web analytics
October 5, 2015 / 22 Tishri, 5776
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Kerry’

No American Has Seen the Entirety of the Side Deals and Not One Note Exists in US

Thursday, September 10th, 2015

In an exclusive interview with the JewishPress.com, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) disclosed that not only has every member of Congress who voted for the Nuclear Iran Deal never seen any of the documents containing key elements of the deal, but also that not a single document from or about those side deals is anywhere in the possession of any Americans.

This means that neither the President of the United States, nor the Secretary of State, nor any member of the U.S. negotiating team has the capacity to read any of these documents and know what they say.

It means that the United States is relying on someone else’s account of what the agreements say in order to determine whether a sufficient degree of protection is afforded the United States and its allies by this agreement.

And if the description U.S. officials have been given is wrong, the United States will not know until Iranian bombs fall.

This government is entrusting – yes, entrusting because there can be no verification of an unknown – the most murderous and voracious regime on the globe with following rules governing its nuclear activity and not even the highest levels of this administration can say exactly what those rules say.

It is staggering.

Pompeo, a Harvard Law School graduate who graduated first in his class from West Point and served in the U.S. military, along with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) discovered the existence of those secret side deals when they traveled to Vienna and met with members of the International Atomic Energy Agency in July.

Since learning about those side deals, one of which deals with Iran’s Parchin military complex and inspections of such sites and the other deals with the possible military dimensions of Iran’s previous nuclear weapons program, Pompeo has been “obsessed” with finding out the details of those deals.

When asked whether he or other members of Congress planned to subpoena the administration for the documentation surrounding those side deals, Pompeo responded: “they don’t have anything.”

“No notes? No lists? No summaries?” Pompeo was asked.

“Nothing,” he answered.


Pompeo told this reporter that the briefings provided by the administration to members of Congress about the side deals were provided based on recollections of what American officials were told.

Given this bizarre turn of events, opponents of the Joint Nuclear Plan of Action (which includes those invisible side deals) plan to do three things, Pompeo said.

First, they intend to vote to block the deal from going forward, as the administration is already in violation of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (Corker-Cardin), the first Article of which explicitly required the administration to provide all documentation of every part of the deal. Because the administration has failed to fulfill its obligation, the 60 day clock on the Congressional review period has not yet begun.

Second, the Congressional opponents of the JCPOA will introduce a new motion, one of approval for the JCPOA. This will require members of Congress to affirmatively vote in favor of the deal, if that is their position, despite their ignorance of key aspects of the deal.

And third, opponents of the JCPOA in Congress will move to ensure that the current sanctions on Iran are not lifted.

The revelation provided by Pompeo also brings into focus another profound problem with the Iran agreement: by its terms – that is, according to the terms we have – the agreement is inconsistent with, and purports to overrule, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement. The NNPA is a treaty, and as such, part of the Supreme Law of the Land ordained by the Constitution.

Therefore, the NNPA cannot be overruled by a mere executive agreement, which the administration has insisted is the status of the Iran deal. But if we do not actually know all of the relevant terms to which the United States has acceded, and which will govern the parts of the agreement we can see, it is even more clearly impossible for anyone to determine the extent to which this set of agreements contravenes the NNPA.

Full Text of Speech on Nuclear Iran Deal Given by Sen. Menendez

Tuesday, August 18th, 2015

Remarks Prepared for Delivery:

“For twenty three years as a member of the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees, I have had the privilege of dealing with major foreign policy and national security issues. Many of those have been of a momentous nature. This is one of those moments.

“I come to the issue of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, with Iran, as someone who has followed Iran’s nuclear ambition for the better part of two decades. I decide on whether to support or oppose an issue on the basis of whether, it is in my judgment, in the national interest and security of our country to do so.

“In this case a secondary, but important, question is what it means for our great ally — the State of Israel — and our other partners in the Gulf.

“Unlike President Obama’s characterization of those who have raised serious questions about the agreement, or who have opposed it, I did not vote for the war in Iraq, I opposed it, unlike the Vice President and the Secretary of State, who both supported it. My vote against the Iraq war was unpopular at the time, but it was one of the best decisions I have ever made.

“I also don’t come to this question as someone, unlike many of my Republican colleagues, who reflexively oppose everything the President proposes. In fact, I have supported President Obama, according to Congressional Quarterly, 98 percent of the time in 2013 and 2014. On key policies ranging from voting in the Finance Committee and on the Senate Floor for the Affordable Care Act, to Wall Street Reform, to supporting the President’s Supreme Court Nominees and defending the Administration’s actions on the Benghazi tragedy, his Pivot to Asia, shepherding the authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) to stop President Assad’s use of chemical weapons, during the time I was Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to so much more, I have been a reliable supporter of President Obama.

“But my support is not – and has not been driven by party loyalty, but rather by principled agreement, not political expediency. When I have disagreed it is also based on principled disagreement.

“The issue before the Congress in September is whether to vote to approve or disapprove the agreement struck by the President and our P5+1 partners with Iran. This is one of the most serious national security, nuclear nonproliferation, arms control issues of our time. It is not an issue of supporting or opposing the President. This issue is much greater and graver than that.

“For me, I have come to my decision after countless hours in hearings, classified briefings, and hours-and-hours of serious discussion and thorough analysis. I start my analysis with the question: Why does Iran — which has the world’s fourth largest proven oil reserves, with 157 billion barrels of crude oil and the world’s second largest proven natural gas reserves with 1,193 trillion cubic feet of natural gas — need nuclear power for domestic energy?

“We know that despite the fact that Iran claims their nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, they have violated the international will, as expressed by various U.N. Security Council Resolutions, and by deceit, deception and delay advanced their program to the point of being a threshold nuclear state. It is because of these facts, and the fact that the world believes that Iran was weaponizing its nuclear program at the Parchin Military Base — as well as developing a covert uranium enrichment facility in Fordow, built deep inside of a mountain, raising serious doubts about the peaceful nature of their civilian program, and their sponsorship of state terrorism — that the world united against Iran’s nuclear program.

Another Congressional Democrat Will Vote No on the Iran Deal

Sunday, August 9th, 2015

It took awhile, but California Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA-30) officially announced that he intends to vote against the Iranian nuclear deal the U.S. negotiated with its P5+1 partners and the Islamic Republic of Iran. And the announcement was not only firm, but biting.

Sherman issued a negative review of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action last week, calling it “the good, the bad and the ugly,” but it wasn’t until Friday, Aug. 7 that the San Fernando Valley Democrat clarified that he intended to vote against the deal.

The California Congressman explained that he has been focused on preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons for the past 19 years.

This agreement, Sherman said,

contains the good and the bad in the first year, and gets ugly in the years thereafter. The Good: Iran gives up 97% of its stockpile of enriched uranium and decommissions 2/3 of its existing centrifuges.  The Bad: Iran gets access to at least $56 billion of its own currently-frozen funds, and free access to the international oil markets.  The Ugly: In 15 years or less, Iran is permitted to have an unlimited quantity of centrifuges of unlimited quality, as well as heavy water reactors and reprocessing facilities.

And then Sherman took a step beyond the point most members of Congress have been willing to go. He wants it to be clear that “future Presidents and Congresses are not bound by this Agreement – not legally, not morally, not diplomatically.”

The Congressman went on to explain that according to “international Law and the U.S. Constitution, the Agreement is a mere ‘executive political agreement’ and is not binding on America, Europe or Iran.

However, if the Agreement is not only signed by the President but also by Congress, it may appear binding. Appearances matter. In future years, many would argue as long as Iran appears to be complying with the Agreement, America cannot insist on modifications or extensions of nuclear restrictions. A strong Congressional vote against the Agreement is the best way to make it clear that the Agreement is not binding on Congress, the American people or future administrations.

Sherman made three additional points in his statement. First, he said that the President and the negotiating team made incredible efforts to prevent Iran from moving forward in its nuclear program, and he thanked the President for being so focused on such an important issue.

In his second additional point, Sherman listed off the various specific problems with the deal such as the flaccid inspections regimen and the infusion of billions of dollars from sanctions relief, some significant amount of which it is likely to use to siphon to its terror proxies in the region and around the world.

The third point packed quite a punch.

President Obama has been harshly criticized for dog whistling about critics of the JCPOA, using code language to suggest that the Jews supported the Iraq war, and they are the same people who are opposing the Iran deal. Well guess who else supported the Iraq war?

As Sherman said: “The President reminds us that many prominent critics of the Agreement supported the invasion of Iraq. It should be noted that many supporters of the Agreement also supported the invasion of Iraq, including: Vice President Biden, Secretary Kerry and Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.”


The nineteen year House Democrat sits on the important House Committee on Foreign Affairs and is a member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade.

Sherman joins the following eight (so far) other Democratic members of Congress who have committed to voting against the JCPOA: Cong. Meng (D-NY), Cong. Vargas (D-CA), Cong. Price (D-NY), Cong. Sires (D-NY), Cong. Lowey (D-NY), Cong. Deutch (D-FL), Cong. Israel (D-NY) and Cong. Engel (D-NY).

Biggest Democratic Foe of Obama on Iran Indicted

Thursday, April 2nd, 2015

U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) was indicted on Wednesday, April 1. The 61-year old senator has been in public life for more than 40 years.

Menendez was indicted on corruption charges which accuse the senator of actions taken on behalf of a wealthy campaign donor in exchange for expensive vacations and gifts.

The indictment charges Menendez with conspiracy with his friend and donor, Dr. Salomon Melgen, eight counts of bribery and other charges, including making false statements.

The indictment states that Menendez made overtures to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which claimed Melgen overbilled the government by nearly $9 million. It also claims that Menendez intervened two other times by making inquiries on behalf of Melgen and his friends.

In exchange for taking these actions on behalf of Melgen, Menendez allegedly accepted, among other things, free flights on Melgen’s private jet and vacations at Melgen’s resort home in the Dominican Republic, as well as campaign contributions and contributions to the senator’s legal defense fund.

Menendez said the charges against him are “outrageous.” He claimed that all the claims against him were trumped up by political enemies.

“I’m confident that at the end of the day, I will be vindicated, and they will be exposed,” Menendez said.

However, the senator will step down from his position as ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It is from that seat that the New Jersey senator has proven to be particularly irksome to this administration, as Menendez has pushed hard for increased sanctions against Iran throughout the current negotiations regarding Iran’s nuclear power program.

Most congressional Democrats have been in lock-step with U.S. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry, but Senator Menendez has pushed back hard against the administration’s insistence on pursuing an agreement with a wily adversary few believe will ever follow the terms of any deal.

Menendez also opposed Obama’s decision to restore diplomatic relations with Cuba. The senator is Cuban American.

‘Apocalyptic’ Iran Deal: Details Increasingly Reveal Bibi is Right

Tuesday, February 24th, 2015

Iran looks to be the big winner in the high stakes negotiation game that the world powers, led by U.S. President Barack Obama’s team, have played like amateurs.

The biggest news is that, whereas ten years ago Iran was not permitted to have even one centrifuge, the “deal” the P5+1 will be offering, according to senior Israeli and other officials, allows Iran about 6,500 centrifuges.

Those centrifuges have nothing to do with creating nuclear “power,” in the oil-rich Islamic Republic of Iran. Those centrifuges will be spinning the material to hurtle Iran towards nuclear weapons capability.

The details that are emerging support the position the Israelis have been warning against, increasingly loudly, for many months. Although the U.S. recently admitted it had kept Israel out of the loop about details of the deal, Israel has been kept abreast through other channels.

The “deal” has not yet been finalized, and talks will resume next Monday, after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif met to hammer out details for several days in Geneva.

“We had serious talks with the P5+1 representatives and especially with the Americans in the past three days…. But still there is a long way to reach a final agreement,” Zarif told Iran’s Fars news.

The P5+1 refers to the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, the U.S., the United Kingdom, Russia, China and France, plus Germany.

In addition to the huge number of centrifuges that Iran will be permitted under the deal, the end date of the agreement between the P5+1 and Iran is of great concern to Israel and others who recognized Iran’s apocalyptic capabilities. The agreement is expected to end in about ten years, after which there will be no restraints at all on Iran’s nuclear program.

AP reported the deal would initially freeze Iran’s nuclear program but gradually allow it to increase activities, as a “reward” for “compliance,” that could enable it to produce nuclear arms in the last years of the agreement. 

Israel’s Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon voiced Israel’s deep concern about the impending deal, according to the Jerusalem Post.

“The agreement with Iran as it is coming together now is a great danger to Western world peace and a threat to Israel’s security,” he said.

“Iran today is the leading factor for instability in the Middle East, and it sends terrorist proxies around the world with the goal of harming Western and Israeli interests,” he said. “Therefore, any agreement that will be signed between the West and this apocalyptic, messianic regime will severely harm Western and Israeli interests and enable Iran to become a threshold nuclear state and continue its terrorist activities.”
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will be addressing a joint session of Congress next week. He will focus on the dangers of the deal with Iran. He openly admits his goal is to convince members of Congress to do all they can to insist any agreement be one that keeps Iran from achieving its goal of obtaining nuclear weapons capability.

The speech has become a major source of conflict between the U.S. administration and Israel, with false allegations that Netanyahu “blindsided” the administration by failing to inform it in advance of accepting the invitation.

With the details slowly emerging of a very bad deal between the world powers and Iran, and with polls showing the vast majority of Americans distrust the Iranians, it may be that Washington’s petulance will have at least one unintended consequence: a boost to Bibi.

‘Chickens***-gate’: Obama Administration Proves it’s Got Nothing

Thursday, October 30th, 2014

{Originally posted on author’s site, Liberty Unyielding}

Many are misreading the import of the Obama administration’s latest essay in narrative placement: the “chickensh*tting of Bibi.”

There is no doubt that the administration wanted to defame Benjamin Netanyahu: to undermine his reputation as a national leader, impugn him and his policies.  The administration has been in high dudgeon over Netanyahu and Israel for some time now, flouncing around in impotent fury like Scarlett O’Hara looking for a vase to throw.

Team Obama is caught, after all, between the stark realities that keep Israel’s security policy constant, and the constancy of American public support for Israel.  Making substantial moves against Israel is a non-starter for an American president; Congress may not agree on much, but on that, it would act with unity and swift purpose – and the urgent support of the people

No form of diplomatic pressure, meanwhile – no matter how publicly uncomfortable – is going to make Netanyahu give in on Israel’s security and her hope of a future.  Nothing short of giving Israel over to destruction is acceptable to the Palestinian Arab leadership as the price of a “peace deal,” and Netanyahu will never agree to that just to make John Kerry or Barack Obama happy.

So the Obama administration snipes from the shadows (and puts on passive-aggressive spectacles like the ridiculous shunning of Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon during his recent visit).  John Podhoretz aptly characterized an earlier incident in the administration’s series of pokes and jabs as a “hissy fit.”  What we’ve been seeing is a very prolonged hissy fit; I almost feel a certain solicitude for the psychological effort it must take to keep it going.

Earnest observers in the U.S. and Israel are taking it seriously.  A policy rift between the U.S. and Israel makes it hard, probably impossible, to confront Iran effectively – that’s the grown-up sense they are trying to make of it all.  And they’re not wrong about that.  But they’re behind the train, standing on the tracks as it pulls away in the distance.

Reality has moved beyond the old touchstones: U.S. power, a “concert of nations” addressing common security threats, maneuvers to line up “global” principles that every nation will feel itself bound to live by.  The status quo defined by those characteristics is collapsing.  In important ways, it has already collapsed, as evidenced by the utter, unaddressed chaos in Syria and Iraq, and the unaddressed Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Hoist on its own petard

This has all come to a head at this particular time largely because the Obama administration thinks it’s a foreign policy to place a narrative in the media about Bibi being a chickensh*t.  The posture represented by that form of sophomoric intrigue is deeply irresponsible, morally vicious, and anti-Westphalian, and it has come out in Obama’s policies over and over and over again.  The entire world, outside of Western academia and the editorial boards of the left-wing media, already knows that Obama is not an honestly-intentioned Westphalian statesman.

That knowledge has material consequences.  Chief among them is the collapse of the global order, and that collapse has follow-on consequences in turn.  Looking just at factors relating to the Iran problem, two of the most important consequences are a loss of prestige for the UN, and a loss of cohesion and purpose in NATO.

The UN today is as toothless as the League of Nations. The tooth in the UN was all America, and now “America” has stepped out of her role.  The UN has been unable to have any effect on problems like the civil wars in Libya and Syria, or the Russian invasion of Crimea.  It recently had to simply abandon one of its oldest peacekeeping missions, in the Golan Heights – literally flee the 40-year-old mission under attack – because the U.S. made no effort to protect the mission and keep it going.

American Bully-Wimps versus Israeli IDF Veterans‏

Thursday, October 30th, 2014

Even Israeli leftist media showed disgust at the American slurs, who’s a “chicken?” on our Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Obama and Kerry hate Bibi, because he is what they aren’t. He is more intelligent and knowledgeable, and he was a real soldier in the top unit in an army known for its personal bravery. As you know I have plenty of complaints about Netanyahu’s policies, but for a foreign government to hurl such immature, gutter-like accusations at a Prime Minister of a country they claim to hold as an ally is the epitome of childish anti-diplomacy.

And for the gazillionth time, the Americans are trying to force Israel to agree to their policy. This is not what negotiating is. The Obama Government is a bunch of dictatorial, fascist bullies, not democratic, respectful allies. They are antisemites. There is no other explanation for such behavior.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/shiloh-musings/202273/2014/10/30/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: