web analytics
July 24, 2016 / 18 Tammuz, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘White House’

Iran Issues New Demands on the Nuclear Deal (It Ain’t Over Till It’s Over…)

Thursday, September 24th, 2015

The Iranian government is now demanding the finished nuclear deal be re-opened for negotiation, again.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei demanded earlier this month that sanctions be lifted entirely, rather than simply suspended as agreed in the nuclear deal signed in July.

This past weekend, the demand was repeated by a top Iranian official ahead of the upcoming United Nations General Assembly, where informal negotiations often take place on the sidelines. On September 28, Iranian officials plan to meet with the entire P5+1 delegation that negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran, according to Iran’s FARS news agency.

However, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly plans to meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in the coming days in New York over the issue. According to Fox News, a State Department official said there will be no further negotiation.

“We’ve long said that we’re not going to comment on or react to every statement attributed to the Iranian leadership,” the official told FoxNews.com. “Our focus is on implementing the deal, and verifying that Iran completes its key nuclear steps under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). There is no renegotiation, and the nuclear-related sanctions relief that Iran will receive once the IAEA verifies that it has completed its nuclear steps is clearly spelled out in the text of the [agreement].”

The ayatollah has said, however, that unless sanctions are lifted entirely, “there will be no deal.” According to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Khamenei warned if sanctions are only suspended, Iran too will only “suspend” the nuclear activities listed in the agreement.

In the text of the agreement, there is a reference to “lifting” the sanctions, but the White House has promised that sanctions “will snap back into place” if Iran violates its end of the deal.

According to MEMRI, it’s not that simple. The talks on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly may provide a forum for new negotiations over further concessions to Iran. Outright “lifting of sanctions” would constitute a “fundamental change” to the deal, MEMRI pointed out, because “lifting the sanctions, rather than suspending them, will render impossible a ‘snapback’ in case of Iranian violations.”

Three Iran leaders announced already last July, however, that Iran intended to openly violate at least part of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231.

“Just as we refrained from complying with UN Security Council resolutions, we can do so with regard to 2231,” explained senior negotiator Abbas Araghchi in an interview on Iranian Channel 2 broadcast on July 20, 2015, picked up and translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

The three leaders, President Hassan Rouhani, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, and Araghchi, who also serves as deputy foreign minister, emphasized in the interview that Iran has no intention of abiding by the UN resolution, which includes both the JCPOA and Annex B – the list of points with which Iran disagrees, including the issue of sanctions on the Iranian missile development project. Rather, Iran seeks to abide only by the JCPOA.

Following the passage of UNSCR 2231, the Iranian foreign ministry issued a statement noting, “Iran does not attach legitimacy to any restriction and any threat. If UNSCR 2231 will be violated by Iran, it will be a violation of the Security Council resolution and not of the JCPOA, similar to what happened 10 years ago when we violated Security Council resolutions and nothing happened.

“The text of the JCPOA notes the fact that the content of the JCPOA and of the UN Security Council resolution are two separate things,” the statement read.

During the interview, Araghchi said that there had been tough bargaining between the Iranian and American delegations over the issue of the arms embargo on Iran and the sanctions related to Iran’s missile development project.

Hana Levi Julian

Trump Calls Obama an ‘Amateur’ and Vows to Re-Negotiate Deal

Wednesday, September 9th, 2015

Donald Trump said Wednesday that President Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran was his “amateur hour” and that the deal will be re-negotiated if the real-estate mogul is elected to the White House.

Trump wrote in an op-ed in USA Today:

It is hard to believe a president of the United States would actually put his name on an agreement with the terrorist state Iran that is so bad, so poorly constructed and so terribly negotiated that it increases uncertainty and reduces security for America and our allies, including Israel.
It was amateur hour for those charged with striking this deal with Iran, demonstrating to the world, yet again, the total incompetence of our president and politicians. It appears we wanted a deal at any cost rather than following the advice of Ronald Reagan and walking away because ‘no deal is better than a bad deal.’

Trump assumed he will be the next president of the United States and said that he “will renegotiate with Iran — right after I enable the immediate release of our American prisoners and ask Congress to impose new sanctions that stop Iran from having the ability to sponsor terrorism around the world.”

He will be one of the most boisterous and photographed leaders at an anti-deal rally Wednesday at the Capitol.

The Republican candidate’s continuing popularity, in the face of all predictions that he is a passing fad, is scaring the hell out of challengers, who no longer can ignore him and have been forced into criticizing him, giving him even more publicity and attention.

Jeb Bush said Trump cannot be trusted to deal with Iran, and he posted a video of Trump praising then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Bush’s going on the attack of past declarations is one of the weakest possible strategies. The GOP candidates are going to have to do a lot of soul-searching and come up with the something better in order to stop the Trump train.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

A Tale of Two Prayers: Muslims and Clinton vs. Jews and Psalms [video]

Friday, September 4th, 2015

I am [at] peace, but when I speak, they [come] to war – Psalms 120:7).

A new video of an Arab event in the Old City that was in celebration of a new groom shows the overwhelming presence of political aspirations, with flags of both the Hamas terrorist organization and the Palestinian Authority.

If foreign media were to take off their blinders, they could understand better, if they wanted to, the essential differences between the intentions of Jews and Muslims at the Old City and on the Temple Mount.

We have no idea of what the Arabs were chanting in their flag-waving celebrations, but it is a safe assumption they were not reciting Psalms.

Up to several thousand Jews march in the same place every month, except when the police decide it might offend Arabs. They also wave flags, those depicting the Holy Temple. Two of them were destroyed centuries ago, but the Palestinian Authority likes to claim they never existed.

The monthly rallies are centered on the recital of several Psalms, which brings to mind the obvious one when comparing the Muslim and Jewish marches.

Psalms 120:67 states:

I am [at] peace, but when I speak, they [come] to [wage] war.

The literal translation is “I am peace, but when I speak, they are war,” and the words “at or “for” are necessarily inserted in the first part of the verse and “come” in the second part.

Every translation of any text is prone to interpretation, and when it comes to Israel, the interpretations come with a mindset.

The international community does not consider Israel for peace, and it likes to believe that the Arab world wants peace.

The most recent evidence comes from the newest batch of “pro-Israel” Hillary Clinton’s private e-mails.

She and her close confidantes pre-judge Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu as a man against peace. The Palestinian Authority is assumed to be a friend of peace, despite Psalms 120:7, Palestinian Authority incitement and terror, and Mahmoud Abbas’ spitting in the face of the Obama administration by openly destroying the basis of the Oslo Accords and rejecting a diplomatic solution.

The e-mails to Clinton’s private e-mail server, even though some of the information was classified, are chock full of anti-Netanyahu observations from people such as Martin Indyk, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel. He wrote Clinton about Netanyahu:

At heart, he seems to lack a generosity of spirit. This combines with his legendary fear of being seen as a ‘freier’ [sucker] in front of his people to create a real problem in the negotiations, especially because he holds most of the cards.

Another source of the e-mails is Sid Blumenthal, whom Clinton seems to have made a de facto adviser when she was Secretary of State even though the White House rejected her attempt to bring him on board in an official capacity.

Clinton insists his e-mails were “unsolicited” but one of her e-mails to him states, “Keep ’em coming,” and another beseeches him to advise her before she was to speak to AIPAC.

She liked what she read because it was nasty towards Netanyahu, and keep in mind that if Clinton is the next president of the United States, Blumenthal will be on her team.

For example:

[Netanyahu’s] father, Benzion Netanyahu; 100 years old, secretary to Jabotinsky, and denounced as too radical by Begin, adored his son Yoni, heroically killed at Entebbe. Benyamin has never measured up. Benzion has constantly criticized him in public for his deviations from the doctrine of Greater Israel.

Bibi desperately seeks his father’s approbation and can never equal his dead brother. See Benzion’s most recent scathing undermining of his son Bibi and Bibi’s tearful tribute to his brother just last month.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Biden Tells Atlanta Jews ‘Honest to God, I Don’t Know If I Will Run’ [video]

Friday, September 4th, 2015

Vice President Joe Biden told a packed Conservative synagogue in Atlanta Thursday night that the biggest factor that will determine if runs for the White House is whether his family can handle it.

His speech was part an Obama-Biden blitz to convince Jews to back the nuclear deal with Iran, which now has enough backing in the Senate to defeat an opposition attempt to override a presidential veto if Congress rejects the deal.

The biggest question on everyone’s mind was not what Biden had to say about “ObamaDeal” but rather if he will run. He answered questions from the audience, including one about putting his hat in the ring, and said:

Honest to God answer is I just don’t know

The most relevant factor in my decision is whether I and my family have the emotional energy to run.

Some people might think that is not appropriate. But unless I can go to my party and the American people and say that I am able to devote my whole heart and my whole soul to this endeavor, it would not be appropriate.

And everybody talks about the other factors — the other people in the race, whether I can raise the money and whether I can put together an organization. That’s not the factor. The factor is, ‘Can I do it? Can my family undertake an arduous commitment that I would be proud to undertake under ordinary circumstances?’

His circumstances are far from ordinary. His son Beau Biden, who was considering running for governor of Delaware, died of brain cancer last May.

The Vice President mentioned a previous tragedy, the death of his first wife and daughter in an auto accident in 1972, in his speech at the Ahavat Achim synagogue. Biden said:

I know from previous experience after my wife and daughter … there’s no way to put a timetable to it.

“If I can reach that conclusion that we can do it in a fashion that would still make it viable, I would not hesitate to do it. But I have to be honest with you and everyone who’s come to me, I can’t look you straight in the eye and tell you I can do it. That’s as honest as I can be.

Considering unfavorable polls of Hillary Clinton when it comes to honesty, Biden is an appealing alternative to the former Secretary of State and to Bernie Sanders, whose popularity has soared in the polls.

Sanders’ success reflects a large sector of the population that is fed up with “establishment political,” but as the Democratic nominee for president. he would leave the Democratic party more vulnerable to a loss to the Republican candidate, assuming the GOP nominee will be someone other than Donald Trump.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

19 Non-Jewish Reasons the Stock Market Is Plunging

Monday, August 24th, 2015

Fear and greed move the stock market, and the fear has grown into paranoia.

If people are in a good mood, they read the news through rose-tinted glasses, and not even another Islamic State (ISIS) beheading of an American could scare them away from buying stocks.
The crash in the market in Shanghai set off fears that have been tucked away in the back of the minds of anyone who ventures to hear or see what is going on in the world.

It seems that the constant Obama administration’s propaganda that the Middle East will fall apart without a “two-state” nightmare is not driving people to sell stocks.

There are real fears out there, no matter how much the White House tries to camouflage them with President Barack Obama’s playing golf with Steph Curry and taking a popularity hitchhike on Jon Stewart’s coattails.

A poll conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research named the threat of terrorism and the Islamic State (ISIS) as the most worrisome foreign policy issues.

Next on the “worry list” is immigration.

Here are 17 other Americans’ fears that no longer are blinded by greed:

— A Congressional veto of the deal with Iran will cause Iran to become more militant and encourage it develop a nuclear weapon and encourage Hezbollah terrorist attacks on the shores of the United States.

— Congressional approval of the deal with Iran will pave the way for Iran to build a nuclear weapon and fund Hezbollah terrorist attacks on the shores of the United States.

— Donald Trump will become the Republican presidential nominee.

— Jeb Bush will become the Republican presidential nominee

— Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic presidential nominee.

— Bernie Sanders will be the Democratic presidential nominee.

— Joe Biden will be the Democratic presidential nominee.

— The Islamic State (ISIS) will behead another American.

— Mexican immigration will destroy America.

— Homosexual marriages will destroy America.

— The Supreme Court will destroy America.

— ‘Millennials” will be lucky if they get 50 percent of Social Security payments.

— Drug care will be non-affordable.

— Joe Biden will be the next U.S. president.

— Donald Trump will be elected president.

— Hillary Clinton will be elected president.

— Jeb Bush will be elected president.

— Bernie Sanders will be elected president.

What happened to the fear that the Arab-Israeli struggle endangers America’s security?

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Report: Israel Refusing US Invite to Joint Military Exercises

Friday, August 7th, 2015

(JNi.media) The first operational consequences of the bitter dispute between Israel and the White House on the Iran agreement have begun to pop their ugly heads, as Israel is refusing extensive US offers of military and security cooperation, IsraelDefense and Makor Rishon columnist Amir Rapaport reported.

At this point, Israel is refusing to participate in a massive joint training exercise with the US military, scheduled for 2016.

The exercise, code-named Juniper Cobra 2016, was expected to include a long list of cooperative activities, and to include the US-financed Israeli missile defense system, which is partially based on American capabilities.

Over the past few weeks, Rapaport says Israel, in an unprecedented manner, has been doubtful as to its willingness to participate—compared to previous times, when the IDF went out of its way to take part in joint exercises, and, in 2012, complained bitterly that it was being kept out of a key NATO summit meeting in Chicago because of Turkey’s objection.

Now, paradoxically, according to Rapapaort, the Americans are all too eager to cooperate with Israel, while the Israeli political leadership has decided that the IDF will not cooperate with the Americans.

“This has given rise to the absurd situation where the Americans are willing to offer us more than we want to receive,” Rapaport writes.

Last month, immediately following the signing of the Iran deal, US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter visited Israel to discuss a security compensation package the Americans were offering. But Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon politely declined. That was the first hint the Israelis considered the White House’s betrayal too fundamental to be paved over with dollar bills.

But the seeds of rancor were sown even earlier, according to Rapaport, when, during the 2014 Protective Edge operation in Gaza, the White House decided against sending Israel urgently needed supply of arms and ammunition which were vital to the IDF because of the unexpected length of the war (it ended up lasting 51 days).

That decision was nothing short of traumatic to the Israeli defense apparatus, states Rapaport, and that wound is yet to heal, even a year later.

One of the immediate results of that American military embargo (which extended to the UK, as well) was an Israeli decision to keep its ammunition production in local Israeli manufacturing plants, even when it is a project involving cooperation with the US, to prevent such an embargo from ever happening again.

Rapaport believes much depends on the outcome of the Iran deal vote—veto—override process in the US Congress. If the deal fails, recovery of the relationship between the Pentagon and the IDF will come sooner. Which means that, in typical Israeli fashion, this thing will remain unresolved until “after the holidays.”

JNi.Media

Kerry ‘Knows’ ObamaDeal Will Make the Middle East a Safer Place

Monday, August 3rd, 2015

Anyone who is sure about anything in the Middle East is talking through his hat, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry sports the most porous hat in the world.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has reassured the Gulf States he “knows” that the nuclear agreement with Iran will make the world a better place, and the Obama administration is being pressed to “prove” it on the terms of the Sunni oil-rich kingdoms.

They want billions of dollars in weapons, and Qatar dedicated much of Kerry’s visit to insist that the United States force Israel out of half of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

He began his Middle East tour, sans Israel, with talks in Egypt before moving on to Qatar. Despite White House spins to the contrary, the Gulf States are miserably unhappy with the agreement and are keeping their opposition under the surface while exploiting the opportunity to feed the military-industrial complex and shrink Israel.

Kerry said in Egypt:

There can be absolutely no question that if the Vienna plan is fully implemented, it will make Egypt and all the countries of this region safer than they otherwise would be or were.

The United States and Egypt recognize that Iran is engaged in destabilizing activities in the region — and that is why it is so important to ensure that Iran’s nuclear program remains wholly peaceful.

How does the man know that the deal will make the Middle East safer?

Because he says so, and that’s that.

There have been few people who ever have been able to predict what will happen in the Middle East. Condoleezza Rice, who was Secretary of State in the Bush administration, was “sure” that her move to force democratic elections on the Palestinian Authority would result in a resounding victory for Mahmoud Abbas.

She was one of the few who were shocked that Hamas won the elections.

Kerry’s predecessor Hillary Clinton, who might prove that President Barack Obama really is not the worst president possible, cheered Bashar al-Assad as a “reformer” weeks after the Arab Spring protests broke out in Syria.

President Obama was sure that getting rid of Hosni Mubarak, whose autocratic and undemocratic rule kept Egypt stable, would usher in a new wave of democracy.

He was so sure that he endorsed the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist party, which won the elections. One year later, President Obama enthusiastically backed the removal of Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi for a more “democratic regime” headed by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who is Mubarak Number 3.

And now Mr. Kerry is sure that the ObamaDeal the best thing for the Middle East ever since Islam.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/kerry-knows-obamadeal-will-make-the-middle-east-a-safer-place/2015/08/03/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: