• Home
  • Wall Street Journal

Posts Tagged ‘Wall Street Journal’

Britain and Obama’s ‘back of the Queue – WSJ

Found this on the WSJ from RA – CA

Given the serial insults to our shared Anglo -Saxon heritage by the Marxist indoctrinated Obama, we are to be excused if we have become numb to his abuse.
Less we forget, his first official act the day following his inauguration was to march back to the Oval Office and summarily return the bust of Churchill given to President Bush by Tony Blair, a sign of the infinite ties between our nations in a time of war. He has sneered at our timeless traditions and values.
With the common arrogance of his alleged father, Mau-mau loving Islamist Obama Sr. , his disregard of England is as insulting as the shameful gifts he bore in a visit to Queen Elizabeth recently.

Now is his latest intrusion into the sovereign decisions of this great Island, a staunch allie to the United States, he is threatening retribution should we follow the course of our hearts and minds and frankly sane logic, and break free from the lies and corruption that the EU has predictably become.
His reflexes are now always predictable and constantly remind us of his indoctrination : TYRANNY BEFORE FREEDOM , FOES BEFORE ALLIES.

Eventually we will awake from the reflex of decency and rationalisation of his actions as being confused or wrong footed for these presume he is on our side ; he is not and never has been.
His actions are those of one inimical to our best interests.
From Israel to England any attempt to assert these interests is met with the same venom.
Far from being at “the back of any queue ” England is and will remain shoulder to shoulder with America despite the presumption of tyrannical imposition by this pretender. As Mr. ROBERTS clearly states, should the English people decide in their best interest to “leave” as allie and major trading partner natural adjustments will be made by our fellow allies to insure a seamless transition. Only an enemy would react in this manner and no matter his intent not even Mr. Obama will alter the course of We ” the English speaking peoples” and our traditions of freedom for all.

Robert F. Agostinelli

London, England‎

Posted in Robert Agostinelli

Continue Reading

Response to “Dictatorships and Obama Standards “, By Dana Rohrabacher, June 18, 2015, WSJ

Another fine response from RA to the WSJ – CA

Dictatorships and Obama Standards

If the president must lead from behind, could he at least get behind someone who wants to win the war against Islamic extremism?

By DANA ROHRABACHER Source: http://www.wsj.com/articles/dictatorships-and-obama-standards-1434582659
It continues, dreadfully. Islamic State’s advancing war on civilization—despite theObama administration’s protestations that it has been stanched—brazenly pushes the modern world toward despair. Now Islamic State, or ISIS, announces it has taken 86 more Christians hostage, their likely fate a grisly martyrdom. On the same day, June 8, at the G-7 summit, President Obama admitted that he lacks a “complete strategy” to defeat the Islamic extremists now bedeviling Iraq, much of the rest of the Middle East, and beyond. Typically, unconscionably, Mr. Obama half-blames the Pentagon for not presenting him with strategic options, which is news to the Pentagon. He blames the incompetent and corrupt Iraqi government, though he bears some of the responsibility for Baghdad’s impotence.
Dictatorships and Obama Standards

Dictatorships and Obama Standards

The Earth had hardly turned a cycle after his admission about U.S. strategy before word came that the president was considering sending 500 military advisers to Iraq. Within hours after that headline, he backtracked to 450 advisers. This ratcheting-up of involvement recalls the Vietnam War with a twist: It’s as if President Ford were sending military advisers as Saigon fell. So an admittedly incomplete strategy becomes an incoherent strategy. We may begin to wonder: Is this irresolution or resolution? I do not like to ascribe darker motives but necessarily wonder what explains the commander in chief’s uncertain trumpet. Long months ago, the president said his strategy was to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIS. So where is the methodical degradation? Where is the righteous destruction of this hellacious force? If the civilized world now searches desperately for steadfast leadership at this time of crisis, it can no longer look to the American administration. Better to look to the embattled region itself—to Jordan’s King Abdullah II, to Israel’s Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu, to the leaders of formative Kurdistan, to the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, Mohammad bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and to Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi. If you would lead from behind, Mr. President, then please get behind these men. It is a paradox of modern times that, as America matures, its foreign policy grows more ideologically naïve, even infantile. This is manifested by two deadly fallacies. One is a giddy globalism that would send the U.S. military to the far reaches of the planet upon any outbreak of instability. The other is an overcompensating retreatism that cites the nation’s war weariness as an excuse for inaction—to our enemies’ delight. President Reagan, for whom I worked, found a third path in his fight against international communism. Reagan’s strategy focused on energetic and comprehensive support for popular uprisings against Moscow’s client regimes. With our coordination, encouragement and supplies, others did the work for us—just as our allies are poised to do in ISIS-threatened countries. Another deadly fallacy holds America’s ability to maneuver to impossible, ahistoric standards. When the Cold War ended in America’s favor, many naïvely believed the U.S. could formulate foreign policy, at long last, with human rights at the top of its concerns. That America would no longer need to ally with unsavory rulers in pursuit of our national interest. Yet the fact is that less-than-democratic, better-than-tyrannical leaders will play a pivotal role in shaping the world our children live in; we need them on our side. A prime example: President Sisi of Egypt, who last year, as a military leader, seized power from the terror-supporting Muslim Brotherhood’s President Mohammed Morsi. These were turbulent times in Egypt, and Mr. Sisi held his own election, in which he polled vastly more Egyptian votes than his hapless predecessor, to secure his legitimacy. Egypt remains engaged in its own war against regional terrorists, some affiliated with the ousted Muslim Brotherhood, who were dragging down the economy, persecuting Christians and Jews and keeping the populace in a state of terror. The elevation of Mr. Sisi has to be seen as a historic confrontation that gave Egypt and perhaps the whole Middle East a chance to avert the calamity of radical Islamic dictatorship. Mr. Sisi, with whom I have conversed candidly at length on two occasions, has employed tough methods to assure Egypt’s progress toward self-government and a market-oriented economy. He has, with some success, encouraged capital investment to return to his country, an unsung encouragement for Egypt to protect human rights. Yes, Egyptian dissidents and journalists have been jailed, with some since released while others wait. Mass death penalties have been meted out by the courts, though enraged Westerners forget that there is also an appeals process through which a clement president must wait. I have urged that the death penalty be lifted for Mr. Morsi. Yet Mr. Sisi has also made inclusion a hallmark of his government, inviting every religious and ethnic community to participate in drafting a new constitution, also overwhelmingly approved by voters. He is rebuilding Christian churches destroyed under the Morsi regime and encouraging Egyptians to make no distinctions between Muslims and Christians in civil life. In an act of personal courage not seen since Anwar Sadat’s 1970s peacemaking with Israel’s Menachem Begin, Mr. Sisi addressed Islamic clerics at Al-Azhar University in February and demanded a reformation that would eliminate coercion and violence as defining features of the faith. The Obama administration’s response? A maddening silence. As it has with others on the front lines of the fight against ISIS and its like, America has been shortchanging de facto allies in the Middle East such as Iraq’s embattled Kurds, sending supplies the slow-or-no way through a balky Baghdad. The Egyptians have not received the F-16 jets for which they have already paid. The Apache helicopters they have received lack defense systems, and the U.S. tanks delivered to them lack spare parts. None of these people are pure enough for our president. This is the mindset on display across the administration. It damages the chance for peace in the region. Seriously. Can our administration not make a strategic choice between Egypt’s President Sisi and the Islamic State’s would-be caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi? You do wonder. Mr. Rohrabacher, a Republican from California, is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats.

Roberts response

The experienced and pragmatic hand of Dana Rohrabacher exposes Master Obama for the incompetent ” lead from behind ” Commander-in-Chief that he is. Or does this give us a full and accurate depiction of our Dear Leader?  Shameful  and shocking as it is, the truth is  as Mr. Rohrabacher politely suggests may in fact be one based on “darker” indeed sinister “motives”. We are all hesitant to look down this hole with the horrors of reality it may entail for we are talking about the POTUS. Certainly we cannot imagine an evil motivation from this office. Sadly This  tortured and complex man is as he claims been very successful to date. How?why? For the simple reason that this community organizer bent on humbling our nation has accomplished much. The “change” he foretold is beyond that which the naive and ignorant amongst us wish to believe, for his has been a comprehensive plan to undermine our very national being. The emergence of ISIS is simply a by product of his conscious acceptance indeed maneuvered defeat in Iraq. Yes like all tyrants lying is a mere means to an end for he can proclaim he will eradicate these terrorists just like he drew deadlines with Iran and red lines with Assad, none of it was other than theater. He has slyly underwrote the destabilization of the region. He has consciously whipped our enemies into frenzy denying our trusted Allie Israel with the necessary support to halt our collective enemies. He has indeed betrayed them on numerous occasions while publicly demeaning them to demonstrate they were fair game. And when the political winds woke up there he was again , lying and reassuring all that he was once again misunderstood. He helped break the back of our Allie Mubarak proclaiming a freedom agenda he has never supported, for the sole purpose of backing the vile Muslim brotherhood, another enemy; demonstrating an empathy for radical Islam while critiquing it all in the same. President Sisi like all our true allies in the Gulf have now understood he is not reliable but rather an enemy of good. He has never once shown support for any of them and remains enthralled with the tyrants who would do us harm. From the radical phony Erdogan, to the Mullahs in Iran our Dear One is willing this instability to new heights, preordaining an arms race in the region and the certainty of an expanded confrontation within  Islam and with our Allie Israel. There is no mistake or hesitation,incompetence on it’s face is really sinister in it’s design. Having forgone our leadership in Iraq a real ” incompetent” would mend his ways and weigh in with our boots on the ground leadership and accelerated destructive force to level this renegade band of evil doers. He would increase support for the brave Kurd fighters and enter into coordinated league with the Arab states truly concerned with safety of their people. But like in Asia the Ukraine and all other fronts where despots test the measure of our means and intent he acquiesces pretending a soft high intellectual sophistication when it is only the sophistry of an evil doer himself  laced with the undeniable markings of a hatred for our very existence.   Change he promised and change he has wrought. The road back will be hard and thankfully require a reaffirmation of our values and of who we are, against the backdrop of, yes a totally sinister act by a sinister man. Robert F. Agostinelli Palm Beach, Florida

Posted in Robert Agostinelli

Continue Reading

Robert Agostinelli’s Response to “Israel Alone”, by Bret Stephens WSJ, April22,2015

Robert Agostinelli’s Response to “Israel Alone”, by Bret Stephens  WSJ, April22,2015

First came the repudiation of our greatness in the form of apology and the bows. Then came the humbling of our self esteem and shame for our systems that enshrine individual rights and reward for human endeavor. Then came the dual track of retreat of global responsibility, neglect to the full term of betrayal of our allies in every theater and the embrace of enemy after enemy.  The Obama mantra marches to its radical drumbeat.

Front and center of this disgrace is the shattering of our alliance with life long allie, Israel. Colored as a personal confrontation between Bibi and Obama belittles the magnitude of the latter’s intent to undermine and even erase Israel’s existence. It is joined in an embrace of one of our most dangerous enemies, Iran. It has confused everyday Americans and every Arab state that understands the motives and design of this creature from that deep well where they chant to this ludicrous notion of the lost Imam and the return of their Caliphate.

A man who proclaims he wishes a world without nuclear weapons and proceeds to unilaterally disarm the stabilizing peaceful force of the country of his oath while enabling our murderous enemies the certainty of ultimate possession of the same is the edge of treason and irresponsibility dressed as sophisticated diplomacy. Forcing Israel to heal to strong arm tactics and threats, with disclosure of their own nuclear secrets and plans of proactive defense while inventing once again the Palestinian rouse as the real threat to regional peace, are all part acts of a foe not a friend. Finally the term of the Ayatollah of “Big Satan” rings true for reasons that world make our Founders turn in their graves and remind us to all re read the Federalist Papers to understand the threat to our Republic of the usurper we call POTUS.

For tiny Israel they are forced between a rock and a hard place and recalling their mantra of ” never again”. Regretfully they must pull the trigger of self defense in an environment where they are already well past the due date.

Robert F. Agostinelli
A Founding Leader of The Friends of Israel Initiative.

Continue Reading

Robert Agostinelli – Response to “Our Plan for Countering Violent Extremism”, by John Kerry, WSJ, February 19, 2015

Our Plan for Countering Violent Extremism by John Kerry, WSJ, February 19, 2015 

Show the world the power of peaceful communities, and tackle bad governance that breeds frustration.

Throughout our history, we have faced threats from aggression, genocide, chaos and dictatorship. Today we are asked to wage a new war against a new enemy. The battlefield is different, and so are the weapons that we need to overcome that enemy and triumph.

The rise of violent extremism represents the pre-eminent challenge of the young 21st century. Military force is a rational and often necessary response to the wanton slaughters of children, mass kidnappings of schoolgirls, and beheading of innocents. But military force alone won’t achieve victory. In the long term, this war will be won only by deploying a broader, far more creative arsenal.

A safer and more prosperous future requires us to recognize that violent extremism can’t be justified by resorting to religion. No legitimate religious interpretation teaches adherents to commit unspeakable atrocities, such as razing villages or turning children into suicide bombers. These are the heinous acts of individuals who distort religion to serve their criminal and barbaric cause.

A safer and more prosperous future also requires us not to be distracted by divisions grounded in hatred or bias. There is no room in this fight for sectarian division. There is no room for Islamophobia or anti-Semitism. Violent extremism has claimed lives in every corner of the globe, and Muslim lives most of all. Each of us is threatened, regardless of ethnicity, faith or homeland. We must demonstrate to the terrorists that rather than divide us, their tactics unite us and strengthen our resolve.

Toward that goal of unity, and of action, President Obama has been hosting a summit in Washington this week that is bringing together leading figures from local and national governments, civil society, and the private sector around the world. This summit at the White House and State Department will expand the global conversation and, more important, adopt an action agenda that identifies, shares and utilizes best practices in preventing and countering violent extremism. And when world leaders gather at the United Nations General Assembly next fall, a key topic of discussion will be the steps we’ve all taken to fight extremism based on the agenda we outline this week.

Put simply, we are building a global partnership against violent extremism.

Success requires showing the world the power of peaceful communities instead of extremist violence. Success requires offering a vision that is positive and proactive: a world with more concrete alternatives to the nihilistic worldview of violent extremists. Success requires empowering leaders from Los Angeles to Lagos, Paris to Peshawar, and Bogotá to Baghdad to take the reins in this effort—because terrorists don’t exist in a vacuum. They require acquiescence from the broader population, if not outright support. They recruit among the disaffected and disenfranchised, but also among those of all backgrounds on a misguided quest for meaning and empowerment. They exploit anger, ignorance and grievance.

Eliminating the terrorists of today with force will not guarantee protection from the terrorists of tomorrow. We have to transform the environments that give birth to these movements. We have to devote ourselves not just to combating violent extremism, but to preventing it. This means building alternatives that are credible and visible to the populations where terrorists seek to thrive.

The most basic issue is good governance. It may not sound exciting, but it is vital. People who feel that their government will provide for their needs, not just its own, and give them a chance at a better life are far less likely to strap on an AK-47 or a suicide vest, or to aid those who do.

We must identify the zones of greatest vulnerability, the places that could descend into the chaos that breeds terrorism—or that could turn the corner and be the hotbed of growth or innovation. And then we must tailor our efforts and target our resources to meet the specific needs of those places. It may be training young people so they can get jobs and envision a future of dignity and self-reliance. It may be working to eliminate corruption and promote the rule of law, so that marginalized communities can enjoy security and justice. It’s very likely both, and of course much more.

There are precedents that can lead us. We’ve combated violent extremism before. We know there are tools that work. We also know the power of the international community to make positive progress when we’ve come together to combat other challenges, such as when we combined our efforts most recently to fight Ebola. We need to funnel more resources, creative ideas and energy into the fight against extremism and work closely with effective local organizations and governments to make sure those resources are used properly.

This week’s summit won’t solve all these problems, but it can catalyze a global effort. But let me be clear: We are in this for the long haul. We can send a clear signal to the next generation that its future will not be defined by the agenda of the terrorists and the violent ideology that sustains them; we will not cower, and we will prevail by working together. Indeed, there are roles for everyone, from religious and government leaders to academics, NGOs and the private sector. Our collective security depends on our collective response.

The 20th century was defined by the struggle to overcome depression, slavery, fascism and totalitarianism. Now it’s our turn. The rise of violent extremism challenges every one of us, our communities, our nations and the global rule of law. But the extremist forces arrayed against us require that we charge forward in the name of decency, civility and reason.

Roberts response

We are pleased to read this outline from Secretary Kerry on the “Plan for Countering Violent Terrorism”.  For It states clearly that this Administration remains unwilling to identify the enemy and second has absolute no concrete plan to defeat the enemy.

First Mr. Kerry must start with the predicate identity of the evil the West is now confronted by. It is not some amorphous collection of misguided individuals who have desperately fallen prey to trickery. Nor is it a collection of people who have turned to terrorism for lack of opportunity. OBL was an extremely wealthy man as exhibit A.

This is yes, a War on Terror. To be precise it is a War on Islamist terror waged against us in the first instance by them in their various guises ( Al-Qaeda,Boko Haram, Hezbollah, Hamas,ISIS, ISIL and many others). It also should include their state sponsors.

These warriors may be diffused but they are very clear on their intent in this long war to destroy Israel and/or conquer eventually all of the West at large.  

They are equally clear on their shared religious beliefs and the teachings of their Prophet as the legitimate predicate for their Jihad and its soft and hard forms.

Attempts to avoid this reality or obfuscate the truth simply provide reassuring illusions of comfort that conferences and dialogue and openness can reeducate these “way wards” of the error of their ways.

This is the classic pitfall of the pacifist left and merely serves as a simultaneously flint and incubator for more terror. It simply emboldens the enemy and those who might be swayed.

War is war and the objective of war is to destroy the enemy first and foremost to break their will and to send a message to the layers and waves of soft supporters that we have the will and the means to insure that they will be  absolutely defeated.

Islam implicitly understands and respects only one thing that is power and  strength as much as it disrespects weakness.

Likewise state sponsors of terror must know that The United States will act in defense of its interests and that they risk the tip of our sword if they don’t recede.

Yes Islam, unmentioned in the diatribe from Mr. Kerry must seek better governance and establish a rule of law based on modern values along with democratic institutions which support universally held values of freedom of the individual but again this tension is within Islam for this suggested secular spirit runs counter to the tenants of Sharia which implicitly reject modernity and it’s secular values.

Mr. Kerry, and its likes point to some societal drawbacks which created these misguided individuals. What it is and the evidence for it only remains in the recesses of the liberal mind’s denial to dare identify the reality of this enemy for to do so runs against their life long mantra that grievance and  societies inability to educate and care for these poor lost souls is a how terror comes about.

While satisfying to the leftist desire for “job training programs, eliminating corruption ” and comparing this war to controlling Ebola are all symptoms of the West’s contribution to the problem by ignoring the root problem that lies at its heart.

The insipid and gutless plea by Mr.  Kerry could apply to any tough adversary because in the rose colored world of his kind it is societies fault, never any religion or the individuals.

Robert F. Agostinelli
Palm Beach , Florida

Posted in Robert Agostinelli

Continue Reading

Robert Agostinelli – Response to ” Another Obama Collision With the Constitution” by Michael Mukasey and David B. Rifkin Jr.

Robert Agostinelli – Response to ” Another Obama Collision With the Constitution” by Michael Mukasey and David B. Rifkin Jr.

Roberts response

The acrobatic evil back flips and triple Jacks that President Obama is willing to go through to undermine our finely balanced system of government is on display every day.  His disregard for the legislature is well documented through appoint of Czars, abuse of the use of executive orders  to unilaterally avoid executing the laws or worse to reinterpret them in accordance with his warped world view. His use of midnight budgetary reconciliation rules to ram through his grand scheme of socialist control of our economy; Obama Care and on and on.

Likewise his abuse and  intimidation of the judiciary branch starting with the high court  contravenes all regard for the balance so implicit in our three branch system.

We need not even include  his daily assaults on state rights, which again strike against the very nature of this Republic.

Now in yet another stunning move

he is asking for an unprecedented invocation of Congress to limit his primary constitutional power of wagging war.

All while simultaneously attempting to impose on Congress sharing of that executive branch power.

This power implicit in the very  title of Commander- in- chief was never meant to be shared  for the logical fear of failure and defeat if decision making was left to a committee.

Now we have  a President demanding c the very conditions for that failure on terms designed to transfer  accountability for it from  his office to them.

Thankfully  we have knowledgeable  guardians of our national interest like Mr. Mukasey and Mr. Rivkin to wake both ourselves and Congress to the evil slight of hand at work in the  latest AUMF.

This sly move is political for sure but worse it is a dagger pointed at the heart of that fine balance of power so struck by our Founders. Here is a man who having recklessly abandoned victor in Iraq which specifically led to the emergence of the virulent disease, ISIS, now setting the stage for future failure and establishment of a  precedent to blame congress.

All while using that same precedent to muddle future Presidents Constitutional power. One has to pause to take in the breath of multiple damage he is attempting to inflict now and in the future.

He is so daring Congress to reject his request in order that he can then in turn deny his ability to act in accordance with his constitutional  power and therefore  accelerate the blame of failure on to them in the face of his already existing accountability.

His own smug mantra of  Leading  from Behind does not fully capture his full intent. Forget national security and national interests. Here is a man who is not even willing to accord the enemy with it’s obvious definition of islamist terror nor affirm their actions as that of an enemy but rather as “random acts” of a group of criminals.

It is terrifying that this seat is occupied by someone so strident as to not offend our enemies yet  so sophisticated and laser focused in his doing so to our own national being.

Robert F. Agostinelli

Pam Beach , Florida

Continue Reading

Latest Tweets