PDA

View Full Version : WTF.....Obama and Kerry Lied about Iran Deal?


SASless
18th Jul 2016, 21:06
In keeping with the new Thread Labeling Scheme...Let's try this one on.

Gee.....another Secret Document Leaked that clearly shows Obama and Kerry lied about the Iranian Nuke Deal. What a surprise....not!



News from The Associated Press (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-07-18-14-12-14)

Disclaimer

To qualify the Source of this information I wish to provide the following.


The Associated Press (AP) is an American multinational nonprofit news agency headquartered in New York City, and operated as a cooperative, unincorporated association. The AP is owned by its contributing newspapers, radio, and television stations in the United States, all of which contribute stories to the AP and use material written by its staff journalists. Most of the AP staff are Union members and are represented by the Newspaper Guild, which operates under the Communication Workers of America, which operates under the AFL-CIO.

As of 2007, news collected by the AP was published and republished by more than 1,700 newspapers, in addition to more than 5,000 television and radio broadcasters. The photograph library of the AP consists of over 10 million images. The AP operates 243 news bureaus in 120 countries. It also operates the AP Radio Network, which provides newscasts twice hourly for broadcast and satellite radio and television stations. Many newspapers and broadcasters outside the United States are AP subscribers, paying a fee to use AP material without being contributing members of the cooperative. As part of their cooperative agreement with the AP, most member news organizations grant automatic permission for the AP to distribute their local news reports. The AP employs the "inverted pyramid" formula for writing that enables the news outlets to edit a story to fit its available publication area without losing the story's essentials.

Cutbacks at rival United Press International in 1993 left the AP as the United States' primary news service, although UPI still produces and distributes stories and photos daily. Other English-language news services, such as the British Broadcasting Corporation, Reuters and the English-language service of Agence France-Presse, are based outside the United States.

Lonewolf_50
18th Jul 2016, 21:27
Caz, try to stay on topic.


The topic is the recent Iran Nukes deal that took a whole lot of effort by multiple nations in extended negotiations. This appears to be, from the article, what has some people upset.
But while some of the constraints extend for 15 years, documents in the public domain are short on details of what happens with Iran's most proliferation-prone nuclear activity - its uranium enrichment - beyond the first 10 years of the agreement.


The document obtained by the AP fills in the gap. It says that as of January 2027 - 11 years after the deal was implemented - Iran can start replacing its mainstay centrifuges with thousands of advanced machine





If you'd bother to do a bit of research, you will note that LTC North was convicted of obstruction of Congress (http://www.pprune.org/, to include a three year suspended sentence and two years of probation. (Why the sentence was suspended I don't recall). (I believe that the charge that stuck was Obstruction of Justice, but it's been about 30 years so I'd need to go back and check).) and accepting an illegal payment.

Nervous SLF
18th Jul 2016, 21:47
More on alleged liars sent to me in an e-mail. There is even more but I hesitate to post that:-

Ed Klein’s book: Unlikeable: The Problem With Hillary hammers the final nails into
the coffin of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s flagging presidential aspirations.
Highly regarded journalist and political analyst Ed Klein has thoroughly documented
HRC’s decades-long trail of lies, deception, and conniving.


GOOD MESSAGE HERE.... NOT TO MENTION that ED KLEIN who wrote the book
on the Clintons - coming out next week -- said Hillary was called to the office of Valerie
Jarrett and Obama back in 2009 and told her she had to stop sending emails thru her
personal server ---OBVIOUSLY SHE DIDN'T LISTEN TO THEM. So, YES, Obama
knew and Jarrett Knew and Huma knew along with how many others!!!!

SASless
18th Jul 2016, 21:55
Prosecuted by the same Government that provided him a Protective Services Detail by the Naval Investigative Service (NIS), fore runner of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS).

Many of his PSD also provided Security for the Israeli Minister of Defense and other Notables during the secret negotiations for what later became known as IranGate.

You might accept I have some "inside" knowledge of those two Evolutions.

Politics is a fickle thing sometimes....with some folks falling on Swords for the Team.

Lonewolf_50
18th Jul 2016, 22:07
I thought this topic was Nukes and Iran Deal. If you all want to talk about Ollie and Iran and Poindexter and others, why not start a new thread? There is already one about Hillary and her emails.

SASless
18th Jul 2016, 22:43
When the Darts start hitting close to home detraction and obstruction are th first step closely followed by name calling.

Obama, Kerry, , ,Jarrett, Mills and others decided to lie as Obama just had to have an agreement. Josh Ernest bragged about it for crying out loud!

vapilot2004
18th Jul 2016, 23:23
Did I mistype pprune and get the Drudge Report? Rush Limpbowels dot com?

Lonewolf_50
18th Jul 2016, 23:28
vapilot, did you read the link or not? I did. I choose not to comment further ... but it is from the AP, not some blog or pundit.

vapilot2004
18th Jul 2016, 23:42
I did LW. You must admit our friend SASless' choice of thread title seems right out of a right-wing blog.

The people that are 'upset' are the same people that have been against the deal with Iran all along. They have vowed to never give up and are behind the push to legislatively prevent the sale of commercial aircraft to the Iranians. Part of those involved are the same folks in our Congress who vowed to block everything the Obama administration attempts to accomplish, irregardless of merit.

I read the article and while the specifics were not generally known, many were already aware of the sunset provisions in the agreement including Israel. I say not bad for government work. So they kicked the can down the road a decade. Better than nothing and it opens the door to improving relations rather than being stuck at the stalemate with no power to monitor and no avenues for dialog.

SASless
19th Jul 2016, 03:12
I even posted a disclaimer!


I guess he must not have gotten past the thread title before he started posting.

vapilot2004
19th Jul 2016, 05:59
No worries on the WTF SAS. It was the rest of the title that made me wonder where I had wandered off to.

Toadstool
19th Jul 2016, 09:08
I see the "subjective" guys still posting.

Even if the democrats had solved world peace, the usual suspects would still find a way to denigrate. Still, its only one subjective WASP vote.

ExXB
19th Jul 2016, 10:11
Why a new thread? Having a snazzy title isn't a reason.

Kulverstukas
19th Jul 2016, 12:31
http://gorodbryansk.info/core/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/powell1.jpg

SASless
19th Jul 2016, 13:31
It is a former Secretary of State who has been out of Office Eight Years or more....and who had nothing at all to do with the Iran Deal Negotiation.

Your point is?

We are talking about the Iran Nuclear Agreement....and the fact the President, Secretary of State, and others have been caught lying about a very serious situation that might lead to a very dangerous regime developing Nuclear Weapons.

You seem bothered by accusations of lying by other American Secretaries of State....but not proven lying by the current one.

You care to explain why that is because this one is proven and the very people doing the lying crowed about it in public.

Do you think the World will be a safer place if the radical clerics in Iran get "Their" Finger on the Nuclear Button?

Lonewolf_50
19th Jul 2016, 13:44
Do you think the World will be a safer place if the radical clerics in Iran get "Their" Finger on the Nuclear Button? It will certainly be more entertaining. I am more worried about the incompetents in Pakistan who already have nukes than I am about potential cases of the Persians having nukes. Not joking about that.

Kulverstukas
19th Jul 2016, 13:47
My point is that politicians constantly lies about anything and I wonder why every time lot of people who discover another lie cry "O my God! How can it be!"

World is already unsafe place. So any government wants it's own nuclear weapon - and lately it's seems only thing that can stop major powers like EU, US, China and RF to mess around with them.

Look at his: North Korea is much less powerful and more demonized than Yugoslavia, Syria or Iraq. But guess which countries are "democratized" and which still is sovereign?

charliegolf
19th Jul 2016, 13:53
From Mil Forum, a hero...

Vietnam War UH-1D Flt Cdr Awarded Medal of Honor

Wait until Kerry sees that!

Lonewolf_50
19th Jul 2016, 14:10
Look at his: North Korea is much less powerful and more demonized than Yugoslavia, Syria or Iraq. But guess which countries are "democratized" and which still is sovereign? NK had a large and powerful friend nearby: China. Yugoslavia? Russians were on holiday at the time, being involved in some internal reorg (You remember that, right? ;) ). I also seem to recall that Tito and his friends were a lot less warm to their big bear of a friend than some others, in terms of their more "independent" approach to Socialism and Communism after the War.


Syria and Iraq? No big friend available nearby, though Mr. Assad has gotten some help from his big friend in due course. So he's still in the seat. He didn't need a nuke: an ally would suffice. I seem to recall that over the past 10 years he has gotten some assistance from another regional friend in Iran. Not as big as Russia but influential.

Who you friends are matters. Always has.

Kulverstukas
19th Jul 2016, 14:15
Who you friends are matters. Always has.

So we back to what I said - big friend with a nuke. Friend without nuke doesn't count ;)

Lonewolf_50
19th Jul 2016, 14:20
Friend without nuke doesn't count http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif I don't think "doesn't count" applies to Iran, given their decades long support of Syria's Assad ruling family. I guess we see it a bit differently.

Kulverstukas
19th Jul 2016, 14:27
You can recall Israeli planes makes raids to Iran airspace and bombs some installations without ever any legally confirmed proofs that it's "nuke bomb project objects". And Iran just powerlessly waves fists in the air. So nukes only count ;)

Lonewolf_50
19th Jul 2016, 14:31
You can recall Israeli planes makes raids to Iran airspace and bombs some installations without ever any legally confirmed proofs that it's "nuke bomb project objects". And Iran just powerlessly waves fists in the air. So nukes only count ;) No, I think that was Syrian "nuke project" in about 2007. I don't think there have been any Israeli raids on Iran's projects.
I know they hit Iraq's June of 1981 (35 years ago).

What Israeli air strike in Iran's nuclear facility are you talking about?
Got a link or a cite? Proof? Evidence? I'd be interested to see it.


FFS, I just remembered. Speaking of "who your friends are" is important Israel is the poster child for that.

Cazalet33
19th Jul 2016, 15:27
Israel doesn't have many friends in the neighbourhood.

Does threatening neighbours with nukes really win friends?

Kulverstukas
19th Jul 2016, 15:33
Does threatening neighbours with nukes really win friends?

No, but it's repels foes ;) And you know, foe of my foe is my friend (tm)

SASless
19th Jul 2016, 16:18
Pakistan is a fine example of why Iran should not ever have have nukes.

Lonewolf_50
19th Jul 2016, 17:40
Pakistan is a fine example of why Iran should not ever have have nukes. Hmm, the Pakistan example stands on its own for a large number of reasons. Iran with nukes is a concern for some, not for others, and it is a sign that the NPT continues to die a gruesome and very public death.


What got my eye was that confirmation that North Koreans were on site (see links in the thread about Nice and its digression (http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/581586-wtf-going-nice-11.html#post9445078)) in Syria in 2007ish as that plutonium reactor, of a kind only used in NK, was being put together as quietly as possible before the Israelis cottoned on to it and eventually bombed it.

racedo
19th Jul 2016, 22:34
Does threatening neighbours with nukes really win friends?

Er who has threatened Neighbours with Nukes ?

Making them aware that you have them is a deterrent is it not ?

Lonewolf_50
19th Jul 2016, 22:37
The only recent threats I am aware of are North Korea vis a vis South Korea and Japan.

Ethel the Aardvark
20th Jul 2016, 13:06
I hope this revelation that Politicians lie applies to the US only. I would hate to think that Politicians lie in other countries as well :(

Cazalet33
20th Jul 2016, 13:26
Not much point in having nukes if you don't threaten to use them one day.

The target countries already know who they are.

Israeli has attacked every one of its neighbouring countries with conventional forces, so they know who is being threatened with nuclear weapons.

Iran, being a Muslim country, knows its special status on Israel's target list for special weapons.

piperboy84
20th Jul 2016, 13:46
Er who has threatened Neighbours with Nukes ?

Making them aware that you have them is a deterrent is it not ?

Both threatened each other, that's why we need to stay out of inter-Arab, Jew v. Arab, Persian v. Jew and NK v. whoever pissing matches. We should neither cheer or denounce either party, its their squabbles not ours and as has been proven by recent events in France trying to play referee, enabler or blocker just costs us lives,money, hassle and blowback.

Source:
http://m.jpost.com/Israel/Peres-Iran-can-also-be-wiped-off-the-map#article=0ODZENUExMEVCRUNBMzdDMjI0OTZDRjc4Q0YzREFBRTY=

baggersup
20th Jul 2016, 14:47
After living and working in Washington for 40 years watching how ugly it is watching the sausage being made...

...keep in mind whatever "deal" they purport to be arranging, it's never about that. It's always, as the nuclear deal was, a front for the REAL deal: And that deal(s) is/are..contracts, contracts, contracts.

Major international companies were putting pressure on the DC bosses to get Iran open for business to them.

I know how to read between the lines in these deals and that's what it was ALWAYS about. Iran was ripe for pickings with loads of money and a country that was not open for business to the West's biggest multi-nationals.

You need look no further for proof, as one connects the dots: Two weeks after the deal was struck, I was reading a Wall Street Journal article about several huge companies like General Electric that were jumping the gun on the agreement (which hadn't been official yet and sanctions lifted) flying on the sly with their private jets into Iran to begin negotiations for their mega-deals.

There were noises about fines and sanctions against the biggest world wide companies flying in there in droves--illegally we might observe--but nothing came of it, as they were all just trying to get ahead of each other before the official sanction lift.

The next in line having got the jump early? Boeing! It's always, always, always about lucrative contracts for the President's biggest donors. Or the biggest donors to the RNC or DNC.

Look no further in any international decision that looks like one thing...but isn't. Because it's about opening new markets to the multi-nationals.

The nuclear deal was a fake, made-up nonsense in order to deflect people's attentions from getting a big, rich market opened up that had not been tapped for 50 years.

Kulverstukas
20th Jul 2016, 16:29
Because it's about opening new markets to the multi-nationals.

I hope ayatollahs will be not so stupid to became another example of exchanging beads and mirrors for manhattan ;)

Lonewolf_50
20th Jul 2016, 17:36
I hope ayatollahs will be not so stupid to became another example of exchanging beads and mirrors for manhattan ;)Heh, if a Dutchman shows up with the right coin, maybe he can buy one of those Islands in the Straits of Hormuz. (One can always hope).

Cazalet33
20th Jul 2016, 18:31
What would they rename the island? New Bradford?

Lonewolf_50
20th Jul 2016, 18:35
What would they rename the island? New Bradford?
Maybe New Kaatsheuvel. They can build an amusement park there like the one in Efteling, (my kids loved it!) but with enhanced features since it will be in hot weather and a water park with hot babes is usually a good draw.

Cazalet33
20th Jul 2016, 19:19
a water park with hot babes

That isn't the way I would describe Kish, but your experience may have been different.

Lonewolf_50
20th Jul 2016, 19:39
That isn't the way I would describe Kish, but your experience may have been different. My proposed idea was to make an upgrade/improvement to that park's basic theme, since it will be on an island in a warm clime. Once the park becomes a Dutch kind of place, I think it would attract plenty of beach goers, particularly on the southern shoreline, but I had in mind a more modestly sized place, like Hengam. Would need to sort out the water supply, but the Dutch are famous for being most excellent hydro engineers.

Cazalet33
20th Jul 2016, 20:19
I remember Hengam too. Will they rename it New Southall?

And Arzanah. Will they remame it New Gorballs?

And Das. Will they rename it New Dyce? Or perhaps New Kirkhill?

It's all in the marketing, y'know. Just like naming that place 'Greenland' on the tenth century travel brochures.