McCain Flat Lines On Red Lines


                        McCain Flat Lines
                           On Red Lines
                                                                        Stanley Zir, author


Chris Wallace’s interview with Senator John McCain on Fox News 

Senator McCain: “Israel is watching with great concern as there is no change in the progress of talks with Iran.”

Chris Wallace: “Let me ask, you say they sit down and talk, and the only thing they agreed upon is another round of talks in Moscow next month. Meanwhile the Iranians continue to install more centrifuges and also it was found that one site had more high enriched uranium from - 20% to 27%. Let me ask you a question - is it time to give up diplomacy?“ Senator McCain: “ I think that it is time to drop some red lines and Israel and America must come together to establish those red lines.”

 Comment - They have already come together to establish the red lines: Israel's red line: from the moment most of the uranium is enriched at a protected site:  Obama’s red line when Iran has progressed to the point of developing a nuclear warhead rather than making do with nuclear capability.  McCain continued omitting this crucial impasse between Israel and Obama on red lines as if there should be no problem . . . “President Obama has said it’s unacceptable for Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb,” as if we should take Obama at his word.

Then Chris Wallace asked a series of questions of Senator McCain that makes you wonder if our Congressional leaders from both sides of the aisle should be quarantined to protect the American people. Wallace: “What do you mean by red lines?” McCain: “Stop the enrichment, allow the IAEA to inspect.”

Wallace: “Is it a deadline?”

McCain: “At least a red line. If you cross these red lines, all options are on the table.”

Wallace: “All options on the table? We always say that.”

McCain: “I can't say as I sit in front of you that I am absolutely in favor of military action, but there has to be a red line they cross then they have to face the consequences. The options can take a variety of ways besides all out air attacks, but the fact is right now despite the harm to their economy, and it is considerable, they have not changed one iota from the path that they are on.”

Wallace: Let me ask you about Egypt. McCain: Chris, first there is one more important thing I have to say about Iran - that those options must be on the table and the Iranians must know that or there will be no success in the negotiations with Iran.

Comment: Obama and the G8 globalists have already crossed the red line  and it looks as though Senator McCain has flat lined.  He has no idea that the time for military action is now.  When faced with the lethal combination of terrorism and religious fascism, Obama’s concessions or sanctions are not an agenda of peace. They are a prescription for disaster.  Furthermore, Egypt is about to cross the red line and McCain’s response is equally disturbing.

Same Interview on Egypt . . . McCain:  There are anti-American sentiments in Egypt for a whole variety of reasons, but we have to recognize their fair, democratic election process

Comment:  Can free elections ever bring democracy to the Islamic world? Why does America have to recognize the results if tyranny and terrorism are the outcome? Read commentary Legitimizing terrorism  Liberty’s last call 

Wallace: Even if the new President of Egypt is from the Muslim Brotherhood and the parliament is run by the Muslim Brotherhood?

McCain:  That can have serious consequences, but let me point out that there are different gradients in the Muslim Brotherhood and they were the only opposition party to Mubarak.

Comment#1: Senator McCain is now parroting the words of the Imam Abdul Rauf !  When Sean Hannity asked Rauf why he’s changing his views, he responded, “Any organization or any individual that targets civilians and kills them for a political agenda is a terrorist organization.”  He acknowledged that Hamas and Hezbollah are both terrorist organizations, but he wouldn’t classify the Muslim Brotherhood as such, saying, “There are different strands within the Muslim Brotherhood. There is a young group within the Muslim Brotherhood coming up today that has a different opinion as to how they have to engage . . .” Has McCain become a spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood and Imam Rauf of Ground Zero infamy?

Comment #2:  The ramifications of McCain‘s misstep will be devastating to the American brand because he is embracing terrorists as viable partners for peace. Do Americans want to be known throughout history as people who gave equal consideration to a terrorist group that has vowed the destruction of Israel?  If we do not continue on America’s path of righteousness, what will the future bring? Will America go the way of Britain, Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Sweden, whose fearful embrace of Islam has deeply penetrated and changed the very nature of these countries?

President Bush speaking to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s statehood he stated: "Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along." The President said to the country’s legislative body, "We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Yet Obama fears offending the enemies of freedom as if Americans must honor Islam‘s hunger for conquest and bloodshed if we wish to remain safe.  Since when has America ever feared her enemies?  The Leader of the Free World should be proud to be hated by fascists, not vice versa as Obama would have us believe. Is giving totalitarian governments an equal vote in determining the outcome of world affairs the gesture of friendship and trust that is needed to avoid future world conflicts? 

Our nation and the future of all humanity are under the greatest threat ever faced in the history of civilization. We are confronting a madman who, if armed with a nuclear bomb, intends to use it. Yet Obama has chosen a retreat and an accommodation campaign as his bargaining chip to garner Iran’s cooperation, as though we are responsible for 1400 years of bloodshed in Allah’s name. 

Why does Obama try to convince us that we can avoid conflicts and secure our freedom when confronted by nations and people who are willing to die to end them?  Obama’s doublespeak betrays our nation’s noble objectives and undermines our national security. He begs and enables rather than standing firm.  He issues stern warnings without adequate consequences. Iran should fear America's resolve, but more than half our population fear Obama, instead.

During the past few years, many of our country's patriots have expressed their deep concern about our nation’s domestic policy and our freedoms' being usurped by the forces of tyranny from within. While Iran could be moments away from achieving its goals, the call for the immediate destruction of its nuclear infrastructure should be a no-brainer. Yet there is no call coming from that the congressional quarter for direct military action to be taken against Iran NOW!

With deepest respect for these congressmen, they must now address Obama’s disastrous foreign policy that will end America’s world leadership and bring our nation to her knees.  If we are to stop Obama from writing America’s obituary, it is ourselves, alone, who must stand up and take action with the hope that what we do could become the impetus for creating a greater action.

Is America the world’s policeman? Yes. We should consider that title our badge of honor! America is not in the business of nation building, but in padlocking the businesses of nations whose mandates honors the subjugation of mankind.

To be a sworn and unrelenting enemy of those championing the dictates of terrorism we must make sure our resolve to stand against the advancement of fascism is unshakable. we must be willing to go down any path in pursuit of these tyrannical beasts.  No sacrifice is too great, lest in the face of economic adversity and social rest, we abandon the noble quest that defines us as Americas

Now if the GOP could renew its belief in America’s global mission, it will unleash a vision of hope and pride that our base hungers after.  This will invigorate not only our base, but the American people who are again seeking confidence in the American dream.  Then and only then will we be able to turn the tables on Iran, our failing economy, and send this President packing.  
Just a few hours after writing the above op-ed, the New York Times reported that “Sophisticated Virus Infects Computers in Iran.” 

It is hardly a coincidence that the Times, the administration’s mouthpiece, would launch their own cyber attack, a mainstream-media misinformation virus that would act to neutralize and discredit any notion that military action against Iran must be taken. 

In the article, the Times touts that President Obama has been aggressively seeking the use of these viruses as a deterrent to resolve this conflict through diplomatic, rather than military, means.  Even though Iran’s enrichment levels have steadily recovered, giving the country enough fuel today for five or more weapons with additional enrichment. The Times article confirms that Obama's aggressive use of the Stuxnet Virus since 2010 has set back Iran’s nuclear program by 18 to 24 months. They also confirm that he has recently issued the use of new viruses that are supposed to make clear to Iran that it is better to seek a diplomatic solution than risking a military attack.  

This was an intentional leak by the Times to make it look as if the president was tough on Iran  The tip off, it was published  several days after Iranian security experts reported that Flame, a virus far more dangerous than the Stuxnet worm, struck the country's computer systems ,and two weeks after the House of Representatives took a more aggressive stance on Iran, when it overwhelmingly passed Resolution HR 568, effectively calling for a military attack on Iran when it obtains nuclear capabilities.

Comment: The vote of 411in favor, 11 opposed, reflects a vote of no confidence in Mr. Obama’s resolve to take military action against Iran, if called for, on both sides of the aisle. 

The Obama con is always on. The only way to defeat a con artist is to remain constantly alert.  The con can persist only so long before the mark begins to catch on.   If Elie Wiesel had the courage to stand up to President Obama and ask why Ahmadinejad is still alive, how could we do anything less?  Who in their right mind would offer a psychopath further access to nuclear power based on a promise signed on worthless pieces of paper and ineffectual deterrence?

Until every Iranian nuclear facility is wiped off the face of the earth, we must keep the pressure on, and fight like it could be America and Israel’s last day on earth.-- Obama a Prince of Peace? - Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?  America you must decide NOW.  November 2012 will be too late. With thanks to

Thanks to Susan North for her invaluable input.

Stanley Zir

Now on SoundCloud (Listen Now!)



Featured Sale Collectibles [Store-Front]