It's come to this: Israelis have less favorable view of Obama than do Iranians
President Hussin Obama's campaign to endear himself to Iranians is paying off. He is now
more unpopular in Israel than he is in Iran.
The poll, conducted by the World Independent Network of Market Research and Gallup International Association, asked residents of 65 countries to indicate whether they had a very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable opinion of each of 10 world leaders.
President Obama scored highest with a 59 percent favorable rating worldwide, followed by Merkel with 42 percent, British Prime Minister David Cameron with 37 percent, French President Francois Hollande with 35 percent and Russian President Vladimir Putin with 33 percent. Iranian President Hassan Rohani placed last at 19 percent, just behind Saudia Arabia's King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud with 20 percent.
Each leader was also given an unfavorable rating, as well as a net score comprised of the difference between the first two ratings. Obama had by far the best score worldwide with +30 percent, followed by Merkel and Cameron with +13 percent and +10 percent, respectively. Putin evoked strong emotions, being the third most unpopular leader with a net score of -10 percent, just behind King Salman (-11 percent) and Rohani (-13 percent).
Israelis clearly view Obama much less favorably than most people around the world, giving him a net score of -22 percent. Israel's net score for Obama was 61st in the world, one spot behind Iran, which gave him a -21 percent net rating.
Obama's net score in Israel placed him in between Putin (-20 percent) and China's Xi Jinping (-22 percent). In contrast, Israelis gave Merkel a +38 percent net score, far ahead of Cameron, who got +15 percent.
Yeah, we know, the feeling is mutual.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Gallup, Hassan Rohani, Iran
ICYMI: Kerry tells Jeffrey Goldberg 'If Congress rejects Iran sellout, Iran won't play role in Middle East peace'
From Jeffrey Goldberg's
interview with John Kerry, which I have
discussed previously.
Kerry also said that his chief Iranian interlocutor, the foreign
minister, Javad Zarif, and Zarif’s boss, the (relatively) reformist
president, Hassan Rouhani, would be in “serious trouble” at home if the
deal falls through. Zarif, Kerry told me, explicitly promised him that
Iran will engage with the United States and its Arab allies on a range
of regional issues, should Congress approve the deal. “Zarif
specifically said to me in the last two weeks, ‘If we get this finished,
I am now empowered to work with and talk to you about regional
issues.’” Kerry went on, “This is in Congress’s hands. If Congress says
no, Congress will shut that down, shut off that conversation, set this
back, and set in motion a series of inevitables about what would happen
with respect to Iranian behavior, and, by the way, the sanctions will be
over.”
You mean that if Congress says yes to the Iran sellout, Iran will want a seat at the table on the 'peace process,' and if Congress says no, Iran will stay away. Sounds to me like another reason to say no.
Labels: Hassan Rohani, Iran Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Jeffrey Goldberg, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Mohammad Javad Zarif, United States Congress
The leading financiers of Islamic terrorism
Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tx) has told the Washington Examiner that as a result of the Iranian nuclear sellout, President Hussein Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have become
the World's leading financiers of Islamic terrorism.
"If this deal goes through, the Obama administration, President
Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, will become the leading global
financiers of radical Islamic terrorism," said Cruz. He further
criticized the deal for lifting the ballistic missile embargo, claiming
it is tantamount to arming a theocratic regime that has pledged to
murder Americans.
"In the middle of negotiating this deal, the Ayatollah Khamenei led
chants of shouting 'death to America'," stated Cruz. The 2016 Republican
candidate went on to compare Obama to former President Jimmy Carter,
charging that Obama has abandoned American hostages in Iran.
...
"Barack Obama left them in a squalid Iranian hellhole," Cruz said.
"Four hostages, Barack Obama cannot even bring himself to utter their
names."
Cruz extended his criticism to Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton
and called on the media to ask her to say the names of the four
Americans being detained in Iran. "If she would be commander in chief of
this country, demonstrate leadership. Stand up and speak out," he said.
Cruz added that no conversation should have begun without the release
of the American hostages.
When asked about the likelihood of Congress stopping the deal, Cruz
said it is on the American people to engage their elected officials. But
he admitted that blocking the deal ultimately depends on Democrats.
Meanwhile, Iran seems
more likely than the United States to reject the deal.
The idea that solving the nuclear crisis would unlock a new Iran of economic riches and political moderation has been enthusiastically promoted
by the Rouhani administration and its supporters. This is good
political spin. But as a reflection of political reality it is seriously
flawed – for the simple reason that it conflates a process into a
single transformational moment; and perhaps more importantly, it fails
to account for the reality of contemporary Iran’s political landscape.
It is a landscape that has been sculpted by the Ahmadinejad years,
and in which the pragmatic presidency of his successor Rouhani stands as
an island in an ocean of hardline institutions. Hassan Rouhani has done
little to change this during his two years in power, in large part
because his strategy has been predicated on a successful conclusion of
the nuclear issue – gambling that popular support and economic necessity
will not only see the agreement through but release some political
capital to enact social and political reforms.
He is on firmer ground with the former – and while there continues to
be a popular clamour for change, it has been a long time since the
politics of the Islamic Republic has been dictated by the will of the
people.
Last week supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei decided to set the record
straight. This was in sum the pursuit of an arms control agreement, he
said – nothing more, nothing less, and certainly not a transformational
moment in the politics of the Islamic Republic.
If only they knew what the deal was.... What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Hillary Clinton, Iran Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, John Kerry, terror funding
What could go wrong?
As I am sure you are all aware, there is currently a meeting going on in Vienna, at the conclusion of which a deal will be announced that will make Iran a nuclear-armed state within ten years. How bad is this deal? Consider the following coming out of Vienna.
I hope that Hussein Obama and John FN Kerry are proud of their 'achievement.' Neville Chamberlain had nothing on them.
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, centrifuges, Hassan Rohani, human rights, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, John Kerry, Neville Chamberlain, nuclear weapons, P 5+1, uranium enrichment
Proof's in the pudding: 'If you treat them with respect, they will moderate'
For seven years, Barack Hussein Obama has been telling us that if we
treat Iran with respect, they will moderate. Has it worked?
You be the judge.
Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president of Iran and an ally
of current President Hassan Rouhani, called for the destruction of
Israel and described the country as “alien” and “temporary,” according
to a report
Monday in Iran’s official IRNA news agency. Rafsanjani, who heads the
powerful Expediency Council, which advises Iran’s Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, made the comments in an interview with a
Hezbollah-affiliated news outlet.
In response to a question why the Zionist regime has done
its best to prevent the path for reaching a nuclear agreement between
Iran and the West, Ayatollah Rafsanjani said that even Tel Aviv knows
well that Iran is not after acquiring nuclear weapons.
‘By doing so the Zionist wish to keep Iran engaged in problems
permanently, knowing that the Islamic Republic’s political, economic,
cultural and propagation status will all improve after such an
agreement,’ he said.
Asked about the future of the Palestinian nation, Rafsanjani said
that he still believes that eventually one day the forged and temporary
Israeli entity, which is an alien existence forged into the body of a
nation and a region be wiped off the map.
Rafsanjani, who along with Rouhani is often characterized as a
moderate, appears to associate Israel’s destruction with the completion
of the nuclear deal.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iranian nuclear threat, myth of moderate Islam, nuclear weapons, P 5+1
Why are these men smiling?
Why are Hassan Rohani and Ayatollah Ali Khameni smiling? Because Barack Hussein Obama and his Euroweenie partners are willing to
provide them with nuclear reactors and equipment.
Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
feels confident enough, only a few days before June 30 (the deadline
for a final-status nuclear deal with world powers), to thumb his nose at
the international community, including the American government, and
declare Iran's three noes: no to freezing its nuclear program, no to
international oversight at its nuclear facilities, no to a phased
lifting of sanctions (as proposed by the French). In other words,
Khamenei is telling the world: Dear superpowers -- bite me.
Meanwhile, almost simultaneously, we have
received an Associated Press report from Vienna that the U.S. and its
partners conducting the negotiations with Iran are prepared -- for the
sake of reaching a deal -- to even provide the Iranians with advanced
nuclear reactors and equipment. This isn't a joke.
It's possible, perhaps, to imagine Khamenei
rejecting this generous offer outright because the Americans aren't also
including ballistic missiles in the package. If you're going to be
generous, then you might as well go all the way.
Truth be told, this entire business to this
point seems quite like a joke. The problem is that it's coming at our
expense. And it's also not that funny.
...
In November 2013, as a
reminder, we were just several days before the interim agreement. I
remember how the Iranian and Western delegations leaked information
about the many difficulties in the negotiations, but that in the end, in
the middle of the night, the deal was born (how shocking). Eventually,
we saw virtually the same scenario unfold in Lausanne this past March --
the numerous problems were made public, the deadline was extended by a
few days, and finally on April 2 we received the framework deal.
We can assume that in the coming days we will
get to see "the best show in town," at the end of which, in contrast to
the previous rounds, we can expect a final status deal with an Iran that
is not only slated to become a nuclear power but a stabilizing force in
our crumbling Middle East.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, nuclear weapons, P 5+1
Iran's 'slightly different' nuclear framework
Iran has released its own 'fact sheet' on what was agreed upon at Lausanne last month. Unsurprisingly, it's
slightly different than the US version.
“The [Iranian] fact sheet urges operation of 10,000 centrifuge machines
at Natanz and Fordow, a maximum five-year-long duration for the deal
and for Iran’s nuclear limitations, [and] replacement of the current
centrifuges with the latest generation of home-made centrifuge machines
at the end of the five-year period,” the Fars News Agency reported on
Wednesday.
“The Iranian parliament fact sheet for a revision to
the Lausanne agreement came after the US released a fact sheet
different from the joint statement issued by Iran’s Foreign Minister
Mohammad Javad Zarif and Federica Mogherini, the high representative of
the European Union for foreign affairs,” the Iranian version said.
According
to the American document, Tehran agreed to reduce the number of
installed uranium enrichment centrifuges it has to 6,104 from 19,000,
and for 10 years will only operate 5,060 under the future final
agreement with the six powers.
The Iranian fact sheet also said
that once the final agreement is signed, there must be an immediate end
to all US and EU sanctions and to UN Security Council resolutions.
However,
the US fact sheet says that Iran would only gradually receive relief
from US and European Union sanctions as it demonstrates compliance with
the future agreement.
The US version also states that UN
Security Council resolutions on Iran’s nuclear file would only be lifted
after Iran has fully addressed all nuclear concerns.
Moreover,
in place of the US claim that Iran agreed to limit its uranium
enrichment to 3.67 percent for 15 years, the Iranian fact sheet says
that after only five years, enrichment would continue at below 5%.
What could be worse than a bad agreement? A bad agreement that's an ongoing work in which no one can agree on what was agreed.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, P 5+1, uranium enrichment
'Just an arms control agreement'
After starting with allegedly high aspirations for real change in Iran, Eli Lake and Josh Rogin report that the Obama administration is asking that any deal it reaches with Iran be judged as '
just an arms control agreement.'
"The only consideration driving what is part of any comprehensive
agreement with Iran is how we can get to a one-year breakout time and
cut off the four pathways for Iran to get enough material for a nuclear
weapon, period," said State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf. "And if
we reach an agreement, that will be the basis upon which people should
judge it -- on the technical merits of it, not on anything else."
When asked if the State Department would argue the benefits of
any deal in part by saying it would help Iran's president, Hassan
Rouhani, against his country's hard-liners and therefore promote
reforms, Harf said: "This is absolutely ridiculous."
This is a long way from the grand aspirational sentiments expressed
by President Barack Obama back in 2009, when he announced his intention
to engage Iran. Obama, speaking on the Persian new year celebration of
Nowruz, said he wanted "the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its
rightful place in the community of nations."
Back then, many advocates for engagement argued that the nuclear deal could unlock the key to moderating Iran's rogue behavior.
Meanwhile, Obama shills like Joe Cirincione and Gary Samore are arguing that the lifting of sanctions - which will be the currency with which the West pays for any deal - could itself magically bring about reform. There's no reason to believe that will happen and there are plenty of reasons to believe that it won't.
"A nuclear agreement that lifts sanctions and reduces tensions with
Iran will advantage the moderates and make it more likely that in the
period of the agreement Iran will become a status quo power and be less
interested in developing nuclear weapons," Samore told us.
He acknowledged that there was no guarantee of such changes, but said
the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon was greater in the absence
of a deal than with one.
...
This echoes the way Obama argued efforts to ease the embargo on Cuba
gave the U.S. more leverage to push for democracy inside the island.
A similar line of thinking was promoted in the 1990s, when the U.S.
struck a deal with North Korea to put severe limits on its nuclear
program in exchange for sanctions relief. Of course, Pyongyang only
increased its internal repression and nuclear ambitions.
Cirincione insisted that Iran is different than North Korea because
it is a more diverse and vibrant society with a reform movement that
enjoys some level of public tolerance. He also said that both the
hard-liners and the reformers there believe that a nuclear deal with the
West could pave the way for greater social and political reforms.
“A nuclear deal is going to be greeted as near-euphoria for the
Iranian people because they see it as a beginning of the reforms,” he
said. Then he warned: “Just because people go out on the streets and
protest, that doesn’t mean good things will happen. I mean, look at
Egypt.”
Iran's pro-democracy green movement is today in shambles. Its two
leaders -- Mehdi Karroubi and Mir Hossein Mousavi -- have been under
house arrest since 2010, despite promises from Rouhani during his
electoral campaign in 2013 to free dissidents.
I read somewhere - I cannot recall where - that there was a disagreement between US and Israeli intelligence over how Iran could be stopped, and Israeli intelligence argued that the only way Iran could be stopped would be if there was real political reform. Now that seems even less likely than ever.
What could go wrong?
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iran, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, P 5+1
The 'Spirit of Geneva'
For months now, President Obama has been appealing to Congress not to impose additional sanctions on Iran because it would spoil the 'Spirit of Geneva.' Well, just what is the 'Spirit of Geneva'? This will give you some idea.
On Wednesday morning, while US Secretary of State John Kerry was meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, Iranian President Rohani announced that
Iran will build two more nuclear power plants. For 'peaceful' purposes, of course.
Iran's
President Hassan Rouhani said the country would build two more nuclear
plants in the southern city of Bushehr in line with the peaceful use of
nuclear energy.
The president made the remarks on Tuesday while visiting the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, Press TV reported.
"The Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant is different from the power plants of
other countries since this power plant is the symbol of a nation's
resistance," he said.
"The construction of this power plant and
making it operational showed the world that should a nation have a will
to attain a goal, it would take steps in that direction, stand up for
its rights and attain its goal."
The Iranian chief executive
said the plant is an example that shows Iran "is only after peaceful use
of nuclear energy and electricity production.
A bit later in the day, while the meetings in Geneva were still going on, Iran announced that it would place a Washington Post reporter whom it has been holding for months
on trial for undisclosed crimes.
A Washington Post journalist detained in Iran
for months has been indicted and will stand trial, Iran's state news
agency reported Wednesday, without elaborating on what charges he faced.
The report by the official IRNA news agency came the same day as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry
met with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif before talks
with world powers resume over the Islamic Republic's contested nuclear
program.
It wasn't immediately clear if the two events were connected, though
Zarif earlier said he hoped the case against reporter Jason Rezaian
could be "resolved."
"We will have to wait for the judiciary to move forward, but we will try
to provide all the humanitarian assistance that we could," Zarif told
journalists in Geneva. "We hope that this issue could be resolved but
unfortunately there are judicial issues involved which the judiciary has
to deal with."
IRNA quoted Tehran prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dowlatabadi saying Rezaian,
the newspaper's bureau chief in Tehran since 2012, had been indicted. He
was previously charged last month, but the bill of indictment clears
the way for his trial.
Rezaian, an Iranian-American who holds dual citizenship, has been held
since July 22. The IRNA report did not disclose what charges he faces.
However, the report says he will stand trial in Iran's Revolutionary
Court, which mostly hears cases involving security offenses.
Given all this 'spirit,' it's not too surprising that Congress is about to defy the Obama administration and
take up sanctions.
The US House of Representatives has begun working on its own Iran
sanctions bill rather than simply agreeing to pass whatever the Senate
comes up with, Al-Monitor has learned.
...
"We feel very strongly that the House needs to play an important
role, not just rubber-stamp whatever the Senate decides to do," the top
Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs
panel, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., told Al-Monitor. "So we're going to
put our heads together [with Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif.] and see what's
the best way to proceed."
The two lawmakers are expected to hunker down next week to decide on a
strategy for moving forward, Engel said. Separately, Royce told
Al-Monitor that he was planning to sit down Jan. 15 with Senate Foreign
Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., for an update on the
Senate strategy.
...
The Senate bill will largely replicate 2013 legislation
from Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., that would
trigger new sanctions on Iran's energy sector if the country doesn't
agree to a nuclear deal that's acceptable to Congress. The two senators
are said to be tweaking their legislation, which never came up for a
vote while Democrats controlled the Senate, to try to sign up a
veto-proof majority of 67 senators before unveiling it.
In a sign of how quickly things are moving, the Senate Banking Committee,
which would have jurisdiction over such legislation, has announced a
hearing Jan. 20 on the "perspectives on the strategic necessity of Iran
sanctions."
Menendez and Kirk hope to get most of the remaining 10 Democrats who
originally co-sponsored their bill back on board as well as Senate
Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., according to sources close to the
issue. One potential change could be a weakening of the bill's ban on uranium enrichment,
those sources say; the 2013 version would have prevented President
Barack Obama from suspending the bill's new sanctions unless he
certified that Iran had agreed to a deal that would "dismantle Iran's
illicit nuclear infrastructure, including enrichment and reprocessing
capabilities and facilities."
...
"I believe that sanctions have brought Iran to the bargaining table,"
Engel told Al-Monitor. "I respect and understand the White House arguing
that sanctions — even triggered sanctions — could be counterproductive
or even harmful. That's their judgment. It's not necessarily mine."
Read the whole thing. If there ever was a 'Spirit of Geneva,' it's gone.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Eliot Engel, Hassan Rohani, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, John Kerry, Mark Kirk, Mohammad Javad Zarif, P 5+1, Robert Menendez, United States Congress
Laughing all the way to the bank: Guess what's next with Iran
The US State Department is denying it, but who is more trustworthy these days - the State Department or the 'Islamic Republic of Iran.' If you believe the Iranians, they're sitting in Baku right now (the capital of nearby Azerbaijan)
negotiating diplomatic relations with the United States.
As the US and world powers approach a November 24 deadline
on nuclear talks with Iran, governmental sources in the Islamic regime
have reported that they are conducting secret talks with America about
renewing diplomatic ties for the first time in 35 years.
Iranian government advisers spoke to the British The Times,
and said secret talks with American officials have centered around the
possibility of opening a US trade office in the Iranian capital of
Tehran if a nuclear deal is reached.
Those talks are to continue this week, and according to the officials
will take place in the Azerbaijani capital of Baku, located just north
of Iran on the Caspian Sea.
They added that the Iranian delegation in the covert talks is led by
Mohammad Reza Sabzalipour, head of Iran's global trade bureau.
...
A source in the US State Department cited by the paper denied the reports.
So when Obama
pardons the turkey this year, he'll pardon Iran? I really don't care if Obama gets egg on his face, but I do care if he leaves egg on the face of the entire West.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iranian nuclear threat
Heh....
His advisers can't seem to stop laughing.... all the way to the bank.....
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani
Stonewall Rohani laughing all the way to the bank
Now that the international sanctions regime against Iran is essentially gone (thank you President Hussein Obama), the IAEA reports that
Iran is refusing to answer questions regarding its nuclear weapons program.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director Yukiya Amano
revealed last Friday that Iran is refusing to answer questions about
whether or not its nuclear program has included activities to build a
nuclear bomb.
Amano said at the Brookings Institute
in Washington DC that his agency is waiting for information on
"possible military dimensions," which Iranian President Hassan Rouhani
has promised to deliver - and never gotten around to doing.
"What is needed now is action," said Amano, enumerating a list
of around a dozen issues that Iran has refused to elaborate on for
years, reports the New York Times.
"We cannot provide assurance that all material is for peaceful
purposes," admitted the IAEA head. "The international community still
has its doubts - it still wants clarification. That inquiry process will
depend on Iran's level of cooperation."
...
Amano continued, saying "Iran has a case to answer. I talked to
President Rouhani, Iran is willing to accelerate the process of the
clarification of the...issue. For now the progress is limited."
He added that limited funds and increased demand for their
service has the IAEA stretched thin, monitoring via satellite imagery
from Vienna. The organization considers "state capabilities as a whole rather than focusing on individual facilities," Amano said.
An expert on the issue who asked for anonymity told International Business Times that
the problem is with IAEA's resources, as only three people from the
agency are investigating the military aspects of Iran's nuclear program.
The 'deadline' for reaching a deal with Iran is November 24. What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Hassan Rohani, IAEA, Iranian nuclear threat, nuclear weapons, Yukia Amano
The United States' newest ally
It's come to this: The United States under Obama is allying itself with the Iranian mullahcracy to act against ISIS, because... after all...
the anti-Bush can never act alone.
According to the sources, Khamenei gave the orders to General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the elite Quds force that is a special operations unit of the Revolutionary Guards for international missions.
Soleimani was tasked with coordinating the moves with US, Iraqi and
Kurdish forces, even though Iran has until now opposed US military
involvement in Iraq. Recently he has been active helping Shi'ite
militias strengthen Baghdad against the IS threat.
On Monday the northern Iraqi city of Amerli was captured by US and
Iraqi forces, with pictures on the internet showing Soleimani in
northern Iraq. BBC speculates this may mean the Iranian cooperation may have already begun.
While Khamenei has previously opposed US action in Iraq, US
airstrikes have been proving effective in the country; recent airstrikes
either by US or US-trained Iraqi forces on Thursday took out 18 IS leaders in Iraq, including an American jihadist leader.
Also on Thursday, airstrikes in Syria took out a top aide to IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi along with a senior IS military commander, Abu Alaa al-Iraqi.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iran, Iranian nuclear threat, Iraq, ISIS
'Progress' in Iran nuke talks
'Moderate' Iranian President Hassan Rohani says that his country
will not retreat one iota from its nuclear program.
Iran will continue to develop its nuclear program and refuses to “retreat even an iota,” the country’s president, Hassan Rouhani, said May 11.
“All westerners, easterners and the (Group) 5+1 (six
world powers engaged in nuclear talks with Iran) should know that we
will not retreat a single step in the field of the nuclear energy,”
President Hassan Rouhani said in a ceremony held on Sunday in Tehran to
unveil three new achievements of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran
(AEOI).
As usual, Rouhani claimed his country’s nuclear program was for peaceful purposes, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
Sounds like they're really making progress in those talks, doesn't it? Wait, it gets worse.
Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi bragged recently that his experts could reverse key nuclear concessions in a matter of weeks.
“Oxidizing 5% uranium does not mean the elimination of
uranium… It is a mistake to say that we lose our reserves by oxidizing
uranium…We can transform our 5% uranium to 20% within two to three weeks
if needed.”
Iran is not developing its nuclear program in isolation over the last
24 hours the country’s military leaders announced new developments in
their respective domains.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Hassan Rohani, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, P 5+1
Iran bans 'Zionist' WhatsApp
I have to be honest with you and to tell you that to me WhatsApp symbolizes everything that's wrong with our society today in which much of our contact is impersonal and remote. Any adult who has tried talking to a teenager (and that applies until age 30) who is 'paying attention' while using WhatsApp on their smart phone knows exactly what I mean. Still, only Iran could have called it a '
Zionist conspiracy.'
The Iranian government has announced a ban on the popular worldwide
messaging application WhatsApp, which was recently purchased by Facebook
for $19 billion. It said that the decision was reached because WhatsApp
was bought “by the Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who is an American
Zionist.”
(Tom Gross adds: In fact there is no indication that
Zuckerberg is a Zionist, and WhatsApp was purchased from its founder,
the Ukrainian-born Jew Jan Koum, who said in interview earlier this year
that he fled anti-Semitism in Ukraine before settling in America and
going on to found WhatsApp.)
The announcement was made by Iran’s Committee on Internet Crimes,
which hinted that other social media projects, including Viber, Tango,
Instagram and Facebook, may soon be shut down in Iran.
One Iranian blogger, speaking anonymously, told Fox News that “The
Revolutionary Guard sees these social sites as a major threat because
there’s an appeal for young people and the government worries about the
exchange of information.”
Thirteen government officials sit on the committee that polices
internet users, six of whom are also members of Iranian President Hassan
Rouhani’s cabinet.
Keep telling us how Rohani is a 'moderate'....
Labels: Facebook, Hassan Rohani, Mark Zuckerberg
No wonder Obama and Rohani get along so well: The Iranian Mooch
It's no wonder that Hassan Rohani and Barack Hussein Obama get along so well. Aside from their mutual contempt for Israel, it seems that Rohani is married to an
Iranian version of Mooch Obama.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani came in for criticism from opponents
on Tuesday for a "lavish ball" thrown by his wife, Sahebeh Arabi.
The "ball" was held on Sunday on Women's Day,
which in Iran is set to the birthday of Mohammed's daughter Fatima. It
was held in a palace of the deposed Mohammad Reza Shah in upscale
northern Tehran, reports Reuters.
The supposedly lavish festivities were slammed by conservative
members of Iran's parliament, at least 11 of whom have signed a petition
condemning Rouhani over the party.
"Can one preach austerity and financial sacrifice and yet throw a
lavish party on the public coffers?" remarked one of the irked Iranian
parliamentarians, noting on the financial situation caused by world
sanctions on Iran's nuclear program.
The "lavish ball" was viewed as particularly hypocritical given that
Rouhani's government is expected to announce price hikes on Thursday, in
a massive cutback of government subsidies for essential goods.
The 'parliamentarians' sound just like the Republican party slamming Mooch's trips abroad... but let's not go there. Rohani's reaction sounds even more like Obama's. Just substitute 'vacation in China' for 'party,' 'event' and 'gathering.'
For his part, Rouhani denied the allegations, saying "it is
most shocking and regrettable that even a pure innocent gathering cannot
escape an orchestrated chorus of gossip, slander and
politically-motivated lies filling the air."
"All Islamic proscriptions
were observed in this event ... women turned out in traditional folk
dress ... only a few little girls capered and rejoiced," the statement
added, in an attempt to play down impressions of a lavish
foreign-influenced party.
Maybe the Americans should send Mooch to Iran for a couple of weeks. I wonder whether it's
on her map. Or maybe we can introduce Rohani to that
cute blonde Prime Minister of Denmark. Hmmm.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iran, Michelle Obama
Obama signs bill barring Iranian terrorist from US, says he won't enforce it
Somehow, the
JPost missed the most important part of the story.
On Friday, President Hussein Obama signed into law a bill proposed by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tx) that would prevent Iran from sending one of the former kidnappers at the US Embassy in Tehran to the US as ambassador to the United Nations. But Obama also announced that
he would never enforce the law.
Obama decided to treat the law as mere
advice. "Acts of espionage and terrorism against the United States and
our allies are unquestionably problems of the utmost gravity, and I
share the Congress's concern that individuals who have engaged in such
activity may use the cover of diplomacy to gain access to our Nation,"
Obama said in his signing statement.
"Nevertheless, as President [George H.W.] Bush
also observed, "curtailing by statute my constitutional discretion to
receive or reject ambassadors is neither a permissible nor a practical
solution." I shall therefore continue to treat section 407, as
originally enacted and as amended by S. 2195, as advisory in
circumstances in which it would interfere with the exercise of this
discretion."
Obama frequently criticized President George W. Bush for such
signing statements during his 2008 campaign. “Congress's job is to pass
legislation," he said, as The Daily Beast recalled. "The president can veto it or he can sign it.”
“It is unconscionable that, in the name of international diplomatic
protocol, the United States would be forced to host a foreign national
who showed a brutal disregard for the status of our diplomats when they
were stationed in his country,” Cruz said when he introduced the bill.
The legislation was directed at
Hamid Abutalebi, whom Iranian President Hassan Rouhani tapped as U.N.
ambassador, because of his alleged role in the 1979 student takeover of
the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, in which 52 Americans were held hostage for
444 days. Abutalebi insists his role was limited to translation and
negotiation.
Iran has said it will not withdraw his name, and has asked the U.N. to investigate the U.S. visa denial.
Here's betting that Abutalebi will be admitted to the United States by the time the General Assembly rolls around at the end of September.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Hassan Rohani, Iran, Iranian hostage crisis, Ted Cruz, United Nations
'Moderate' Rohani appoints hostage taker as UN ambassador
'Moderate' Iranian leader Hassan Rohani has appointed Hamid Aboutalebi, a 1979 hostage taker at the United States embassy in Tehran, as
Iran's ambassador to the United Nations.
The Iranian government has applied for a U.S. visa for
Hamid Aboutalebi, Iran’s former ambassador to Belgium and Italy,
who was a member of the Muslim Students Following the Imam’s
Line, a group of radical students that seized the U.S. embassy
on Nov. 4, 1979. Imam was an honorific used for Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution.
Relations between the Islamic Republic and the U.S. and its
allies are beginning to emerge from the deep freeze that began
when the self-proclaimed Iranian students overrun the embassy
and took the hostages. The State Department hasn’t responded to
the visa application, according to an Iranian diplomat.
A controversy over Aboutalebi’s appointment could spark
demands on Capitol Hill and beyond during this congressional
election year for the Obama administration to take the unusual
step of denying a visa to an official posted to the UN. It also
could hamper progress toward a comprehensive agreement to curb
Iran’s nuclear program, which the U.S. and five other world
powers are seeking to negotiate with Iran by July 20.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani chose Aboutalebi to serve
at the UN, which is headquartered in New York City on
international, soil after the interim nuclear deal was forged
last Nov. 24.
...
Aboutalebi has said he didn’t take part in the initial
occupation of the embassy, and acted as translator and
negotiator, according to an interview he gave to the
Khabaronline news website in Iran.
“On a few other occasions, when they needed to translate
something in relation with their contacts with other countries,
I translated their material into English or French,” Aboutalebi
said, according to Khabaronline. “I did the translation during
a press conference when the female and black staffers of the
embassy were released, and it was purely based on humanitarian
motivations.”
He referred to the release of some embassy staff members
during the first few weeks of the crisis in November 1979.
...
Although Aboutalebi downplays his involvement, his
photograph is displayed on Taskhir, the website of the Muslim
Students Following the Imam’s Line. Taskhir can mean both
capture and occupation in Persian.
According to Mohammad Hashemi, one of the students who led
the occupation of the embassy, Iran’s revolutionary government
sent Aboutalebi and Abbas Abdi, another architect of the
occupation, as emissaries to Algiers. The Algerian capital at
that time was a mecca of third-world liberation movements,
including the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Hamid Babaei, a spokesman for the Iran’s UN Mission in New
York, declined to comment.
I wish it were otherwise, but I can't see Hussein Obama denying a visa to an Iranian diplomat. Anyone disagree?
Labels: Hassan Rohani, Iran, Iranian hostage crisis, United Nations
So whom did you dress up as this year for Purim?
It's all over. Purim is done. Whom did you dress up as this year for Purim? Here's how some 'world leaders' dressed.
Heh (Hat Tip:
Jack W).
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Catherine Ashton, Hassan Rohani, John Kerry, Vladimir Putin
Rohani called for destruction of America in 2013 - What's it going to take to stop Iran from going nuclear
Here's a new advertisement to stop Iran from going nuclear - notice the striking statement from Iran's new 'moderate' President, Hassan Rohani, and especially its date.
Let's go to the videotape.
Labels: Hassan Rohani, Iranian nuclear threat
