RUTHFULLY YOURS

Introduction
Iran’s Supreme Leader is the Main Agitator for the Destruction of Israel

Sixteen years after his death, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s founding vision — that the eradication of Zionism is an inevitable precondition for redeeming contemporary Islam — keeps guiding the current generation of Iran’s religious, political and military establishment. To him the destruction of Zionism was an axiom never to be questioned or strayed from and an objective to be perpetually and actively pursued. According to this vision, Israel should be fought as part of a protracted global struggle between Islam and the West, which “planted intentionally the Zionist Entity in the heart of Islamic World.”

Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was faithful to this doctrine, making it the centerpiece of his foreign policy; current President Hassan Rouhani, his successor for the last two years, is also faithful to this doctrine, just less obvious. Notwithstanding, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei bears the torch and is the chief agitator for the extermination of Israel, spreading this message worldwide over social media, such as Twitter and Facebook, books1 and addressing various target audiences in English, Arabic and Persian.

The Iranian religious, political, intellectual and military elite support and repeat Khamenei’s messages. Members of the Iranian Army high command (as opposed to the Revolutionary Guards) have even declared their willingness and capability to destroy Israel, once the leader’s order is given. Practically speaking, the regime’s intelligence and international subversion agencies, mostly the Revolutionary Guards Quds Force, massively support anti-Israel terror groups and stage repeated conferences in Iran dedicated to denial of the Holocaust and to the deligitimization of Israel’s right to exist.

Ruthie Blum is the web editor of Voice of Israel talk radio (voiceofisrael.com).

Two pieces published on Monday illustrate the depth of the cognitive dissonance with which Western liberals are afflicted in relation to the nuclear agreement with Iran. One is a report in the Fars News Agency, a semiofficial mouthpiece of the Iranian regime; the other is Roger Cohen’s column in The New York Times, titled “Iran and American Jews.”

The Fars article covers Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s address to the so-called 8th International General Assembly of Islamic Radios and Televisions Union about the nuclear deal.

“Washington imagined that it could use this agreement whose fate is not clear yet … to find a way to wield influence in Iran, and this was their intention,” Khamenei said. “But we closed this path, and we will definitely keep it closed. We will not allow the U.S. to influence our economy, or politics or culture. We will stand against such penetration with all our power — that is, thank God, at a high level today.”

He went on to say, “[The Americans] seek to disintegrate the regional states and create small and subordinate countries … but the territorial integrity of the regional states, Iraq and Syria, is highly important to us.”

It’s not just scandal-mired IPCC chieftain Rajendra Pachauri, he of the roving hands and lustful emails, who makes you wonder about sleaze and sexism at the top of an organisation allegedly devoted to making the world a better place. When it comes to misogyny he has plenty of company
Dr Rajendra Pachauri, while chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change from 2002 to February, 2015, was the darling of global academia and the media. He oversaw and signed off on the IPCC reports of 2007 and 2013, and stepped squared up at the crease in Norway in 2007 to receive the IPCC’s half-share in the Nobel Peace Prize. Those 2007 and 2013 IPCC reports ramped up the global climate-change industry to what is now a $US1.5 trillion business.

The West’s endeavors to reduce CO2 emissions – notwithstanding the 18-year halt to global warming – are now diverting $US4 billion a day from potentially worthwhile Third World causes such as malaria control, safe water, sanitation and food security. Just for old times sake, I looked up Pachauri’s speech at the Oslo Peace Prize ceremony.

He quoted approvingly, “We honor the earth; for bringing forth flowers and food and trees…” Lovely! He then went on to warn about accelerating loss of water supplies from Himalayan glaciers, relied on “by more than one-sixth of the world’s population”. Oops! That was the Fourth Report’s “all gone by 2035” howler (based on a newspaper cutting) which nearly saw him sacked by the InterAcademy Council in 2010, after he’d abused a genuine scientist for pointing out the error. Pachauri finished, “Will those responsible for decisions in the field of climate change at the global level listen to the voice of science and knowledge, which is now loud and clear?”

Are open-borders advocates and Hispanic activists sowing the seeds for revolution? Not just a social revolution, but an armed, violent revolution?

In a little-discussed news item [1] from this month, a 16-year-old illegal alien set a police cruiser on fire in Texas before attempting to swerve his car into two motorcycle cops during a police chase that followed. Although he was armed — and aimed a rifle at the police twice — he was eventually apprehended without a shot being fired.

The teen, whose name hasn’t been released due to his age, later told [2] investigators he was tired of ICE “always sending Mexicans back to Mexico for no reason.” He said they are the ones in America “doing all the work.” He was also tired of “his people getting shot by police and nothing happening.” His broader motivation? As he put it, to create a “war against the government.”

We’re listening…

As anti-establishment Republicans are gaining traction in the polls, Scott Walker is trying to establish himself as an outsider as well.

In a speech set to deliver in Minnesota on Tuesday, Walker will take on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).Never a bad idea.

“Republican leaders in Washington told us during the campaign last year that we needed a Republican Senate to repeal Obamacare,” the Wisconsin governor will say according to pre-released remarks. “Well, Republicans have been in charge of both houses of Congress since January and there still isn’t a bill on the President’s desk to repeal Obamacare.”

Walker will say that he’s had to take on the establishment in his party before and that he told GOP lawmakers in Wisconsin, “It was put up or shut up time. If we didn’t do what we said we’d do, the voters would have every right to throw us out.”

“And just like I did in my own state, I am willing to take on anyone – including members of my own party – to get the job done,” he will say.

File this one under “UN Sleaze,” or perhaps under “UNRWA’s Use of Dead Infants to Defend and Abet Terrorists.” Though even that may be putting it too mildly.

In the run-up to next month’s annual opening of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the latest Israel-trashing report from the propaganda mills of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) has been released. This one’s a doozy, summed up by an UNRWA press release [1] dated August 8 with the headline: “INFANT MORTALITY RATE RISES IN GAZA FOR THE FIRST TIME IN FIFTY YEARS.”

This is the finding of an UNRWA-conducted study. In the opening sentence, the press release points a finger at — where else? — Israel, saying “the Agency’s Health Director says the blockade may be contributing to the trend.”

GOP presidential candidate would eliminate mandates, provide tax credits based on age
Scott Walker’s proposal to replace President Barack Obama’s signature health-care law would set up a system that eliminates a host of federal mandates and provides tax credits for the uninsured based on age, not income or family status.

The Wisconsin governor and GOP presidential candidate says the plan wouldn’t add to the federal deficit and would completely repeal and dismantle the Obama administration’s health-care law. Mr. Walker says his plan would give more control to the states, overhaul Medicaid and do away with tax credits based on income. It would also toss out the law’s requirement that insurers offer plans that cover essential health benefits such as maternity care and mental-health services.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American; Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

My wife and I were a very nervous and excited young couple purchasing our first home. Our homebuilder was a dear friend of my parents. Upon going to closing, there were numerous odds and ends the builder had not completed. He vowed to complete my home asap and asked that I sign a paper for the bank stating that he completed all the work on my home.

My mom cautioned me not to sign the paper. Mom said, “Eaten bread is soon forgotten.” I ignored Mom’s counsel. Sure enough, after my builder received his check from the bank, I had to chase him for over a year to complete my home.

Just as my builder said whatever necessary to get paid, politicians make voter-pleasing promises on the campaign trail. After they are elected, they forget their promises. Therefore, the final Jeopardy question is: Which GOP presidential contender would keep his word if elected? Having been burnt so many times, trustworthiness, character and backbone must be paramount in selecting our nominee.

In this primary season, we have witnessed honorable conservative candidates dialing back their original comments or apologizing due to pressure from the mainstream media and the candidate’s handlers. This raises concerns in me about how these candidates would holdup under world-class attacks once they are in the WH.

Leftists (mainstream media, Democrats and liberals) viciously insulted and accused president Ronald Reagan of every nasty thing imaginable. It takes a rare human being to stand firm in the midst of 24/7 relentless character assassination. Thus, my question. Which GOP contenders would follow through with their conservative promises?

At the top of my list is Senator Ted Cruz. On several issues, Cruz seems to always end up on the opposite side of the GOP establishment and Leftist Democrats; in-sync with We the People. Cruz never follows the crowd. Eagles fly alone.

Our society is under attack, not from Russia or radical Islam, but from heterophobes.

Okay, I made the term up…sort of. But if a homophobe is a person who fears or hates homosexuals, then what else can we call gays who hate straights? Yep, surprise, there are not-so-nice people on both sides. I know, I’m an unforgivable homophobic creep for pointing this out, but since the rest of the country seems to be in some sort of trance, I feel obliged.

Gays say they just want to have normal lives. But for the LGBT movement, this is patently false. They’ve come out of the closet, and good for them. But they didn’t stop there; they have taken over American’s living rooms, kitchens, and yes, even bedrooms. And now that they’re in possession, they want to shove heterosexuals, especially Christians, back into that closet they just vacated.

LGBT’s hate campaign fired an opening salvo back in June 2012, when the Chick-fil-A CEO was revealed as a Christian against same-sex marriage. Gasp! That couldn’t stand. You let one guy start spouting his opinion, and soon the whole country will think they can do it.

Before Obama restored ties to Cuba, he ended an inventive U.S. effort to promote freedom.

There was an odd sight over John Kerry’s shoulder as he stood in the Havana sun Friday. At a flagpole in front of him, U.S. Marines were raising the Stars and Stripes to mark the return of a U.S. embassy to Cuba after 54 years. Choreographed and solemn, that was the scene that U.S. and Cuban leaders wanted the world to see.

Behind Secretary of State Kerry, though, was a peculiar sea of other flagpoles, tall and empty, steel spires rising from nowhere. These were visible in photographs splashed across world news but little noted. Which is unfortunate. Because those steel poles are a reminder of an unusually creative and bold chapter in recent U.S. diplomacy—and one the Obama administration ended.

In 2006 the U.S. faced a challenge. For nearly 30 years it had been operating a quasi-embassy in Havana, known as an Interests Section, from the same building that housed the U.S. Embassy before the 1961 break in formal diplomatic ties. The Bush administration wanted to support liberalization by aiding the victims of the Castro regime, including labor activists and journalists and those punished for trying to worship, work or travel freely. But U.S. officials were largely confined to the Interests Section, barred from freely meeting the public or communicating through the state-controlled media.