web analytics
November 24, 2015 / 12 Kislev, 5776
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘nuclear weapons’

Secure in Nuclear Deal, Iran Boasting New generation of Long-Range Missiles

Friday, October 16th, 2015

(JNi.media) Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Aerospace Force, announced this week Iran’s plans to replace its solid and liquid fuel long-range missiles with a new generation next year, FARS reported. Hajizadeh said on Wednesday that “a new and advanced generation of liquid and solid fuel long-range missiles will replace the current productions next year.”

Hajizadeh said that Iran is now designing and building different types of long-range, mid-range and short-range missiles, adding, “We are not concerned even an iota about the enemies’ new and most advanced generation of satellites and espionage and offensive devices and equipment.”

“The missiles in various ranges are mounted on the launchers in all bases and [are] ready to be launched,” Hajizadeh said, while the FARS video showed an underground facility which, according to Hajizadeh, was only one of “numerous missile bases” scattered across the country.

Noting that all US military bases in the Middle East are within the range of the IRGC’s missiles, Hajizadeh insisted that Iran will never initiate a war, but warned that “any mistake by the enemies will trigger eruption of missiles from bases deep under the ground like eruptions of volcano which will destroy the enemy.”

The release of the new footage came a few days after Iran reported test-firing a new generation of long-range ballistic missiles. The test was in violation of the UNSC sanctions, but not, as the US Administration insisted, in violation of the nuclear agreement.

Iran’s new generation missile

Iran’s new generation missile

Russia-Linked Gangs Trying to Smuggle Deadly Radiation Material to ISIS

Wednesday, October 7th, 2015

Russia-linked smugglers have been trying — and may have succeeded — in smuggling deadly radioactive material to Islamic State (ISIS) terrorists, according to the Associated Press.

Investigators in Moldova shared with the AP files concerning four busts over the past five years.

The most recent known case was last February, when a smuggler was looking for a buyer from ISIS to purchase a quantity of cesium, a deadly radioactive material, that AP reported was “enough to contaminate several city blocks.”

One of the gang members told the Moldova undercover agent, whom he thought could sell the radioactive material to the ISIS:

You can make a dirty bomb, which would be perfect for the Islamic State. If you have a connection with them, the business will go smoothly.

The smugglers are criminal gangs, some of which have ties with the Russian intelligence agency.

The Moldovan investigators, who were assisted by the FBI, often smashed the rings after samples of nuclear material had been obtained but before they could catch the ringleaders, who were able to escape with the radioactive material that ISIS wants to wreak more destruction.

The investigators infiltrated into smuggling gangs, using a Mercedes-Benz and high-tech equipment supplied in part by the FBI.

Matthew Bunn, a Harvard University professor who led a secret study for the Clinton administration on the security of Russia’s nuclear arsenal, told AP:

In the age of the Islamic State, it’s especially terrifying to have real smugglers of nuclear bomb material apparently making connections with real buyers.

One bust in 2011 led investigators to a group that was headed by a man whom authorities believe is an officer with what used to be known as the KGB and now is called FSB.

Wiretapped conversations revealed that the gang sought an ISIS buyer “because they will bomb the Americans.”

One of the investigators told AP:

We can expect more of these cases. As long as the smugglers think they can make big money without getting caught, they will keep doing it.

The Experts Were Wrong, Iran Strikes Vast Uranium Reserves

Saturday, September 12th, 2015

(JNi.media) Iran has discovered high reserves of uranium at a new mine, which it will soon begin to extract, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Ali Akbar Salehi said on Saturday, according to IRNA.

“I cannot announce [the size] Iran’s uranium mine reserves,” Salehi said, noting “the important thing is that before aerial prospecting for uranium ores we were not too optimistic, but the new discoveries have made us confident about our reserves.”

Back in 2009, Iran’s Atomic Energy Agency officially announced there were some 400 uranium mines in operation nationwide. Official Iranian sources back then reported more than 36,000 tons in uranium reserves in those mines.

However, according to Reuters, some Western analysts have said Iran had a low supply of uranium, suggesting that, were it to pursue an aggressive nuclear program, it “would sooner or later would need to import uranium.”

According to a 2009 report of the Institute for Science and International Security, for instance, “Iran could be close to exhausting its supply of uranium oxide while lacking the adequate resources to sustain indigenous commercial-scale uranium processing and enrichment.”

A 2013 Carnegie Endowment and Federation of American Scientists report said the scarcity and low quality of Iran’s uranium resources forced it “to rely on external sources of natural and processed uranium,” stating that “Iran’s estimated uranium endowments are nowhere near sufficient to supply its planned nuclear program.”

Salehi said uranium extraction is starting soon at a new mine in the central province of Yazd, according to IRNA.

Arab League Presses for Israel to Disclose Nuclear Development

Tuesday, July 21st, 2015

The other shoe has fallen.

The Arab League has used the “ObamaDeal” nuclear agreement as a lever to exert diplomatic pressure on Israel to “join the non-proliferation agreement (NPT) as a non-nuclear state.”

Israel, assumed to have stockpile nuclear warheads, has maintained a position of “nuclear ambiguity” whereby it clams up about any nuclear weapons.

Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Elaraby said:

It’s time for the international community… to stop its policy of double standards and to undertake its responsibilities by pressuring Israel.

The U.N. General Assembly last year adopted a resolution calling for Israel to join the NPT and open the Dimona nuclear reactor to IAEA inspection.

Israel also possesses five German-made Dolphin-class submarines that reportedly can carry cruise missiles with nuclear warheads.

ObamaDeal: US to Protect Iranian Nuke Sites from Israeli Attack

Monday, July 20th, 2015

“ObamaDeal” explicitly states that the United States and the other P5+1 powers can help Iran deflect and even “respond” to sabotage and nuclear threats to its nuclear sites.

The damming evidence that ObamaDeal directly allows Western powers to help Iran to protect its nuclear sites, and possibly even to stage a counter-attack on the source of the threat, is stated in Annex III of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Congress is reviewing the agreement and has the option to cancel America’s commitments under the deal.

You have to reach page 142 of the JCPOA until you reach “Annex III: Civil Nuclear Cooperation,” where Section “D 10 states that the P5+1 “and possibly other states are prepared to cooperate with Iran on the implementation of nuclear security guidelines and best practices. Cooperation in the following areas can be envisaged:

Co-operation in the form of training courses and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to prevent, protect and respond to nuclear security threats to nuclear facilities and systems as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems [boldface added];

Co-operation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage, as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems.

Emphasis should be placed on the word “respond.” It leaves open for interpretation the possibility that the United States and other P5 +1 countries can take action in the form of training and preparing Iran to stage a cyber attack or retaliation in the event of a third-party assault on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Israel is assumed to have been behind the Stuxnet cyber attacks on Iran’s centrifuges at the Natanz nuclear facility in 2010, which set back the Iranian nuclear weapons program. The agreement provides for assistance from the United States and the other P5+1 countries to thwart “sabotage” on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Al Jazeera reported earlier this year that President Barack Obama threatened Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in 2014 that he would order American fighter planes to down Israeli aircraft if the Israeli Air Force tried to carry out an attack, which reportedly was about to happen.

If (or when) it was discovered that Iran has cheated and is close to developing a nuclear weapon, the complicated review methods in the agreement could take several months or even a year before the United States and other P5+1 nations could prove their findings. In the meantime, Israel could be met by the United States as well as Iran as enemies in the event of an attempt to sabotage or attack the sites where Iran violated the agreement.

Even without the agreement, Iran is on the way to receiving from Russia, one of the P5+1 powers, S-300 anti-missile systems that could possibly deter any Israeli missile attack on Iranian nuclear sites, in which Russia has a heavy investment.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has argued that ObamaDeal not only does not prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon but actually paves the way for a nuclear-armed Islamic Republic.

But the agreement does more than that. It helps make Iran impervious to an attack, whether from the air or from cyber space, and ObamaDeal also ratifies a possible Iranian counter-attack on Israel

To read the entire ObamaDeal, click here.

Second Take on Iran by AIPAC: Congress Must Stop this Bad Deal

Friday, July 17th, 2015

Following the announcement of the Iran- P5+1 nuclear deal, JewishPress.com summarized the major Jewish American organizations’ positions on the Iran deal. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee initial statement was rather pareve, but today’s statement, based on a fuller review of the document, is a clear thumbs down and call to action.

AIPAC has concluded that the deal falls short on all five areas it had concluded were critical: inspections, possible military dimensions, sanctions, duration and dismantlement.

The deal, AIPAC told its membership, “would facilitate rather than prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and would further entrench and empower the leading state sponsor of terror.”

AIPAC concluded that the deal would further destabilize the Middle East, including encouraging an arms race in the region.

In contradiction to what the negotiators and President Obama told the nation, AIPAC insisted that the alternative to the proposed deal is not war.

Calling on its members to inform their legislative representatives, AIPAC said the agreement must be rejected and sanctions on Iran must be maintained while efforts are made to negotiate “a better deal that will truly close off all Iranian paths to a nuclear weapon.”

Guess What Each of the US Jewish Organizations Are Saying About the Iran Deal

Wednesday, July 15th, 2015

We know the Iran deal is bad. How bad it is is we all may be spending the rest of our lives finding out. That is, unless enough members of Congress are able to inject sufficient spine-strengthening and -straightening serum to override President Barack Obama’s already promised veto of any effort to derail the deal.

So let’s take a stroll through the playground of American Jewish organizations and see what they have to say about the proposed deal which allows many of the things American leaders swore would not be permitted and forbids many of the things that were promised would be included.

First, let’s lay out the general parameters of the deal, as they are currently understood, based on analyses of the 159 page document.

According to the Iranians themselves, the deal blesses Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear programs and will lift sanctions from Iran through a new UN Security Council resolution. It allows all of Iran’s nuclear installations and sites to continue, none of them will be dismantled. Plus, research and development on key and advanced centrifuges will continue.

There will be no “anywhere, anytime” inspections. Instead, there will be a mechanism in place that will ensure that at least 24 days elapses before inspectors can visit any facility which Iran decides it doesn’t want visited.

And although the U.S. administration and its representatives repeatedly insisted that the nuclear program deal would have no impact on any other sanctions imposed against Iran, guess what? It does.

The P5+1 have agreed to lift the arms embargo against Iran within five years, and the embargo on missile sales will be lifted within eight years. Of course, the unfreezing of between $100 and 150 billion is perhaps the most frightening immediate effect of the deal. As with the nuclear and military sites, there will be no transparency to ensure that the money does not get funneled into Iran’s other favorite activity: financing global terrorism, especially murderous terrorism directed at Israel.

Most of the major Jewish organizations either blasted the agreement with Iran or punted, assuming a wait and see stance. However, one “pro-Israel, pro-peace” outfit was thrilled with the deal. More on that in the body of the article.

Here they are, summaries of the statements on the Iran deal issued by American Jewish organizations.In alphabetical order.

The Anti-Defamation League unhappy

Usually known for a more even-keeled approach to most administration ventures, the ADL is highly critical of the Iran deal. The ADL leadership said they were “deeply disappointed by the terms of the final deal with Iran” which “seems to fall far short of the President’s objective of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state.” The ADL leadership praised the administration’s negotiators for sticking to it for so long and for appearing to put off Iran’s ability to become a nuclear state in the short term, but it fails to prevent it for the long term.

The ADL further blasted the “front-end loaded infusion of billions of dollars in sanctions relief [which] will finance Iran’s ongoing global campaign of terror against Israel and other U.S. allies, and be used to further exert its influence across the Middle East, thereby harming U.S. interests.”

While stopping short of calling on Congress to do its best to derail the job, the ADL leadership took the time to urge those debating the matter to do so in a civil and respectful manner.  Some jaded commentators might wonder whether such admonishments are ladled out when the plan of someone considered to be right wing is under attack.

Americans for a Safe Israel angry

Not surprisingly, the small, New York-based, staunchly Zionist organization AFSI is unalterably opposed to the Iran deal. As Helen Freedman, AFSI’s long-time executive director wrote regarding the deal crafted by Obama and Kerry, “there was never any doubt in our minds that this deceitful duo would cross all the red lines and give Iran everything it demands-  and more. Our ‘leaders’ even made it difficult for Congress to do anything to Stop Iran by insisting this is not a treaty, only a ‘deal.’ Only those who applaud the naked emperor will celebrate this travesty.”

American Israel Public Affairs Committee worried

AIPAC’s deep affinity for diplomacy and close connections with the administration as well as members of Congress puts the organization in a bit of a bind. Its statement reflects that dilemma. AIPAC had previously outlined several requirements any deal with Iran had to meet. Those included:”anywhere, anytime” inspections – that ain’t happening; sanctions relief should only come after Iran satisfies all its commitments – nope; any deal had to prevent Iran from the ability to acquire nuclear weapons for decades – not that either; and Iran had to dismantle its nuclear infrastructure – nope again.

“We are deeply concerned based on initial reports that this proposed agreement may not meet these requirements, and thereby would fail to block Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon and would further entrench and empower the leading state sponsor of terror.” Deeply concerned? Even the President’s talking points make clear that AIPAC’s red lines have not been met.

AIPAC, as did several of the other organizations, signaled that it would continue to review the deal and issue updates on its position.

American Jewish Committee worried

The AJC spent the first third of its statement praising the administration’s negotiators and leadership for its attempt to reach an accord. AJC’s executive director David Harris then called on Congress to ” thoroughly review, debate, and, ultimately, vote it up or down.” Towards the end of the statement, Harris finally gets around to venturing an opinion about the deal. He said that the nuclear deal does not appear to address certain “extremely troubling aspects of Iranian behavior.” He then lists out five different concerns of the AJC regarding the deal, including its reign of terror in the Middle East and its Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program (which cannot have a peaceful purpose), and its systematic repression of human rights.

But rather than urging its members to take any particular action, the AJC director concludes his statement by noting that however “Congress decides to vote on the nuclear deal,” Harris concluded, “the need for vigilance regarding Iran will not for a single moment be diminished.”

Endowment for Middle East Truth angry

EMET expressed “profound disappointment” that the deal with Iran is “more deplorable than we had even anticipated. Of particular concern to EMET is that the “Administration has caved on almost every one of its initial criteria. It also pointed out that the Iranian Ayatollah maintained all of his red lines, even those which are contrary to UN resolutions.”

Sarah Stern, the president and founder of EMET said, “we all understand and appreciate that Americans are not eager for armed conflict, but willfully blinding ourselves to the reality of a bad deal does not prevent war.” EMET blasted the deal as a “diplomatic disaster of historic proportions.”

The Israel Project unhappy

TIP’s president, Josh Block, said of the deal with Iran that it “is a realization of the deepest fears and the most dire predictions of skeptics who have, for two years, been warning against exactly this outcome – a bad deal that enriches this tyrannical regime and fails to strip Iran of nuclear weapons capability.” TIP unequivocally called on Congress to reject “this bad deal.” The Israel Project has been providing nearly daily, and extremely detailed, updates and analyses of the negotiations for many months, and is considered extremely knowledgeable regarding both the process and the details of the agreement as it has evolved.

J Street  happy

J Street founder and president Jeremy Ben-Ami once described his nascent organization as “President Obama’s blocking back.” It apparently still sees itself that way. While hedging its bets a tiny bit by calling the deal “complex and multi-faceted,” J Street takes President Obama at his word and concludes that the deal “appears to meet the critical criteria around which a consensus of non-proliferation experts has formed for a deal that verifiably blocks each of Iran’s pathways to a nuclear weapon.” Tellingly, the statement does not mention what those criteria are.

Every other organization that praised the negotiators did so for their efforts. Not J Street. J Street congratulated them for bringing the negotiations “to a successful conclusion.”

J Street mentioned the upcoming review of the deal by Congress, but sent its own thinly-veiled threat: Congress should be “mindful of the likely consequences of its rejection: a collapse of diplomacy and international sanctions as Iran pushes forward with a nuclear program unimpeded.”

In other words, unless Congress approves the deal, or fails to override the promised veto, J Street is telling its followers that the alternative will be an Iran with nuclear weapons. You can bet that is how they will couch their calls to supporters in the upcoming congressional review period.

Jewish Federations of North America hmmmm

The parent organization of the Jewish Federations and JCRCs was careful to thank the negotiators for their efforts and to express its support for diplomacy, but clearly signaled its discomfort with the way the deal has shaped up, given Iran’s terrorist history. The JFNA statement expresses its concern: “Iran’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas, its human rights violations and its aggressive threats toward neighboring countries – including Israel – make the specter of a nuclear-armed Iran untenable.”

But the JFNA resorted to mouthing the assurances that President Obama has been making – even while the facts regarding them have been changing – for nearly the entire period of the negotiations. The JFNA concluded its statement by urging Congress to give the accord its “utmost scrutiny.”

National Jewish Democratic Council can't talk

Perhaps not surprisingly, the NJDC takes absolutely no position on the content of the deal and does not state one word about it. Instead, the statement issued by the NJDC focuses on the process of deliberations going forward and the need “to take partisan politics completely out of this situation.” In fact, it preemptively takes those who oppose this deal to task for turning the Iran deal into a “wedge issue” which divides Jews. It appears the NJDC did not take the temperature of its erstwhile center and center-left Jewish organizational playmates, as virtually every one of them, and they all contain large numbers of Democrats, are highly critical of the deal.

Republican Jewish Coalition angry

The RJC called the agreement “a bad deal” because “it is not enforceable, verifiable or in America’s national security interest.” The group called on Congress to stop the deal or “the world will be less safe as the United States will remove sanctions on Iran, and in return, Iran will still pursue nuclear weapons.” The RJC called on all members of Congress to reject the deal.

Simon Wiesenthal Center worried

The Wiesenthal Center’s leadership said they are “deeply worried” about the deal which they said “confirms Iran as a threshold nuclear power” and that “will end economic sanctions against the Mullahocracy.” The SWC called on Congress to review the document carefully and to vote against it if it is as dangerous as it appears to be.

World Jewish Congress hmmmm

The president of the World Jewish Congress, Ronald Lauder, expressed strong skepticism about the Iran deal. He also mentioned the hard work of the negotiators but repeatedly stated that Tehran has a long history of misleading the world and that there is no reason to trust Iran over the implementation of the deal.

“I fear we may have entered into an agreement that revives the Iranian economy but which fails to stop this regime from developing nuclear weapons in the long terms, which would have disastrous consequences for the entire region and the world.” The WJC urged the international community to stand ready to reimplement sanctions immediately if Iran fails to meet its obligations under the agreement.

Zionist Organization of America angry

No surprises from the ZOA leadership on this issue. If they didn’t use a thesaurus to find every word that means bad to describe this deal, it is only because they have been using those words to describe this deal that way since its infancy.

The ZOA is “deeply horrified, but not surprised by the truly terrible nuclear agreement,” the statement begins. In a highly detailed recitation of how and why the deal is so bad, long-time ZOA president Mork Klein said that the nuclear agreement “is quite simply a catastrophe and a nightmare. It leaves the world standing at an abyss.”

In addition to decrying the lack of spontaneous inspections, the huge boatloads of cash to spend on its terrorist activities and subordinates and the egregiously antagonistic behavior of the Iranian leadership even over the past few days, Klein made another point.

“Two years ago, the Iranian economy was collapsing under the weight of sanctions. President Obama could have intensified pressure and international resolve to compel Iran to relinquish its nuclear program. He never even tried. Instead, he preemptively relieved the pressure on Iran by easing sanctions which enabled Iran to withstand every demand. As a result, we now stand on the precipice of an era of nuclear terror.”

The ZOA, as did several other organizations, urged Americans to call their elected federal representatives through the Capitol Hill Switchboard (202-224-3121) and urge them to oppose the nuclear deal.


While there are two outliers, it turns out the Iran deal is so bad that nearly every major American Jewish organization is, at minimum, extremely concerned about it. That’s quite a feat.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/guess-what-each-of-the-us-jewish-organizations-are-saying-about-the-iran-deal/2015/07/15/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: