Posted tagged ‘Islam’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Huckabee is Right: Holocaust Lessons Needed in Iran Deal

August 1, 2015

Huckabee is Right: Iran Nuclear Deal Brings us Closer to Catastrophe of Holocaust Proportions

by Anne Bayefsky31 Jul 2015

via Huckabee is Right: Holocaust Lessons Needed in Iran Deal.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee prepares to speak to guests gathered at the Point of Grace Church for the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition 2015 Spring Kickoff on April 25, 2015 in Waukee, Iowa. The Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition, a conservative Christian organization, hosted 9 potential contenders for the 2016 Republican presidential nominations at the event. (Photo by

Scott Olson/Getty Images

When former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee raised the specter of the Holocaust in his evaluation of President Obama’s Iran deal, he touched a raw nerve because Huckabee got it right: The Holocaust taught us that evil is not satiated after it consumes Jews. A deal that is catastrophic for Israel is also catastrophic for the United States.

The Governor reminded us that imagining the deal means losing some purportedly tolerable number of American servicemen to Iranian terror, somewhere “over there,” is morally and empirically wrong.

Critics, however—starting with the President—jumped on the Governor’s remarks – misread and misrepresented. What the Governor actually said to Breitbart News on July 25, 2015 was as follows: “This president’s foreign policy is the most feckless in American history. It is so naive that he would trust the Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven.”

In response to the critics, Huckabee refused to be cowed. He subsequently told reporters and tweeted: “The last time the world did not take seriously threats against the Jewish people, just before World War II, this ended up in the murder of six million Jews… For decades, Iranian leaders have pledged to ‘destroy,’ ‘annihilate,’ and ‘wipe Israel off the map’ with a ‘big Holocaust.’” “What’s ‘unacceptable’ is a mushroom cloud over Israel,” he added. “If we don’t take seriously the threats of Iran, then God help us all.”

President Obama, anxious to court American Jews to support the deal – and New York Senator Chuck Schumer in particular – responded with alacrity from a trip abroad in Ethiopia: “The particular comments of Mr. Huckabee are, I think, part of just a general pattern that we’ve seen that is — would be considered ridiculous if it weren’t so sad.”

Huckabee shot back via Twitter: “What’s ‘ridiculous and sad’ is that @POTUS does not take Iran’s repeated threats seriously.”

The accuracy of Huckabee’s reply was corroborated by Secretary Kerry within a day, when Kerry testified at the House Foreign Affairs Committee this week. Over and over, Kerry was asked by Congressmen about the dangers of Iran in the here and now.

Congressman

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL)

80%

: Three months ago Iranian Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Naqdi stated that erasing Israel off the map is non-negotiable. Do you believe his comments accurately reflect Iranian government goals?Secretary Kerry: I think it accurately reflects some people’s rhetoric and some people’s attitude…

Congressman

Rep. Steven Chabot (R-OH)

80%

: If this is such a good deal, why is Israel so opposed to it?Secretary Kerry: First of all, I understand when you say Israel, there are people in Israel who support it…There are concerns about the region they live in, about the nature of the rhetoric that’s used…

Congressman

Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX)

74%

: Is it the policy of the ayatollah…that Iran wants to destroy the United States? …Do you think it’s their policy to destroy us?Secretary Kerry: I think they have a policy of opposition to us and a great enmity. But I have no specific knowledge of a plan by Iran to actually destroy us.

In other words, the Prime Minister of a democratic state, a close ally, and three-quarters of Jewish Israelis from all political stripes who are opposed to the deal were dismissed, along with the insufficiently specific “rhetoric.”

The militarization of Iran’s nuclear program, Kerry suggested in the same hearing, was all in the past. “We know what they were doing, we’ve already drawn our conclusion about 2003. We know they were engaged in trying to make a weapon.” So this deal literally gives Iran a do-over.

Downplaying the evil intent of Iran isn’t just fuzzy thinking. This posture has formed the essence of the President’s foreign policy from the moment he took office and is critical to appreciating the catastrophic nature of the deal.

As early as March 2009, President Obama produced a video in which he directly addressed the “leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” seeking “engagement grounded in mutual respect.” When his vision finally culminated last week in the overthrow of the entire hard-won UN sanctions regime, Ambassador Samantha Power boasted that negotiators “demonstrated” “mutual respect.”

Governor Huckabee is telling us: stop whatever you’re doing, and let that sink in. Mutual respect for a regime overtly committed to genocide against the Jewish state.

After the President ridiculed the Governor for his own political purposes, there were other politically tinged responses.

The Anti-Defamation League – whose new National Director Jonathan Greenblatt is a former Special Assistant to President Obama – immediately fell in line behind the President. Naturally, Greenblatt labeled Huckabee’s comments “completely out of line.”

Marvin Hier, Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told CNN, “…the only way we’re going to win this is with bipartisan support…[W]hat [Huckabee] said…is hardly the way to achieve that bipartisan support.” Huckabee’s political rival Jeb Bush told MSNBC: “This is not the way we’re going to win elections…” The Israeli Ambassador to the U.S., Ron Dermer, called Huckabee’s words inappropriate while explaining to USA Today that “he had met with dozens of congressional Democrats because ‘I think ultimately they may decide whether this deal goes through or doesn’t go through.’”

Critics of Huckabee worried that Democrats would defend their president if his honor was at stake, regardless of the demerits of the deal. Seeking precisely such an outcome, the President had twisted Huckabee’s words into a personal assault devoid of substance. From Ethiopia, the President said: “we just don’t fling out ad hominem attacks like that.” Instead of addressing Iran’s illegal, evil intentions and deeds, or Iran’s lack of mutual respect for diversity of any kind, the President made the critique of the deal all about himself.

The liberal news outlet Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) ran a piece about Huckabee’s comments that counseled those considering making a Holocaust analogy: “never again.” That’s exactly the intimidation President Obama hoped to achieve.

It is also exactly the opposite of the lesson that ought to be drawn from the Holocaust.

In 1939, when Hitler spoke of “the end of the Jews” of Europe, precious few took seriously his genocidal intent. Just days ago, Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a chanting crowd: “You heard ‘Death to Israel,’ ‘Death to the US’… So we ask Almighty God to accept these prayers by the people of Iran.”

Last year, Khamenei said “this barbaric… regime of Israel… has no cure but to be annihilated.”

It is time that the Obama administration stopped calling these statements “rhetoric” and stopped pretending that the subject at hand is Mr. President.

The subject at hand is an enemy that is the leading state sponsor of terror; today openly advocates genocide; funds the killers of Israelis; tortures Americans in its prisons; and stays in power only through brutality and mass disenfranchisement. An enemy that was caught red-handed trying to acquire nuclear weapons and has spent years continuously violating nuclear non-proliferation laws.

The subject is a deal that puts billions into the hands of this deadly foe. A deal that promises Iran an end to an arms embargo when the previously entrenched Security Council regime had no time limit and was not about to expire. A deal that grants Iran a right to enrich that was denied under the now defunct legally binding resolutions.

The President’s deal, with this enemy, takes Israel to the brink of a catastrophe of Holocaust proportions. What else should we call nuclear war?

 Anne Bayefsky is the director of the Touro College Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Lawmakers Confirm French Diplomat Supports Congress Rejecting Iran Deal

August 1, 2015

Lawmakers Confirm French Diplomat Supports Congress Rejecting Iran Deal

Jacques Audibert reported to have said congressional rejection would be ‘helpful’

BY:
July 31, 2015 4:05 pm

via Lawmakers Confirm French Diplomat Supports Congress Rejecting Iran Deal | Washington Free Beacon.

Two more lawmakers stepped forward on Friday to confirm recent comments by senior French national security official Jacques Audibert, who reportedly told a delegation of lawmakers in a recent meeting that a congressional rejection of the recent Iranian nuclear deal could be “helpful.”

Audibert, a senior diplomatic adviser to President Francois Hollande, is said to have told Reps. Loretta Sanchez (D., Calif.) and Mike Turner (R., Ohio) in a recent meeting that congressional disapproval of the deal could be beneficial and help world powers secure more favorable terms.

The comments, which were first reported Thursday by Bloomberg, are directly at odds with recent remarks by Secretary of State John Kerry, who has argued that a rejection of the deal would destroy international sanctions on Tehran and push it to pursue nuclear weapons more aggressively.

Reps. Paul Cook (R., Calif.) and Tom Marino (R., Pa.) released a joint statement on Friday confirming Audibert’s comments as described by Sanchez.

“We participated in the meeting and can confirm that Congresswoman Sanchez’s account of the meeting is accurate. We disagree with recent claims that seek to refute her account,” the lawmakers said in a statement provided to the Free Beacon.

The French Embassy continues to deny the report and worked furiously on in conjunction with White House officials Thursday to downplay Audibert’s comments, sources said.

“I was in the July 17 meeting of Codel Turner with French Diplomatic Advisor Jacques Audibert, and the July 30 Bloomberg article on the meeting is completely inaccurate,” U.S. Ambassador to France and Monaco Jane Hartley said in a statement released by the embassy. “Mr. Audibert expressed France’s strong support for the JCPOA, never said there would be a better deal if Congress rejected it, and emphasized that it was a robust and hard-won accord.”

The initial report of Audibert’s comments prompted a quick pushback by the French Embassy, which was pressed to do so at the behest of White House officials, who were reportedly panicked over the report, according to sources apprised of the situation.

Audibert “basically said, if Congress votes this down, there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again and that would be to our advantage,” Sanchez told Bloomberg. “He thought if the Congress voted it down, that we could get a better deal.”

The comments  “directly disputed Kerry’s claim that a congressional rejection of the Iran deal would result in the worst of all worlds, the collapse of sanctions and Iran racing to the bomb without restrictions,” according to Bloomberg.

The French Embassy’s Twitter account issued a statement by Audibert, who also distanced himself from the report.

“During the meeting with the members of the US Congress on the 17th of July, I never said or suggested that a no vote from the Congress on the JCPOA might be helpful or lead to a better deal,” Audibert said in the statement. “I insisted repeatedly on the fact that the deal itself was the best possible.”

Eric Schultz, White House press secretary, also took to Twitter to push back against the report.

However, Audibert walked back his initial rejection of the report on Friday in an interview with French-language press.

When asked by European officials what would happen if Congress were to reject the deal, Audibert “told them that in my opinion, no European company would take the risk of going to do business in Iran, since it risks being subjected to US sanctions, as was recently the case of a large French bank. It’s obvious,” French press reported.

Audibert’s apparent support for a congressional no vote on the deal is said to have swayed some lawmakers to oppose the agreement.

While Kerry and senior Obama administration officials claim that congressional refusal to lift sanctions on Iran would collapse sanctions and push international entities to do business in Iran, Audibert disagrees.

Sanchez told Bloomberg that she asked the French official “specifically what the Europeans would do, and his comment was that the way the U.S. sanctions are set in, he didn’t see an entity or a country going against them, that the risk was too high.”

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

U.S. Defense Official: ‘No Meaningful Degradation’ In Islamic State Force From Obama Bomb Campaign

July 31, 2015

U.S. Defense Official: ‘No Meaningful Degradation’ In Islamic State Force From Obama Bomb Campaign

BY:
July 31, 2015 1:15 pm

via U.S. Defense Official: ‘No Meaningful Degradation’ In Islamic State Force From Obama Bomb Campaign | Washington Free Beacon.

The CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that the Obama administration bomb campaign launched last year against the Islamic State has yielded no perceivable degradation of the terrorist organization’s forces.

The Associated Press reported:

The military campaign has prevented Iraq’s collapse and put the Islamic State under increasing pressure in northern Syria, particularly squeezing its self-proclaimed capital in Raqqa. But intelligence analysts see the overall situation as a strategic stalemate: The Islamic State remains a well-funded extremist army able to replenish its ranks with foreign jihadis as quickly as the U.S. can eliminate them. Meanwhile, the group has expanded to other countries, including Libya, Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula and Afghanistan.

An unnamed defense official, who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter, admitted that U.S. intelligence has “seen no meaningful degradation in their numbers.”

U.S. intelligence officials estimate that the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS) remains between 20,000 and 30,000 fighters strong.

Nevertheless, President Obama spoke earlier this month on the “progress” the United States has witnessed after hitting IS in Iraq and Syria with thousands of air strikes.

John Allen, the retired Marine general tasked with developing the campaign against IS, said, “ISIS is losing” at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado last week. At the same event, FBI director James Comey called IS a “the threat that we’re worrying about in the homeland most of all.”

The Obama administration strategy to thwart IS involves bombing militants and training Syrian and Kurdish fighters on the ground. It bars U.S. troops from engaging in combat with the Islamic State or launching air strikes from the ground.

Only 60 Syrian insurgents have received appropriate training and been vetted by the United States to fight the Islamic State. Still, the U.S. is planning to rely on Syrian rebels–many of whom have connections to Islamic militant groups and are more concerned with toppling Bashar al-Assad’s regime–to secure an IS “safe zone” along the Syrian-Turkish border.

Despite the U.S. campaign, the Islamic State has exhibited signs of transforming into a functional state, issuing identification cards and dispersing fishing guidelines in the areas of Syria and Iraq that it controls.

John E. McLaughlin, who served as deputy director of the CIA between 2000 and 2004 during portions of the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, recently admitted that the idea of IS eventually becoming a legitimate state with working airports and passports is “not inconceivable.”

The Islamic State is also accumulating plenty of money. According to one estimate, IS nets $500 million in annual revenue from oil sales in addition to the $1 billion the terrorist group lifts from banks in areas it controls.

Obama has insisted in July that there are “no current plans” to send more U.S. troops overseas to fight IS.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Netanyahu: Under nuke deal, Iran has months to hide illicit activity

July 30, 2015

Netanyahu: Under nuke deal, Iran has months to hide illicit activity

Prime minister dismisses claim of 24 days for international inspectors to access suspect sites, confirms Jerusalem not apprised of annexes to deal

By Raphael Ahren July 30, 2015, 5:21 pm

via Netanyahu: Under nuke deal, Iran has months to hide illicit activity | The Times of Israel.

In this Tuesday, July 14, 2015 file photo, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a news conference at his Jerusalem office. (AP/Oren Ben Hakoon, File)

In this Tuesday, July 14, 2015 file photo, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a news conference at his Jerusalem office. (AP/Oren Ben Hakoon, File)

The nuclear deal between the West and Iran gives Tehran up to three months to hide illicit nuclear activity in hitherto undeclared locations, and not 24 days as claimed by the accord’s backers, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday.

If Iran honors the agreement, it will be able to build numerous nuclear weapons with the blessing of the international community, he lamented during a briefing for Israeli diplomatic correspondents in his Jerusalem office.

“The inspections regime is full of holes,” Netanyahu said. “This deal is terrible. It’s preferable to have no deal than this deal.”

Under the Comprehensive Joint Plan of Action that the world powers signed with Iran earlier this month, Iran has 24 days before it needs to grant international inspectors access to hitherto undeclared sites they suspect host nuclear activity.

But, Netanyahu said, if no agreement has been reached after that time elapses, the deal says that the complaint is to go to another committee trying to bridge the dispute, which will deal with the issue for another 30 days. If Iran still refuses to let inspectors into the site and the United Nations Security Council is involved, it will take another 30 days before any action is taken, the prime minister said.

“It could take a total of three months,” Netanyahu said.

During an in-depth briefing, interrupted by a phone call during which Netanyahu discussed the Iran deal and other regional issues with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the prime minister vociferously attacked the deal, saying it endangers Israel’s existence.

“In another 10 to 15 years, Iran will become a nuclear threshold country with the potential to build nuclear weapons — with permission and authorization,” he said.

If US Congress rejects the deal, “it will avert the greatest danger of Iran becoming a legitimate nuclear threshold power in 10 years,” Netanyahu added.

The opposition to the deal is growing steadily, he said. “With every passing day there are more and more opponents to this deal. The more a person learns about the agreement, the more he opposes it,” Netanyahu said.

He said that Sunni Arab states in the region shared his concerns about the pact.

“Most Sunni Arab states don’t just criticize the deal, they fully reject it. They are outraged by the agreement,” he said. “There are very concrete threats on our existence. We’re not the only ones who understand that. Others understand it too.”

The comments seemed to contradict US Defense Secretary Ash Carter, who earlier this month said Saudi Arabia had offered some support for the accord. In the UN Security Council, Jordan, another Sunni Arab state, voted for the deal.

The prime minister pointed to a critical article by Leon Wieseltier, a frequent critic of Netanyahu’s policies, as proof that Jews and Americans were united in opposition to the deal.

“It shows that you don’t have to be right wing Jew to criticize this agreement. You also don’t have to be a Jew at all to reject this agreement.”

Recent polling has shown Americans, as well as American Jews, split on whether to support the deal. Religious Jews are most likely to oppose the agreement, according to most surveys.

Netanyahu also said that Israel is not privy to all the content of the secret supplements of the agreement signed by Iran and the world powers. “We didn’t receive all the parts of the deal,” he said, refusing to elaborate.

On Wednesday, national security adviser Yossi Cohen told Knesset lawmakers that Israel was being kept in the dark on the annexes.

“Contrary to promises, Israel has not yet received all the written supplements to the agreement signed between Iran and the world powers,” Cohen, a former deputy head of the Mossad, told members of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

The nuclear deal is currently being weighed by Congress, which will likely vote on whether to support it in September.

Netanyahu has indicated he will lobby against the deal in the US, even at the cost of ruffling feathers with the White House.

During the talk with Putin, the Russian president said the agreement “provided reliable guarantees” that Iran’s nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, according to the Kremlin.

Putin said that the agreement would help secure nuclear non-proliferation and “have a positive impact on security and stability in the Middle East.”

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

ISIS preparing to attack India to provoke US into war, group’s document reveals

July 30, 2015

ISIS preparing to attack India to provoke US into war, group’s document reveals

A story published by the USA Today says the attack is intended to provoke an Armageddon-like confrontation with the US

Press Trust of India | Washington July 29, 2015 Last Updated at 13:42 IST

via ISIS preparing to attack India to provoke US into war, group’s document reveals | Business Standard News.

ISIS

The ISIS is preparing to attack India to provoke an Armageddon-like confrontation with the US, according to an internal recruitment document of the much-feared group which also seeks to unite the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban into a single army.

An investigative story published yesterday by the USA Today and reported by American Media Institute refers to a 32- page Urdu document obtained from a Pakistani citizen with connections inside the Pakistani Taliban.

“The document warns that ‘preparations’ for an attack in India are underway and predicts that an attack will provoke an apocalyptic confrontation with America,” the report said.

“Even if the US tries to attack with all its allies, which undoubtedly it will, the ummah (Muslims) will be united, resulting in the final battle,” it added.

The document, according to the report, was independently translated into English by a Harvard scholar and verified by several serving and retired intelligence officials.

Bruce Riedel, a retired CIA official and now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, said striking in India would magnify the ISIS’ stature and threaten the stability of the region.

“Attacking in India is the Holy Grail of South Asian jihadists,” he was quoted as saying.

The undated document is titled ‘A Brief History of the Islamic State Caliphate, The Caliphate According to the Prophet.’

It seeks to unite dozens of factions of the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban into a single army, the daily said.

“It includes a never-before-seen history of the Islamic State, details chilling future battle plans, urges al-Qaeda to join the group and says the Islamic State’s leader should be recognized as the sole ruler of the world’s 1 billion Muslims under a religious empire called a ‘caliphate’,” it said.

Aware of the ISIS’ presence in Afghanistan, the White House said it is closely monitoring the situation.

ISIS’ presence and its threat perception was also discussed in the past two months between senior US and Pakistan officials.

“Instead of wasting energy in a direct confrontation with the US, we should focus on an armed uprising in the Arab world for the establishment of the caliphate,” the document said.

The document was reviewed by three US intelligence officials, who said they believe the document is authentic based on its unique markings and the fact that language used to describe leaders, the writing style and religious wording match other documents from the ISIS, USA Today added.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Iran: Nuke Deal Permits Cheating on Arms, Missiles

July 27, 2015

Iran: Nuke Deal Permits Cheating on Arms, Missiles

Deal puts ‘Zionist regime in irrecoverable danger’

BY:
July 27, 2015 3:16 pm

via Iran: Nuke Deal Permits Cheating on Arms, Missiles | Washington Free Beacon.

 

Iran’s foreign minister and lead negotiator in nuclear talks said that under the terms of the recently inked accord, the Islamic Republic is permitted to violate current embargoes on the shipment of arms and construction of missiles, according to recent comments made before Iran’s parliament.

Zarif, who spoke to the country’s parliament about the terms of the nuclear deal, also bragged that the finalization of the accord “puts the Zionist Regime in an irrecoverable danger,” according to an independent translation of his Persian language remarks provided to the Washington Free Beacon.

Zarif insisted that “violating the arms and missiles embargo” placed on Iran by the United Nations “does not violate the nuclear agreement.”

U.S. officials and analysts have become increasingly concerned about portions of the deal that will unilaterally lift current restrictions on Iran’s importation and exportation of weapons, as well as its missile construction programs.

While these restrictions still apply, they would be completely lifted in five to eight years under the agreement.

Zarif also took aim at Israel in his remarks, claiming that the deal has isolated Israel as it never has been before.

“Benjamin Netanyahu is ready to kill himself if it helps to stop this nuclear agreement because this agreement puts the Zionist regime in an irrecoverable danger,” Zarif was reported as saying. “The abominable Zionist Regime has never been so isolated among its allies.”

The recent approval of the deal by the United Nations Security Council has solidified Iran’s right to enrich and operate a nuclear program, Zarif went on to say.

“Our biggest accomplishment is that the U.N. Security Council has endorsed our enrichment, this has never happened in the last 70 years,” Zarif said.

“Permit me not to mention the names, but many countries close to the U.S. have agreed to relinquish their enrichment rights, they all envy us today,” he added.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 3 Comments

Immoral to say Israel should stay out of Iran accord debate in US, minister says

July 26, 2015

Immoral to say Israel should stay out of Iran accord debate in US, minister says

via Immoral to say Israel should stay out of Iran accord debate in US, minister says – Middle East – Jerusalem Post.

 

Steinitz responds to comments US Secretary of State John Kerry made Friday that were interpreted by some as a warning for Israel to temper their criticism of Iran deal.

Efforts to muzzle Israeli voices in the US debate over the Iran nuclear accord are unacceptable, illogical and even immoral, national Infrastructure, Energy and Water Minister Yuval Steinitz said on Sunday.

Steinitz, a close confidant of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, responded in an Israel Radio interview to comments US Secretary of State John Kerry made Friday that were interpreted by some as veiled threat to Israel to tamp down its criticism of the nuclear deal.

Kerry, speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, said that if Congress overturns the accord, “our friends in Israel could actually wind up being more isolated and more blamed, and we would lose Europe and China and Russia with respect to whatever military action we might have to take because we will have turned our backs on a very legitimate program that allows us to put their [Iran’s] program to the test over these next years.”

Steinitz completely rejected warnings that Israel should stay out of the debate. “To demand from a country which Iran threatens publicly to destroy, to wipe it off the map, that it not express its opinion on something so relevant for our national security, future and existence is an illogical and even immoral demand,” Steinitz said.

If there is harsh criticism inside the US – among the public, in Congress, in the media and among experts – then it is because the accord is “full of holes,” Steinitz added.

“This hint that if the agreement will be rejected by Congress, then Israel will turn into a scapegoat, is unacceptable to us,” he said.”Congress is sovereign to make any decision. If it rejects it, that means there is a big majority among the Republicans and also many Democrats who think the accord is not good and is full of holes, and needs to be rejected.”

Steinitz said that hanging the spectre of “isolation” over Israel’s head is not acceptable dialogue between friends.

It is, however, not the first time Kerry has warned Israel of isolation if it does not adopt policies he favors.

In a joint television interview in November 2013 with Israeli and Palestinian television networks, Kerry said. “I believe that if we do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis, if we do not find a way to find peace, there will be an increasing isolation of Israel, three will be an increasing campaign of the delegitimization of Israel that has been taking place on an international basis.”

During that same interview he asked, after saying that the potential of chaos was the alternative to getting back to negotiations. “Does Israel want a third intifada?” Two months later, at the Munich Security Conference, he said that the status quo between Israel and the Palestinians cannot be maintained.

“It is not sustainable. It is illusionary,” he said. “You see for Israel there is an increasing delegitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it, there is talk of boycott and other kinds of things. Are we all going to be better with all of that?”

 

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

American Dream Does not Stop Radicalization of Terrorists

July 23, 2015

American Dream Does not Stop Radicalization of Terrorists, Act for America, July 22, 2015

 

Categories: Human rights, Islam, Islamic jihad, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Islamism, Islamophobia, Moderate Muslims, Obama, Obama's affinity for Islam, Obama's America
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

‘Side deals’ cast shadow over Congress Iran review

July 23, 2015

Side deals’ cast shadow over Congress Iran review

Lawmakers complain about secret agreements between Tehran and UN watchdog over Parchin military site and nuclear program’s ‘military dimensions’

By Rebecca Shimoni Stoil July 23, 2015, 6:20 am

via ‘Side deals’ cast shadow over Congress Iran review | The Times of Israel.

 

2004 satellite image of the military complex at Parchin, Iran. (AP/DigitalGlobe-Institute for Science and International Security)

2004 satellite image of the military complex at Parchin, Iran. (AP/DigitalGlobe-Institute for Science and International Security)

WASHINGTON — As top administration officials prepared for what will be their first day of unclassified testimony in Congress Thursday in support of the Iran nuclear deal, a very public row erupted Wednesday over whether the administration could — and would — disclose what some lawmakers called the “secret side deals” of the agreement.

Even as the White House deployed Secretary of State John Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz to Capitol Hill for a series of classified briefings Wednesday meant to shore up support for the Iran deal in a dubious legislature, lawmakers demanded more details on agreements reached between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Iran with the consent of the P5+1 group of world powers. Those agreements were not previously revealed to Congress as part of the 60-day review process required under law.

One day after Senator Tom Cotton and Representative Mike Pompeo said that an IAEA official in Vienna had told them about the agreements with Iran, administration officials denied these constituted “secret side agreements” that were kept out of the nuclear agreement presented to Congress for review.

“There’s no side deals, there’s no secret deals, between Iran and the IAEA, that the P5+1 has not been briefed on in detail. These kinds of technical arrangements with the IAEA are a matter of standard practice, that they’re not released publicly or to other states, but our experts are familiar and comfortable with the contents, which we would be happy to discuss with Congress in a classified setting,” State Department Spokesman John Kirby said during his daily press briefing.

Tom Cotton (Courtesy United States Congress)

Tom Cotton (Courtesy United States Congress)

 

Kirby explained that the so-called “side deals” involved “issues between Iran and the IAEA,” referring to them as “technical agreements” and emphasizing that such agreements “are never shared outside the state in question in the IAEA.” At the same time, the US had been briefed on the agreements and administration officials were willing to discuss them with lawmakers.

US National Security Adviser Susan Rice during an interview with Charlie Rose on the Public Broadcasting Service, February 24, 2015. (screen capture/YouTube/Charlie Rose)

US National Security Adviser Susan Rice during an interview with Charlie Rose on the Public Broadcasting Service, February 24, 2015. (screen capture/YouTube/Charlie Rose)

 

National Security Adviser Susan Rice on Wednesday confirmed the existence of the side agreements, telling reporters that they dealt with Iran’s documentation of previous military dimensions of its nuclear program, a key aspect of intelligence about the program that enabled a better assessment of its scope and purpose.

Although Rice claimed that the arrangements between the IAEA and Iran were “no secret,” the firestorm began when Cotton and Pompeo, following a meeting in Vienna Friday with representatives of the IAEA, said officials from the watchdog group had told them the agreements would remain secret.

“The agency conveyed to the lawmakers that two side deals made between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) will remain secret and will not be shared with other nations, with Congress, or with the public,” the lawmakers said in a statement.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tennessee), left, shakes hands with ranking member Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Maryland) during a committee markup meeting on the proposed nuclear agreement with Iran on April 14, 2015. (JTA/Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tennessee), left, shakes hands with ranking member Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Maryland) during a committee markup meeting on the proposed nuclear agreement with Iran on April 14, 2015. (JTA/Win McNamee/Getty Images)

 

One of the agreements covers inspection of the Parchin military complex, a site that the IAEA suspects was being used for experiments related to weaponization of Iran’s nuclear technology. The second details how the IAEA and Iran will resolve outstanding issues in determining the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program, Cotton and Pompeo said.

Although Rice and Kirby claimed that US negotiators were familiar with the contents of the IAEA-Iran agreements, Cotton and Pompeo said that they were told that the agreements would not be released even to the P5+1 member states who negotiated the broader deal.

Under the terms of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed earlier this year, the administration is required to provide Congress with all documents related to the agreement, including “annexes, appendices, codicils, side agreements, implementing materials, documents, and guidance, technical or other understandings and any related agreements, whether entered into or implemented prior to the agreement or to be entered into or implemented in the future.”

On Wednesday, the author of the law, Senator Bob Corker, a Republican, teamed up with Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat, to write their second letter to the administration in as many weeks expressing concern over whether it had adhered to the law’s requirements.

This time, the bipartisan duo reportedly requested that Kerry provide them any available documents related to the IAEA-Iran agreements.

Cardin is one of many Democratic senators who have yet to say whether they will support or oppose the deal with Iran when it comes to key Senate and House votes on deal-killing legislation that will likely be placed before Congress within the allotted 60 days. The administration needs to win over at least 34 senators or 146 House members to ensure President Barack Obama’s veto of any such legislation cannot be overturned.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, an announced supporter of the deal, has expressed optimism that the White House can prevail, and Senator Dick Durbin, a member of the Senate Democratic leadership, declared his support for the agreement this week.

AP contributed to this report.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Iran Scoffs at ‘Non-Binding’ Ban on Ballistic Missiles

July 21, 2015

Missiles

Zarif says Iran can continue making ballistic missiles because the agreement’s ban is “non-binding.”

By: Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Published: July 21st, 2015

via The Jewish Press » » Iran Scoffs at ‘Non-Binding’ Ban on Ballistic Missiles.

 

Iranian long-range Shahab-1 missiles.
Iranian long-range Shahab-1 missiles.
Photo Credit: Press TV

Iran’s Foreign Minister buried the Obama administration’s claim that the nuclear agreement will curtail Iran’s ballistic missile production and maintained that the prohibition is in a non-binding appendix of “ObamaDeal.”

Foreign Minister Javad Zarif was quoted by the state-controlled Fars News Agency as saying:

Using ballistic missiles doesn’t violate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA); it is a violation of a paragraph in the annex of the (UN Security Council) Resolution (2231) which is non-binding

This paragraph (of the annex) speaks about missiles with nuclear warheads capability and since we don’t design any of our missiles for carrying nuclear weapons, therefore, this paragraph is not related to us at all.

That is pretty fancy mouth-work, even better than President Barack Obama’s.

Zarif is laughing all the way to the nuclear bank. He admits that the nuclear agreement prohibits ballistic missiles but since it is non-binding, so what?

And it doesn’t make any difference because the missiles are not meant for carrying nukes.

If anyone wants to inspect the military sites to make sure he is telling the truth, he can’t because military sites are off-limits. The Islamic Republic’s international affairs adviser to the regime stressed on Tuesday that Iran will not allow international inspectors visit our military centers and interfere in decisions about the type of Iran’s defensive weapons.”

Velayati added:

Missiles like Shahab, Sejjil and the like, have never been used for carrying nuclear warheads, and therefore, are not subject to the paragraphs of the Vienna draft agreement.

Just take his word for it.

Zarif’s Foreign Ministry reassured everyone who still is listening that “Iran will continue its pioneering role in campaign against terrorism and violent extremism.”

For the record, just in case Congressional Democrats are awake, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told a Senate committee just before ObamaDeal was concluded:

We should under no circumstances relieve pressure on Iran relative to ballistic missile capabilities and arms trafficking.

Secretary of Defense Secretary Ash Carter, who is in Israel to go through the motions that ObamaDeal is good for Israel, told the Senate Armed Services Committee:

We want them [Iran] to continue to be isolated as a military and limited in terms of the kinds of equipment and material they are able to procure.

That is what he wants. That is not what he – and Israel – is going to get.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »