Posted by: Elizabeth Berney Esq., ZOA Staff
May 7, 2015
News Press Release

Huge Crowd Cheers Amb. John Bolton at ZOA Long Island Event Discussing Catastrophic Iran Deal

Bolton: "I always enjoy working with ZOA. It is an incredibly effective advocate for a strong US - Israel relationship."

Memorandum

 

 

From:     Elizabeth Berney Esq. – Executive Director ZOA Long   Island/Queens Region           

 

To:           ZOA National Board, Regions, Special Friends

 

On Sunday evening, May 3, 2015, a huge crowd of almost one thousand people attended a major public event of the Zionist Organization of America Long Island-Queens region (ZOA-LIQ), featuring former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and foreign policy expert, the Honorable John R. Bolton, who was introduced by ZOA National President Morton A. Klein.   The Great Neck Synagogue (GNS) Men’s Club joined with ZOA-LIQ to host this event in the beautiful GNS sanctuary.  ZOA officers Martin Sokol, Dr. Alan Mazurek, and Great Neck Synagogue Men’s Club President, Hilly Milun also spoke. ZOA also gives special thanks to Dr. Alan Mazurek, Martin Sokol, David Schimel, Esq., and David Neinken for all their help in making this important event possible. 

 

Mr. Sokol recounted that Mort Klein spoke the unvarnished truth 20 years ago that the Palestinian Authority was immediately violating the Oslo agreement – and that Mr. Klein continues to tell the truth today.   Mr. Sokol added: “ZOA is fighting for what is good for America and what is good for Israel,” and asked audience members to join ZOA to fight this important battle with us.  Dr. Mazurek also noted that, unlike most leaders, “Mort Klein always speaks the truth.”

 

During their speeches, Ambassador Bolton and ZOA Pres. Klein received repeated standing ovations from the large, enthusiastic crowd.

 

ZOA President Klein noted the very serious, dangerous, frightening times we live in, particularly due to Iran, and asked the audience to join with ZOA, to strengthen ZOA’s voice on Capitol Hill, in the media, and on campuses, and among Jewish communal leaders who still support a terrorist Palestinian Arab terrorist state and still complain about the Jews living on just 2% of the land in Judea and Samaria – falsely claiming that this is the primary cause of the ongoing Arab war against Israel.  Mr. Klein especially appealed to Great Neck’s Iranian Jewish community to join with ZOA, as the Persian community understands better than anyone that the Iranian regime is a rogue terrorist regime that seeks to destroy Israel and, if possible, America, to fulfill their religious beliefs to bring about the twelfth Imam’s arrival and worldwide Muslim rule after a catastrophic war.  

 

Klein urged the audience to tell their Congressmen to stop the disastrous Iran deal, and to support Israel if Israel needs to take military action to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.  

 

Klein stated: “The deal with Iran is a catastrophe.  The deal will immediately eliminate most if not all of the sanctions in place now, which will give Iran $50 billion to $100 billion a year of additional revenue which it will use to fund and arm Islamic terrorism, the scourge of the Western world.  We are funding the Hitler of today’s world with this deal.   We are giving Iran money to promote its monstrous and outrageous goals.”

 

Mr. Klein added to his introduction of the Ambassador:  “Ambassador Bolton wrote in the past year that by simply negotiating with Iran, Obama has not only created a path to legitimize Iran’s nuclear weapons program, but he has actually facilitated Iran’s plans.   Surely, Iran’s nuclear weapons program will proceed unimpeded in the unknown and undisclosed locations that we are not even aware of.”

 

Ambassador Bolton described how the U.S. administration’s policy of diminishing American power and influence is contributing to chaos, disintegration of former countries throughout North Africa and the Middle East, and instability around the world.  He cited various examples including Russia’s aggressive moves in Ukraine, ISIS’s growth, Boko Haram terrorists subjecting three countries to breakdowns, terrorists almost overwhelming Mali’s government, Libya’s disintegration into a country ruled by competing groups of terrorists and warlords, etc. 

 

Ambassador Bolton explained the importance of stopping terrorist regimes as quickly as possible, and noted America’s ineffective response to ISIS, saying:

 

“ISIS is growing in power as a state, and every day that we delay in dealing with it effectively is going to raise the cost in blood and treasure of what we need to do to prevent the establishment of another radical Islamic state in the region.” 

 

Ambassador Bolton then turned to the world’s biggest threat, Iran, stating:

 

“The single greatest threat remains the Iranian nuclear weapons program.  I have dealt with this for the past 15 years.  It is the consequence of America’s leaders not being willing to confront the unpleasant reality of Iran making continuous strides towards nuclear weapons capabilities.”

 

Ambassador Bolton also described the uselessness of sanctions. 

 

For instance, he explained that despite five decades of sanctions against North Korea, an impoverished, isolated country that lacks resources, North Korea has detonated 3 nuclear devices, and our commanders believe that North Korea’s nuclear program is on track to miniaturize a nuclear device to fit under a ballistic missile nose cone to reach the west coast of the United States, within a very short period of time.

 

The Ambassador asked:  “If North Korea can do that, do you think economic sanctions against a 7,000 year old civilization like Iran are going to stop the ayatollahs from their 30-year-long objective of getting nuclear weapons?  It is a form of delusion for our political leaders to go through exercises about diplomacy and sanctions.”

 

Ambassador Bolton explained that although the Iran sanctions caused some economic hardship to Iran, the sanctions imposed on Iran were far from what might theoretically be effective.  The Iranians sanctions have been piecemeal, targeted against named individuals and companies, which spring up again using new names and aliases within a manner of days; not adhered to by some of Iran’s critical trading partners; and violated with impunity from the day they were enacted.  Oil is coming out of Iran through the Kurdish areas into Turkey, and through Iraq.  Moreover, the Iranian sanctions are being violated on a routine basis, and are not being enforced, as negotiations with Iran have proceeded over the past two years.

 

Ambassador Bolton noted that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified last year that the sanctions against Iran have not slowed down Iran’s nuclear weapons program one iota.

 

“One of the principle costs of negotiations is time.   Iran has used 12 years [of negotiations], as any nuclear proliferator would, to overcome the complex scientific and technological difficulties in the way of achieving nuclear weapons and deliverable ballistic missile capability.”

 

“Iran is not rushing to build one or two nuclear weapons.  They are building a broad and deep nuclear infrastructure, and are very capable when they make the decision to go ahead with weapons production, not just to build one or two weapons, but to produce scores or hundreds of nuclear weapons.”

 

Ambassador Bolton also explained that Iran knows that “once sanctions are lifted formally, it will be very difficult to ever put them back into place.  Our negotiators talk about snap back sanctions, but cannot describe how these would occur.  There is no such thing as snapback sanctions.   The Iranians will violate this deal once the ink is dry, as they have violated every other agreement regarding nuclear weapons, beginning with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty.  The end result of the deal is to give Iran discretion as to when they decide to break out.”

 

Ambassador Bolton also explained that argument about levels of uranium enrichment and numbers of centrifuges are irrelevant, because “once you decide to allow a rogue state like Iran to have any uranium enrichment, you are giving them the basic tool to have a nuclear weapons program.”   

 

The Ambassador advised that there are only have two possible outcomes: either Iran will get nuclear weapons and a Middle East nuclear arms race will quickly ensue – or someone will stop Iran before Iran crosses the nuclear finishing line.  Since no one believes that the U.S. President will act, the burden will unfairly fall on Israel.  It will difficult and costly in terms of men and material for Israel to strike, but not impossible.  The United States could do the job more thoroughly. 

 

Ambassador Bolton then discussed Russian President Putin’s recent decree authorizing the sale of Russia’s sophisticated S-300 anti-aircraft defense system to Iran. The Russian system can defeat any aircraft other than stealth aircraft, which Israel does not possess.   Ambassador Bolton noted that our government has not criticized the Russian government much for its pending sale “because it will stop Israel from being able to take out the key aspects of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, which I think would please the president to no end.”

 

“So Israel now faces an existential threat from nuclear Iran and its time horizon are diminishing, and its options are narrowing.  I don’t expect our president will give Israel any encouragement.”

 

“As citizens we should be making two points:  It is critical to make the case beforehand that any military action by Israel is a legitimate exercise of Israel’s inherent right to self-defense.   Second, recognizing that the effort to break Iran’s control over the nuclear fuel cycle will be dangerous and costly in terms of service members and material, the US should pledge immediately to protect Israel at the United Nations and resupply Israel with whatever it needs to protect itself against any Iranian response…”

 

A lively question and answer period moderated by Dr. Alan Mazurek followed, during which Ambassador elicited cheers and a standing ovation when he stated that he was considering running for president. 

 

ZOA President elicited huge cheers and a standing ovation when he asked:

 

“President Obama’s first speech on foreign policy was at the Muslim Brotherhood University in Egypt.  Mubarak begged him not to go there and not to invite the Muslim Brotherhood, telling Obama that he, Mubarak, could not come if he does.   Obama invited the Muslim Brotherhood, and Mubarak did not come.  President Obama made speech after speech demanding that Mubarak, an ally of the US, leave office, screaming, supporting the people who were demanding his [Mubarak’s] overthrow.   But when Ahmadinejad had hundreds of thousands of people in the streets, President Obama was asked to support the people in the rallies to get rid of Ahmadinejad. Obama said it is an internal matter, I won’t do it.   When Prime Minister Netanyahu simply said that under these circumstances, a Palestinian State is not possible, for weeks Obama attacked him.   Yet, when Iran, throughout negotiations calls for death to America, death to Israel, says that the United States is the number one enemy of Iran, Obama says nothing. President Obama refused to attend the rally against Islamic terrorism in France, one of the only major leaders who wouldn’t go – he also refused to send to this rally Vice President Biden or Secretary of State Kerry, who was in Paris at the time. Top Obama aide Valerie Jarett called it a parade.  Obama refuses to use the term Islamic terrorism in any of his speeches, and is also eliminating Islamic terrorism from the military manuals and from the State Department reports. Obama has released numerous Islamic terrorists from Guantanamo prison who are officially designated as high risk for future terrorist attacks. Muslim Brotherhood members have had regular meetings at the White House and National Security Council. During Obama’s 2008 campaign Obama spoke of the need to deal with the “legitimate claims of Hamas and Hezbollah.” (New York Times reported May 16, 2008). He repeatedly fought against imposing sanctions on Iran. I could go on and on.  Isn’t what I said enough evidence that this president is not naïve, is not incompetent, but is sympathetic to and tolerant of radical Islam? 

 

Ambassador Bolton responded:

 

“Well said, Mort.  The president’s view is uniformly wrong about the threats that we face.  However he gets to that, whether it is sympathy for the radical Islamists, or incompetence or naiveté, doesn’t change the reality that America’s interests are in retreat around the world and our adversaries are advancing.” 

 

Dr. Alan Mazurek asked: The president has threatened to withhold the veto in the UN. What do you think will happen?

 

Bolton answered: This is an attack on Israel’s very legitimacy because it is saying that Israel’s right to protect itself is somehow impermissible. It is only the American veto that protects Israel against resolutions to that effect. So if the president stands back and allows one of these resolutions to be adopted, we would be back in the days of Zionism is racism. And that would be a catastrophe for all the obvious reasons. It speaks to the president’s antipathy towards Israel. It’s not something about Bibi Netanyahu. If Obama doesn’t like Bibi, be a professional and get over it. It would be a direct assault on Israel, and people should understand that.

 

Question: There is a lack of leadership in the country. Can you start your campaign towards the presidency tonight? If Hillary wins, how do you feel she would treat the rest of the world?

 

Answer: One of the things that personally dissuades me is that I’m not wealthy, but one of the things that may bring me into this is the opportunity to debate Hillary. Hillary was one year ahead of of me in law school. She was a radical then, and is a radical now. She doesn’t have any problem getting to the left of Elizabeth Warren. Her Hard Choices book shows no differences from Obama. She is in the same place politically as Obama.

 

Question: What do you think the Iranian response would be in the aftermath of an Iranian nuclear attack, and what would be the ability of the Iranian government to persist after a military attack. 

 

Answer: Any attack should be accompanied by a policy of regime change. The difficulty of knowing how Iran would respond is one of the most difficult decisions that the Israeli government is to make. Iranian government has a certain element of irrationality, and this makes things hard to predict. They will probably not want to involve the US by closing the straits of Hormuz or increasing attacks against American targets. The most likely response is to unleash Hamas and Hezbollah to rocket Israeli civilian targets. Most observers believe there are already Iranian revolutionary guards personel in the Bakaa valley with fajr missles and others. I don’t believe that Operation Protective Edge destroyed all the fajr missiles that are buried underneath Gaza. I believe that Hamas and Iranian personnel there will be able to get the fajr missiles out of the deeply buried tunnels there, where they are stored. It is so important for America to resupply Israel with F16s. Israel will need to immediately establish air superiority over Lebanon and the Gaza strip. They should have that at the same time they are attacking the Iranian targets.

 

At the conclusion of the event, audience members described the evening as “fantastic!” “A terrific evening!”