Epic Twitter battle: State Department's @marieharf v. NY Times @SangerNYT
This has to be the first time in a long time that the media in the US has actually done its job.After Tuesday's New York Times story about Iran's increasing its nuclear fuel supply by 20% over the last 18 months, State Department spokesperson Marie Harf had it out with New York Times reporter and story co-author David Sanger over the story. Or at least Harf had it out - Sanger only tweeted once at the beginning. Harf's argument essentially comes down to this: It doesn't matter how much nuclear fuel Iran has until the deadline, when it will all magically disappear.
Yes, she really said that. Read her last tweet in the rant.
.@SangerNYT You can tweet all the ISIS reports you want - doesn't change the fact that main contentions in your story were wrong.
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
.@SangerNYT You write that "Western officials and experts cannot quite figure out why" Iran's stockpile is at this level - not true
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
.@SangerNYT You write that "The overall increase in Iran’s stockpile poses a major diplomatic and political challenge" - not true
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
.@SangerNYT You write that this partially undercuts our contention that the Iranian program has been “frozen” - not true
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
.@SangerNYT And you insinuate Iran is doing something it's not supposed to do under the JPOA or in violation of its obligations - not true
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
.@SangerNYT Bottom lines: We know exactly what's going on, Iran has agreed to reduce to 300kg in final deal, program frozen/complying w/JPOA
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
She's all in for defending Iran too, isn't she? Although she denies it....
.@davidfrum Not defending Iran, defending the JPOA we negotiated with Iran and making clear we've all been in compliance. V different things
— Marie Harf (@marieharf) June 3, 2015
I don't think anyone has alleged that anyone other than Iran has violated the JPOA....If they've lost the New York Times....
Labels: Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Marie Harf, New York Times, P 5+1
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 6:49 PM
4 Comments:
This is all a ברכה לבטלה. In the end Israel will have to take care of Iran. I suggest an EMP strike to shut down all electronics in the country, including their atomic program. Don't put IAF pilots at risk any more than necessary. This will assuage the world that Israel kills unnecessarily.
So this means that the Obama/Clinton/KhmerRouge Kerry JPOA, according to Harf, is a-okay with stockpile increase, as long as they ship it out (to who? Hezbollah in Mexico or Lebanon?) as the deal is signed, so that only 300 kg is in whatever Iranian storage the munchkins are allowed to see... Right, AIPAC? Just fine, right?
Marie Harf is under qualified to wear a paper hat.
Iran is already increasing harvest above the percentage agreed at effective at time of signing. However it doesn't take a genius to figure that Iran's stockpile will be at a much higher level now at signing than previously thought which should nullify tge deal and enact the "snap-back clause. ..which is a horrifying joke.
You don't make a deal with the devil-and Marie Harf, Obama and Kerry are doing his bidding. Pitifully frightful!
Post a Comment
<< Home