Iran has 'penetrated' the Obama Administration

[vector7]

Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Report: Iran has assembled network of lobbyists that has 'penetrated' administration

WASHINGTON — The number of significant pro-Iran lobbyists has grown and key players have gained access to the new administration of President Barak Obama, a report said.

The Center for Security Policy said veteran Iranian lobbyists, several of them former government officials, have been granted access to the Obama administration.

"A complex network of individuals and organizations with ties to the clerical regime in Teheran is pressing forward in seeming synchrony to influence the new U.S. administration's policy towards the Islamic republic of Iran," the report, titled "Rise of the Iran Lobby," said.

"Spearheaded by a de facto partnership between the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC), the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other organizations serving as mouthpieces for the mullahs' party line, the network includes well-known American diplomats, congressional representatives, figures from academia and the think tank world."

[vector7]

March 20, 2009
Obama's Message to Iran

The President's Message to the Iranian People (video)

Text of a videotaped message from President Barack Obama in celebration of Nowruz. In his message, the president speaks directly to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The video of his remarks will include a subtitled Farsi translation. Below is the embargoed text of the video, as well as background on Nowruz and the goal of the President's message.

The video will be available at the following link: www.whitehouse.gov/Nowruz

THE PRESIDENT: Today I want to extend my very best wishes to all who are celebrating Nowruz around the world.

This holiday is both an ancient ritual and a moment of renewal, and I hope that you enjoy this special time of year with friends and family.

In particular, I would like to speak directly to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Nowruz is just one part of your great and celebrated culture. Over many centuries your art, your music, literature and innovation have made the world a better and more beautiful place.
Here in the United States our own communities have been enhanced by the contributions of Iranian Americans. We know that you are a great civilization, and your accomplishments have earned the respect of the United States and the world.

For nearly three decades relations between our nations have been strained. But at this holiday we are reminded of the common humanity that binds us together. Indeed, you will be celebrating your New Year in much the same way that we Americans mark our holidays -- by gathering with friends and family, exchanging gifts and stories, and looking to the future with a renewed sense of hope.

Within these celebrations lies the promise of a new day, the promise of opportunity for our children, security for our families, progress for our communities, and peace between nations. Those are shared hopes, those are common dreams.

So in this season of new beginnings I would like to speak clearly to Iran's leaders. We have serious differences that have grown over time. My administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us, and to pursuing constructive ties among the United States, Iran and the international community. This process will not be advanced by threats. We seek instead engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect.

You, too, have a choice. The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right -- but it comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization. And the measure of that greatness is not the capacity to destroy, it is your demonstrated ability to build and create.

So on the occasion of your New Year, I want you, the people and leaders of Iran, to understand the future that we seek. It's a future with renewed exchanges among our people, and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce. It's a future where the old divisions are overcome, where you and all of your neighbors and the wider world can live in greater security and greater peace.

I know that this won't be reached easily. There are those who insist that we be defined by our differences. But let us remember the words that were written by the poet Saadi, so many years ago: "The children of Adam are limbs to each other, having been created of one essence."

With the coming of a new season, we're reminded of this precious humanity that we all share. And we can once again call upon this spirit as we seek the promise of a new beginning.

Thank you, and Eid-eh Shoma Mobarak.

[Malsua]

We're doomed. They infiltrated alright....right at the top.

[vector7]

Barack Obama calls for 'new beginning' with Iran

Barack Obama, the US President, has called for a “new beginning” of "honest" relations with Iran in a video released on YouTube.

Video:

By Mark Coleman in Los Angeles
Last Updated: 4:47PM GMT 20 Mar 2009

In a dramatic reversal of White House policy, the president announced that America was determined to pursue “constructive ties” with its former arch enemy.

He pledged that Tehran could take its “rightful place” in the world if it renounced terror in favour of peace.

Related Articles

• Obama makes 'special Olympics' gaffe on Jay Leno Show
• Barack Obama appears on Jay Leno
• Iran in swift response to Obama video pledge
• Michelle Obama digs vegetable patch at White House
• Barack Obama appeals to Iranians for 'new day' in relations with US in video message
• Syria will be first rogue state to get Barack Obama charm offensive

The two nations have had no diplomatic ties for 28 years.

George W Bush, Mr Obama's predecessor, famously banded Iran within a so-called “Axis of Evil”, along with Syria and North Korea.

Mr Obama said: My administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us, and to pursing constructive ties among the United States, Iran and the international community.”
He added: “For nearly three decades relations between our nations have been strained.

“But at this holiday we are reminded of the common humanity that binds us together.

“Indeed, you will be celebrating your new year in much the same way that we Americans mark our holidays – by gathering with friends and family; exchanging gifts and stories, and looking to the future with a renewed sense of hope.”

Mr Obama’s comments, timed to coincide with the start of Nowruz, the Iranian New Year, are due to air today on various Middle East networks carrying English and Farsi subtitles. The format of the message suggests it is an attempt to reach the Iranian people directly.

The three and a half minute video serves as vivid proof that Obama’s administration sees Iran as a pivotal player in many of America’s most delicate issues.

These include dealing with a resurgent Taliban; disbanding the US military from Iraq, as well as addressing Israeli-Arab tension in the Middle East.

Describing the Nowruz celebrations a time of “new beginnings”, Mr Obama announced his intention “to speak clearly to Iran’s leaders” to enforce a new era of “engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect.”

The president cautioned that such a gesture, however, “comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization.”

Mr Obama added: “The measure of greatness is not the capacity to destroy; it is your demonstrated ability to build and create.”

[vector7]

We're doomed. They infiltrated alright....right at the top.

Did you check out the latest developments between Russia and China on page 42 in the Frantic Day as Banks Fall thread? Bad, VERY BAD developments for this nation.

[vector7]

MARCH 21, 2009
Iran's Axis of Nuclear Evil

By JOHN BOLTON

While President Obama's unanticipated Nowruz holiday greeting to Iran generated considerable press attention, his video wasn't really this week's big news related to the Islamic Republic. Far more important was that a senior defector -- Iran's former Deputy Minister of Defense Ali Reza Asghari -- disclosed Tehran's financing of Syria's nuclear weapons program. That program's centerpiece was a North Korean nuclear reactor in Syria. Israel destroyed it in September 2007.

At this point, it is impossible to ignore Iran's active efforts to expand, improve and conceal its nuclear weapons program in Syria while it pretends to "negotiate" with Britain, France and Germany (the "EU-3"). No amount of video messages will change this reality. The question is whether this new information about Iran will sink in, or if Washington will continue to turn a blind eye toward Iran's nuclear deceptions.

That the Pyongyang-Damascus-Tehran nuclear axis went undetected and unacknowledged for so long is an intelligence failure of the highest magnitude. It represents a plain unwillingness to allow hard truths to overcome well-entrenched policy views disguised as intelligence findings.

Key elements of our intelligence community (IC) fought against the idea of a Syrian nuclear program for years. In mid-2003, I had a bitter struggle with several IC agencies -- news of which was leaked to the press -- concerning my testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the Syrian program. Then Sen. Joe Biden made the Syria testimony an issue in my 2005 confirmation battle to become ambassador to the United Nations, alleging that I had tried to hype concern about Syria's nuclear intentions. (In fact, my testimony, in both its classified and unclassified versions, was far more anodyne than the facts warranted.)

Key IC agencies made two arguments in 2003 against the possibility of a clandestine Syrian nuclear weapons program. First, they argued that Syria lacked the scientific and technological capabilities to sustain such a program. Second, they said that Syria did not have the necessary economic resources to fund a program.

These assertions were not based on highly classified intelligence. Instead, they were personal views that some IC members developed based on public information. The intelligence that did exist -- which I thought warranted close observation of Syria, at a minimum -- the IC discounted as inconsistent with its fixed opinions. In short, theirs was not an intelligence conclusion, but a policy view presented under the guise of intelligence.

How wrong they were.

As for Syria's technical expertise, North Korea obviously had the scientific and technological ability to construct the reactor, which was essentially a clone of the North's own at Yongbyon. Moreover, it is entirely possible that Syria's nuclear program -- undertaken with Pyongyang's assistance -- is even more extensive. We will certainly never know from Syria directly, since Damascus continues to deny it has any nuclear program whatever. It's also stonewalling investigation efforts by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

As for Syria's ability to finance a nuclear program, Iran could easily supply whatever Syria might need -- even in a time of fluctuating oil prices. Moreover, given Iran's hegemony over Syria, it is impossible to believe Syria would ever undertake extensive nuclear cooperation with North Korea without Iran's acquiescence. Iran was likely an active partner in a three-way joint venture on the reactor, supplying key financial support and its own share of scientific knowledge.

Cooperation on ballistic missile programs between Pyongyang and Tehran is longstanding and well-advanced, and thereby forms a basis of trust for nuclear cooperation. Moreover, both Iran and North Korea share a common incentive: to conceal illicit nuclear weapons programs from international scrutiny. What better way to hide such programs than to conduct them in a third country where no one is looking?

Uncovering the North Korean reactor in Syria was a grave inconvenience for the Bush administration. It enormously complicated both the failing six-party talks on North Korea and the EU-3's diplomatic efforts with Iran, which Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice so actively supported.

Mr. Asghari's revelations about Iranian financing of Syria's nuclear program -- if borne out -- will have precisely the same negative impact on Obama administration policies, since they track Mr. Bush's so closely. In fact, the two administrations' approaches differ only to the extent that Mr. Obama is poised to pursue policies, like face-to-face negotiations with Iran, that the second term Bush State Department wanted to do, but faced too much internal dissonance to implement.

The Nowruz video reflects the dominant view within the Obama administration that its "open hand" will be reciprocated. It's likely Iran will respond affirmatively to the near-plaintive administration request to "engage."

And why not? Such dialogue allows Iran to conceal its true intentions and activities under the camouflage of negotiations, just as it has done for the past six years with the EU-3. What's more, Iran will see it as confirmation of U.S. weakness and evidence that its policies are succeeding.

There is very little time for Mr. Obama to change course before he is committed to negotiations. He could start by following Iran's money trail.

Mr. Bolton, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of "Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations" (Simon & Schuster, 2007).

[vector7]

Syria's Assad praises Obama, wants meeting

Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:25am EDT

ROME (Reuters) - Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said he hoped to meet U.S. President Barack Obama and expressed his willingness to help mediate between the West and Iran.

Assad, in an interview with Italian newspaper La Repubblica published on Wednesday, also confirmed he was ready to resume peace negotiations with Israel but expressed concern about the political climate there.

"With the pullout in Iraq, the will for peace, the closing of Guantanamo, (Obama) has shown himself to be a man of his word," he said, referring to the U.S. naval base in Cuba where hundreds of suspected Islamist militants have been held, most for years without trial.
But Assad said it was too soon to speak of a "historic shift" in U.S. foreign policy.

Asked about meeting Obama, Assad said: "Yes, in principle. It would be a very positive sign. But I'm not looking for a photo opportunity. I want to see him, to talk."

Obama has been reviewing U.S. policy toward Syria, including whether to return an ambassador to Damascus. Earlier this month he sent two envoys to Damascus earlier this month, where in a change of tone after years of animosity with Syria, one of the officials said they had found "a lot of common ground."

Washington pulled its ambassador out of Syria after the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri.

Syria, which is on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism, denies any involvement in Hariri's murder but the United States pointed fingers at Damascus.
Assad said the United States under Obama could play an important role bringing peace to the region. Although he voiced confidence about the growing diplomatic roles of countries like Turkey and France in the area, he said "only Washington can press Israel."

PEACE TALKS
Assad said he was willing to resume negotiations with Israel but expressed concerned about the ascent of Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing Likud party after last months' election.

"I'm not concerned about Netanyahu's thinking, but of the return of the right-wing of Israeli society, which Netanyahu's rise reflects. This is the biggest obstacle to peace."

Israel and Syria last held direct peace talks in 2000 in the United States, failing to reach a deal on the future of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, which Damascus wants returned.

Since mid-2008, Israel and Syria have held off-and-on indirect negotiations in Turkey.

On Iran, which Washington believes wants to build nuclear weapons, Assad said: " ... with Iran, I'm ready to mediate."

He urged the West to come up with concrete proposals for Tehran, which he said was "an important country, like it or not." Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

Of Iran's role in Iraq, he said Tehran's influence should not be seen as negative if based on "reciprocal respect" and drew distinction between influence and interference.

"If instead we're talking about facilitating dialogue with Tehran, a concrete proposal is needed to give to that government. Until now, I've only received an invitation to play a role. Agreed, but that's not enough," Assad said.

"What's lacking is a plan, rules and specific mechanisms to put forward to Tehran."

(Writing by Phil Stewart; Editing by Matthew Jones)

© Thomson Reuters 2009 All rights reserved

[vector7]

Mar 23, 2009 9:43
Iran targets the US

By YORAM ETTINGER

The prevention of a nuclear Iran constitutes a top US national security priority. It sheds light on a special aspect of US-Israel relationship: defiance of mutual threats.

Iran pursues nuclear capabilities to advance strategic goals, which are led by the super-goal: hegemony over the Persian Gulf and its natural resources. Those who undermine the super-goal are considered super-enemies, targeted by super-capabilities. Hence, Teheran would use its nuclear power/threat, first and foremost, to force the US and NATO out of the Gulf and the Indian Ocean.

It would then turn it against Iraq - its arch rival since the seventh century - and against Saudi Arabia, which is considered an apostate regime. All Gulf states are perceived by Iran as a key prize, required in order to control the flow and the price of oil and to bankroll its megalomaniac regional and global aspirations (e.g. leading Islam's drive to dominate the globe).

The Jewish state constitutes a non-Gulf basin target for Iran, not a primary target. Moreover, Israel is expected to retaliate in a traumatic manner, which would paralyze much of Iran's military and civilian infrastructure. Therefore, Iran would not sacrifice its super-goal (forcing the US out of the Gulf and subjugating the Gulf states) on the altar of a secondary-goal (obliterating the Jewish state).

FOR THE US AND ISRAEL, the preferred option against Iran is preemption rather than retaliation. Recent precedents suggest that the two countries benefit from leveraging each other's unique experience, as well as from bold unilateral military action against rogue threats.

In September 2007, the IAF destroyed a Syrian-North Korean nuclear plant, extending the US's strategic arm. It provided the US with vital information on Russian air defense systems, which are also employed by Iran. It bolstered the US posture of deterrence and refuted the claim that US-Israel relations have been shaped by political expediency.

In 1981, Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor, providing the US with a conventional option in 1991 and 2003, preventing a mega-billion dollar, mega-casualty nuclear war. In 1970, while the US was bogged down in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, Israel forced the rollback of a pro-Soviet Syrian invasion of pro-US Jordan. It prevented a pro-Soviet "domino effect" into the Persian Gulf, which would have shattered US economy.

In 2009, Israel shares with the US its battle-tested experience in combating Palestinian and Hizbullah terrorism, which are the role model of anti-US Islamic terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan. US GIs benefit from Israel's battle tactics against car bombs, improvised explosive devices and homicide bombing. An Israel-like ally in the Persian Gulf would have spared the need to dispatch US troops to Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE and NATO commander Alexander Haig refers to the Jewish state as the largest cost-effective, combat-experienced US aircraft carrier that does not require US personnel, cannot be sunk and is located in a most critical region for US national security interests.

While the US has been Israel's indispensable ally, Israel's battle experience has been integrated into the US defense industry. For example, the F-16 includes more than 600 Israeli modifications, sparing the US a mega-billion dollar and a multi-year research and development budget. A litany of state-of-the-art US military systems have been upgraded in a similar manner, enhancing US national and homeland security and expanding US employment and exports.

Iran's nuclear threat is a symptom of endemic Middle East violent unpredictability and Muslim hostility toward Western democracies. It calls for an upgraded US-Israel win-win relationship, which requires a strong Israel as a national security producer. A weak Israel, pushed into a nine-15 mile sliver along the Mediterranean, pressured to concede the mountain ridges of Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights, relying on foreign troops and guarantees, would become a national security consumer. It would be a burden rather than an asset to the US in a bad neighborhood, which is crucial for vital US interests.

Iran would benefit from an ineffective Israel. However, the US would have to deploy to the eastern flank of the Mediterranean real aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of US servicemen, costing scores of billions of dollars annually, denied the benefits of Israel - the largest US aircraft carrier, which does not require a single US sailor.

[vector7]

April 7, 2009 - 8:22 PM
Secret US-Iran meetings held in Geneva


Image caption: Talks between Iran and the United States in Geneva are shrouded in secrecy (Keystone)

Related stories

• 18.07.2008
  "Good vibrations" ahead of Iran nuclear talks
• 15.02.2009
  "Iran is unknown and misunderstood"
• 05.03.2009
  Geneva returns to diplomatic scene

Academics and specialists from Iran, the United States and Europe have been meeting regularly in the Swiss city of Geneva for high level but informal talks.

Switzerland's Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey said she was aware of the ongoing contacts over the past few years but had not played an active role.

"The talks are on a purely informal level and the foreign ministry is not involved," Calmy-Rey said on Tuesday.

The meetings – known as the Track II process – involving academics from Iran and the US, European Union states, Switzerland, Arab countries and Israel have all been held in Geneva, according to an article in Tuesday's Le Temps newspaper.

The Geneva-based daily says about 30 participants were present at the meetings which took place mainly in Geneva, but also in other European cities. The last talks were reportedly held from March 6-8.

In total, up to 400 people have attended secret talks but are said to want to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals by the Iranian government.

Washington and Tehran broke off diplomatic relations 30 years ago in the wake of Iran's Islamic revolution. Switzerland has been representing the interests of the US in Tehran since 1980.

Mutual understanding
Le Temps also quotes an unnamed professor who has participated in the secret talks as saying that the dialogue can help to further mutual understanding.

He says participants can speak freely and are less tempted to take political stands in the closed-door meetings.

Such meetings have taken place with the approval of Tehran and Washington, Le Temps believes.

It says a person close to the Iranian government and an ambassador from another state were present at a gathering at the beginning of March.

Nuclear
The participants, which included strategic and nuclear experts and international relations specialists, reportedly discussed Iran's nuclear technology.

Iran, under investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), denies it is seeking a nuclear arsenal. It claims its uranium enrichment work is to supply energy for peaceful means.

Last week, the IAEA welcomed a coordinated approach by the US and Russia to pursue diplomacy on Iran instead of policy focused isolating and threatening the Islamic republic.

The US government in 2002 described Iran as part of the "axis of evil" and has not have direct relations for three decades. Relations could thaw under the administration of US President Barack Obama.

Diplomatic overture
Observers point out that it is too early to say whether informal talks will result in a deal but add that the discussions have widened the scope of contacts between the two countries.

Obama last month called on Iran to renew dialogue. In Turkey on Monday, he said the US "is not, and will never be, at war with Islam".

The leading reformist candidate in Iran's June presidential elections, Hossein Mousavi, has said he will negotiate with the US but that Iran will not give up its nuclear programme.

Le Temps says the venue for informal meetings has moved away from Geneva for the time being, apparently because of increasing public interest in the talks. It is possible that the meetings will return to Geneva.

"This could become even more likely if the diplomatic drive by the Obama administration is beginning to bear fruit," wrote Le Temps.

swissinfo, Urs Geiser

[vector7]

Iran president says ready for nuclear talks




AP – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, second right, gestures, as he visits Iran's Fuel Manufacturing …

By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writer – 2 mins ago

ISFAHAN, Iran – Iran's president said Thursday his country is open to talks with the U.S. and other countries over its nuclear program. But he insisted the talks must be based on respect for Iran's rights, suggesting the West should not try to force Tehran to stop uranium enrichment.

Hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran would present a new proposal for negotiations, saying "conditions have changed" — an apparent reference to President Barack Obama's election and Iran's own progress in its nuclear program since previous talks with Iran were held last year. He did not elaborate on the proposal.

Iran has been tepid in its response to Obama's offers of dialogue, but in recent days Ahmadinejad has appeared to warm up. Earlier this week, he said he was ready for dialogue if Obama was "honest" in his intentions.

Ahmadinejad's speech Thursday made clear he saw a difference between Obama and former President George W. Bush, who took a tough stance on Iran.

Ahmadinejad spoke during celebrations for Iran's Nuclear Day, in which a number of nuclear advances were announced.

Among them, officials said the number of centrifuges at Iran's enrichment facility has increased to 7,000 — up from 6,000 announced in February — and that a new, more advanced type of centrifuge has been tested. Ahmadinejad also inaugurated a new plant for developing uranium fuel for a planned hard-water reactor.

The United States announced Wednesday that it would join direct talks with Iran that Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia are seeking to convene. The talks aim to break a long deadlock over Iran's nuclear program, which the U.S. and its allies fear aims to build a nuclear weapon.

Iran denies the charge.

The Bush administration generally shunned such nuclear talks with Iran, though it sent a diplomat to the last round of talks last year.

Ahmadinejad said past negotiations failed because "they were insisting on stopping our peaceful activities, they were trying to impose that."

"The Iranian nation has always been for talks," Ahmadinejad said. But, he said, "dialogue has to be based on justice and respecting rights ... Justice means both sides are treated equally and bilateral rights are respected."

The United Nations has demanded Iran halt uranium enrichment, a process that can produce nuclear fuel but also the material for a warhead. Iran has refused, saying it has a right to develop peaceful nuclear technology.

In past talks, European nations backed by Washington offered a package of economic incentives for Tehran to suspend enrichment. Iran rejected it and countered with its own "package," but U.S. and European officials said its proposals were unclear.

On Thursday, Ahmadinejad said Iran would adapt its proposals. "Today conditions have changed. We had presented a package. Given new world developments, new subjects need to be added to the package," he said, without elaborating.

Thursday's ceremony celebrated the National Day of Nuclear Technology, the day in 2006 when Iran first enriched uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. Since then, it is believed to have enriched enough uranium to build a bomb — though first the uranium would have to be more highly enriched, and it is not known if Iran has perfected such techniques. Iran says the enriched uranium is for its first domestically produced nuclear plant, due to open in several years.

In the enrichment process, uranium gas is pumped into a series of thousands of centrifuges, which spin it at super-sonic speeds to remove impurities. Uranium enriched to a low degree is used to fuel a light-water nuclear reactor, but when enriched to a high degree it produces the basis of a warhead.

Vice President Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, who is also the nuclear chief, announced to the gathering the increased number of centrifuges and the new, more advanced version.

Ahmadinejad said the new centrifuge has been tested, and has several times more capacity more than the P-1 centrifuges currently used at Natanz. Neither gave details or said when it might be brought into use.

Ahmadinejad also said the country has inaugurated a new facility producing uranium fuel for a heavy-water nuclear reactor that is under construction in the town of Arak and is expected to be completed in 2009 or 2010.

Heavy-water reactors use a different process than light-water ones, but have their own nuclear proliferation concerns. The West fears Iran could eventually reprocess spent fuel from the heavy-water reactor to produce plutonium for a warhead.

[vector7]

Apr 10, 2009 0:15 | Updated Apr 10, 2009 22:22
France 'worried' by Iran's defiance

By HERB KEINON AND AP

A day after US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton downplayed Iran's claim that it had developed new uranium enrichment technology, France expressed its concern over the assertion.

"These are worrying declarations," French Foreign Ministry spokesman Eric Chevallier told reporters. "We need to check the accuracy of the figures ... and for that we'll wait for the International Atomic Energy Agency."

Chevallier urged Teheran to submit to a full IAEA inspection regime at all its nuclear sites and halt its uranium enrichment program.

On Thursday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced advances in the country's nuclear program, including the inauguration of a new nuclear-related facility and the testing of two types of high-capacity centrifuges that he said would speed up Iran's enrichment capacity.

He also claimed that there were 7,000 working centrifuges to enrich nuclear fuel at Iran's Natanz facility.

Clinton said Thursday night the declaration would not affect the US decision to resume participation in international talks on the Islamic republic's nuclear program.

"We don't know what to believe about the Iranian program," she said, adding that the US government did not "attribute any particular meaning" to Iran's statement with respect to the negotiations.

An official in the Prime Minister's Office said Thursday night that Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons "demands everyone's attention" and "must be of grave concern to every thinking individual."

The comment came two days after US Vice President Joe Biden said in a CNN interview that it would be "ill advised" for Israel to launch a military strike against Iran. Biden added that he did not believe Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu would take such a step.

The Obama administration announced Wednesday that it would participate directly in group talks set to start Saturday in Geneva with Iran over its nuclear program, another significant shift from president George W. Bush's policy toward a nation he labeled part of an axis of evil.

The State Department said the United States would be at the table "from now on" when senior diplomats from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany meet with Iranian officials to discuss the nuclear issue.

"We believe that pursuing very careful engagement on a range of issues that affect our interests and the interests of the world with Iran makes sense," Clinton told reporters. "There is nothing more important than trying to convince Iran to cease its efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon."

Meanwhile, the Japanese newspaper Nikkei reported Thursday that several Western intelligence organizations were investigating whether a ship that recently traveled from North Korea to Iran had several dozen tons of enriched uranium hidden in its cargo.

According to the report, the suspected move was seen by some intelligence officials as an effort to hide traces of the highly enriched uranium program to develop nuclear weapons, which the US believes North Korea is secretly pursuing.

According to one Western intelligence source, the ship in question left North Korea last December and traveled through the Indian Ocean. The cargo was then shipped to a location near Teheran.

"The bulk of the [transferred] materials appears to be medium-level enriched uranium," the source said. "It could be further enriched to weapons grade in Iranian facilities."

Western countries fear that there could be some kind of enrichment agreement between North Korea and Iran.

Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, said Thursday that Iran was open to talks offered by the US and other countries over its nuclear program, if the negotiations were based on "respect" for its rights.

Speaking at a ceremony to inaugurate the new facility producing uranium fuel for the planned heavy-water nuclear reactor in Isfahan, Ahmadinejad said that past negotiations had fallen apart because of the West's demands that Iran rein in its nuclear program.

He said "the Iranian nation has always been for talks," but that negotiations must "be based on justice and respecting rights."

The US and its allies have expressed concerns that Iran could reprocess spent fuel from the heavy-water reactor into plutonium for building a warhead.

The process is distinct from uranium enrichment, which produces fuel for a light-water reactor. Highly enriched uranium can be used to build a warhead as well. Iran's enrichment program presents more immediate concerns to the West than the hard-water reactor, because it is far more advanced.

The Defense Ministry said in a statement it was closely following the developments, stressing that the inauguration of the new plant reinforces the need for the world to closely monitor Iran's nuclear program.

The inauguration ceremony came a day after the US announced it would participate directly in group talks with Iran over its nuclear program, another significant shift from former US president George W. Bush's policy toward a nation he labeled part of an axis of evil.

Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia announced Wednesday they were inviting Iran to a new session of negotiations aimed at breaking a deadlock in the talks.

Iran has not yet replied to the invitation.

Following the US decision to be a full participant in talks with Iranian officials held by senior diplomats from the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany, a senior adviser to Ahmadinejad said Thursday that the Islamic republic would decide on a response to the overture after evaluating the details.

"We will review it and then decide about it," Ali Akbar Javanfekr told Reuters.

China urged the Islamic republic to pursue negotiations.

"We are glad to see an improvement in relations between the United States and Iran," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu told a press conference in Beijing on Thursday. "We encourage Iran and other parties to have active contacts to seek an all-round, appropriate and long-term solution to the Iran nuclear issue."

The State Department had said that the US would be at the table "from now on" when senior P5+1 meet with Iranian officials.

Clinton said the United States would now be a "full participant" rather than an observer in the talks, which include it and the other four permanent members of the UN Security Council - Britain, China, France and Russia - along with Germany.

"We believe that pursuing very careful engagement on a range of issues that affect our interests and the interests of the world with Iran makes sense," Clinton said. "There is nothing more important than trying to convince Iran to cease its efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon."

State Department spokesman Robert Wood said the decision was conveyed to representatives of Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia by the third-ranking US diplomat William Burns at a Wednesday meeting in London.

"The US remains committed to the P5+1 process; what is different is that the US will join P5+1 discussions with Iran from now on," Wood said, adding that Washington was hopeful Iran would attend.

Wood said the administration wants a diplomatic resolution to the nuclear issue and believes that requires "a willingness to engage directly with each other on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interests."

The invitation is to be sent to the Iranians by European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana. In a statement the group said it welcomed the "new direction" of US policy toward Iran. No time frame was given for a date of the meeting.

[vector7]

US Weighing Punishing Israel if it Attacks Iran




Having taken military action against Iran off the table, the Obama administration is considering ways of punishing Israel if it attacks Iran to end its nuclear arms program (and prevent a second Holocaust).

In other words, having failed to contain Iran, the United States is concentrating on restraining Israel.

Administration contingency plans include condemnation of Israel, support for a United Nations Security Council resolution that could include sanctions on Israel, and suspending or seriously cutting military aid to the Jewish State.

One of President Obama's closest foreign policy advisers, National Security Council member Samantha Power, is a proponent of ending military aid to Israel in order to force it to negotiate with Iran's Palestinian Islamist proxy, Hamas, and withdraw from all lands taken during the Six-Day War of June 1967. Power also advocates shifting aid to a Palestinian state. Overall, she views Israel as a liability and a historic mistake, in line with the European left position (and that of old-line, right-of-center, American isolationists and anti-Semites). Her antidemocratic admirers in the Democratic Party's (Hillary-hating) left wing agree and are eager for an opportunity to paint Israel as a Jewish North Korea (although they actually have more sympathy for North Korea than for Israel).



The big question is how the Obama administration would react if Iran retaliated against Israel indirectly as well as directly--by making good on its repeated threats to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East and shut down the strategic, 29 mile-wide Strait of Hormuz, through which an estimated 20% of the world's crude oil is transported by tanker ships. Would the U.S. fight back with real ferocity or respond in a limited way while blaming Israel for preemptively attacking Iran and appealing to "the Muslim world" for "understanding?"

One wonders how the Apologizer-in-Chief would react.

Holocaust-denying Iran and its Lebanese Islamist Shiite proxy, the Hitlerian Hezbollah, have also vowed to "burn Tel Aviv" if attacked by either Israel or the U.S. Jerusalem's clerical fascist foes have amassed arsenals of ballistic missiles and rockets to bombard Tel Aviv and Haifa. Israel's political-military leadership must be taking this into consideration; a "six-hour war," designed to eliminate Iranian missile installations and nuclear sites could be the result.

Three decades of attempts to appease and accommodate Islamist Iran have led to the present countdown to conflict. Obama's so-called diplomatic surge--which transcends appeasement in downgrading and ultimately abandoning Israel in order to try to strike a "grand bargain" with Iran for pacification of the Middle East--has put Jerusalem on a political collision course with Washington.

Israelis are understandably stunned by the developments. Prime Minister Netanyahu's late, great mentor, Menahem Begin, would not recognize today's political landscape; his late, Labor Party rivals--Golda Meir comes to mind--would also be shocked by the situation. Time was, no Israeli expected Iran--a predominantly Muslim, non-Arab ally of the U.S. and tacit ally of Israel--to emerge as the number-one existential threat to the Jewish State.

But that was before the catastrophic Carter administration betrayed Iran's modernizing monarch, Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, in a craven, failed attempt to hop aboard the Islamist bandwagon.

Jimmy Carter betrayed the Shah; Barack Obama is betraying Israel--already. His "engagement" drive is giving Iran time to achieve its nuclear/missile objectives.

EDITOR'S NOTE: About Obama's apologizing to the world and bowing to the Saudi King--the left loves it. The more the President apologizes for alleged American arrogance and other supposed sins, the more popular he is with the Democratic Party's left wing. The deeper he bows, the more they appreciate him. The left believes it is high time that America was brought to its knees, forced to submit to the Third World. Like the radical right, the left makes common cause with Islamism in order to cut America down to size and set Israel up for a final solution. Israel is especially despised for its success and power; its defeat is seen as paving the way for the disappearance of the Jews as a people. Like the failed Russian revolutionaries of the late 1800s, the pro-pogrom Norodniki, who sought to ally with Russia's notoriously anti-Semitic peasants, today's left believes that "Jewish blood will oil the wheels of revolution."

Most Jewish Norodniki left the movement because of its anti-Semitism. Will American Jews leave the Democratic Party when the Obama administration's betrayal of Israel becomes too obvious to ignore?

posted by Confidential Reporter @ 1:26 PM

[Backstop]

Having taken military action against Iran off the table, the Obama administration is considering ways of punishing Israel if it attacks Iran to end its nuclear arms program (and prevent a second Holocaust).

Holy freaking cow...

[vector7]

As the U.S. Retreats, Iran Fills the Void


By AMIR TAHERI

Convinced that the Obama administration is preparing to retreat from the Middle East, Iran's Khomeinist regime is intensifying its goal of regional domination. It has targeted six close allies of the U.S.: Egypt, Lebanon, Bahrain, Morocco, Kuwait and Jordan, all of which are experiencing economic and/or political crises.

Iranian strategists believe that Egypt is heading for a major crisis once President Hosni Mubarak, 81, departs from the political scene. He has failed to impose his eldest son Gamal as successor, while the military-security establishment, which traditionally chooses the president, is divided. Iran's official Islamic News Agency has been conducting a campaign on that theme for months. This has triggered a counter-campaign against Iran by the Egyptian media.

Last month, Egypt announced it had crushed a major Iranian plot and arrested 68 people. According to Egyptian media, four are members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Tehran's principal vehicle for exporting its revolution.

Seven were Palestinians linked to the radical Islamist movement Hamas; one was a Lebanese identified as "a political agent from Hezbollah" by the Egyptian Interior Ministry. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah, claimed these men were shipping arms to Hamas in Gaza.

The arrests reportedly took place last December, during a crackdown against groups trying to convert Egyptians to Shiism. The Egyptian Interior Ministry claims this proselytizing has been going on for years. Thirty years ago, Egyptian Shiites numbered a few hundred. Various estimates put the number now at close to a million, but they are said to practice taqiyah (dissimulation), to hide their new faith.

But in its campaign for regional hegemony, Tehran expects Lebanon as its first prize. Iran is spending massive amounts of cash on June's general election. It supports a coalition led by Hezbollah, and including the Christian ex-general Michel Aoun. Lebanon, now in the column of pro-U.S. countries, would shift to the pro-Iran column.

In Bahrain, Tehran hopes to see its allies sweep to power through mass demonstrations and terrorist operations. Bahrain's ruling clan has arrested scores of pro-Iran militants but appears more vulnerable than ever. King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa has contacted Arab heads of states to appeal for "urgent support in the face of naked threats," according to the Bahraini media.

The threats became sensationally public in March. In a speech at Masshad, Iran's principal "holy city," Ali Akbar Nateq-Nuri, a senior aide to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, described Bahrain as "part of Iran." Morocco used the ensuing uproar as an excuse to severe diplomatic relations with Tehran. The rupture came after months of tension during which Moroccan security dismantled a network of pro-Iran militants allegedly plotting violent operations.

Iran-controlled groups have also been uncovered in Kuwait and Jordan. According to Kuwaiti media, more than 1,000 alleged Iranian agents were arrested and shipped back home last winter. According to the Tehran media, Kuwait is believed vulnerable because of chronic parliamentary disputes that have led to governmental paralysis.

As for Jordan, Iranian strategists believe the kingdom, where Palestinians are two-thirds of the population, is a colonial creation and should disappear from the map -- opening the way for a single state covering the whole of Palestine. Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have both described the division of Palestine as "a crime and a tragedy."

Arab states are especially concerned because Tehran has succeeded in transcending sectarian and ideological divides to create a coalition that includes Sunni movements such as Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, sections of the Muslim Brotherhood, and even Marxist-Leninist and other leftist outfits that share Iran's anti-Americanism.

Information published by Egyptian and other Arab intelligence services, and reported in the Egyptian and other Arab media, reveal a sophisticated Iranian strategy operating at various levels. The outer circle consists of a number of commercial companies, banks and businesses active in various fields and employing thousands of locals in each targeted country. In Egypt, for example, police have uncovered more than 30 such Iranian "front" companies, according to the pan-Arab daily newspaper Asharq Alawsat. In Syria and Lebanon, the numbers reportedly run into hundreds.

In the next circle, Iranian-financed charities offer a range of social and medical services and scholarships that governments often fail to provide. Another circle consists of "cultural" centers often called Ahl e Beit (People of the House) supervised by the offices of the supreme leader. These centers offer language classes in Persian, English and Arabic, Islamic theology, Koranic commentaries, and traditional philosophy -- alongside courses in information technology, media studies, photography and filmmaking.

Wherever possible, the fourth circle is represented by branches of Hezbollah operating openly. Where that's not possible, clandestine organizations do the job, either alone or in conjunction with Sunni radical groups.

The Khomeinist public diplomacy network includes a half-dozen satellite television and radio networks in several languages, more than 100 newspapers and magazines, a dozen publishing houses, and thousands of Web sites and blogs controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The network controls thousands of mosques throughout the region where preachers from Iran, or trained by Iranians, disseminate the Khomeinist revolutionary message.

Tehran has also created a vast network of non-Shiite fellow travelers within the region's political and cultural elites. These politicians and intellectuals may be hostile to Khomeinism on ideological grounds -- but they regard it as a powerful ally in a common struggle against the American "Great Satan."

Khomeinist propaganda is trying to portray Iran as a rising "superpower" in the making while the United States is presented as the "sunset" power. The message is simple: The Americans are going, and we are coming.

Tehran plays a patient game. Wherever possible, it is determined to pursue its goals through open political means, including elections. With pro-American and other democratic groups disheartened by the perceived weakness of the Obama administration, Tehran hopes its allies will win all the elections planned for this year in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

"There is this perception that the new U.S. administration is not interested in the democratization strategy," a senior Lebanese political leader told me. That perception only grows as President Obama calls for an "exit strategy" from Afghanistan and Iraq. Power abhors a vacuum, which the Islamic Republic of Iran is only too happy to fill.

[vector7]

Obama's SOS to Gulf emirs: Invest in US and global economies

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
May 7, 2009, 9:33 PM (GMT+02:00)

A massive petrodollar influx would help

A secret American delegation was sent by US President Barack Obama this week to solicit Saudi Arabian and other Gulf rulers for hundreds of billions of petro-dollars for investment in US and global economic stimulus plans, DEBKAfile's exclusive Gulf sources report.

They came away empty-handed.

The chilly welcome received by the delegation, which met finance ministers and the heads of banks in Riyadh and the five emirates, was generated by wide disapproval of the US president's policy of engagement with Iran. Two other US missions had just been and gone, headed by defense secretary Robert Gates and special adviser to the US secretary of state for South Asia and Gulf affairs, Dennis Ross. Both failed to allay Gulf anger and trepidation over this policy.

Our Gulf sources report that the third delegation, which unlike the first two was unannounced, argued that since US economic recovery was not expected to turn the corner before 2011, Gulf investors still had a unique opportunity to partner the US in helping the world economy out of its doldrums. The general message was that if they Gulf rulers fail to invest in US and international markets at this point, they would miss out on the rewards of the recovery.

Not all the data presented to the Gulf officials matched the figures published in Washington and other western countries. They were informed on the quiet that Federal Reserve Governor Ben Benanke had been "premature" in his optimistic forecast of "slightly positive" growth in the second half of this year, particularly in the fields of banking and construction, and a recovery that will "strengthen" next year - even though US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Wednesday, May 6, it was "a good, independent, credible forecast."

The Gulf states were urged to help the global economic back on its feet because, according to US data, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) would by the year 2018 rank as the world's fifth-largest economy after the US, China, Japan and the EU. “As major players in the world economy, you cannot stand on the sidelines,” they were told.

President Obama's discreet approach figured in general terms at the GCC meeting of heads of state and finance ministers meeting in Riyadh Wednesday, May 6, which was convened to establish a regional central bank. But no decisions were taken.

According to our sources, the negative vibes between the Gulf and Washington over the Obama administration's policy of favoring Tehran have made these Arab rulers doubly wary of responding to the US president's appeal for a Gulf stake in US and global economic recovery

[vector7]

Obama's charm offensive for radical rulers abandons Israel to Iranian threat

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis
April 18, 2009

The new US president's dramatic global policy steps have easily dwarfed the knotty Israeli-Palestinian peace issue handed down from one US president to the next over decades. Barack Obama's outstretched hand to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Iran's best friend in the Americas, on April 17, at the summit of American leaders in Port of Prince, made the talk surrounding Special Middle East Envoy George Mitchell's mission to Jerusalem and Ramallah this week sound eerily like voices from the past.

After talking to Mitchell, Israel's prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minister Ehud Barak tried the usual bromides: They protested that Jerusalem's ties with Washington and Jerusalem were as strong as ever and they would work together toward an agreed solution for the Palestinian problem.

But those words were lost in the black Iranian cloud hanging over the relations.

Barack Obama has set his sights and heart on friendship with the rulers of the Islamic Republic of Iran and their radical allies. The name and policies of the occupant of the prime minister's office in Jerusalem do not matter - any more than Tehran's determination to complete its nuclear weapons program in defiance of the world, or even its first A-bomb test in a year or two, for which intelligence sources report Tehran is already getting set.

Obama's Washington believes America can live with a nuclear-armed Iran – a decision probably taken first under the Bush presidency. But Israel cannot, and may have no option but to part ways with the Obama administration on this point. As a nuclear power, Iran will be able to bend Jerusalem to the will of its enemies, make it unconditionally give Syria the Golan plus extra pieces of territory, tamely accept a Hamas-dominated Palestinian West Bank louring over its heartland and let the Lebanese Hizballah terrorize Galilee in the north at will. All three would make hay under Iran's nuclear shield, while Tehran lords it over the region in the role of regional power conferred by Obama's grace and favor.

In no time, Israel would be stripped of most of its defenses.

Israel is not the only nervous country in the region. But Hosni Mubarak of Egypt is the only Middle East leader brave enough to stick his neck out, albeit with Saudi backing, and stand up to the Iranian peril, direct and through Hizballah.

He has also outspokenly criticized Washington's courtship of the revolutionary Islamic republic.

Cairo's Al Ahram Saturday, April 18, accused Iran, Syria, Qatar, Hizballah, Hamas, al Jazeera TV of a conspiracy to overthrow Egyptian government.

But the US president is not daunted by the radicalism or enmity of his new friends or the loss of old ones. At the Summit of All Americas, Obama greeted Hugo Chavez 24 hours after the Venezuelan ruler said: "The United States Empire is on its way down and will be finished in the near future, inshallah!"

Using the Muslim blessing to underline the wish for America's downfall was no bar to the smile and handshake; neither was Venezuela's recent severance of its ties with Israel for no provocation or its willingness to host a delegation of Hizballah (internationally branded a terrorist organization) in Caracas.

What is relevant to Obama is Hugo Chavez's role as co-architect of the joint Russian-Iranian campaign to displace American influence in the southern hemisphere. The US president has opted for winning America's enemies over with smiles and embraces rather than punishing them like George W. Bush.

Obama continues to woo Bashar Assad apace despite his blunt refusal to loosen his strategic ties with Tehran or stop supporting the Lebanese Shiite group [with arms] because Hizballah is dedicated to fighting Israel, - as he is quoted as saying in the pro-Hizballah Lebanese publication al Akhbar on April 17.

For the first time in years, the administration this week sent a high-ranking delegation to Syria's independence day celebrations at Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel, headed by Jeffrey Feltman, former ambassador and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs.

The thaw in relations has gone so far that some Washington wags are calling Assad's capital "Syria on the Potomac."

The American storm besetting the Middle East leaves Israel's most vital interests way behind. The condition Netanyahu put before Mitchell for progress in peacemaking - that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state, which was instantly rejected by Palestinian Authority leaders – aroused scant attention in Washington or anywhere else.

As Netanyahu will find when he meets Obama in Washington early next month, Israel is no longer a prime factor in US global policy, because America has fundamentally reshuffled its Middle East allegiances and alliances. Even Tzipi Livni at the helm in Jerusalem would not divert Obama from his détente with Ahmadinejad, Assad and Chavez.

To gain points with his new friends, Obama's White House is not above nudging Israel to please them. This week, his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told Jewish leaders whom he met in Washington that if Israel wants America's help for thwarting Iran's nuclear program, it must first start evacuating West Bank settlements.

This was of course cynical claptrap.

Even if every single settlement were to be removed and Israel lined up with Obama's quest for a Palestinian state alongside Israel, the US president would not drop Tehran or help Israel strike Iran's nuclear facilities.

He has already ceded Tehran's uranium enrichment program (and therefore its drive for nuclear arms), and would forcefully oppose any Israeli military action.

US defense secretary Robert Gates indicated as much this week when he went to almost absurd lengths to play down the Iranian nuclear threat and Israel's ability to handle it.

So what options are left to Israel at this juncture?

1. To bow under the Obama tempest until it blows over in keeping with the old proverb which says that trees bowing in the wind remain standing. This would entail going along with US acceptance of Iran as a nuclear power. The question is will Israel's trees still be standing when the storm has passed and, if so, in what strategic environment?

2. To follow the example set by Likud's first prime minister Menahem Begin in 1981. He stood up to Ronald Reagan's fierce objections and sent the Israeli Air force to smash the Iraqi nuclear reactor before it was operational. Saddam Hussein never rebuilt the facility. By following in Begin's footsteps before it is too late, Netanyahu would change the rules of the game regionally and globally.

(The London Times reported from Jerusalem Saturday that the Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government. Two civil defense drills have been scheduled to prepare the population for missiles that could fall on any part of the country without warning.)

3. Israel could go for a more modest target, one of Iran's faithful surrogates – Syria or Hizballah – to warn Washington that a larger operation is in store for their boss. If the Gaza offensive against Hamas last January was meant to send this message, it failed. Hamas is still the dominant Palestinian power and Barack Obama was not swayed from forging ahead with his policies of rapprochement with Iran and other radical world leaders.

[vector7]

Ahmadinejad: Obama Won’t Keep His Promise To Stop Us From Building Nukes If He’s Reelected…


Obviously.
Via Washington Examiner:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad believes that President Obama’s ‘red line’ about Iranian nuclear weapons is written in vanishing ink.
Ahmadinejad suggested that Obama will give him more flexibility on the nuclear program after the American presidential election.
“Do you believe that he [Obama] will repeat such a policy?” Ahmadinejad said during a Washington Post interview this weekend. That was his reply when asked if Obama will reiterate his oft-stated position that “the U.S. is prepared to prevent Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon—that’s Obama’s ‘red line,’” as David Ignatius put it.
“I think we should just leave that,” Ahmadinejad said. “If he does repeat it, then our answer will be amply clear. But do you really believe the people of the United States support conflict? Will the people of the U.S. accept meddling and intervention in the affairs of others? I don’t believe so. I don’t believe so.”
Keep reading…

[vector7]

Ahmadinejad Defends Holocaust Denial at UN; Israel Walks Out, U.S. Sticks Around to Listen



Print Article Send a Tip

by AWR Hawkins 24 Sep 2012 post a comment
When Iranian President Ahmadinejad ascended the podium to speak on the rule of law at the UN today, Israeli UN envoy Ron Prosor rose from his seat and walked out while the U.S. envoys remained, according to Fox News. Update: Raw video from the UN confirms that U.S. representatives attended the entire speech.

Ahmadinejad alluded to what he sees as Israel's illegitimate nuclear arsenal, and criticized members who haven't stopped Israel from acquiring it: "Some members of the Security Council with veto rights have chosen silence with regard to the nuclear warheads of a fake regime, while at the same time [impeding]...the scientific progress of other nations."

He also bore down on those who have revolted at Holocaust revisionism. He did this by calling attention to those who "infringe upon other's freedom and allow sacrilege to people's beliefs and sanctities, while they criticize posing questions or investigating into historical issues."

Throughout all of this, the U.S. envoy remained seated.

Outside the hall where Ahmadinejad was speaking, the Israeli envoy referred to Ahmadinejad as, "the leader of an outlaw country that is a serial violator of the fundamental principles of the rule of law." He added, "It is a shame and a disgrace to give someone like him the opportunity to speak on such an important topic."

ON BREITBART TV

US Officials Stay Seated For Ahmadinejad's Speech, Israel Walks Out

[vector7]

Court Reveals Iranian Operatives In Charge Of Obama’s Iran Policy Since 2009

September 26, 2012 By Doug Book

A ruling handed down on September 13th by the D.C. District Federal Court has finally made clear what many have known for years–that the Obama Administration’s Iran policy was initiated and advanced by a group with illicit, hidden ties to the Iranian Regime and financed by the U.S./Israel- hating George Soros.

In 2009, Barack Obama turned over virtually all responsibility and authority for foreign policy negotiations with Iran to Trita Parsi and his National Iranian American Council (NIAC). Founded by Parsi in 2003, the Washington-based NIAC is a powerful lobbying group that is “…widely considered the de facto lobby for the Iranian Regime in America.”

Like too many organizations that claim to represent the best interests of the nation of Iran and Iranian-Americans, the NIAC is tightly connected with and known to be funded at least in part by the George Soros empire. Small wonder NIAC advice on dealing with Iran was replete with claims that Israeli propaganda was responsible for the negative image imposed on otherwise peace-loving, misunderstood Iranian mullahs. Not exactly a friend of Israel is George Soros.

And how did the reputedly “non-partisan” NIAC suggest the Obama Administration proceed with negotiations? Simple. The Council “…opposes sanctions on Iran, soft-pedals any controversial events in Iran, and counsels “patience” regarding Iran’s stance towards its nuclear program.”

What better way for NIAC representatives to serve their hidden masters in Tehran than by promoting a policy of “peaceful coexistence” between the US and Iran. And to the NIAC, peaceful coexistence meant “…acceptance of [the] Iranian government, accepting Iranian hegemony in the Gulf and its place in other parts of the Middle East, removal of sanctions and pressure against Iran, abandon of assistance to the Iranian people’s resistance against the regime and etc.”

For the U.S., the consequences of this game of intrigue played by the Administration’s hand-picked, Iranian representatives are summed up in this statement by Barack Obama: “I’ve made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs.” And indeed, this is the path Barack Obama has followed. Not exactly reassuring words from a president charged with keeping the American public safe from a nuclear-bound administration of religious fanatics dedicated to our demise.

And it is thanks to an ill-advised lawsuit that proof of the NIAC’s wrongdoing has finally been placed before the American public. In 2008, Trita Parsi and his organization filed a defamation suit against perpetual critic Seid Dai. Dai had publicly accused Parsi of secretly working with the ruling Iranian Regime against the interests of the United States and the Iranian people. But when Parsi filed suit hoping to silence-through-intimidation such potentially lethal criticism, it opened the floodgates of legal discovery allowing Dai to demand internal NIAC documents and emails that eventually “… confirmed [Parsi’s] ties to the [Iranian] mullahs…”

Not only did recovered emails reveal that Parsi had held “…numerous secret meetings with top level IRI [Islamic Republic of Iran] officials,” “Court documents show the NIAC was guilty of: lying to members of Congress, fraudulent membership numbers, tax law violations and evasions, Lobbying Disclosure Act violation, the Foreign Agents Registration Act violations, foreign bank accounts, defrauding of federal funds, bribing of eye witnesses, etc…”

And so egregious were NIAC attempts to duck its legal responsibilities of discovery that Judge John Bates dismissed the Parsi defamation suit, ordered sanctions against Parsi for his failure to comply with discovery, and ordered Parsi to pay significant percentages of Dai’s costs and fees.

This is an immensely important story, not surprisingly “missed” in its entirety by the mainstream media.

But why has the Romney campaign not demanded Obama’s rationale for handing the foreign policy decisions of the United States and the security of the American people over to representatives of the Iranian government itself? Could voters be pleased upon finding the president had placed America’s safety from possible nuclear attack in the hands of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?




An Open Letter To Communist Valerie Jarrett!

• Posted by Jake Martinez on August 25, 2012 at 5:58pm
• View Blog

[IMG]http://api.ning.com/files/dogfuOTzUPLELkU-DH-ncD*CKRY8GHKdt652fS7mtCBMhSUqpZpXnP4CIBPiKpa3d9WXj Q1FRS0xaomIbWWfo-xiHL5UhyW0/ValerieJarrettANOPENLETTERTOCOMMUNISTVALERIEJARRET Tjpg.jpg[/IMG]

What's disturbing about this picture?-You Decide:

Posted on ImpeachObamaCampaign.com-By ROBERT PHILIP DEAN-On August 15, 2012:
“Iranian-born Communist sympathizer Valerie Jarrett, Barack Obama’s Senior Adviser, spoke recently during a forum at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, in which she implied members of the TEA Party needed simple instructions and outlines to understand Obama’s major government overhaul of healthcare, the stimulus package, bailouts, and his road to socialism. When asked if she thought a simple booklet would help us conservative simpletons understand Obama’s desire to “fundamentally transform America,” she agreed, stating ““Hope and Change were so catchy because it was really very simple and it was something everyone understood the definition. And so I think part of what our challenge is is to find a very simple way of communicating.” Her condescending attitude and remarks garnered a historical retort from The American Patriot Alliance in an open letter to Ms. Jarrett.

Dear Valerie,

Greetings and salutations in the name of Our Lord & Saviour Christ Jesus.

It saddens me somewhat that recent events and situations developing from within the White House have caused me to write this letter, though in reality it should have been done much sooner. I understand there must be a devastating conflict raging within the walls of ‘The People’s House’ between your boss Obama’s Muslim faith and Wednesday’s Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day, showing that we are STILL a “Christian Nation.”

But I write to you today somewhat distressed over comments you made during a speaking engagement at the John F. Kennedy School of Government. During that forum, in which you blasted the TEA Party as an “‘anti-government” organization that thrives on scare tactics,” an audience member asked,

“Could the Obama administration write much simpler booklets on housing foreclosure, on the health care bill, whereas a typical person, including those in the tea party, could understand the basics of it?”

Your reply, and acknowledgment of his analogies, are yet another condescending assessment of the philosophies within, and the people of, the TEA PARTY that emanate from within the Obama administration, and let me quote you:

“Hope and Change were so catchy because it was really very simple and it was something everyone understood the definition. And so I think part of what our challenge is is to find a very simple way of communicating.”

First of all, Valerie, Obama’s 2008 “Hope & Change” campaign slogan was not only simple; it was shallow and void of any and all intelligence, direction, purpose, or specifics (which definitely made it VERY EASY for his supporters to understand). But Conservatives and members of the TEA Party got it. We knew EXACTLY what his meaning and objectives were all about… a fundamental change (YES Val, we ALL remember Obama’s plea to “join me as I ‘FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE’ America!”) of the United States from a Republic form of government whose power is vested in “WE, The People” to a Marxist/socialist tyranny where government has complete control over every aspect of American life. As in what we eat, what we earn, what we drive, how we receive healthcare and insurance, in addition to a complete erasure of our sovereign borders and national identity. In other words, a complete destruction of the foundation, principles, and moral values upon which America was created by our Founding Fathers. All of which fits perfectly into your Islamic Shari’ah form of Theocracy (which, considering you and Obama were born and raised in it, you surely understand and advocate).

But you went even further than agree that a “simple little booklet” could help us understand your ultimate plan for the destruction of America. You continued to make direct attacks against the TEA Party, calling those of us who LOVE America, “anti-government extremists” (Janet Napolitano and Nancy Pelosi must have been ever-so-proud of you!),

“Even if they are in favor of, let’s say, a different form of health care insurance reform, fine; but what’s happening is it’s an anti-government – I mean, that’s the tea party. They really are, um, are, uh, trying to rebel against government at all. And I think that that’s … again, it’s an extreme.”

“And it’s always a lot easier, again, to scare people and to get them angry when they’re already scared, and they’re already uncertain. And I think that’s what the tea party is trying to capture.”

So now that you have made your views and opinions abundantly clear, let me proceed to my second point…

America already HAS that booklet, Ms. Jarrett. It was inspired by God Almighty and printed with the blood of the Patriots who sacrificed their lives to remove themselves from tyranny and repression. And inside that booklet are the designs, laws, and hopes of a people entrusted with the greatest gift from God, and the most incredible experiment in the history of human government. I believe you know well the booklet I speak of. It has been a source of contention, frustration, obstacle, and hatred for the Obama administration and the socialist/Marxist advocates who have attempted to bring America to her knees since January 2009… The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United States of America. (You can view these original documents at the National Archives just down the street from your office and see them for yourself!)

Whilst I am aware you are quite familiar with these documents, I would like to take the opportunity to provide you a refresher course on their content, none of which is open to your (or Obama’s) interpretation…

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” ~ Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

As you can see so simply, Valerie, the Founding Fathers were adamantly opposed to the tyrannical form of government you and Barrack Obama wish to institute amongst the American people, so much so that their very signatures on the bottom of this document provided for them a Death Warrant. Their faith, convictions, and moral strength sustained them throughout the American Revolution and provided the foundation for a new government amongst men, one that cherished individual, God-given rights, equality, and the liberties and freedoms that came with their sacrifice. This was a time of men, and when the last report from gunfire resonated across the American landscape, they had brought forth from their blood the genesis of a Nation of Exceptionalism. That commitment led to the establishment of the greatest governing document in the history of mankind… The Constitution of the United States of America.

Within our Constitution, which you so conveniently attempt to deny, are the Rights and Freedoms of the people of this great Nation; the restrictions of government; and the undeniable duty and responsibility we have to ensure, by rebellion if necessary, that never again may a nation enslave her people by treason and tyranny (something you should consider carefully, Ms. Jarrett…)

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” ~ Preamble to The Constitution of the
United States of America

But the Founding Fathers weren’t perfectly satisfied with the Constitution and wished to expand upon its meaning and definitions to ensure there were NO questions as to their thoughts and intentions, and that every American citizen was afforded the same equality, rights, and privileges without prejudice or qualification. THAT, Ms. Jarrett, is the difference between a REPUBLIC and a DEMOCRACY (the former protecting the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, whilst the latter provides for the denial of those rights in favor of, and advance of, MAJORITY rule). These are the first Ten Amendments to the Constitution, known asThe Bill of Rights.

For the sake of expediency, I just want to touch on a couple of the Amendments as they are really quite important to us and in essence lay out our rights and responsibilities to guard against the “fundamental change” in America and the establishment of tyranny you and the Obama administration have so fervently been advocating. Let’s start with the First…

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This should be quite simple for you and your followers, Valerie, and I am always baffled at the misunderstandings and interpretation. We as citizens of the United States have the God-given right to speak FREELY against our government, to assemble in protest, and to question our government’s actions and motives (both verbally and in print); and equally, we are free to worship God in any manner we wish. Additionally, it is our RIGHT and our DUTY to petition the government by any means necessary. In case you haven’t realized, this was a very poignant grievance within the Declaration against King George:

“In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Now it may just be me, but that whole statement sounds hauntingly familiar in light of the actions of the Obama administration. But that’s just me, and of course 100 million of my Patriot friends. For the past three-and-a-half years, we have watched not only the Executive Branch of the federal government, but Legislative and Judicial as well, attempt to usurp, deny, and strip the American people of their First Amendment Rights through legislation, court ruling, and Obama’s favorite ~ Executive Order. From his refusal to enforce the Constitution and Rule of Law, to his failure as Commander-in-Chief to secure our nation’s borders and remove those illegal, criminal elements that have come to this country and taken advantage of our nation’s resources without contribution or loyalty, he has pandered to special-interest groups such as his Union supporters, homosexuals, Muslims, and illegal aliens in direct conflict with the Oath of Office he swore when he was inaugurated (contained in Article II, Section I). That, Ms. Jarrett, is a very serious dereliction of Constitutional duties (and one that was addressed in the Constitution, to wit):

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” ~ Article III, Section 3

So as you can see, Valerie, WE The People take these matters, and our responsibilities to question and resolve them, VERY seriously. Which brings me to my next point.

Whilst the First Amendment is the basis of the freedoms and liberties afforded the American people, our right to be secure in those liberties, freedoms, and our persons, is further expanded up on by the Fourth Amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” ~ Fourth Amendment

But what say, our own government should turn against us? What recourse do we have? While we know we have a right and a DUTY to protest and protect those rights, how can this be accomplished against a government who views its citizens as enslaved subjects? That, my friend, is called the SECOND AMENDMENT… something our Founding Fathers were once again VERY clear and concise about.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR Arms, shall NOT be infringed.” ~ Second Amendment

Let us be clear here, Ms. Jarrett– the Second Amendment in NOT about hunting, personal protection, or sport. It is about the citizens of this Nation protecting themselves against a TYRANNICAL government, one which we are seeing more and more of these days within our own borders under the Obama administration. From the illegal Fast & Furious operation to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, we have seen legislation passed and Executive Orders issued that attempt to weaken and prevent the American people from owning and maintaining firearms. Let me make something very clear to you, Ms. Jarrett… there will be blood on the streets of America, and on the hands of the administration, if EVER you attempt to remove from our homes or possession those instruments that provide us the ability to wage rebellion against an out-of-control Administration/Congress, or to restore this Nation to her previous exceptionalism. Understand though, we do not advocate the overthrow of the United States government, but rather a tyrannical administration seeking to strip away those rights, freedoms, and liberties forged in blood by the sacrifices of our forefathers, brothers, and sisters. A government maintained under the Constitution and her Amendments is perfect. It is those wishing that system of government irreparable harm who must be removed. And furthermore, I am proud to be one of the more than 89 million legal, registered gun owners who did NOT kill anyone today, and I have no plans to kill tomorrow either, unless circumstances require judicious action on my part.

So in closing, let me remind you, Ms. Jarrett, and your mindless minions that we HAVE that “BOOKLET”, and I will be more than happy to forward you one if you so desire (or you can get one from The CATO Institute). But we GET YOU! WE are well aware of what your desires are for this most incredible Nation. The TEA Party is about a restoration of America and the government, not a complete absence of it. And be aware: we WILL, come November 6, 2012, achieve our goals. NEVER underestimate the resolve and determination of the American People. It’s happened countless times throughout our 236 year history, and for the enemies of freedom and liberty, it didn’t turn out too well for them.

God bless you, Ms. Jarrett, and I hope this letter has served to remind you of the foundation, history, and fortitude of the greatest Nation on Earth. Semper Fi.

Robert P. Dean, USMC
Founder, The American Patriot Alliance”

Source:
http://www.impeachobamacampaign.com/an-open-letter-to-communist-val...
Note: The following articles and/or blog posts, videos and film relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. VALERIE JARRETT PLANTED BY COMMUNIST SYMPATHIZER? ‘Family worked closely with Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis!’-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On April 11, 2012:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/valerie-jarrett-planted-by-communist-sym...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/JaR0Yzzr6MKMvayw*B5FMpk6VH6PgJqdKDZDC-JPfWjvxHKvPVz3n8ua3SKPYORsBKraEBFi7hiec6-W1fP6dtFRjTgQpNyA/ValerieJarrettWasASlumLordInObamasStateSenateDistr ict.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
II. Video: Valerie Jarrett Was A Slum Lord In Obama’s State Senate District!-Posted on Western Journalism-By KRIS ZANE-On May 21, 2012:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/valerie-jarrett-was-a-slum-lord-in...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/cyQZ-4VbzdsdTNcksCsrdI2LCK5XSHk*aqSj1H-b6-CYAEHd3V8RO2Nl*oNe8tkCD9Xa-6OBuFRhIuKBmkMGcW-Ty3sx0nYS/ValerieJarrettBookbombshellObamacanceledBinLadenki llraidthreetimesatJarrettsurging.png?width=100[/IMG]
III. Book bombshell: Obama canceled Bin Laden ‘kill’ raid three times at Jarrett’s urging!-Posted on Right Wing News-By Matt Vespa-On July 29, 2012:
http://www.rightwingnews.com/democrats/valerie-jarrett-blocked-thre...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/y7EeHiZA1ZTODMTOSfVj1aQU1HOdhM14Ujvd17NOXtRdIqaw0l 535gpiM1MZhMB-jyDz88J-vuZa*fbbbfplOChnWMEiFhKf/ValerieJarrettAConnectionBetween3MassMurderersAndV alerieJarrettjpg.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
IV. A Connection Between 3 Mass Murderers And Valerie Jarrett?-Posted on Western Journalism-By TIM POWERS-On August 10, 2012:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/a-connection-between-3-mass-murder...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/EZlEvMY7iYgmaesNN9cieGbMPGuir-snxXCtTu8rdYNLRJmNx3ZLLlsLgSM77A581en6MXGrlV0padBh nMpELcqrqaKlI*gy/AmericasNewCivilWar.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
V. America’s New Civil War!-Posted on TeaPartyorg-By Katie Baker, MOD 11-On August 17, 2012:
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/topic/show?id=4301673%3ATopic%3A8...

VI. Iron Curtain begins Descending onto the United States of America!-Posted on Canada Free Press-By Sher Zieve-On December 2, 2011:
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/42915
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/a2Y0PTPZUMH3SDdnIGwqfwax3WfM*d-bpwQt4p3ErL8yYaseEF7zbZ8gicJcKkt6q22*ZbXdI6kXlmszC XjGDZMu2XbTuuOK/ScannedRetinaLogo.png?width=200[/IMG]
VII. How do you like the egg on your face? Scrambled? Omelet?-Posted on Scanned Retina Blog-By Arnie-On August 18, 2012:
http://scannedretina.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/how-do-you-like-the-e...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/lfkEn*4SHMFKWo*cx78vjQuxe1MhsUB9*B3Vp0GGa1p44nqHl6 Oa0i6*WC4RRYV97fcHJRfX0hNmIDeCmouZ*c0sj3YB9GSd/MarxismAugust202012FormerunionbossatOccupyeventOur goalistooverthrowthecapitalistsystemandbuildcommun ism.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
VIII. Former union boss at Occupy event: Our goal is to ‘overthrow the ca...!-Posted on The Daily Caller-By Matthew Boyle-On August 20, 2012:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/20/fo...t-occupy-event...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/MfBhVP4GilERYIFmm-X2kiX5jcicxaci3B3W5Y*YVoaw1qyrpRSyQ4kYWT289bwaN8Ga es6-nZP2av2uieEGswPtHctaxi8n/ObamaTheUnvettedFilm.png?width=150[/IMG]
IX. New Film “The Unvetted” Exposes Obama’s Communist Cover-up!-Posted on Right Side News-On August 23, 2012:
http://www.rightsidenews.com/2012082316905/editorial/rsn-pick-of-th...
Continue Reading My Following Blog Posts That Relate To This Disturbing Issue:

Report: “Obama is Preparing to Leave the Presidency”!
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/report-obama-is-preparin...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/G261tRKH*txwOp21-GCVojNXh8n2eSeogVAceSvjJNTAmF8fz43v7wq*dfoOTgXCV32 xm9wLHqLq*sM3N6xHo1gEYPfElc3m/KonstantinPreobbrazhensky.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Communists and Muslims: The Hidden Hand of the KGB!
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=4301673%3ABlogPos...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/B-Q7UxORPmARtykgkOofxDX9S4G48WAV94cRiPSIbzc2WkyzxU5Y R0Bc8lnj2dazm*GgRpUGM0C3NsrZBsPOn96ppz978XhS/ObamaJustCaughtInaLieSocialist.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
OBAMA JUST CAUGHT IN BIG LIE? ‘Documents confirm he was member of socialist party!’
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=4301673%3ABlogPos...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/mL*FuIhRqp9z5j3l9VHV8v*hL5QUde8e1ZuN1YGeDe1Rwulonc VHeJQ3QiNpA3FPgzzSbpoj2Q9dUL9emRgQoSTPgiO5uE3X/CommieCapital.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Progressives and Communists Are Out of the Closet Together!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/progressives-and-communist...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/45iu0Vp3PpnOOHAhUnUSqsid8CrS1dtTjxyHRUK*Gw4F0veg8s CTkl7cyMU5SNq9fbib-q76CNsrIEgl3ijC7eYi5Vtocef4/ObamaAFLCIO.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Is President Obama inciting riots across the US?
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/23/is-president-obama-incitin...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/RE1H*RXxuzrSns*2Xx4evvhJntOv1aTflZ9au9-IuBBLk0uSC2ZyQdyXjt373aWt1hPM49-Rzo-KXfvj5VoMfs2yf1L9ioe8/MarxisminAmerica.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-underst...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/HWjnOQq5hEjs730*PUbfraMf2gkRDT8oy*6c3D*B7dDtHydl1q w2ScoQ8XybMNEs5hHqukGOBuxDt4JbZkS-CzHdkXr*0e3n/IslamHollyLandFountation.gif?width=200[/IMG]
The Islamic Infiltration: Inside Our Government, Armed With Our Secrets!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/the-islamic-infiltration-i...

Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/godfather-of-the-islamic-r...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/9X89hNU8ic5wW1uLuNajmYUNEjuXyJU8kwvE-gjkAlcAFDh7f1HLsEKXYt3UdScW*Ll-B9cfC56b4zrBcYX457zTIZHn-jYS/ObamaCivilizationJihadObamasConnection.jpg?width=1 50[/IMG]
‘CIVILIZATION JIHAD’ AND OBAMA’S CONNECTIONS!
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/civilization-jihad-and-o...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/j0KTS1brV4me679TutqVvgnofK52557t*jvZRPgFz0JXc0lIwF Zw0rvZ1z00c94MoAFL5S-d51zstslUidHbzYH1rn3HARmr/ObamaWhorancoverforObamasIslamicbackground.jpg?wid th=100[/IMG]
Who ran cover for Obama’s Islamic background? ‘Tracing The Politics And The Money Behind Obama’s 2008 Campaign’!
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/who-ran-cover-for-obama-...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/dD1Pt02wsk7Ry2v6h-H2-joJKpjDrbBthjQvsoQmWJgN43YKInmvMw2h689Ol*FklqNs5rY D2JTpVP3WdL3rTlbNkeQvyuxj/MilitaryPaysThePrice.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
The Military Pays the Price for Obama’s Agenda!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/08/11/the-military-pays-the-pric...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/xvg03MJhTS8KlRuW9-ZNNd*y9iZbliQx8LwYuSopark8nFYjSjcPaYCtNOwuDhufjO7A QdAm9*NRIuwGEH0plpQBSyWhEGxg/ObamaandPaneta.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Veterans and members of our Armed Forces under attack!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/23/veterans-and-members-of-ou...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/foz34T9*Boj8duur3Ow4Kh-MiCDt0nyu2yWXn1*K9nrJsYeGwyXpxiRUJnXcJrx8vSMlCdLnz Xh3op-8d76MIA29KV6oS4Qg/OpSecFlagLogo.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Special Ops Group Attacks Obama Over Bin Laden Bragging, Leaks!
http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/special-ops-group-att...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/foz34T9*BohcNfHzFEsqoc65nZSQBei6rDc2tumNT-vKgtcsPWfTlvkM4MEtsmxPIUvKc1JR3cSnIJG87PHA0JWCpVC5 LlfX/MilitaryIstheObamaRegimeTargetingVeterans.png?widt h=100[/IMG]
Is the Obama Regime Targeting Veterans?-Posted on TeaPartyorg-By Jake Martinez-On August 24, 2012:
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/topics/is-the-obama-regime-target...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/BRJZJzqTpgzqBe**dpxs-Vz8aGSTtRDiJLjy4UQjpWuNl9xRjeboRsQDcVlR*Iobg8Q67Va CYL8w9ZzSMngYHw1uS*RtsRL4/UNSecurityCouncilLogo.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
What is the true intent of the UN Small Arms Treaty?
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/what-is-the-true-intent-of...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/SF9aMzAZg0zoougfoWhCbnqOJ9CS3c4tm*Isgqd-DNMI2png6cwxhJ1TkvHFswLOc69lwsqqPLBDDYiTUFwwsb3Vqg HWjfSb/ObamaFraud.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetr...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/roaT5Fx6a*ias6ghITnRMs5X3YTB8nIj7*ljc6RukkJ7ErgBKj Tsaa0nKveFVuHq7QeOlSM5m*6m9XOmW3lJQH8xkxdZITIv/DeclarationofIndependenceWhyItStillMatters.jpg?wid th=100[/IMG]
Is History Repeating Itself?
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/0...eating-itself/
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/kpH6nbK9uCkYjFfNliiarMz3eD8n03qZ1rvIOx7yYL*qCBvtOT sjRQgFJKrDIv8aC7RRQUSu5WGOvU8HbIebgw__/ObamaSheeple.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
The Russian View of What Has Been Happening In America!
http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/22/the-russian-view-of-what-h...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/E5-H*vGpDiDeJj**itYIZZHShujx-Hfibv5FPbmGhFtmxpsPKXzYU1SUNs3i-aYoW5CHFxUGAmW-yGBZj8A0hoogkU6RBwrN/SenatorTomUdall.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
Letter To NM U.S. Senator Udall Regarding Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan!-Posted on We The People USA-ByJake Martinez-On August 15, 2012:
http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/letter-to-nm-u-s-sena...
Note: The following videos seem extremely appropriate today-hope you agree:
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/wr2hTIGJ7SoQJQSV9kTw*NNoCYwsF9ku4EnJdnXDhR4pR2ALdi 4Dzm2Hs45gmUk837hnKkfE3-TPqel8IyepYS-5jDbwC23p/GiveMeBackMyAmerica.jpg[/IMG]
Give Me Back My America!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFVfH...layer_embedded
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/cyQZ-4VbzdsYLZS8Cm48VE1mlVxjcIJLilG2uAyjnkm12wGMQ*yeHdS b8lZ3TitlrjQXbf7sEOvydSfEZgoKR6bPeJDFyzOr/WeWantOurCountryBack.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
We Want Our Country Back!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yFNcWf1HLE&feature=player_embed...
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/DMPowYTImSDnCJf3Hd4WUswAW3mVY9-fZW3SDJImMpXIQPKn0*Av7kboevDo*OlCiB04il*QOz3pEro6M 5w6GoA5PYrY-3In/TheFightinSideofMe2.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
The Fightin Side of Me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32-Oy...layer_embedded
“Food For Thought”
[IMG]http://api.ning.com:80/files/dD1Pt02wsk6p9V22Z-ykWmIYowbu6tE8a*eywg8fVVspGIuOe0a0y1lWh6O11TShEwx5 q*q1HQRBdxq-zAm5HtM241cXMRhK/GodBlessTheUSA.jpg?width=100[/IMG]
God Bless the U.S.A.!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZ...eature=related
Semper Fi!
Jake


Views: 136

[vector7]

Iran agrees to one-on-one nuclear talks, US sources say

Bush-era official: 'It would be unconscionable to go to war if we haven’t had such discussions'


Digital Globe / AP file This 2004, satellite image provided by DigitalGlobe and the Institute for Science and International Security shows the military complex at Parchin, Iran, about 19 miles southeast of Tehran.

By Helene Cooper and Mark Landler


updated 10/20/2012 5:46:40 PM ET
WASHINGTON — The United States and Iran have agreed for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, according to Obama administration officials, setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran.

Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election, a senior administration official said, telling their American counterparts that they want to know which American president they would be negotiating with.

News of the agreement — a result of intense, secret exchanges between American and Iranian officials that date almost to the beginning of President Obama’s term — comes at a critical moment in the presidential contest, just two weeks before Election Day and a day before the final debate, which is to focus on national security and foreign policy.

It has the potential to help Mr. Obama make a case that he is nearing a diplomatic breakthrough in the decade-long effort by the world’s major powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, but it could pose a risk if Iran is seen as using the prospect of the direct talks to buy time.

It is also far from clear that Mr. Obama’s opponent, Mitt Romney, would go through with the negotiation should he win election. Mr. Romney has repeatedly criticized the president as showing weakness toward Iran and failing to stand firmly with Israel against the Iranian nuclear threat.

The White House publicly denied the report on Saturday evening. “It’s not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections,” said Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman. He added that the administration has “said from the outset that we would be prepared to meet bilaterally.”

Reports of the agreement have circulated among a small group of diplomats involved with Iran.

There is still a chance the initiative could fall through, even if Mr. Obama is re-elected. Iran has a long history of using the promise of diplomacy to ease international pressure on it. In this case, American officials said they were uncertain whether Iran’s opaque supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had signed off. The American understandings have been reached with senior Iranian officials who report to him, an administration official said.

Source: No deal yet on US-Iran nuclear talks Even if the two sides sit down, American officials worry that Iran could prolong the negotiations to try to forestall military action and enable it to complete critical elements of its nuclear program, particularly at underground sites. Some American officials would like to limit the talks to Iran’s nuclear program, one official said, while Iran has indicated that it wants to broaden the agenda to include Syria, Bahrain and other issues that have bedeviled relations between Washington and Tehran since the American hostage crisis in 1979.

“We’ve always seen the nuclear issue as independent,” the administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the matter. “We’re not going to allow them to draw a linkage.”

The question of how best to deal with Iran has political ramifications for Mr. Romney as well. While he has accused Mr. Obama of weakness, he has given few specifics about what he would do differently.

Moreover, the prospect of one-on-one negotiations could put Mr. Romney in an awkward spot, since he has opposed allowing Iran to enrich uranium to any level — a concession that experts say is likely to figure in any deal on the nuclear program.

Beyond that, how Mr. Romney responds could signal how he would act if he becomes commander in chief. The danger of opposing such a diplomatic initiative is that it could make him look as if he is willing to risk another American war in the Middle East without exhausting alternatives.

“It would be unconscionable to go to war if we haven’t had such discussions,” said R. Nicholas Burns, who led negotiations with Tehran as under secretary of state in the George W. Bush administration.

Iran’s nuclear program “is the most difficult national security issue facing the United States,” he said, adding: “While we should preserve the use of force as a last resort, negotiating first with Iran makes sense. What are we going to do instead? Drive straight into a brick wall called war in 2013, and not try to talk to them?”

The administration, officials said, has begun an internal review among officials at the State Department, the White House and the Pentagon to determine the American negotiating stance, and what the United States would put in any offer. One option under consideration is “more for more” — more restrictions on Iran’s enrichment activities in return for more easing of sanctions.

Israeli officials initially expressed an awareness of, and openness to, a diplomatic initiative. But when asked for a response on Saturday, Israel’s ambassador to Washington, Michael B. Oren, said the administration had not informed Israel, and that the Israeli government feared Iran would use new talks to “advance their nuclear weapons program.”

“We do not think Iran should be rewarded with direct talks,” he said, “rather that sanctions and all other possible pressures on Iran must be increased.” Direct talks would also have implications for an existing series of negotiations involving a coalition of major powers, including the United States. These countries have imposed sanctions to pressure Iran over its nuclear program, which Tehran insists is for peaceful purposes but which Israel and many in the West believe is aimed at producing a weapon.

Dennis B. Ross, who oversaw Iran policy for the White House until early 2012, says one reason direct talks would make sense after the election is that the current major-power negotiations are bogged down in incremental efforts, which may not achieve a solution in time to prevent a military strike.

Mr. Ross said the United States could make Iran an “endgame proposal,” under which Tehran would be allowed to maintain a civil nuclear power industry. Such a deal would resolve, in one stroke, issues like Iran’s enrichment of uranium and the monitoring of its nuclear facilities.

Within the administration, there is debate over just how much uranium the United States would allow Iran to enrich inside the country. Among those involved in the deliberations, an official said, are Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, two of her deputies — William J. Burns and Wendy Sherman — and key White House officials, including the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and two of his lieutenants, Denis R. McDonough and Gary Samore.

Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium bears on another key difference between Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney: whether to tolerate Iran’s enrichment program short of producing a nuclear weapon, as long as inspectors can keep a close eye on it, versus prohibiting Iran from enriching uranium at all. Obama administration officials say they could imagine some circumstances under which low-level enrichment might be permitted; Mr. Romney has said that would be too risky.

But Mr. Romney’s position has shifted back and forth. In September, he told ABC News that his “red line” on Iran was the same as Mr. Obama’s — that Iran may not have a nuclear weapon. But his campaign later edited its Web site to include the line, “Mitt Romney believes that it is unacceptable for Iran to possess nuclear weapons capability.” He repeated that in a speech at Virginia Military Institute this month.

For years, Iran has rejected one-on-one talks with the United States, reflecting what experts say are internal power struggles. A key tug of war is between President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ali Larijani, Iran’s former nuclear negotiator and now the chairman of the Parliament.

Iran, which views its nuclear program as a vital national interest, has also shied away from direct negotiations because the ruling mullahs did not want to appear as if they were sitting down with a country they have long demonized as the Great Satan.

But economic pressure may be forcing their hand. In June, when the major powers met in Moscow, American officials say that Iran was desperate to stave off a crippling European oil embargo. After that failed, these officials now say, Iranian officials delivered a message to their American counterparts that Tehran would be willing to sit down for one-on-one talks.

At the United Nations in September, Mr. Ahmadinejad hinted as much, describing the reasoning to American journalists. “Experience has shown that important and key decisions are not made in the U.S. leading up to the national elections,” he said.

A senior American official said that the prospect of direct talks is why there has not been another meeting of the major-powers group on Iran.

In the meantime, pain from the sanctions has deepened. Iran’s currency, the rial, plummeted 40 percent in early October.

Even with possible negotiations in the offing, there is no evidence Iran has slowed its fuel production. It continues to make nuclear fuel and has refused to allow international inspectors into key sites. Any negotiation with Iran, American officials say, would have to include highly intrusive inspection regimes.