New Bill Would Force Obama to Publish US Drone Strike Casualties

Bureau of Investigative Journalism | Bill would require the White House to publish an annual report of casualties from covert US drone strikes.
Infowars

With rumors of Israeli strike on Iran in 2014 rising, Santorum & Rosenberg write oped for CNN: Could there be a “Second Holocaust”? Lessons from Nazi Germany & modern Iran.

CNN-logo>> Please join me on April 1st for a book tour event with an Orthodox Rabbi at a Synagogue in Manhattan. RSVP today. We’d love to have you join us.

(Netanya, Israel) — Greetings from Israel. I’m here doing media interviews for The Auschwitz Escape, having various meetings, and trying to get a better sense of how Israeli citizens and leaders are viewing the crisis in Ukraine and the rising Iranian nuclear threat.

Rumors are swirling in the media here about a possible Israeli preemptive strike on Iran this year. Israeli officials at the highest level — including the Defense Minister — are reportedly coming to the reluctant belief that they cannot count on President Obama to take decisive action to neutralize the Iranian threat before it is too late.

Here are several recent headlines worth noting:

In this context, CNN.com has just published an op-ed that former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum and I have written. It examines parallels he and I find sobering between the history of Adolf Hitler and the current regime in Tehran. In the column, we also cite the exclusive new poll showing 80% of Americans fear a “Second Holocaust” if Iran is allowed to build nuclear warheads.

I hope you’ll take a moment to read the full column. Then please post your comments on the “Epicenter Team” page on Facebook, and share this column with friends and get their reaction, as well.

——————–

Lessons of history: Americans fear ‘second Holocaust’ if Iran gets the bomb

By Rick Santorum and Joel C. Rosenberg

(CNN) — Hillary Clinton raised eyebrows this month when she compared Vladimir Putin’s tactics in Ukraine to those of the Nazis.

She was right, but there is an even more ominous similarity between the actions of Iran and those of pre-war Germany.

On May 21, 1935, Adolf Hitler delivered his infamous “peace” speech. In his masterful history of Nazi Germany, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” William L. Shirer quotes the Fuhrer’s remarks at length:

  • “Germany needs peace and desires peace.”
  • “Germany has solemnly recognized and guaranteed France her frontiers.”
  • “Germany has concluded a non-aggression pact with Poland.”

Shirer, a CBS Radio correspondent, called the address “one of the cleverest and most misleading of his Reichstag orations this writer, who sat through most of them, ever heard him make.” He observed the West seemed beguiled by the speech, noting the Times of London welcomed Hitler’s words “with almost hysterical joy.”

“The speech turns out to be reasonable, straightforward, and comprehensive,” stated the Times editorial. “No one who reads it with an impartial mind can doubt that the points of policy laid down by Herr Hitler may fairly constitute the basis of a complete settlement with Germany.”

Yet Hitler was lying to buy time. He would not bring peace, but a horrific war, annexing Austria, invading France and Poland, and ordering the extermination of six million Jews.

Indeed, Hitler’s lies were apparent less than a year after the speech. On March 7, 1936, the Nazis marched into the Rhineland, the demilitarized zone between Germany and France, in violation of the Treaty of Versailles.

If the West had confronted Hitler then, it could have forced him out of the Rhineland with a limited application of military force.

Such history is worth noting in today’s showdown with Iran. Many in the West seem beguiled by the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Hassan Rouhani. But are they….

[To read the full column, please click here.]

————————


Joel C. Rosenberg’s Blog

Exclusive poll: 59% of Americans support “decisive” US strike on Iran to prevent “Second Holocaust,” if diplomacy & sanctions fail.

MEME-AmericaStrikeIran(Netanya, Israel) — An exclusive new poll reveals Americans not only fear a “Second Holocaust” if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, but also strongly support the White House ordering “decisive” military action to neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat, if diplomacy and sanctions fail.

During an interview on Fox News on Sunday with anchor Shannon Bream, I  shared more of the results of the new polling Tyndale House Publishers and I conducted through McLaughlin & Associates, a nationally-respected polling firm.

Gearing up for the release of The Auschwitz Escape, and trying to understand how Americans’ fears of a “Second Holocaust” affects their views of current geopolitical issues, we asked 1,000 likely U.S. voters the following question: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘While I do not wish for war, if diplomacy and economic sanctions fail to stop Iran, and we have no other choice, I believe the President of the United States should launch devastating airstrikes to decisively neutralize the Iran nuclear threat, so long as we do not put U.S. ground forces into Iran’?”

Here are the results:

  • 59.0% of Americans said they agreed with a U.S. military strike on Iran
  • 31.1% disagreed
  • 9.9% said they did not know

Here are some of the other results of the poll we discussed:

At this point, it seems unlikely to me that President Obama would order such a preemptive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities unless there were dramatic developments that posed an imminent threat to the U.S. For the last several years, Mr. Obama has been withdrawing U.S. military forces from the Middle East, reducing military spending, and pressuring Israel not to launch a preemptive strike. What’s more, top White House and Pentagon officials fairly routine dismiss the idea of military action, while continuing to state for the record that “all options are on the table.”

That said, what I wanted to test with this poll question was not whether Americans believe the President really will strike Iran if there is no other choice. Rather, I wanted to understand whether the American public would support such a preemptive air attack (with no ground forces) if they believed there was no other choice. It turns out they do. Indeed, the fact that nearly six-in-ten Americans say they would support a U.S. first strike tells me their fears of a “Second Holocaust” are motivating them to support stronger American action against Iran than many in Washington appear to be seriously contemplating.

———————————-


Joel C. Rosenberg’s Blog

New polls find Americans prefer military strike to nuclear Iran, deeply skeptical of President’s approach towards Iran.

U.S. President Obama delivers remarks at the White House in Washington(Washington, D.C.) — Americans are losing confidence in President Obama’s policy towards Iran, and when push comes to shove prefer a military strike to allowing Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons.

Only 42% of Americans approve of the President’s approach towards Iran, a drop since December, finds a new AP poll released Tuesday.

What’s more, fewer than half the country believes the recent nuclear deal with Iran will work. A CNN anchor recently called the deal “a train wreck.”

In his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, President Obama insisted his Iran policy was working. He even vowed to veto a bill imposing new economic sanctions on Iran that is working its way through Congress.

“The sanctions that we put in place helped make this opportunity possible. But let me be clear: if this Congress sends me a new sanctions bill now that threatens to derail these talks, I will veto it,” the President told a Joint Session of Congress.

Yet another new poll released Tuesday finds that Americans strongly support sanctions on Iran, want more sanctions, are skeptical of the nuclear deal the President struck with Iran and don’t believe Iran will keep its end of the bargain.

“A new poll revealed Tuesday that one of the foreign policy achievements that US President Barack Obama is likely to tout – the interim agreement with Iran – may not enjoy broad support among the voting public,” reports the Times of Israel. “According to the study, conducted by the Mellman Group for the Israel Project, while a slim majority of Americans support the deal, a larger number of likely voters wish that sanctions relief had only been granted after Iran dismantles its entire nuclear program.”

“The poll also indicated that for most Americans, preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is a ‘higher priority than preventing military action,’ said pollster Mark Mellman,” the Times noted. “The American public, he added, was “overwhelmingly negative in terms of how the administration handled Iran,” with 66% of likely voters polled giving the president a negative evaluation on his Iran policy. The poll surveyed 800 likely voters nationwide, and has a 3.5% margin of error.

  • When asked which is more dangerous for the US – allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons or to carry out targeted military strikes against Iran — 54% answered that allowing Iran to develop nuclear capacity was a greater danger.
  • When asked again about which are most important goals for the US in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program, 68% selected “preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons even if it means launching military strikes” in comparison with slightly over 30% who answered avoiding military strikes even if it allows Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.
  • The interim agreement with Iran, considered by the administration to be a significant foreign policy milestone of Obama’s second term, was greeted by coolly by voters. When offered a description of the agreement, 55% said that they favored it, while 37% said that they opposed it. Among voters who said that they were already familiar with the agreement, opposition to the deal rose by about 10 points.
  • Despite the moderated support for the agreement, 57% of those polled said that US should have forced Iran to abandon its entire nuclear program before releasing sanctions.
  • Mellman also found that US voters were cynical as to the future of the agreement – only 35% thought it was at all likely that Iran would live up to the agreement.
  • Americans, Mellman found, overwhelmingly support economic sanctions against Tehran in a bipartisan manner – 83% of Democrats and 89% of Republicans said that they supported the sanctions. Fewer than 20% of respondents said that they wanted the sanctions reduced, while 38% said they wanted to see them strengthened….
  • Sixty-two percent of those polled said that they supported the demand that Iran dismantle its nuclear infrastructure before receiving any sanctions relief when that position was juxtaposed with the agreement currently in place, in which sanctions are lifted as part of a gradual process.

————————


Joel C. Rosenberg’s Blog