web analytics
April 19, 2014 / 19 Nisan, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Iran nuclear’

Netanyahu Says Rouhani Master of Deception

Thursday, January 23rd, 2014

Mohammed “Rouhani is continuing with the Iranian show of deception,” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said Thursday after the Iranian president’s speech to the 2014 World Economic Forum in Davos.

Rouhani said, “The Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to engage in constructive cooperation for promoting global energy security, drawing on its vast oil and gas resources. I hereby announce that one of the theoretical and practical priorities of my government is constructive engagement with the world.”

He limited his definition of the world to those countries that Iran recognizes- in other words, a world without Israel.

Rouhani also said with a straight face, “We never sought and will never seek nuclear weapons. I declare that a nuclear weapon has no place in our security strategy.”

The media lapped up the loving words, but Netanyahu warned everyone not to be fooled.

“At a time when Rouhani condemns the killing of innocents, dozens of innocents were recently executed in Iran,” said the Prime Minister. “At a time when Rouhani talks about a positive approach to technology, he prevents Iranians from freely surfing the Internet. At a time when Rouhani talks about peace with the countries of the Middle East, he refuses – even today – to recognize the existence of the State of Israel, and his regime daily calls for the destruction of the State of Israel.

“At a time when Rouhani claims that Iran is not interested in a nuclear project for military purposes, Iran continues to strengthen its centrifuges and heavy water reactor, and to arm itself with intercontinental missiles, the sole purpose of which is for nuclear weapons….

“The goal of the Iranian ayatollahs’ regime, which is hiding behind Rouhani’s smiles, is to ease sanctions without conceding on their program to produce nuclear weapons.”

Report: Iran Balks over Centrifuges

Wednesday, January 8th, 2014

Iran is holding up progress for implementing the interim deal agreed to by world powers in November because of the issue of centrifuges that can be used to purify uranium to level that would make it suitable to make a nuclear weapon.

“This issue (centrifuges) was among the main factors in stopping the previous technical discussions on December 19-21,” a Western diplomat told Reuters on condition of anonymity.

That is exactly why there is a bi-partisan effort in Congress to pass a new bill that would place harsher sanctions on Iran if it reneges on the interim  agreement.

The sponsors of the bill, Democrats as well as Republicans, don’t trust Iran to have suddenly surrendered its nuclear program. President Barack Obama, who has put his weight behind “engaging” Iran diplomatically, has vowed to veto the bill if it is passed.

Iran said it has installed new and advanced centrifuges since the interim deal was reached, an issue that is to be discussed this week in meetings with the P5+1 countries.

“As part of the (November 24) agreement, Iran is permitted to engage in R&D (research and development), but that is tempered by the fact that it is prohibited to install new centrifuges, except as required by wear and tear,” one diplomats was quoted by Reuters as saying.

The interim deal is to be implemented on January 20 if Iran and the world powers can overcome disputes on the wording and meaning of the November agreement.

Reuters quoted an Israeli official as saying, “It was clear from the outset that the Iranians would play games. They did it in the past, and now they’re up to their old tricks again.”

Wasserman Schultz Turning Her Back on Israel over Iran Sanctions

Wednesday, January 8th, 2014

Florida Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s pro-Israel image is being tarnished – make that blackened – by a firmly based report that she is the number one obstacle to a bi-partisan Congressional initiative to threaten new sanctions on Iran, effectively scuttling the recent interim agreement secured by President Barack Obama and the rest of the P5+1 club.

Her spoiler role, reported Wednesday by the Washington Free Beacon, starkly differs from her wild support in August 2012 for the “hardest-hitting sanctions in history” against Iran thanks to Congress having made “clear to the world [that] we are resolute in using all tools at our disposal to halt Iran’s nefarious nuclear ambitions.”

Those “nefarious ambitions” apparently have transformed in less than 18 months into the development of enriched uranium for medical research and other do-good humanitarian efforts that are a disguise for a nuclear warhead headed for Israel, if not Washington.

President Obama has threatened he will veto any Congressional bill to impose harsher sanctions on Iran and put a hole in his “engagement” with the Ayatollahs. Nevertheless, leading Democrats such as New York Sen. Charles Schumer and New Jersey’s Sens. Robert Menendez and Cory Booker don’t buy it, and they support the proposed bill that shows Iran it cannot get away with murder literally.

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland also was on the sanction bandwagon but backed off in the past two weeks. Why?

All fingers point to Wasserman Schultz, the Free Beacon reported, and the reactions back home in her strongly Jewish South Florida district are far from favorable.

“Every minute she is publicly silent, or working against bipartisan efforts to pressure Iran, is a minute she is siding with the Mullahs over the American people who overwhelmingly want mounting pressure,” one Democratic Congressman told the Washington newspaper.

“Debbie has been busy at home telling her constituents she is doing all she can to stop Iran, but in reality it appears she is busy behind the scenes working to scuttle bipartisan action to put increased sanctions pressure on Iran.”

It quoted a South Florida Jewish community leader as saying that her constituents have serious problems with her new soft-on-Iran position.

She has a Congressional ally with Florida Rep. Alan Grayson, who also opposed the bi-partisan effort, but she will have a lot of explaining to do at a meeting this week called by Jewish leaders in her South Florida district.

Wasserman Schultz’s spokeswoman did not reply to the Free Beacon’s request for a comment on the report.

The first sign of her currying favor with President Obama and closing her eyes to Iranian’s Islamic wish to annihilate Israel came on November 25, after the interim agreement was reached.

“I commend President Obama, Secretary Kerry, Under Secretary Sherman and their team for the tremendous amount of work they put into these negotiations,” she said in a press release. “This agreement provides a framework to stop the development of a nuclear weapon in Iran while we work to negotiate a broad, comprehensive deal to permanently dismantle their nuclear weapons capability.”

After having bragged in 2012 that the Congressional sanctions caused Iran “a daily loss of $133 million and 1.2 million barrels of oil… [and] that we will not accept a nuclear Iran, and that we are prepared to use all options at our disposal to keep the world free from this Iranian threat.” she has swallowed the Obama “let’s trust Iran” policy hook, line and sinker.

Wasserman Schultz is ignoring official Iranian statements that make it clear it signed the agreement to buy time.

For example, the interim agreement would prohibit Iran from adding more centrifuges at its uranium enrichment facilities.

So how did Iran follow up? Well, at least it is honest, to wit:

“We have two types of second-generation centrifuges. We also have future generations [of centrifuges] which are going through their tests,” Ali Akbar Salehi, head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, said less than two weeks ago.

Also last December, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry assured the House Foreign Affairs Committee that the Arak reactor in Iran that is designed to use plutonium, which could be used to construct a bomb, is “frozen stone cold, where it is” and “we’re actually going to have the plans for the site delivered to us.”

Really?

Salehi announced a week later that Iran’s heavy water installations Arak will continue its work with full power.

If Wasserman Schultz still believes that Iran has turned over a new leaf and no longer has “nefarious ambitions,” all she has to do is look at Lebanon and Syria.

Hezbollah, now up its neck in Syria and working with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, is smuggling anti-ship missiles from Syria piece by piece after previous attempts to smuggle them into Lebanon were ruined by Israeli intelligence, followed up by Israeli aerial strikes on the weapons.

So Iran really does not need a nuclear bomb if it can simply use Hezbollah to blow Israel off the map.

Wasserman Schultz may be the woman who saves President Obama from having to veto the sanctions bill, which already has the support of 50 senators, twice as many as when the bill was introduced last month, and one short of a majority.

The bill is aimed at putting teeth into the interim agreement by declaring that Iran must abide by it rather than simply biding time until a final agreement is reached, if that ever happens.

If not, then new sanctions would go into place.

It appears that the only thing that might change Wassermann Schultz’s new go-soft-on Iran position is a severe backlash from her constituents, who are more worried about the Iranian nuclear threat against Israel – and the United States – than she is.

Texas Congressman Says Obama Must Apologize to Israel on Iran

Tuesday, January 7th, 2014

President Barack Obama should apologize to Israel for putting “Israel in a position of having to defend both of us” from Iran, Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, told Fox News.

Israel strongly opposed the Obama administration’s recent relaxation of sanctions against Tehran, which continues to develop its nuclear program without international supervision.

Gohmert said the United States should send Israel the new F-35 steal fighter jets as soon as possible and “give them our best bunker-busters because I think Bibi [Benjamin] Netanyahu has the will and the credibility to be a threat.”

“If the United States were a credible threat to attack Iran, we would not have to attack them. But Iran knows we’re not a credible threat to attack them,” said Gohmert. “If Ronald Reagan were president, Iran would’ve stopped a long time ago. Just like Iran released our prisoners the day he took office, they knew Carter was not a credible threat but they knew Reagan was. They know Obama is not a credible threat.”

 

Israel Has ‘License’ to Act without US on Iran, Says Mike Huckabee

Monday, December 9th, 2013

Now that the U.S. and other P5+1 powers made an interim nuclear deal with Iran without involving Israel, the Jewish state is free to act as it sees fit on the Iranian issue without consulting America, former Arkansas governor and 2008 presidential candidate Mike Huckabee told JNS.org.

“I think now [the Israelis] have really a license to act without having to be scolded for not having consulted the U.S. for their plans,” Huckabee said. The United States “has indicated that they are going to act independently of Israel as it relates to Iran,” Huckabee continued, calling that a “very foolish policy.”

“I think now [the Israelis] have really a license to act without having to be scolded for not having consulted the U.S. for their plans,” he said.

When asked about the possibility of making another presidential run in 2016, Huckabee, the runner-up to U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in the 2008 Republican primary, said, “I’m looking at it very seriously.” Huckabee—an ordained Southern Baptist minister who currently hosts the talk show “Huckabee” on Fox News—said he is having exploratory meetings to determine “whether people who I trust, and people whose views I have confidence in, believe that there is a pathway forward for me through the primary.”

Bibi Shoots Back: Diplomatic Solution Needs Military Threat (Video)

Sunday, December 8th, 2013

There never will be a peace agreement with the Palestinian Authority unless it is willing to accept that Israel is a Jewish state, and there cannot be a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear threat without the threat of a military option, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told the Saban conference Sunday.

Addressing the Saban Center for Middle East Policy less than 24 hours after President Barack Obama tried to assure Israel it should trust the “peace process,” the Prime Minister tried to throw the reason for a lack of an agreement on peace with the Palestinian Authority on the shoulders of PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

He pointed out that that the Arab world rejected the existence of Israel as recommended by the British Peel Commission in 1937 and in the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947.

The core of the conflict has never been the borders and settlements, Netanyahu said in a video address. He explained that the problem is the “persistent refusals to accept Israel as a Jewish state. Six prime ministers…have been ready for compromise, but it  was never enough because all of the Israeli proposals, the concessions, were based on the premise that the conflict would be over and there would be no further Palestinian claims on the State of Israel… The Palestinians were unwilling.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu the past year has shifted gears. He knows there is no sense in talking about “issues,” because no matter what Israel says or offers, it faces a broadside opposition by the United Nations, the United States and foreign media, all of which are stuck in the mindset of the Arab world that all of its demands must be met, period, with nothing in return.

He has focused on the failure of the Palestinian Authority, and the Arab world, to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, a condition that even the anti-Israel crowd will have a difficult time in rejecting and which the Palestinian Authority cannot accept if its leaders want to stay alive.

“So the question is not why Israel does not compromise, but [is] why do the Palestinians consistently refuse to accept” Israel as a Jewish state,” Prime Minister Netanyahu declared.

He also deflated the PA cry for sympathy with its Big Lie that it has been around for centuries. “We have been around for nearly 4,000 years,” Netanyahu said. The Palestinian have to come to grips with the fact there will always be a Jewish state next to their own. “He then added another requirement – security. No one has revealed exactly what security suggestions  U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and retired General John Allen proposed to Netanyahu also week, but the Prime Minister made it clear that all security arraignments must be “based on Israel’s own forces,” Netanyahu asserted. “There is no substitute for that.”

So Abbas can put that in his pipe and smoke it until time runs out on Kerry’s clock because he has made it clear – and there is no backtracking – that no Israeli soldier will set foot on a future Palestinian Authority state.

So Abbas can put that in his pipe and smoke it until time runs out on Kerry’s clock because he has made it clear – and there is no backtracking – that no Israeli soldier will set foot on a future Palestinian Authority state.

Netanyahu also hammered one point over and over concerning the Iranian nuclear threat, after the usual fawning over Israel’ great admiration, respect and love for the United States, meaning President Obama.

“We share” President Obama’s desire for a diplomatic solution, he stated, but he emphasized that “it must be coupled with sanctions and a military threat to succeed.” For good measure, Netanyahu then repeated,  “A military option is necessary for a diplomatic solution.”

Netanyahu countered several American claims, particularly those of The New York Times and some Obama administration officials, that Israel is exaggerating the threat of Iran.

“Regimes with unlimited appetites act out their mad ideologies,” Prime Minister Netanyahu told the Saban Forum. “The Jewish people take seriously those who speak of our annihilation.

The Prime Minister also threw another monkey into Obama’s wrenching deal with Iran. He said no deal with Iran should be concluded without a declared change in what he called its “genocidal policy.”

Noting that Iranian president Hassan Rouhani last month called Israel “a rabid dog,” the Prime Minister stated that Rouhani regime “is committed to our annihilation, and I believe that there must be an uncompromising demand at the Geneva talks, for a change in Iran’s policy.

“In other words, there needs to be not just a change in the capability of Iran to arm itself, but also a change in its policy of genocide.

Perhaps the most telling remarks by Prime Minister Netanyahu were his six closing words:

“Thank you all –  and good luck.”

It had a slight intonation, of “good luck  because you are going to need all you can get and that won’t be enough.”

Obama Takes Aim at Israeli Positions on Iran (Full Video)

Saturday, December 7th, 2013

Watch the video starting at minute 8:56



President Obama sharply criticized as not viable a number of Israeli government postures on talks with Iran, but reasserted the military option should those talks fail.

In a wide-ranging talk with Haim Saban, the entertainment mogul who funds the annual Saban Forum in Washington, Obama took aim at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claims that increased pressure during the interim talks would extract greater concessions from Iran, and anticipated a final deal that would grant Iran some uranium enrichment capabilities.

Alluding to the view of Netanyahu and a number of lawmakers in Congress, Obama said, “what this comes up down to is the perception that if we kept churning up the pressure, new sanctions, more sanctions, more military threats etc, that eventually Iran would cave.”

Instead, Obama said, that would likely drive away allies who have helped keep up the pressure on Iran through U.S.-led sanctions.

Obama outlined U.S. red lines in a final agreement, including the dismantling of the plutonium reactor at Arak and the underground nuclear reactor at Fordow, as well as advanced centrifuges.

However, he made clear an enrichment program would remain in place that would ensure that “as a practical matter, they don’t have a breakout capacity.”

That, Obama acknowledged, contradicted Netanyahu’s objective that “we can’t accept any enrichment on Iranian soil, full stop.”

Israel’s government believes that Iran has been allowed to advance its nuclear capability to the point where even a modest enrichment capability positions it dangerously close to weapons breakout capacity.

Demanding no enrichment, Obama said, was unrealistic, likening it to his believing Congress would pass every one of his legislative initiatives.

The Iranians needed to come to a deal that would afford them some “dignity,” he said, and alluded to broad popular support for some enrichment capacity.

Obama said that he did not trust Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s newly elected president, but noted that he was elected on a platform of reaching out to the West.

Again alluding to a Netanyahu claim, he said that those who say Rouhani is not different from his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadeinjad, a Holocaust denier and anti-Israel maximalist, “understate the shift in politics” in Iran.

Obama twice said that he would reassert the military option should talks fail with Iran.

“I’ve made clear I can avail myself of including a military option, is one we can consider and prepare for,” he said.

He emphatically rejected hard lines in dealing with other countries. “Wherever we see the impulses of a people to move away from conflict and violence and toward a diplomatic resolution of conflict we should be ready to engage them,” he said. “We have to not constantly assume that it’s not possible for Iran like any country to change over time.”

Obama said he had a good, open relationship with Netanyahu. “There are occasionally significant tactical differences, but there is a constancy in trying to reach the same goal,” he said of the relationship.

Addressing renewed Israeli-Palestinian talk,s Obama said mediation is currently focused on addressing Israeli security needs, and appeared to back away from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s insistence that the sides achieve a final status agreement next year.

An agreement, he said, need not address “every detail” but is one that “gets us to a moment that gets us to move forward than move backward.”

Bibi Is Not Crazy: White House Admits Final Deal Includes Enrichment

Wednesday, December 4th, 2013

A final deal with Iran could include a capacity for uranium enrichment, the White House said.

“Could” is what you say when you used to say “couldn’t” but then the other side insisted they would, and so you add a kind of implied “maybe” to the word by making it “could” instead of, say, “will zealously engage in producing weapons grade plutonium which is what they’d been meaning to do all along while we, here, at the White House were making fun of Netanyahu for being such a panicky sort.”

Here’s what Bernadette Meehan, the National Security Council spokeswoman actually said in a statement Tuesday to JTA, in response to their query based on a story first reported by the Washington Free Beacon.

“We are prepared to negotiate a strictly limited enrichment program in the end state, but only because the Iranians have indicated for the first time in a public document that they are prepared to accept rigorous monitoring and limits on level, scope, capacity, and stockpiles.”

This is so like the joke about Churchill who asks a lady if she’d sleep with him for a thousand pounds and she said yes, then he asked what about for five, and she said: Sir, what do you think I am, and he said We already established that, now we’re haggling over the price.

See, once the White House admits they lied all along, the part about monitoring day and night, with extra binoculars, the really good kind – that doesn’t really matter any longer. The fact remains, the president agreed to Iranian enrichment and lied to the Israelis and the Saudis and everybody else who’s shaking in their boots on account of they know the crazy monkeys in Tehran will happily go down in nuclear flames if they knew they were taking everybody else with them.

Saying now that you’ve only agreed to low level, not high level enrichment is exactly like low-balling the questionable lady from the apocryphal Churchill story.

Israel and the Saudis and, really, anyone with a healthy fear of Shiites, oppose any Iranian enrichment capacity, because Iran is led by madmen to whom Mutually Assured Destruction is martyrological panacea, not a threat.

“If we can reach an understanding on all of these strict constraints, then we can have an arrangement that includes a very modest amount of enrichment that is tied to Iran’s actual needs and that eliminates any near-term breakout capability,” Meehan told JTA. “If we can’t, then we’ll be right back to insisting on no enrichment.”

And a hearty good luck to you on that one, hope you’ll visit Yad Vashem II, the Iranian Holocaust Museum. By the time the U.S. gets around to do all that insisting, Iran’s economy will have started to blossom, anywhere from $50 to $300 billion will have been injected into their economy and they could do whatever they feel like, no matter what Obama is insisting on.

Folks, the first thing Obama did when he took office in 2009 was to betray the people who voted for him by compensating the bankers for their losses. He didn’t invest a trillion dollars in Main Street, like so many of us expected he would – he gave it all to his buddies on Wall Street. We didn’t know he had buddies on Wall Street – turns out he did.

This president will betray you just to pass a boring afternoon – of course he’ll betray his Israeli and Saudi allies. He has done it already, in fact. Listen to his spokeswoman, for heaven’s sake:

“Since the P5+1 would have to agree to the contours of a possible enrichment program, it is by definition not a ‘right’,” she said.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/bibi-is-not-crazy-white-house-admits-final-deal-includes-enrichment/2013/12/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: