butchered upwards of 200,000 people. Besides, keeping promises to genocidal rulers (Shia or Sunni, as is the case with his fealty to the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia) is a necessity, if the fulfillment of red/green alliances are to come to fruition. 

Always remember a central component to Obama’s outreach tour to the Muslim world in the Mid East, back in 2009. His intentions were made clear in a myriad of ways, some of which are documented herein: “I AM A MUSLIM,” OBAMA TELLS EGYPTIAN FOREIGN MINISTER GHEIT – ISLAMIC COUP ON THE WHITE HOUSE:

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, in which President Obama told him that he was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the stepson of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.

Finally, during the week of 14-18th of January 2010, just on the eve of my winter tour to the US, Rachel picked up a Nile TV broadcast in which Egyptian Foreign Minister Abul Gheit said on the “Round Table Show” that he had had a one on one meeting with Obama who swore to him that he was a Moslem, the son of a Moslem father and step-son of Moslem step-father, that his half-brothers in Kenya were Moslems, and that he was loyal to the Moslem agenda. He asked that the Moslem world show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic American problems (Healthcare), that he would show the Moslem world what he would do with Israel. (more here)

BUT, what if there is NO there even there? How so? Well, the following, passed onto yours truly, more than gums up the works and adds to the deception in play:

The consequences of the Geneva hoax (info # 012811/13 EV) [analysis]

By Jean Tsadik © Metula News Agency

Trans. From French Llewellyn Brown

Of course, in history, kings or governments have already made oral agreements without signing the slightest document. There have already been cases of such understandings being respected. The existence of a signed treaty is not the only way for two States to come to an understanding. As far as we are concerned, we have never claimed the contrary.

It remains nonetheless true that an agreement that is duly written up in legal language, signed by plenipotentiaries and endorsed by the legislative powers of a country has substantial advantages over a contract whose contours are only vaguely defined. Thus including, of course, over a “Joint Plan of Action”, conceived in such a way that each one can present it to his population, his journalists, his supreme guide or his Congress, in the way he deems fit, while a rationally insuperable abyss separates these interpretations.

Moreover, one is obliged to make an absolutely different strategic analysis according to whether there is an agreement in all due form or a common working draft, since they do not have the same consequences: they do not offer the same guarantees and require extremely distinct safeguards.

That is why the scoop the Ména made on Sunday is fundamental. Firstly, it was important to say that there was no agreement at Geneva between Iran and the 5+1; next, that the governments are deliberately lying to the public by claiming the contrary; finally, that the media, all the media, are participating in the hoax, shirking their duty to inform, to analyze and to be curious.

Are the latter sinking into activism? Into euphoria? Into naivety? into anti-Semitism? Into an absence of any professional spirit or simply into stupidity? The details of our colleagues’ reasons do not have the slightest interest in our opinion. What is important, however, is the phenomenon: that of an entire profession, on a global scale, of people that spend their days commenting a text they have never seen, that does not exist and that they do not demand to be entitled to read.

An entire profession of people that interpret and dissect Obama’s Fact Sheet, that peremptorily repeat that at Geneva Iran engaged to do this or that, whereas in the “Joint Plan of Action”, there is not the least phrase starting by “Iran engages to…”. Neither in the form nor the content. There is no mention of a contract, a treaty, an understanding, all of that is simply invention or deception.

President Obama also risks a proceeding of impeachment, having asserted before his fellow citizens that the United States had signed an agreement that they did not sign and that Iran accepted commitments that they did not.

Other places have other rules, other traditions: in France, François Hollande can be “glad about the treaty signed” in the Swiss capital – the laws of the Fifth Republic French are very flexible when it comes to presidential distortions –, in America, it is not the case. In the USA, people do not accept that fact that a head of state can lie to those who have elected him.

Members of the Congress, Democrats and Republicans, doubtless warned by Stéphane Juffa’s article, are considering initiating impeachment proceedings. Soon, they will demand that Barack Obama present them with the “agreement signed in Geneva”. That promises to be spectacular.

In the meantime, Congressmen and Senators are preparing to draw up and enact a law defining the measures that the United States should instantly apply should the Islamic “Republic” break its undertakings. According to the calls we have received from Washington, retaliation would be fierce, and this law is most likely to pass.

Its content will obviously be based on Obama’s Fact Sheet, in the absence of any other document. On Capitol Hill – that is the good side of the fools’ agreement imposed by the president! –, they do not bother themselves, they “trust him” when they take note of all the contractual commitments supposedly agreed to by Iran.

And if the inspectors of the IAEA are hindered from inspecting, or if they discover that the Persians are not acting in accordance with the Fact Sheet, the Congress will hasten to sound the charge. Because they have the justified impression they have been duped by the White House, because they are aware of what is happening in Iran under the present dictatorship, and they do not want it to become a nuclear power, and because they support Israel.

On the international level, one can thus almost act – on the condition that one is the United States of America – on the basis of an interpretation one intends to impose on a text that has not been endorsed by the adverse party. It suffices that one arbitrarily sets the red lines and threatens one’s interlocutor with the worst sanctions if he does not undertake what is mentioned in the Joint Plan of Action.

In these conditions, why does the Ména make such a fuss about the absence of a formal treaty? Answer: because of everything such an absence implies!

Because in spite of all the pressure, the months of secret negotiations between the USA and Iran, which we have written about every week in our columns, the sanctions, the threats of Israeli interventions, the Ayatollahs have not capitulated: they have not publicly accepted to give up their project of an atomic bomb.

Because, and that is for sure – the 5+1 being believable nations – as Laurent Fabius announced yesterday, the sanctions will start to be lifted in December. What haste for Bayard-Fabius since, in such a short time, it will be impossible to observe if the Persians have or have not acted according to the terms of commitments they did not agree to!

Because the economic isolation imposed on Teheran – and which helped oblige the mullahs to discuss with the Westerners – has been irreparably broken. The Indians have already announced they are only waiting to solve a problem of transport insurance before ordering six million barrels of black gold from Khamenei. The head of the French automobile industry has already bought his ticket for Persia, where he hopes to negotiate contracts intended to give some air to his suffocating sector. He was right to hurry, because he will probably come across his Japanese, Korean and European counterparts in his hotel.

The business world is as eager to include the Iranians again, as are the latter themselves. And in the absence of clear and constraining treaty, Teheran will, in the next few days, be transformed into a new Eldorado. Moreover the figures of the increase in the Persians’ revenues resulting from the relaxing of the sanctions that are integrated in Obama’s Fact Sheet appear for what they are: ridiculous.

Besides, no mention is made of these estimations in the “Joint Plan of Action”, and it is one of the other base tricks. Even in their content, even without bothering about the lack of commitments: the facts published by Obama and Rohani do not coincide.

And on that score there is no doubt, the American previsions of 4 to 8 billion dollars of revenue for the ayatollahs will be demolished, as will those of the Israeli Minister of International Relations, Intelligence & Strategic Affairs, Yuval Steinitz, that totaled forty billion. In six months, at Metula, we would be surprised if these revenues did not attain a hundred billion, and above all, if the enthusiasm and interests they generate do not make the commitments of the 5+1 irreversible, with or without a further relaxing of sanctions, whatever the Iranians’ action regarding their nuclear program may be.

To put the Americans on the warpath, in these conditions, there would need to be a huge violation by the theocratic junta of the commitments it did not agree to. But there is nothing on the horizon that could force Obama to reconsider the other options, of which he says they remain “on the table”.

Since these hypothetical violations would not be flagrant: for example, how can one precisely qualify the dilution of the existing stock of 20% enriched uranium? How can one determine when and where it should start, and what ultimate form it should take, since nowhere is it stipulated. And if nothing is provided for, nothing can constitute a violation, that is obvious.

And this example is rather appropriate, since it constitutes the second condition imposed by the Westerners for an agreement with Teheran: 1. the ceasing of enrichment activities, 2. the lengthening of the breakout time, the time necessary for the Shi’a theocracy to build a bomb, if it decides to do so.

Then with the 185 kilos of 20% enriched uranium listed in their possession, the breakout time can be set at about 21 days. Next to nothing, in fact, and that is why the planet at least required a very precise calendar for the destruction of these reserves, starting yesterday rather than tomorrow, and stipulating all the necessary technical items. And above all, a formal, verifiable and signed one!

The agreement hoax, set up by the Obama administration with the active help of the other members of the Security Council and Germany, constitutes this time an attempt to plot [this is the first time, since its creation, that the Ména has spoken of the eventuality of a plot. Editor’s note.]. Barack Obama decided a long time ago that he would not engage in an armed conflict with the Islamic “Republic”; then, by dint of trying to negotiate, he has ended up convincing himself that Khamenei, having doubtless seen through the intentions of the American President, would not give up his nuclear project, and that he would not sign any document to this effect.

That was clear to Obama and Kerry well before the call to the meetings in Geneva, since their emissaries and their atomic experts had been regularly meeting their Persian counterparts for more than six months.

Two options remained for the resident of the White House: to resort to force in order to stop the ayatollahs from progressing on the path to their bomb, or making do with a nuclear Iran, in the short or medium term, hoping that the economic upturn and the fear of a return to sanctions would make the supreme guide and his clique back away.

That is really misjudging them, however; knowing their ability to ruse, it seems to me they will have both.

What is extraordinary, in this matter, is the relaxed manner in which Barack Obama announced to his people the signing of an agreement, and Iran’s equally fictitious commitments. And the ease with which the other powers – who also fear a confrontation that is unimaginable for them without Washington, and who were jubilant about trading with the Iranians anew – participated in the deception.

As for Binyamin Netanyahu, he is most naïve, as it so happens. His Ministry of Foreign Affairs followed in the footsteps of the US administration, and he too drew up a Fact Sheet of his own devising, taking the White House’s one at face value.

Here is a Prime Minister criticizing a non-existent treaty! He complains that Iran has not committed itself to dismantling its production tools for enriched uranium, that it is allowed to continue to enrich up to 5%, and that it has not destroyed its heavy water factory at Arak, while benefitting from a relaxing of economic sanctions. The reality is much darker: Iran is reintegrated into the world of international commerce, but has committed itself to nothing at all.

Were he better informed, better advised, he should content himself with demanding that the 5+1 publish the agreement that they claimed to have signed, that would make his task easier. And demand, alternatively, if the agreement is secret, that they say so, if it is an oral one, that they say so too.

But for that, it is much too late, most of the 5+1 leaders having already spoken of the “signing of an agreement” that is supposedly written. It remains for the Israelis to demonstrate that it is not an agreement, and that the “Joint Plan of Action” contains no commitment on the part of the Iranians.

One option remains on the table: that of an intervention by Tsahal [the IDF]. It worries the conspirators to the highest degree, as they do not want the first condemned to revolt. That explains Laurent Fabius’ comment, according to which, if the Israelis intervened militarily, whereas an agreement had been reached, no one would understand them.

Or the much tougher and even threatening remark made by the British Foreign Office Secretary, William Hague on Monday: “We would discourage anybody in the world, including Israel, from taking any steps that would undermine this agreement and we will make that very clear to all concerned”. W. Hague added that Great Britain “is on its guard”.

Not to hinder the Iranians from making an atomic bomb, but to dissuade the Israelis from putting their spanner in the works. Here, we repeat that William Hague is shamelessly lying when he speaks of an agreement, regarding which he is ideally situated to know that it does not exist.

The British Foreign Affairs Minister is only protecting the plot he is participating in. But basically he is right, as is Fabius: it will be difficult for Israel to act, as long as the conjuration obliging the latter to bend its knee remains powerful.

For Jerusalem to extricate itself, it would have to start by utilizing appropriate arguments, and for the moment, that is limited to officially demanding the treaty be published. I know, I am repeating myself, it is not my style, but here, it is important to be precise and to insist.

But essentially, for Israel to extricate itself, three conditions are necessary: 1. That it demonstrates that there is a plot, 2. That it succeeds in proving – in the juridical meaning of the term – a major violation by the Iranians of Obama’s Fact Sheet, and 3. That Saudi Arabia and other Arab states participate, and not simply half-heartedly, in a military operation with the Hebrews against the Islamic “Republic”.

In these contingent circumstances, in the case where the Jews and the Arabs of the region allied together to intervene, considering the Shi’a nuclear threat to be unbearable, and the “Joint Plan of Action” to be insufficient, no one could oppose their decision, neither Hague nor Obama, and that would delight the Congress.

And I assure you that we are infinitely closer to a coalition of this sort, which seemed improbable for decades, than I have the right to tell you. In fact, Khamenei only has one chance of escaping the joint thunderbolt of Jews and Arabs: by scrupulously respecting a contract he refused to sign and by relinquishing his nuclear project.

It is on every account a wild situation, but it is so.

NEVERTHELESS, despite the heretofore leader of the free world’s ultimate betrayal, the nation of Israel is hardly at his mercy. In fact, the only thing standing in Israel’s way is the spinelessness of many of its top leaders, as they genuflect to Obama Inc’s dictates and obediently take his administration at its (lying) word.

IN this regard, the Betrayer-in-Chief has the pulse of Israel’s leadership in the palm of his hand. He knows that they are malleable and terrified of losing America as an ally, therefore, whenever Israel’s leaders (momentarily) push back, Obama dangles “this and that” to keep them in line. Now, no one with any brain cells left believes that the following sweeteners are worth a damn, considering the POTUS’s track record, as well as the existential threat which a nuclear-armed Iran poses.

Joint Israeli-US war game when Iran deal expires

Future generations will (metaphorically) crucify PM Netanyahu if he fails to step out of Obama’s shadow, in time to save half of world Jewry. Time will soon tell. It’s of the essence.