I have fled away from this sin as the Lord hath told ...
Proud to be a Jew and an Israeli
אני ישראלי - I am Israeli
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/user/
http://www.israpundit.org/
Previously posted ...
Panoply of conCERN !!!
http://conpats.blogspot.com/
Commentary about CERN from beloved Ben Davidson ...
pertaining to
http://www.wnd.com/2015/08/
Ben obviously found the 1% lie and more, within the article and replies ...
Don't buy the CERN hype - it is 1,000,000% bullshit.
Hallelujah !
CHECK DAILY - Suspicious 0bservers - Ben Davidson
extensive research links in each vid description and comments
Your mind is your weapon
237,387+ community members
https://plus.google.com/
http://www.observatoryproject.
http://www.
http://www.
http://spaceweathernews.com/
http://www.earthchangesmedia.
Morning updates at 06:30 EST - 24/7/365
http://www.youtube.com/user/
https://www.youtube.com/user/
✡ ✡ ✡
Yavoh ~ He is coming !
Yahweh - Yeshua - Ruach Ha-Kodesh
Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה
BREAKING NEWS FROM ISRAEL
Minute by minute updates here ...
Watching for Yeshua Ha-Mashiach
http://www.kolbonews.com/
https://friendsoflibi.org/
http://www.ynetnews.com/home/
http://www.jewishworldreview.
http://www.israpundit.org/
http://www.voiceofisrael.com/
http://www.defendingzion.org/
http://www.breakingisraelnews.
http://pamelageller.com/
http://www.jihadwatch.org/
http://www.joyofkosher.com/
http://prophecyupdate.
http://www.prophecynewswatch.
http://prophecynewsdaily.com
http://www.itshallcometopass.
http://www.
http://hummingbird027.com/
http://pawcreek.org/
http://www.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/
http://www.yeshua-hamashiach.
http://free.messianicbible.
Pray at the Kotel - the Western Wailing Wall
http://free.messianicbible.
Entire Media News on this Planet
click continue to use PressDisplay.com
http://www.pressdisplay.com/
Rally - Stop Iran - Sept 1st 2015
Thanks - beloved Ted Belman writing from Jerusalem, Israel for 12+ years ...
Stop Iran Rally is being held on September 1, 2015 -
in front of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s office,
at 780 Third Avenue, between 48th and 49th Streets.
Learn why a nuclear Iran must be stopped !
http://stopiranrally.org/
Speakers at the Stop Iran Rally on September 1 in front of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s office,
will include:
Rob Astorino
Westchester County Executive, serving his second, four-year term
Robert Bartlett
US Army Staff Sergeant Robert Bartlett, Retired, was gravely injured by an Iranian bomb in Iraq in 2005, and is the recipient of 12 military awards including a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart
Fred Fleitz
25 year career with the CIA, DIA, and the House Intelligence Committee staff, Chief of Staff to John Bolton when he was Under Secretary of State for Arms Control, senior vice president for policy and programs at the Center for Security Policy
Mike Gallagher
Radio Host from 970 AM The Answer
Senator Lindsey Graham
Third-Term Republican Senator, Congressman, Air Force Reserve Colonel
Jesse Hamilton
New York State Democratic Senator
Michael Leeden
Historian, Expert on Iran’s failed 2009 Green Revolution, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Senator Joe Lieberman
Chairman of United Against Nuclear Iran, Former Democratic and Independent Senator, serving from 1989 to 2013
Kevin McCullough
Radio Host from WMCA and 970 The Answer
Daniel Miller
Victim of an Iranian-financed terror attack by Hamas in Jerusalem who then sued the Islamic Republic of Iran in US courts.
Rebecca Yousefzadeh Sassouni
Iranian-American lawyer and activist whose family was forced to flee Iran
Sami Steigmann
Sami is a child survivor of experiments, abuse and torture at the hands of Nazi doctors at
labor camp in Mogilev Podolski, Ukraine, during World War II
Ken Stethem
Former US Navy SEAL whose brother Robert Stethem, also a Navy Seal, was kidnapped, along with 39 other passengers
on TWA Flight 847, then tortured and shot by Iranian terror proxy Hezbollah
David Webb
Radio Host, Sirius XM Patriot Ch 25
James Woolsey
Former Director of the CIA and Chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Our mission is to educate our countrymen on the dangerous accord being
negotiated today in Geneva that will soon be put up for a vote in Congress.
Our aims:
1. An end to the farce being perpetrated against the American people with a pending
deal which will endanger America and our allies.
2. A restoration of the ORIGINAL demands – NO nuclear military capability,
NO centrifuges and authority for any and all unannounced inspections
of all known and any future facilities discovered.
3. Providing an understanding that a failure to STOP IRAN NOW
will necessitate a military response later.
http://stopiranrally.org/
http://www.rjchq.org/
UANI Ad Highlights Iran's Record of Violating International Agreements
Don’t Settle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/user/
Mark Wallace - http://
America Can’t Trust Iran
Tell your elected officials that America can’t risk more concessions to Iran !
http://
Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Ephesians 2:19 KJV
I ran away from the Iran Deal !!!
The Chosen One
by David Francis
August 28, 2015
Meet Adam Szubin,
Obama’s point man to sell the Iran deal to Israel.
Three days http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
The July 17 celebration was organized by Adam Szubin, acting https://www.whitehouse.gov/
Szubin is in Israel this weekend to lobby http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
Szubin’s argument is likely to fall on deaf ears. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is the most vocal opponent of the deal between Tehran and world powers, including the United States. Netanyahu fears the agreement, which would ease bruising economic sanctions against Iran, would give government hard-liners in Tehran enough of a cash windfall http://www.breitbart.com/
Before heading to Tel Aviv, Szubin said he’ll seek to convince Israeli officials that this will not be allowed to happen. He planned to meet http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
The remaining sanctions against Iran will be enforced “with all the toughness that people have come to expect from the U.S. Treasury,” Szubin told reporters Thursday, according to a transcript obtained by Foreign Policy. “I expect I will be addressing some of the finer points. So not just which sanctions remain in place irrespective of the [Iran deal], but also how we will be rigorously enforcing them.”
It’s a sell he has struggled to make before. Along with White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and top State Department negotiator Wendy Sherman, Szubin wasn’t allowed http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/
“There is no ‘signing bonus,’” Szubin said http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
These were chilly receptions for a man who, on the surface, appears to be universally admired around Washington — a difficult feat in a town filled with backbiting and relentless ambition. His role as an advocate for the Iran deal highlights Szubin’s importance to the White House’s strategy to deal with conflicts around the world.
Obama insists that projecting “soft power” http://www.nationaljournal.
“Adam understands the complexity of the sanctions world and implications for national security,” said Juan Zarate http://csis.org/expert/juan-
“He’s been part of this world for a very long time,” added Zarate, now a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Obama himself has named-checked Szubin. During a rare July appearance https://www.whitehouse.gov/
“This is a vital position to our counterterrorism efforts,” Obama said then, adding that cracking down on illicit Islamic State financial streams is key to degrading the extremists’ grasp in Iraq and Syria. “Nobody suggests Mr. Szubin is not qualified. He’s highly qualified.”
Szubin, who has an undergraduate http://www.treasury.gov/about/
In 2006, Szubin, who was then in his early 30s, was appointed by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to head http://www.treasury.gov/press-
“When he first got to OFAC as director, he was young. And he looked really young on top of that,” the official said. “There were people who had an immediate skepticism.”
While at the Treasury Department, he has been busy. He has carried out Obama’s strategy to starve terrorists in Somalia, for example, by hammering U.S. financial institutions to ensure that remittances http://www.treasury.gov/
“Any time you’re talking about funds-transfer mechanisms — whether it’s wires, whether it’s the banking system — any funds transfer can be exploited by bad actors, including terrorist groups,” Szubin told PBS’s NewsHour http://www.pbs.org/newshour/
At the same time, Szubin has helped develop a sanctions regime against Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, for meddling in eastern Ukraine. “There was a need here for a rapid response — and rapid in a meaningful, not just symbolic, way — to identify key [Russian] cronies and key financial networks,” Szubin was quoted as saying in a 2014 Newsweek http://www.newsweek.com/2014/
The Treasury Department denied FP‘s request to interview Szubin for this article.
There are vocal critics of the carrot-and-stick approach that sanctions provide. Republicans, including most of the field of 2016 GOP hopefuls http://www.nationaljournal.
Within Congress, there’s also a chorus of critics who don’t think sanctions are enough to stop Putin.
Obama “is afraid of provoking Vladimir Putin,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said in June.
“Vladimir Putin is on the move because he has paid no price for his aggression.”
“What Putin is trying to do is market the strongman concept,” added http://in.reuters.com/article/
Zarate said he suspects that skepticism about Obama’s sanctions strategy is what is holding up Szubin’s appointment. “It has nothing to do with Adam and his qualifications,” he said.
Szubin is an “excellent diplomat and negotiator,” added Elizabeth Rosenberg, a senior fellow http://www.cnas.org/Rosenberg at the Center for a New American Security who has worked with Szubin in the past. “He leads by example, which is really powerful, and sets an important tone for his colleagues and people working for him.”
But being well liked only counts for so much. And as he seeks to win over Israeli officials this weekend
in a relentless push for the Iran nuclear accord, Szubin may find his charm offensive
isn’t enough for a Jewish state on the defense.
Article URL passworded
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/
♥†♥ ♥†♥ ♥†♥
The Iran nuclear deal is President Obama’s Iraq troop surge
George W. Bush's foreign policy gamble might help predict the fate of Obama's
by James Jeffrey
The drama is breathtaking. A decisive president makes a crucial decision on the Middle East issue that defines his tenure, a decision that could transform not just the specific situation but regional security. Yet he has just lost both houses of Congress, opinion polls on the decision are heading south, lawmakers are up in arms, and even some in his administration have doubts. But rather than hesitate, he drives ahead.
Barack Obama, 2015, with Iran? No, George W. Bush, 2006-07, with the Iraq troop surge to save his effort in the country he ordered the U.S. military to invade. Both presidents, at the same point in their tenures, pushed major initiatives against very strong domestic opposition. Given the similarities, the fate of Bush’s surge could provide insight into the fate of the Joint Comprehensive Program of Action with Iran. [...]
https://www.washingtonpost.
http://t.uani.com/1KnOfxn
James F. Jeffrey is the Philip Solondz distinguished fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
He served as U.S. ambassador to Turkey from 2008 to 2010 and Iraq from 2010 to 2012.
More from beloved Mark Wallace
- http://
WSJ: "Capitol Hill opponents of the landmark Iranian nuclear accord are devising a Plan B to ratchet up pressure on Iran as President Barack Obama moves closer to locking up the support needed to implement the deal... One focus is expected to be the 20-year-old Iran Sanctions Act, which expires at the end of 2016. The law prohibits investments of more than $20 million by U.S. or foreign firms in much of Iran's energy industry. Sens. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.) and Bob Menendez (D., N.J.) are pushing a bill to extend the law for an additional decade. They have said such sanctions must be reauthorized to ensure that Iran can be punished if it cheats on the nuclear deal or commits other violations. Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), a presidential candidate, and other Republican lawmakers are also drafting bills to impose new sanctions on the Revolutionary Guards, or IRGC. 'I'm trying to make sure Americans aren't blown up, we're trying to prevent the IRGC and the Quds Force from their external terror plots,' said Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.). U.S. officials believe the IRGC is the single most dominant entity in the Iranian economy, with vast holdings in real estate and construction, telecommunications and energy. Maintaining, or increasing, sanctions on the unit could stave off a flood of new investment into Iran after the nuclear agreement goes into place."
http://t.uani.com/1hOXR82
The Hill: "Republicans intend to hammer Senate Democrats next month if they do not allow an up-or-down vote on a measure disapproving President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran. Democrats appear close to having enough support for the deal to bottle up the disapproval measure with procedural motions. If Republicans vote in a united bloc, they would need the support of six Democrats to break a filibuster, but only two Democrats have broken rank so far. If the resolution is filibustered, it would be a major victory for the White House, which wouldn't have to use President Obama's veto pen to protect the Iran deal. Opponents of the agreement, however, believe Senate Democrats will pay a political cost. 'Democrats will be setting themselves up for a further political hit if they deny the people the opportunity - the people meaning members of Congress - to vote on it,' said Allen Roth, the president of the hawkish Secure America Now, which is staunchly opposed to the agreement. 'I think it'll be handing a political gift to the Republicans.' Republicans have already begun to make their case."
http://t.uani.com/1hP7zas
AFP: "A senior Kuwaiti lawmaker on Sunday described Iran as the 'true enemy' of Sunni-ruled Gulf Arab states, in a sign of growing tensions with the Shiite power. 'It has become clear to all that Iran is an enemy plotting to swallow up our states and resources and is the true enemy of the region,' Hamad al-Harashani, the head of the Kuwaiti parliament's foreign relations committee, said in a statement. It was the strongest Kuwaiti criticism in years of Iran, with which Kuwait has traditionally had better ties than its fellow Gulf Arab states. Harashani singled out an apparent bomb attack Friday in Bahrain as 'yet further evidence of Iran's aggression' in the region... 'Iran is seeking to spread chaos and undermine the ruling regimes' in the region, Harashani said, calling on Gulf states to boost security coordination. Kuwait and Iran were on relatively good terms for years until the Gulf state this month broke up a 'terrorist cell' and seized large quantities of weapons and explosives. Local media reported that the cell belonged to pro-Iranian Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah."
http://t.uani.com/1Q4kSip
Nuclear Program & Agreement
Reuters: "Iran's military capability has not been affected by its nuclear deal last month with six world powers, President Hassan Rouhani said on Saturday, moving to reassure hardliners that the deal was no sign of Iranian weakness. 'With regards to our defensive capability, we did not and will not accept any limitations,' Rouhani said at a press conference carried on live television. 'We will do whatever we need to do to defend our country, whether with missiles or other methods.' Last week, Iran unveiled a new surface-to-surface missile it said could strike targets with pinpoint accuracy within a range of 500 km (310 miles), a move likely to worry Tehran's regional rivals."
http://t.uani.com/1KzzZA8
AP: "President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday he opposes a parliamentary vote on the landmark nuclear deal reached with world powers because terms of the agreement would turn into legal obligations if passed by lawmakers. Rouhani told a news conference that the deal was a political understanding reached with the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, not a pact requiring parliamentary approval. The deal also says Iran would implement the terms voluntarily, he said... 'If the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is sent to (and passed by) parliament, it will create an obligation for the government . it will mean the president, who has not signed it so far, will have to sign it,' Rouhani said. 'Why should we place an unnecessary legal restriction on the Iranian people?'"
http://t.uani.com/1X6SBwp
Congressional Vote
Politico: "Critics of the Iran deal believed the August congressional recess was their best chance to scuttle the nuclear accord, as wavering lawmakers returned home to angry protesters and a barrage of TV ads. The longer the deal hung out there, they figured, the worse it would be for President Barack Obama. Instead, the monthlong break has been a major bust... Opponents are baffled that only 14 House Democrats and two Senate Democrats have sided with them. The polls are getting worse, Iranian leaders keep making impolitic comments and TV ads continue to hammer uncommitted lawmakers. What aren't these Democrats seeing, they wonder? ... 'There's a very strange disconnect now, which grows larger as every day goes by, between the way American people feel about the Iran agreement and the way members of Congress seem to feel,' said Lieberman, an independent who caucused with the Democrats and is now an architect of several big-dollar, anti-deal campaigns. 'In public opinion, the high point was the day the agreement was announced.' ... But other steadfast critics are still battling. United Against a Nuclear Iran, which Lieberman chairs, is preparing to unleash yet another ad against the deal. Coleman and Lieberman's American Security Initiative is still up on the air. And after going dark for several days, Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran is back on the air."
http://t.uani.com/1O42TqZ
WashPost: "Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz prevented consideration of a resolution at the party's summer meeting here that praised President Obama and offered backing for the nuclear agreement with Iran, according to knowledgeable Democrats. The resolution was drafted with the intention of putting the national committee on record in support of the agreement as Congress prepares to take up the issue when members return from their August recess... A party spokeswoman and said procedural issues prevented the proposed resolution from being considered. She did not directly address Wasserman Schultz's role in the decision-making. Other Democrats said that it was congresswoman's direct opposition that blocked its consideration."
http://t.uani.com/1JHq7Pv
Free Beacon: "A majority of American voters believe that President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry are to some extent misleading the public on the nuclear deal with Iran, a survey released by an organization that opposes the agreement indicates. Specifically, 64 percent of voters believe that Obama and Kerry are 'only telling Americans what they think will help the agreement be passed by Congress,' according to a poll released by Secure America Now. Only 19 percent believe that the president and his secretary of state are providing Americans with 'all the facts.' The poll also demonstrates that 82 percent of U.S. voters-and 74 percent of Democrats-oppose Obama's plan to grant $100 billion in sanctions relief to Iran over the next several months 'without approval from Congress.' ... According to the survey, which was conducted between Aug. 13 and 17, 61 percent of American voters want their representative lawmakers on Capitol Hill to vote to reject the deal in the wake of knowledge that Congress will not be provided with details of the Iran-IAEA agreements."
http://t.uani.com/1UnQIah
Sanctions Relief
WSJ: "In the 10 years since RAK Ceramics opened a $40 million tile manufacturing plant in Iran, the United Arab Emirates-based firm has racked up millions of dollars in losses in the Persian country, fired hundreds of employees and all but stopped its kilns from burning. But then Iran struck a nuclear deal with the U.S. and other foreign powers this summer. Now with sanctions expected to ease, RAK Ceramics is looking to boost output of the kitchen and bathroom tiles it sells in Iran and the wider region. Executives for one of the world's largest manufacturers of tiles and sanitary ware by capacity are now betting the long wait on Iran is about to pay off. 'We were a patient investor,' says Abdallah Massaad, RAK Ceramics' chief executive. RAK Ceramics is one of a handful of Arab-owned firms positioning their businesses to profit from a post-sanctions neighbor, even as frosty political ties between Iran and most of the Gulf Cooperation Council-Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the U.A.E., Oman, Qatar and Kuwait-show few signs of thawing. The week after the U.A.E. joined Saudi Arabian-led airstrikes in April against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, U.A.E.-owned Etihad Airways launched a daily commercial service to Iran's capital Tehran. Dubai-owned FlyDubai has launched seven new routes to Iran this year after a bilateral aviation agreement was signed in January between the U.A.E. and Iranian governments. Dubai's Jumeirah Group, operator of the ultra-luxury Burj Al Arab hotel, is searching for properties in Iran. Officials at DP World, one of the world's biggest shipping container handlers, recently visited the Persian state to see if the country's ports and railway infrastructure can be used to transport goods faster between China and Europe."
http://t.uani.com/1FcX2L0
Reuters: "Would-be foreign investors in Iran should be prepared to share the benefits of their deals, the country's president said, indicating Tehran will impose tough terms that could clash with U.S. regulations even after sanctions are lifted... President Hassan Rouhani on Saturday suggested foreign investors will be welcome only if they work with a local partner, hire local workers and transfer technology, in some of the most explicit comments to date about the obligations businesses are likely to face. 'If foreign companies or countries think they can take control of a market of 80 million people, they are mistaken, and we must not allow it,' Rouhani said at a news conference broadcast on state television on Saturday. 'Our policy is that you bring your investment and technology to the country and partner with Iranians, and then a part of the Iranian and regional markets will be within reach of us both and there will be employment for our youth.' Such requirements are typical in developing economies, but companies could get into trouble in Iran if they accidentally partner with an entity under non-nuclear sanctions or share technology with potential military applications, experts said... Companies could, for instance, end up linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), which controls much of the economy and often hides its financial interests. Much of the IRGC will remain under terrorism-linked U.S. sanctions. 'The risk of investing in a business in which there is either an overt or hidden IRGC interest is probably the single greatest risk facing investors who are exposed to U.S. or EU regulatory regimes,' said Nicholas Bortman, partner at risk consultancy GPW."
http://t.uani.com/1LFY6Me
Bloomberg: "Indian Oil Corp. is seeking to build a $3 billion petrochemicals plant in Iran, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter. Shares rose. The plan hinges on assurances from Iran that the 1 million-ton-a-year project will have access to cheap natural gas as feedstock, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the information isn't public. A company spokesman didn't respond to requests for comment by phone, text message and e-mail. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government is eyeing energy and infrastructure investments totaling billions of dollars in Iran, including upstream gas production and port developments. India has sought to secure ties with Iran and ensure access to its abundant hydrocarbons as years of sanctions on the Persian Gulf nation may be nearing an end."
http://t.uani.com/1LOC1xW
Reuters: "South Korea will consider increasing its imports of Iranian crude oil and condensate when sanctions on Tehran are lifted, a senior government official said on Monday. Woo Tae-hee, deputy minister for trade, who was part of a recent South Korean delegation to Iran seeking possible deals in the oil, gas and construction sectors noted there had been a sharp fall in imports of Iranian oil since the sanctions were imposed. 'Iranian crude has good quality, and its condensate is one we can utilize well,' Woo said. 'We will consider increasing imports of Iranian oil, which however will only be possible when the sanctions are lifted since they are still present.' ... Iran's Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh said after the delegation's visit that Seoul agreed to increase its purchases of Iranian oil once a nuclear deal with world powers cleared the way for an easing of international sanctions on Tehran."
http://t.uani.com/1NT0HVx
Terrorism
AFP: "A policeman was killed and seven people, including a child, injured in an explosion Friday evening in a predominantly Shiite district of Bahrain's capital Manama, authorities said... The minister said the explosives used in the apparent bomb attack was 'very similar' to that seized by authorities last month which 'came from Iran'. In July, Bahraini authorities declared they had foiled an attempt to smuggle weapons from Iran. A few days later, two police officers were killed and six others injured in a bomb attack on Sitra island outside Manama. Bahraini authorities said earlier this month they had arrested five suspects over the attack. Police chief Major General Tariq al-Hasan said the suspects had links to Iran's Revolutionary Guards and the Iran-backed Shiite militant movement Hezbollah."
http://t.uani.com/1VsK4lB
Human Rights
NYT: "Iran's judiciary sentenced two people to 10 years in prison on Sunday for spying for the United States and Israel, but their names were not released, local media reported. It was not clear if the Iranian-American reporter Jason Rezaian, who faces similar charges, was one of them. It is not uncommon in Iran to hand down sentences without revealing names of the convicted, especially in matters involving national security. Judiciary spokesman Gholami Hossein Mohseni Ejei told reporters that a revolutionary court, which is also handling Mr. Rezaian's case, had sentenced the two 'due to their espionage for the United States and Israel,' he said according to the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency... Mr. Rezaian is charged with spying and assisting the 'hostile' American government, Iran's judiciary has said. Despite four sessions in a closed court, no further details of the case or the allegations have been publicized. According to Iranian law, a verdict needs to be issued one week after the final court session. Mr. Rezaian's last session was held on August 10. Instead of issuing a verdict, Iran's judiciary issued a statement saying that it was up to the judge, Abdelqassem Salavati, to decide whether the August 10 session was the final one."
http://t.uani.com/1FcVWPt
AFP: "US Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday urged Iran to free Amir Hekmati, an American who served as a US Marine, from four years of 'unjust detention.' Saturday marks the fourth anniversary of Hekmati's imprisonment on what Kerry called 'false espionage charges' while Hekmati was visiting relatives in the Islamic republic. 'We repeat our call on the Iranian government to release Amir on humanitarian grounds,' Kerry said in a statement. 'This is a milestone no family wants to mark, and the Hekmati family has shown inspiring perseverance in the face of this injustice,' he added. 'And as befits a former Marine, Amir has shown tremendous courage in the face of this unjust detention.' Kerry reiterated his government's call for Iran to release two other Americans. These include pastor Saeed Abedini, who was arrested in 2012 and sentenced to eight years in jail for gathering a group of people to study the Bible, and Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. Kerry also urged Iran to 'work cooperatively' to help locate Robert Levinson, a former FBI agent who disappeared while on Iran's Kish island in 2007."
http://t.uani.com/1UnMwrh
AP: "Dozens of people at a Michigan rally released balloons Saturday to mark the four-year anniversary of Iran's refusal to free a former Marine from prison. But they first heard from Amir Hekmati, whose words were recorded weeks ago during a phone call with relatives. He has been in an Iranian prison since 2011, although the U.S. government denies he's a spy and has repeatedly called for his release. 'The list of people I want to thank is far too long to include here,' Hekmati, 32, said. Rain suddenly stopped in Bay City as about 100 people turned out to hear remarks from Hekmati's Flint-area family, U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee, D-Michigan, and others."
http://t.uani.com/1fRNqP8
AFP: "Iran's President Hassan Rouhani signalled Saturday there would be no quick resolution to the house arrest of the reformist political leaders who said an election was rigged in 2009. Though not mentioned by name, the house arrest of Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi was raised at a press conference to mark the start of Rouhani's third year in office. Mousavi and Karroubi have been under such restrictions since 2011. Both said that the presidential election two years earlier, which saw Mahmoud Ahmadinejad re-elected, was fraudulent. A reporter asked Rouhani why, despite 'reviving' hopes that the two former presidential candidates may be released, though again not naming them, 'we have not seen anything' on the issue. 'The government cannot do everything on its own,' Rouhani replied, acknowledging that the matter remained unsolved but suggesting it could be ended. 'I have made my efforts for resolving political and social problems but... more explanations can be given at the time within the framework of national interests.'"
http://t.uani.com/1MYjuOj
Foreign Affairs
AFP: "Iran has barred famed conductor Daniel Barenboim from entering the Islamic republic because of his Israeli citizenship, thwarting his plan to lead a performance in Tehran, media reported Sunday. Barenboim, the 72-year-old general music director of the Berlin State Opera House, said Thursday he was in talks with Iran about a concert, in what would have been a major example of cultural diplomacy. But an Iranian culture ministry spokesman, Hossein Noushabadi, said an investigation meant Barenboim could not enter the country for 'security reasons', though the Berlin orchestra was welcome. 'We have no problem with the German orchestra coming to Iran, but we are opposed to the person leading that group,' Noushabadi said, quoted by news agency ISNA. 'He has multiple nationalities and one of them is Israeli. For security reasons and to prevent issues following the entry of certain people into Iran, we stopped it.'"
http://t.uani.com/1PHflgU
Opinion & Analysis
Sen. James Inhofe & Scott Pruitt in WSJ:
"President Obama's executive agreement with Iran is enormously controversial for good reason. Negotiated in coordination with Russia, China, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, the deal welcomes Iran as a participant in the world community conditioned only on marginal changes to its nuclear program. It effectively allows Iran to maintain technology that would lead to a nuclear weapon, as well as continue its human-rights abuses, sponsoring of terrorism, imprisoning of American hostages, and threats to American allies, including Israel. Fortunately, the U.S. states have the power to limit these threats, if they all choose to use it. President Obama pursued this major international accord as an executive agreement, rather than as a treaty, in order to evade the Constitution's requirement of two-thirds approval by the U.S. Senate for enactment. The consequence of the president's decision to skirt the people's representatives in Congress is that the people, through the states, may come to their own decisions regarding sanctions on Iran. To date, 25 states have enacted such sanctions against Iran. This is pursuant to the explicit authorization for such sanctions contained in the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, in which Congress found 'that the United States should support the decision of any State or local government that for moral, prudential, or reputational reasons divests from, or prohibits the investment of assets of the State or local government in' Iran. These sanctions were bipartisan accomplishments in states from New York to Florida to Texas to California, and they were passed as expressions of those states' disapproval of a regime that holds American citizens in darkened cells and American allies under threat of annihilation. Secretary of State John Kerry confirmed during July 28 congressional testimony that President Obama's deal does not affect the states' ability to impose sanctions on Iran, but said that the administration 'will take steps to urge [the states] not to interfere,' because President Obama had, as part of the deal, agreed to 'actively encourage' the states to drop their sanctions. We urge states to do exactly the opposite. Rather than drop their sanctions against Iran, states should strengthen and expand those sanctions. Regardless of President Obama's view of Iran, the states certainly have numerous moral and reputational reasons to prohibit the investment of public assets, such as pension funds, into companies doing business with countries that sponsor terrorism, and to prohibit state agencies from doing business with such companies... Because of these moral, reputational and prudential reasons, on Monday we are sending and endorsing a letter and a draft sanctions document to all 50 states, calling on the 25 states with existing sanctions to strictly and aggressively enforce those sanctions, and encouraging the 25 states that have not yet enacted sanctions to take every executive and legislative action available to immediately impose sanctions on Iran." http://t.uani.com/1MYfAEZ
Richard Haass in WSJ:
"The agreement to constrain Iran's nuclear capacity, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which the U.S. Congress will vote on next month, places significant limits on Iran's nuclear program for a decade or longer. At the same time, the accord allows Iran access to resources that will enhance its ability to carry out a worrisome agenda throughout much of the Middle East. In addition, the agreement in no way resolves the problems posed by Iran's nuclear program. To the contrary, these problems could well grow as most of the restrictions on centrifuges and enriched uranium run out after 10 and 15 years respectively. So what should Congress do? Just to be clear, it is not being asked to vote on whether the accord is good or bad but whether the U.S. would be better or worse off with it. Nor should the vote be based on hopes the agreement will bring about a more moderate Iran. This is possible, but so, too, is the opposite. We cannot know if Iran will be transformed, much less how or how much. The agreement is a transaction that should be judged on its merits. It is a close call. The JCPOA like any pact is filled with compromises, some understandable, others questionable. Unfortunately, renegotiating the accord is not an option. The U.S. would quickly make itself rather than Iran the issue. International support for sanctions would erode. Rejecting the agreement would make it likely that Iran would resume nuclear activity in one or more areas the agreement prohibits. That would bring closer a difficult and far-reaching decision on whether to use military force in a preventive strike. Rejecting the agreement would also reinforce questions around the world as to American political dysfunction. Reliability and predictability are essential attributes for a great power that must both reassure and deter. On the other hand, simply voting in support of the agreement does nothing to address its shortcomings. There is, however, a third option: to make any vote in favor of the agreement conditional on the U.S. adopting policies and positions that supplement and clarify the JCPOA. The following seven points would address many of the legitimate questions and concerns voiced by members of Congress and others in a manner that would protect U.S. interests and position the U.S. to deal with the Iranian challenge for the long haul. These points could be made in a White House communication, congressional resolution, or both."
http://t.uani.com/1PHhHfN
Amb. James Jeffrey in WashPost:
"The drama is breathtaking. A decisive president makes a crucial decision on the Middle East issue that defines his tenure, a decision that could transform not just the specific situation but regional security. Yet he has just lost both houses of Congress, opinion polls on the decision are heading south, lawmakers are up in arms, and even some in his administration have doubts. But rather than hesitate, he drives ahead. Barack Obama, 2015, with Iran? No, George W. Bush, 2006-07, with the Iraq troop surge to save his effort in the country he ordered the U.S. military to invade. Both presidents, at the same point in their tenures, pushed major initiatives against very strong domestic opposition. Given the similarities, the fate of Bush's surge could provide insight into the fate of the Joint Comprehensive Program of Action with Iran. Bush's success suggests that, one way or another, Obama will also prevail in implementing the Iran deal... But aside from presidential grit and creative legal reasoning, there is another reason that Obama is likely to prevail. The international system over which the United States still presides rests on the ability of the American president to act unilaterally even on unpopular decisions if a vital national interest is at stake. Bush, facing the collapse of his Iraq policy if he could not curb that country's descent into civil war, acted on such an interest, despite resistance in Congress, deep skepticism in the Iraq Study Group and doubts among many top advisers. We see similar behavior by Obama on Iran. His American University defense of the deal was simplistic, but left no doubt where he stands. That doesn't mean the agreement deserves to survive, only that Obama will use every trick in the book to ensure it does. Just as Bush coupled the surge with commitments for a relatively rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, Obama might have to concede points on his Iran project to critics to save the deal, but save it he likely will. Which means the more interesting question is not whether the deal will survive, but whether the nuclear agreement and Obama's underlying Iran project will suffer the same fate as seen with Bush's Iraq project... Like the surge, the deal has become the defining element in a presidential project to transform the Middle East. Obama's is focused on Iran, while Bush's focused on Iraq. The first characteristic of these projects is serious risk - with Iraq, major conflict; with Iran, regional and alliance turbulence. The second is deviation from standard U.S. foreign policy since 1945. With few disastrous exceptions (North Korea 1950, Bay of Pigs 1961), that policy has concentrated on defending its global perimeter while containing first communism and, since 1989, chaos in places like the Middle East, in part due to public opposition to more ambitious but riskier national gambits. But ambitious is exactly what the projects behind the surge and Iran deal have been - to transform, respectively, Iraq and Iran, and thereby move the Middle East decisively toward a peaceful global community. Bush and Obama's means differ, but not the goal: fix the problem rather than, as usual, manage it... So the fate of Bush's project can shed light on Obama's. While the surge worked militarily, and some American-encouraged democratic reforms survive, the United States did not succeed in the larger project to inculcate our values in Iraq, and even less in the region as a whole. There are many reasons for the 'Arab Spring,' but Iraq was not among them. The surge was a courageous gamble by Bush that saved the United States and Iraq from military defeat, but has not transformed the Middle East. Obama's Iran project faces similar risks. Ambitious efforts of this kind require projecting our values onto very different societies, with extremely broad goals based on the presumed universality of those values. But this is a huge lift with little precedent aside from America's unique experiences in Japan and Germany. And thanks to the timing of U.S. elections, in both cases, soon after tactical success - implementing the surge, negotiating the Iran deal - the president in question had or has to make way for a successor, although in both cases, the larger project still faced or faces public skepticism. Bush's successor, Obama, campaigned on an 'ending America's wars' theme not compatible with a transformational Iraq policy, as seen in his half-hearted effort to keep a troop presence there. Likewise, Obama will yield office almost certainly to someone more skeptical toward Iran. That includes any Republican, but also Hillary Clinton, his former secretary of state, who said last month that 'even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran.' Thus, even if Obama is right on Iran's potential transformation, he won't be around to nudge it forward, just as Bush was not there to ensure that the surge's success could jump-start regional change. It's not that Bush had to be proven wrong on Iraq; rather, absent immediate, demonstrable and extraordinary success, the political friction such a bold endeavor generated almost guaranteed he would be succeeded by a leader who isn't enthused about carrying it forward. The timing didn't work for him, and well might not for Obama. His bet on an Iran transformed has to be immediately, demonstrably and extraordinarily right, or his larger project could suffer the same fate as Bush's in the hands of his successor."
http://t.uani.com/1KnOfxn
No comments:
Post a Comment