by Dennis Lund
Dr. Ledeen, wrote: “The actual strategy (of Obama in Iran)… has been on display since before the beginning of the Obama administration. During his first presidential campaign in 2008, Mr. Obama used a secret back channel to Tehran to assure the mullahs that he was a friend of the Islamic Republic, and that they would be very happy with his policies.”
After the GOP released the open letter to the leaders of Iran the Democrats and went into high dudgeon with a level of outrage rarely seen.
TRAITORS!! -- blasted the headline in the New York Daily News
The Washington Post’s Dana Millbank was less apoplectic: “It’s true that 47 Republican senators did their level best to bring us closer to war…
Democrat leaders chimed in unison with their umbrage:
Vice President Joe Biden: “This letter, in the guise of a constitutional lesson, ignores two centuries of precedent and threatens to undermine the ability of any future American President…
Hillary Clinton took time out from deleting embarrassing e-mails to declare: “Either these senators were trying to be helpful to the Iranians or harmful to the commander-in-chief…”
President Obama: “Their basic argument to (the Iranians) is, 'Don't deal with our president because you can't trust him to follow through on an agreement,' that's close to unprecedented"
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign committee launched a mocking broadside salvo against signatory Sen. John McCain: “(If) ‘Weather Vane’ McCain… is going to do something as dangerous and reckless as cozying up to Iran…”
There are at least two issues involved here: the first is an overlooked technicality, while the second is a very big problem for the Democrats, as well as those helping to draw up plans for the gallows.
First, the letter was in fact an open letter, meaning that is was never delivered nor specifically meant to be delivered to the Iranians. Instead it was posted on a website and published in various papers. The ‘technicality’ comes into play in that to be convicted or charged with “treason” one must take some action beyond exercising First Amendment rights.
The second is a bit thornier: it has been reported that presidential candidate Barack Obama, took action in March of 2008 to specifically discuss U.S.-Iranian policies, via an emissary, with the Iranians and thereby attempted to undermine the policies of President George W. Bush.
All of those mentioned above are, in all likelihood, fully aware of the actions taken by then-Senator Obama. Quoting George Santayana on repeating history would be superfluous, as his quote assumes history is not remembered by those named. They are in fact relying on the public either not knowing (or not believing) the facts even when presented.
The story of Obama and the mad mullahs of Tehran was presented by controversial Iranian expert Michael Ledeen last year.
The report, now getting well-deserved attention, originally appeared in PJ Media in August, 2014. Dr. Ledeen, wrote: “The actual strategy (of Obama in Iran)… has been on display since before the beginning of the Obama administration. During his first presidential campaign in 2008, Mr. Obama used a secret back channel to Tehran to assure the mullahs that he was a friend of the Islamic Republic, and that they would be very happy with his policies.”
A sidebar on Mr. Ledeen is in order, as his name will be disparaged by those seeking distraction as well as avoiding the discussion of the charges leveled.
Columnist Jonah Goldberg, a colleague of Ledeen’s at the National Review Once described the so-called “Ledeen’s Doctrine”, in tongue-in-cheek fashion as: "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business,"
Goldberg reported that this description was a paraphrasing of a statement once made by Ledeen in the early 1990s.
Ledeen’s anti-Iranian belligerence does not take away from the facts regarding actions taken in 2008 by the future president.
The story, also carried late last year by former Reagan staff member and now radio talk show host Mark Levin, has recently resurfaced, as a result of the venomous attacks directed at the 47 signatories of the letter.
The mission, which took a great deal of hubris on the part of Obama, was intended to circumvent President Bush by sending a message stating: ‘just wait until I am president, things will be different between our nations’.
The channel chosen was William Miller, former ambassador to the Ukraine, one fluent in Farsi, having served in Tehran for the State Department during the reign of the Shah.
Those who are students of history may recognize the name, as it had surfaced previously pertaining to Iran.
In November, 1979 former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and then Senate Intelligence Committee staff director William Miller were sent by President Carter to Tehran to negotiate the release of the hostages. Though that negotiation failed, two weeks later all female and black hostages were released. The role of Mr. Miller in this is unconfirmed, but his experience in Iran is both extensive and undeniable.
President Obama may be a lot of things to a lot of people, but one thing he is not is ignorant of those people who may be of use to him to ‘fundamentally change America’. One of those he chose to accomplish this goal was the same William Miller.
Being that what Barrack Obama did back in 2008 exceeded the actions of an “open letter” does anyone want to reconsider their charges against the GOP gang of 47?
TRAITORS!! -- blasted the headline in the New York Daily News
The Washington Post’s Dana Millbank was less apoplectic: “It’s true that 47 Republican senators did their level best to bring us closer to war…
Democrat leaders chimed in unison with their umbrage:
Vice President Joe Biden: “This letter, in the guise of a constitutional lesson, ignores two centuries of precedent and threatens to undermine the ability of any future American President…
Hillary Clinton took time out from deleting embarrassing e-mails to declare: “Either these senators were trying to be helpful to the Iranians or harmful to the commander-in-chief…”
President Obama: “Their basic argument to (the Iranians) is, 'Don't deal with our president because you can't trust him to follow through on an agreement,' that's close to unprecedented"
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign committee launched a mocking broadside salvo against signatory Sen. John McCain: “(If) ‘Weather Vane’ McCain… is going to do something as dangerous and reckless as cozying up to Iran…”
There are at least two issues involved here: the first is an overlooked technicality, while the second is a very big problem for the Democrats, as well as those helping to draw up plans for the gallows.
First, the letter was in fact an open letter, meaning that is was never delivered nor specifically meant to be delivered to the Iranians. Instead it was posted on a website and published in various papers. The ‘technicality’ comes into play in that to be convicted or charged with “treason” one must take some action beyond exercising First Amendment rights.
The second is a bit thornier: it has been reported that presidential candidate Barack Obama, took action in March of 2008 to specifically discuss U.S.-Iranian policies, via an emissary, with the Iranians and thereby attempted to undermine the policies of President George W. Bush.
All of those mentioned above are, in all likelihood, fully aware of the actions taken by then-Senator Obama. Quoting George Santayana on repeating history would be superfluous, as his quote assumes history is not remembered by those named. They are in fact relying on the public either not knowing (or not believing) the facts even when presented.
The story of Obama and the mad mullahs of Tehran was presented by controversial Iranian expert Michael Ledeen last year.
The report, now getting well-deserved attention, originally appeared in PJ Media in August, 2014. Dr. Ledeen, wrote: “The actual strategy (of Obama in Iran)… has been on display since before the beginning of the Obama administration. During his first presidential campaign in 2008, Mr. Obama used a secret back channel to Tehran to assure the mullahs that he was a friend of the Islamic Republic, and that they would be very happy with his policies.”
A sidebar on Mr. Ledeen is in order, as his name will be disparaged by those seeking distraction as well as avoiding the discussion of the charges leveled.
Columnist Jonah Goldberg, a colleague of Ledeen’s at the National Review Once described the so-called “Ledeen’s Doctrine”, in tongue-in-cheek fashion as: "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business,"
Goldberg reported that this description was a paraphrasing of a statement once made by Ledeen in the early 1990s.
Ledeen’s anti-Iranian belligerence does not take away from the facts regarding actions taken in 2008 by the future president.
The story, also carried late last year by former Reagan staff member and now radio talk show host Mark Levin, has recently resurfaced, as a result of the venomous attacks directed at the 47 signatories of the letter.
The mission, which took a great deal of hubris on the part of Obama, was intended to circumvent President Bush by sending a message stating: ‘just wait until I am president, things will be different between our nations’.
The channel chosen was William Miller, former ambassador to the Ukraine, one fluent in Farsi, having served in Tehran for the State Department during the reign of the Shah.
Those who are students of history may recognize the name, as it had surfaced previously pertaining to Iran.
In November, 1979 former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and then Senate Intelligence Committee staff director William Miller were sent by President Carter to Tehran to negotiate the release of the hostages. Though that negotiation failed, two weeks later all female and black hostages were released. The role of Mr. Miller in this is unconfirmed, but his experience in Iran is both extensive and undeniable.
President Obama may be a lot of things to a lot of people, but one thing he is not is ignorant of those people who may be of use to him to ‘fundamentally change America’. One of those he chose to accomplish this goal was the same William Miller.
Being that what Barrack Obama did back in 2008 exceeded the actions of an “open letter” does anyone want to reconsider their charges against the GOP gang of 47?
Dennis Lund
Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/03/the_gang_of_48.html
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment