Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: iran

Showing posts with label iran. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 02, 2018

NYT "expert" calls Bibi Iran nuclear speech a "nothingburger." Here's where he shows his ignorance.

From an op-ed in The New York Times by Steven Simon, who somehow survived a single year as National Security Council’s senior director for the Middle East and North Africa:

Monday afternoon, just a bit behind schedule, Mr. Netanyahu took to the stage next to an enormous screen. The headlines had suggested he would be in his office at a desk or podium to share news of existential importance. Instead, he presented a minor-league TED Talk — and in English, no less. Outside the elite, fewer and fewer people in Israel speak English, so the notion of a country’s leader supposedly addressing his compatriots in a foreign language on a matter of national security added to the weirdness of the performance.

One would think that a writer freely admitting that he didn't understand why something happened would disqualify him from calling it "weird."

But it wasn't weird. Netanyahu is a brilliant communicator. Dismissing his choice and medium of messaging reveals that Simon cannot think outside his own little box.

Obviously Bibi wasn't addressing Israelis. A good theory of who he really was addressing comes from Michael Weiss, an expert on the Middle East:

Today [Bibi] broadcast to the IRGC that their most guarded facilities are playgrounds for the Mossad. Not a confidence building exercise for Iranians if they seek to go to war.

Netanyahu is playing chess and Simon thinks he's watching a game of tic-tac-toe.

The archive had been stored in what Mr. Netanyahu described as a derelict warehouse in Tehran. The photos he displayed indicated that there did not even appear to be a lock on the door. One wonders how important the Iranians thought these documents were, given the slapdash approach they took to storing them.

Is Simon seriously claiming that the Iranians didn't care about the contents of these archives? Without knowing the content of any of the tens of thousands of documents? Again - he doesn't understand something so he displays his ignorance by disparaging what he doesn't understand.

Why were sensitive documents in this civilian warehouse? Barak Ravid has an excellent Twitter backgrounder on the Mossad operation, and he writes in part:

An Israeli official said the Mossad received intelligence that showed the Iranians were trying to hide all the documents which dealt with the military dimensions of their nuclear program. The official said that in a highly secret operation known to a handful of Iranian officials the Iranians transferred tens of thousands of documents and CD's from several different sites around the country to a civilian warehouse in Tehran. The Israeli official said the Iranians did all that because they were afraid that in post Iran deal inspections the IAEA will discover the incriminating documents The Mossad has put the warehouse under surveillance and started preparing for a possible operation to seize the documents. According to Israeli officials more than 100 Mossad spies worked on this operation.

100 Mossad agents working in a highly sensitive area, and this NYT "expert" claims that there was not even a lock on the door so it was a cinch. Wow, those Mossad agents should have just walked in the unlocked door- what's wrong with them for not consulting with Steven Simon?

Simon goes on to say that everything revealed in the archives was known already. Um, no - there are so many files that the US and Israel haven't finished going through them yet. Ravid again:

In February Mossad started translating & analyzing the documents most of were written in Farsi. A special team with 50 analysts was formed in the Mossad & a separate team is working in the CIA. Both intelligence agencies still haven’t finished analyzing the documents
An Israeli official told me: "The documents tell us new things about the military dimensions of the Iranian nuclear program. Things we didn’t know before. The documents give us new details about Iranian R&D sites, sites for possible nuclear tests & individuals involved"
The official added: "The documents tell us more details than the IAEA knew until toady about the Iranian nuclear program.

And as David Horovitz notes, the documents show not that Iran is violating the deal - but how terrible the deal was to begin with, and how foolhardy it was to offer a deal that gave Iran the pathway to nuclear weapons and delivery systems where research can continue at full tilt.

All this in exchange for a delay of a few years for the weapon itself and many billions of dollars to help pay Hezbollah and prop up the Syrian dictator who gasses his own people to death.

But the New York Times is committed to supporting the deal that should be replaced with something that actually stops Iran's obvious quest for nuclear weapons - something that has teeth.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Iranian media: "9/11 a false flag op," New (Islamic) World Order, support for terror

Remember Iran? Our new ally in the war against terror?

Here are some English-language stories from today's government-run Iranian media:

9/11: The Ultimate False Flag Operation

In his top-selling book, “Solving 9/11: The Deception That Changed the World”, Christopher Bollyn states that a small gang of high-level Zionist extremists carried out the 9/11 attacks on the US soil.
According to the American investigative journalist, this group centers on Shimon Peres, who is currently president of Israel, as well as other Zionist leaders, such as the former prime minister, Ehud Olmert, and the current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The gang also includes the former minister of defense, Ehud Barak, and other less known members of Israel’s military intelligence establishment. Former Mossad officers, especially people like Arnon Milchan, who have been involved in building Israel's nuclear weapons arsenal with Shimon Peres, are also included.

In his superb book, which caused him serious troubles with the government and forced him to move his family to Europe, Bollyn notes that the crime of September 11 is still very much at the center of the political stage: “It is the real reason why the Zionist-controlled Barack Obama is president of the United States and why the 91-year-old Shimon Peres is still president of Israel.”

Leader's Aide: Arrogant Powers Unable to Block New World Order

Supreme Leaders' senior advisor Ali Akbar Velayati referred to the recent developments in the Middle-East and North Africa, and said the arrogant powers can no more stand against the new world order being shaped by the Islamic Awakening.

"The world is witnessing a change and tilt in power equations towards the Muslim world with the rapid growth of developments in West Asia and North Africa and this important event has basically created the new regional order, and the world of arrogance is and will no more be able to confront this new order," Velayati told FNA on Tuesday.

His remarks came after Ayatollah Khamenei said on Thursday that the West lacked the might and awe it enjoyed in the past as its representative, the Zionist regime of Israel, lost the battle against the small population of the Muslims in Gaza.

"The current world order cannot continue and a new order is emerging," Ayatollah Khamenei said in a meeting with members of the Assembly of Experts in Tehran.

Iran hosts intl. confab on Palestinian resistance

On Monday, Iran hosted an international conference on the Palestinian resistance in Tehran.

The conference brought together over 400 religious scholars from across the globe. The conference came after Palestinians bravely resisted the Zionist regime’s 51-day war on Gaza.

Addressing the conference, Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior foreign policy advisor to the Supreme Leader, said ...that Muslims are duty bound to support the Palestinian resistance and express disgust at the “illegitimate and child-killer Zionist regime”.

Now that the Zionist regime’s “illegitimate and dangerous” nature has been exposed to the entire world, Muslims should make efforts in arming the Palestinian resistance “because their ability to defend themselves is the only thing that alleviates the Palestinians’ pain”.

But, remember: they don't like extremist Sunni Islamists (who aren't shooting at Israel) and we don't like extremist Sunni Islamists.

So besides their rabid daily attacks on Western civilization and explicit support for terror groups, we really have a lot in common.

Iran's Supreme Leader's Twitter is a goldmine of humor

Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, often puts graphics on his Twitter account. Here's the latest, in somewhat fractured English:

OK, so he is against sectarianism in Islam and says that the people who practice it are really helping the "enemy," meaning Israel and probably the US.

But minutes earlier, he tweeted this:

Many #Salafis & #Wahabis who are nourished by oil money & act as #terrorists, don't know they are enemy’s operatives.6/5/2009
— khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) January 6, 2014

No fostering schisms there!

Iranian media rages about "Zionist New World Order"

Here's a new op-ed in Iran's state-controlled PressTV by someone named Anisa Abd el Fattah:

What is in store for the world, should we not succeed in our efforts against global Zionism and stop it in its tracks, is a world where global corporations and banks rule and where we the people are little more than slaves.

How do we know this? Just look at what the NWO is doing and what is happening in the world as global Zionist rule takes shape.

It’s clear that the primary interest of the NWO is economic. Its social perspective is shaped solely by its need for quiet as it initiates its transition period. This is why we have the militarization of law enforcement in most countries and also the common training, uniforms, equipment, etc.

...Laws are being passed that prohibit criticism of sacred cows like Zionism, war, occupations, poverty, monarchies, presidents and those traitors who open up their countries to NWO control.

....They also want wars. Contrary to the belief that a one world government can bring peace to the world, the reality is that the Zionist one world government is dependent upon perpetual war.

It must keep people and states at war with one another to prevent them from unifying against the authority’s abuses; its greed, brutality, racism, elitism, etc.

The greatest downfall of the Zionist global economic scheme in my opinion is the destruction of sovereign domestic economies and the enslavement of entire populations to the international banks through debt.

...Global markets and economics are part of the Zionist world order scheme to break down domestic sovereignty of all kinds with the hope of transitioning failed states along with their failed economies into a single entity, governed by a single Zionist government.

...In such situations, the people are left with only two choices, both of which serve the interests of the Zionists. They either protest, creating disorder which leads by design to chaos, or they submit. The only way the people win is if the goal of the protests is to bring down the corporations and the banks, not the governments.

Such protests can succeed globally but only if the working people of the world unite and carry out protests that are coordinated and share a single message, that being to end corporate control and to shut down the international banking cartel.

Controlled by those "Zionists," of course.

El-Fattah claims to be "a political analyst and human/civil rights activist..she been published in many of the major newspapers in the United States such as the Boston Globe, The Washington Times and the New York Times and has lectured at some of the United State's most prestigious universities including Georgetown University, Columbia University in New York and the American University in Washington DC."

I couldn't find any evidence of her being quoted anywhere outside extremist sites. Her resume seems to be mostly wishful thinking.

But for some reason PressTV's blurb didn't mention that she ran for President in 2012, that she is a 9/11 "truther" who claims that Muslims had nothing to do with it, and that she has apparent Hamas ties. You can spend a week following her Internet trail to terrorism.

Here's another word missing from the Iran nuclear deal: Parchin

Yes, Parchin.

As Reuters reported some 18 months ago:

Six world powers demanded Iran keep its promise to let international inspectors visit a military installation where the U.N. nuclear watchdog believes explosives tests geared to developing atomic bombs may have taken place.

The joint call was an unusual show of unity among the powers on Iran before a planned revival of high-level talks as well as widening disquiet about the nature of Tehran's nuclear ambitions, with Israel threatening last-ditch military action.

Heaping pressure on Iran to come clean, the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany used a U.N. nuclear watchdog governors' meeting on Thursday to urge Tehran to grant prompt access to its Parchin military facility.

They voiced concern that no deal was reached between Iran and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors at talks in January and February, "including on the access to relevant sites in Iran, requested by the agency ... We urge Iran to fulfil its undertaking to grant access to Parchin."

The message was reinforced by a remarkably blunt statement from IAEA director Yukiya Amano accusing Tehran of seeking to "tie our hands" and restrict inspectors during their last two rounds of meetings.

His deputy Herman Nackaerts told Thursday's closed session of the IAEA board of governors session, according to one participant: "Due to major differences between Iran and the agency, agreement could not be reached."

Nackaerts, the IAEA's chief safeguards inspector, said it had information from satellite pictures showing "the precise location where we believe an explosive chamber is situated".

The word "Parchin" is not mentioned at all in the actual published deal.

As bad as we already know the deal to be, it is astonishing that the US-led alliance did not consider inspections at Parchin to be of paramount importance. Remember, Parchin is where evidence of a weaponization program was clearly being actively hidden by Iran, even to the point that they built large pink tarps to cover the complex to stymie satellite intel.

Simple explanation of what's wrong with the Iranian nuclear deal

The full text of the nuclear deal has been published. The best description I could find of why it is a disaster comes from former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton:

This interim agreement is badly skewed from America’s perspective. Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its “right” to enrichment in any “final” agreement. Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a “comprehensive solution” will “involve a mutually defined enrichment program.” This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a “compromise” on Iran’s claimed “right” to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.

Indeed, that's what the agreement says:

This comprehensive solution would involve a mutually defined enrichment program with practical limits and transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the program.

It is hard to interpret this as anything other than the "right to enrich," something that Kerry strenuously denied last night. In this specific example, Iran clearly won.

Bolton goes on:

In exchange for superficial concessions, Iran achieved three critical breakthroughs.

First, it bought time to continue all aspects of its nuclear-weapons program the agreement does not cover (centrifuge manufacturing and testing; weaponization research and fabrication; and its entire ballistic missile program). Indeed, given that the interim agreement contemplates periodic renewals, Iran may have gained all of the time it needs to achieve weaponization not of simply a handful of nuclear weapons, but of dozens or more.

Second, Iran has gained legitimacy. This central banker of international terrorism and flagrant nuclear proliferator is once again part of the international club. Much as the Syria chemical-weapons agreement buttressed Bashar al-Assad, the mullahs have escaped the political deep freezer.

Third, Iran has broken the psychological momentum and effect of the international economic sanctions. While estimates differ on Iran’s precise gain, it is considerable ($7 billion is the lowest estimate), and presages much more. Tehran correctly assessed that a mere six-months’ easing of sanctions will make it extraordinarily hard for the West to reverse direction, even faced with systematic violations of Iran’s nuclear pledges. Major oil-importing countries (China, India, South Korea, and others) were already chafing under U.S. sanctions, sensing President Obama had no stomach either to impose sanctions on them, or pay the domestic political price of granting further waivers.

Even if you disagree with Bolton's politics, all three points seem incontrovertible.

He continues:

[T]he deal leaves the basic strategic realities unchanged. Iran’s nuclear program was, from its inception, a weapons program, and it remains one today. Even modest constraints, easily and rapidly reversible, do not change that fundamental political and operational reality. And while some already-known aspects of Iran’s nuclear program are returned to enhanced scrutiny, the undeclared and likely unknown military work will continue to expand, thus recalling the drunk looking for his lost car keys under the street lamp because of the better lighting.

Moreover, the international climate of opinion against a strike will only harden during the next six months. Capitalizing on the deal, Iran’s best strategy is to accelerate the apparent pace of rapprochement with the all-too-eager West. The further and faster Iran can move, still making only superficial, easily reversible concessions in exchange for dismantling the sanctions regime, the greater the international pressure against Israel using military force. Iran will not suddenly, Ahmadinejad-style, openly defy Washington or Jerusalem and trumpet cheating and violations. Instead, Tehran will go to extraordinary lengths to conceal its activities, working for example in new or unknown facilities and with North Korea, or shaving its compliance around the edges. The more time that passes, the harder it will be for Israel to deliver a blow that substantially retards the Iranian program.

(h/t Lauri)

Things not looking good on Iran

Robert Satloff in Politico writes:

The current crisis is already one of the biggest U.S.-Israel blowups, ever—and it could get worse before it gets better.

Not since Menachem Begin trashed Ronald Reagan’s 1982 peace plan has Israel so publicly criticized a major U.S. diplomatic initiative. In a rousing speech in Jerusalem on Nov. 10, Netanyahu even called on leaders of American Jewry to use their influence to stop what he called a “bad” Iran deal.

Never has a U.S. secretary of state taken to a podium in an Arab capital, proclaim his pro-Israel bona fides and then specifically caution the prime minister of Israel to butt out of ongoing U.S. diplomatic efforts and save his critique for after a deal is inked. That is what John Kerry did in a remarkable Nov. 11 news conference in Abu Dhabi, standing next to the foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates.

And not in recent memory has the spokesperson for the president of the United States, knowing that Israel and many of its American friends have criticized the administration’s Iran policy, accused detractors of leading a “march to war,” thereby opening a Pandora’s box of hateful recrimination that will be difficult to close.

Israel’s critique of U.S. Iran policy has three key aspects.

First, in terms of strategy, Israel worries that the administration quietly dropped its longtime insistence that Iran fulfill its U.N. Security Council obligation to suspend all enrichment activities and that an end to enrichment is no longer even a goal of these negotiations.

Second, in terms of tactics, Israel cheers the administration’s imposition of devastating sanctions on Iran but fears that the near-agreement in Geneva would have wasted the enormous leverage that sanctions have created in exchange for a deal that, at most, would cap Iran’s progress without any rollback of Iran’s uranium enrichment capabilities and no commitment to mothball the worrisome Arak plant, which could provide an alternative plutonium-based path to a nuclear weapon.

And third, operationally, Israel has complained that it was kept in the dark on details of the proposed Geneva deal—what was being offered to Tehran and what was being demanded of it—despite commitments from Washington to keep Jerusalem fully apprised.

These are weighty concerns and serious accusations. They deserve a full accounting. It is shameful to suggest that anyone who raises these questions prefers war to diplomacy. That is especially because each of these charges appears to have merit.

One would be hard-pressed, for example, to find a senior administration official saying that securing Iran’s full implementation of U.N. Security Council resolutions remains the goal of these negotiations, let alone an American “red line.” Instead, officials have termed the pursuit of suspension a “maximalist” position and prefer to cite the president’s commitment to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, a far looser formulation that could allow Iran a breakout capacity. Rejecting the Iranians’ claim to a “right to enrich,” as the administration apparently did in Geneva, is important, but it is not the same as demanding that they suspend enrichment.

The signals from the US get even worse.

Yesterday, John Kerry said, "I have no specific expectations with respect to the negotiations in Geneva except that we will negotiate in good faith and we will try to get a first-step agreement and hope that Iran will understand the importance of coming there prepared to create a document that can prove to the world that this is a peaceful program."

In the first year of the Obama administration, statements coming from top officials showed that the US believed that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. On May 24, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), Admiral Michael Mullen, said “Well, I believe then and I still believe that Iran's strategic objective is to achieve nuclear weapons, and that that path continues. Their leadership is committed to it. They conducted a missile test this last week that was successful, which continues to improve their missile delivery system and capability. Their intent seems very clear to me, and I'm one who believes if they achieve that objective, that it is incredibly destabilizing for the region. And I think eventually for the world."

Now, Kerry seems to be saying that Iran only needs to produce a document that can prove it has no military dimensions to its nuclear program. It is an invitation to Iran to show that it can hide its activities. (This has been a key IAEA requirement for years, and Iran has never shown interest.)

Even more troubling, by backing off on demands to suspend the enrichment program, the US has already weakened UN Security Council Chapter VII resolutions calling on Iran to do exactly that.

By contrast, the Bush administration - while also willing to talk with Iran and willing to allow it to have a civilian nuclear program - always insisted that enrichment must stop.

There is nothing wrong with talks, but here the US seems to be abandoning its long-held positions while Iran has not budged an inch. It is hardly how a superpower should be acting.

(h/t Zvi, Stan)

Iran launches slick nuclear energy propaganda site

Iran has created a very professional English language website, NuclearEnergy.ir, that was launched right before the Geneva nuclear talks.

Based on its Twitter feed, it looks like the site is associated with Iran's Foreign Ministry.

It pretends to be a transparent description of Iran's nuclear program, answering questions in the FAQ such as:

Has Iran allowed IAEA inspections of the Parchin complex?

Yes, Iran allowed IAEA inspectors to visit several buildings at the site during two visits in 2005. It also allowed the inspectors to take a number of soil and environmental samples. In its February 2006 report, the IAEA said it “did not observe any unusual activities in the buildings visited, and the results of the analysis of the environmental samples did not indicate the presence of nuclear material at those locations.” Since then, however, Tehran has denied access to the site, insisting that the IAEA must first come up with a step-by-step roadmap for resolving all outstanding issues.

and

The IAEA has in the past raised several concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities. How cooperative has Iran been in addressing these concerns?

Tehran has addressed every concern raised by the IAEA. It has also allowed inspections of its sites when needed and provided explanations to clarify ambiguities.

These are all half-truths and 100% propaganda.

This, for example, comes from the latest IAEA report on Iran, from August, about Parchin:

[I]t is worth recalling that the Agency’s request for access to a specific location at the Parchin site was followed by Iran undertaking extensive activities at this location that have seriously undermined the Agency’s ability to conduct effective verification.

And about Iran's supposed cooperation with the IAEA:

In November 2011, the Board of Governors adopted resolution GOV/2011/69, in which, inter alia, it stressed that it was essential for Iran and the Agency to intensify their dialogue aimed at the urgent resolution of all outstanding substantive issues for the purpose of providing clarifications regarding those issues, including access to all relevant information, documentation, sites, material and personnel in Iran. In September 2012, the Board of Governors adopted resolution GOV/2012/50, in which, inter alia, it decided that Iranian cooperation with Agency requests aimed at the resolution of all outstanding issues was essential and urgent in order to restore international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme. The Board of Governors also stressed that it was essential for Iran to immediately conclude and implement a structured approach for resolving outstanding issues related to possible military dimensions to its nuclear programme, including, as a first step, providing the Agency with the access it had requested to relevant sites. In light of these resolutions, between January 2012 and May 2013, Agency and Iranian officials held ten rounds of talks in Vienna and Tehran, including during a visit by the Director General to Tehran in May 2012, aimed at reaching agreement on a structured approach document. However, no concrete results were achieved.

The Agency has not been able to begin substantive work with Iran on resolving the outstanding issues, including those related to possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme. Since the Director General’s previous report, no further talks aimed at concluding the structured approach document have been held. However, another round of talks is planned for 27 September 2013 in Vienna.

Doesn't sound exactly the same as the Iranian answers, do they?

Iran's "charm offensive" is not charming. But it is quite offensive.

(h/t Irene)

If Iran is only interested in a civilian nuclear program, it doesn't need centrifuges

From Israel's Minister of Intelligence,Yuval Steinitz, at Financial Times (behind paywall):

The simple, logical answer to the Iran nuclear conundrum
As negotiations on Iran’s nuclear programme make faltering progress towards an interim agreement – minor gestures from Tehran in return for a partial relaxation of sanctions – it is essential to have a concrete idea of the goal of the overall diplomatic process. At first glance, reaching a comprehensive agreement might seem exceedingly complicated. Yet if we narrow our focus to the official, public statements of both sides, there is a simple, logical solution.

According to the public statements of Iranian leaders in the past decade, what Tehran really wants is “civilian nuclear energy”. What the rest of the world wants, meanwhile, is the confidence that Iran will not possess the capacity to produce nuclear weapons. Conveniently, these two demands can be reconciled by the following formula: nuclear electricity, yes; uranium enrichment, no. Iran could be permitted to operate a civilian nuclear reactor for the production of electricity and medical purposes, but it should agree to buy its nuclear fuel rods elsewhere. This would create a win-win situation.

Why should Iran reject such an apparently satisfactory solution – one that could bring a quick end to the sanctions regime and immediate relief to its economy? Tehran argues that “uranium enrichment” has become part of its “national identity” and it would wound Iranian pride if it were forced to buy fuel rods abroad. Tehran also claims all signatories to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty possess an inherent right to enrich, which cannot be disputed.

Both arguments are an insult to human intelligence. Acquiescence would result in an unreliable deal. In fact, there are 25 countries around the world that operate purely civilian nuclear programmes, and about 80 per cent of them import nuclear fuel rods. Has this wounded the national pride of Sweden, Spain, Mexico or South Africa?

Iran’s “legitimate right” to enrich is similarly preposterous. For starters, there is no such automatic privilege; rather, permission to enrich is conditional on International Atomic Energy Agency approval which, in turn, depends on meeting stringent requirements over a meaningful period. Second, the UN Security Council has already passed a series of binding resolutions contravening any Iranian right to enrich uranium.

Finally, and most important, even if we were to assume all countries, including Iran, are entitled to enrich, it would be eminently legitimate for the international community to demand that Tehran concede such a right. It would be perfectly reasonable to expect that the Iran of 2013, like Libya in 2003, would concede this “legitimate right” in return for rescuing its economy and placating the entire world.

Precisely because there is no valid justification for international consent to Iranian enrichment facilities as well as a plutonium reactor, any compromise on this crucial point will be interpreted as consent for its development of at least a partial military nuclear capability. This will inevitably sustain regional fears and suspicions, and conceivably spark new military nuclear programmes in several neighbouring countries. Such an accord will also complicate the inspection of Iranian nuclear facilities and obscure the red lines that, when violated, will compel the international community to resume economic sanctions or to consider military action.

In the same way, the forthcoming interim agreement is wrong – not just because easing the pressure now will make it harder to reach a satisfactory agreement in the future but also because it allows Iran to gain legitimacy for being a threshold nuclear country. Iran became a threshold state a year ago when it acquired the capability to produce a nuclear bomb within a year, but this was clearly considered illegitimate in the eyes of the international community and stood in clear violation of the UN Security Council resolutions. An agreement that will enable Iran to retain its breakout capabilities – this time under an international agreement that provides it with legitimacy – will make it very hard to reach a different end state in the final agreement.

There is only one logical solution that is profoundly simple: yes to nuclear energy; no to uranium enrichment. Any alternative deal would be evidently illogical, and thus incalculably dangerous.

The unstated corollary is that Iran's refusal to budge on this fundamental issue proves that its public statements that it is only interested in nuclear energy is a lie.

The idea that the West must compromise with Iran because it insists on retaining its enrichment capability is completely nonsensical. Iran's insistence on maintaining its centrifuges is proof positive that Iran has the desire to do something beyond a civilian energy program and is therefore a reason to redouble sanctions, not to ease them.

Diplomats sometimes miss the forest for the trees. Their desire for a deal sometimes obscures the reason for the talks to begin with. This seems to be a perfect example of that shortsightedness.

Simulation of missile attack on Israel broadcast on Iranian TV

From YNet:

An agreement between the United States and Iran over the latter's nuclear program seems imminent, but the charm offensive in Geneva is not mirrored at home. In Tehran, the Iranian government sent a different message with a broadcast on state television of a simulated missile attack on Israel.

The hour-long documentary program included segments about the capabilities of Iranian missiles and the possibility of their use in response to foreign threats. The program included a video simulation of a potential response by Iran to an Israeli strike on its nuclear facilities.

The video showed computer-animated launches of Iran's long-range Sejjil ballistic missiles. The animations show Israel's air defense systems intercepting a few missiles as others penetrate the protective layer and destroy different strategic targets across Israel.

Among the targets shown are the Azrieli Towers and the Kirya in Tel Aviv, the IDF base Tzfirin in central Israel, a generic missile launch site, Ben Gurion Airport, and the nuclear reactor at Dimona. The targets were circled on Google Maps, and the video finished with real pictures of casualties from the Second Lebanon War.

The idea of making a video simulating different scenarios is not inherently bad. It would be expected in a Western newscast or documentary about the situation. But there are two things to note about this video.

One is that the patriotic, uplifting music shows that this isn't a situation that is looked upon reluctantly, but as an ideal. Attempting to destroy Israel is not considered a last resort and regrettable but it is portrayed as a nationalistic duty, only waiting for a plausible excuse.

The other is that Iran is publicly bragging that it would aim its missiles at civilians (the Azrieli towers, Ben Gurion airport.) The Azrieli Center is particularly interesting because it is Israel's equivalent to the World Trade Center in terms of symbolism.

Iran gloats that it wholeheartedly supports terrorism against Israelis.

Bibi: "A very, very bad deal" on Iran

From the Prime Minister's Office:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this morning, made the following remarks prior to his meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry:

"I understand that the Iranians are walking around very satisfied in Geneva, as well they should be, because they got everything, and paid nothing, they wanted. They wanted relief from sanctions after years of a grueling sanctions regime. They got that. They are paying nothing because they are not reducing in any way their nuclear enrichment capability. So Iran got the deal of the century and the international community got a bad deal. This is a very bad deal. Israel utterly rejects it and what I am saying is shared by many, many in the region whether or not they express it publicly. Israel is not obliged by this agreement and Israel will do everything it needs to defend itself, to defend the security of its people. That is true also of our negotiations with the Palestinians. I will never compromise on Israel's security and our vital interests, not in the face of any international pressure. I think the pressure has to be put where it belongs, that is on the Palestinians who refuse to budge. But I think in any case, no amount of pressure will make me or the Government of Israel compromise on the basic security and national interests of the State of Israel. The people of Israel know this and they support it, as they should."

After the meeting with Kerry:

"I met Secretary Kerry right before he leaves to Geneva. I reminded him that he said that no deal is better than a bad deal. And the deal that is being discussed in Geneva right now is a bad deal. It’s a very bad deal. Iran is not required to take apart even one centrifuge. But the international community is relieving sanctions on Iran for the first time after many years. Iran gets everything that it wanted at this stage and pays nothing. And this is when Iran is under severe pressure. I urge Secretary Kerry not to rush to sign, to wait, to reconsider, to get a good deal. But this is a bad deal, a very, very, bad deal. It’s the deal of a century for Iran; it’s a very dangerous and bad deal for peace and the international community."

The Telegraph reports on the expected parameters of the deal. For a (presumed) six month period:

Iran would stop enriching uranium to the 20 per cent level that is close to weapons-grade – and turn its existing stockpile of this material into harmless oxide.

Iran would continue enrichment to the 3.5 per cent purity needed for nuclear power stations – but agree to limit the number of centrifuges being used for this purpose. There would, however, be no requirement to remove or disable any other centrifuges.

Iran would agree not to activate its plutonium reactor at Arak, which could provide another route to a nuclear weapons -capability, during the six-month period. Iran may, however, continue working on the facility.

Iran would agree not to use its more advanced IR-2 centrifuges, which can enrich uranium between three and five times faster than the older model.

In return, America would ease economic sanctions, possibly by releasing some Iranian foreign exchange reserves currently held in frozen accounts. In addition, some restrictions affecting Iran’s petrochemical, motor and precious metals industries could be relaxed.

All this comes after John Kerry was unusually blunt in criticizing all building of Jewish homes across the Green Line, no matter where.

"Koran says Zionist regime will perish in 2022"

Mark your calendars:

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency [Iran]) - Several Iranian NGOs staged a panel discussion on Tuesday to discuss the political and social status of the Zionist regime.

Titled 'End of Israel,' the conference also gave a touch to the faltering status of Israel amid the regional developments.

Iran-based Office in Support of Palestine and the House of Young Top Citizens will staged the panel discussion under the auspices of Tehran Municipality.

During the conference, director of the pro-Palestinian research center Neda, Ahmad Soroush-nejad believed that the Zionist-dwelled areas in the occupied Palestine are so small in area that they are within the range of the Palestinian resistance rockets, adding that the geographically small area are never safe.

So it is time for Israel to expand, say, from the Nile to the Euphrates. Thanks for the advice, Ahmad!

Next, a researcher in the Islamic Center I South Africa, Hojjat-ol-Islam Abdollah Husseini, expert maintained that the Holy Koran suggests that the regime would perish in 2022.

But how does the Koran explain that Muslims would be humiliated by the poor, weak, dhimmi Jews for 74 years between 1948 and 2022? Obviously it is Allah's will.

The participants also heard from an expert in Zionism affairs, Ali Akbar Raefipour and representative of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Naser Abu Sharif.

Hey, don't make fun - they're experts!

Iran's Supreme Leader: Zionists are behind all intra-Muslim problems

The Hajj message of Iran's "Supreme Leader" Ayatollah Khamenei says that every single problem in the Muslim world is caused by Zionists and the West. Not a single Muslim is guilty of any crimes, terrorism, civil war, chemical weapons usage, infighting or anything else unseemly - it is all controlled by the expansive network of Zionists and their allies.

I particularly like how he positions the Syrian regime as a Muslim nation when it has been largely secular and anti-Islamist.

...The existence of civil wars, religious and denominational prejudices and political instabilities, the prevalence of cruel terrorism, the emergence of extreme groups and orientations- which like savage tribes in history, cut open the chests of human beings and rip their hearts out with their teeth- the emergence of armed mercenaries who kill women and children, cut off the heads of men and rape women and who do such horrible and disgusting crimes in the name of religion are all the products of the satanic and arrogant plots of foreign intelligence services and their regional agents.

Such plots are implemented in countries in which the ground is prepared before-hand and as a result, they create a disastrous situation for these nations and peoples. In such conditions, it is clear that one cannot expect Muslim nations to remedy their material and spiritual shortcomings and to achieve security, welfare, scientific progress and international dignity which are the results of achieving awakening and finding one's true identity.

These disastrous conditions can abort the progress of Islamic Awakening, destroy the mental awareness which has been created in the world of Islam, drag Muslims- once more- towards stagnation, isolation and decline and consign to oblivion important and fundamental issues such as the liberation of Palestine and other Muslim nations from the transgressions of the USA and Zionism.

The most important cure for this situation can be summarized in two key phrases, both of which are among the clearest lessons of hajj:

First: unity and brotherhood of Muslims under the flag of monotheism.

Second: knowing the enemy and confronting his plans and methods.

Strengthening the spirit of brotherhood and cooperation is a great lesson of hajj. During hajj, even quarrelling and arguing with others is forbidden. During hajj, wearing the same clothes, following the same practices, making the same moves and behaving in a kind way,all mean equality and brotherhood for all those who believe in and rely on monotheism.

This means that Islam strongly rejects any idea and belief which views a number of Muslims and believers in Ka'bah and monotheism as people who are outside the circle of Islam. These orientations which are based on takfirism, which have become playthings in the hands of the treacherous Zionist politicians and their western supporters- commit serious crimes and shed the blood of Muslims and innocent people, and the people who claim to be religious, who call themselves clerics and who fuel the fire of fitna between Shia and Sunni and other denominations- should know that the hajj pilgrimage will thwart their claims.

I, like many Islamic scholars and sympathetic personalities in the Islamic Ummah, announce that any statement or action which fuels the fire of discord among Muslims, any insult to the sacred beliefs of each one of the Muslim denominations and any act of takfirism against Islamic denominations equals serving the camp of atheism and polytheism and betraying Islam. All of these things are haraam.

Knowing the enemy and its methods is the second important factor. First, we should not forget about the existence of a spiteful enemy. Performing the ritual of the stoning of the jamarat during hajj is a symbolic sign of this awareness. Second, we should not make a mistake in knowing the main enemy, who in the present time is global arrogance and the criminal Zionist network.

Third, we should properly identify the methods of this hostile enemy which is creating discord among Muslims, promoting moral and political corruption, threatening and tempting outstanding personalities, exerting economic pressures on all nations and arousing doubts about Islamic beliefs. Moreover, we should identify their agents and those who are, knowingly or ignorantly, dependent on them.

Arrogant governments, headed by the USA, conceal their true character with the help of comprehensive and advanced propaganda tools. By claiming that they support human rights and democracy, they deceive public opinion in different countries. They speak about the rights of all nations while each day Muslim nations feel- with their bodies and souls- the fire of discord more than the past.

For decades, the oppressed Palestinian nation has been receiving strikes as a result of the crimes of the Zionist regime and its supporters. In the countries of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, terrorism - which originates from the policies of global arrogance and its agents in the region - has ruined the lives of the people.

Syria has come under the attack of arrogant powers and their regional agents because of supporting anti-Zionist orientations and it has experienced a bloody civil war. In Bahrain and Myanmar, Muslims have been ignored and their enemies are supported. Other nations are threatened by the USA and its allies with military attacks, economic sanctions and different acts of sabotage. Taking a general look at all these countries can reveal to all people throughout the world the true face of these leaders of global arrogance.
....
I ask Allah the Exalted to bestow peace on Muslims and to foil the plots of the enemies. ...

More in an upcoming post about how the symbolic "stoning of the devil" during Hajj has now become a symbolic "stoning of Zionists."

Why Iran's reported offer to stop uranium enrichment at 20% is a joke

YNet reports:

Iran is preparing a package which could revitalize long-stalled negotiations over its nuclear program, but which falls short of a complete shutdown of uranium enrichment, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

According to the report, the Iranian proposals include an offer to stop enriching uranium to levels of 20% purity – a demand which Tehran has rejected in the past.

In return Iran will request that the US and European Union begin scaling back sanctions that have left it largely frozen out of the international financial system and isolated its oil industry.

Would a plan to limit uranium enrichment to 20% be adequate?

No - it would be a joke.

This is not only my opinion or even only Israel's opinion. ISIS, the independent scientific think-tank that has been closely following the Iranian nuclear program for years, explains why enough of a stockpile of 20% enriched uranium is effectively giving Iran the bomb.. Here is what they wrote last March:

We estimate that Iran, on its current trajectory, will by mid-2014 be able to dash to fissile material in one to two weeks unless its production of 20%-enriched uranium is curtailed. If the number or efficiency of Iran’s centrifuges unexpectedly increases, or if Tehran has a secret operational enrichment site, Tehran could reach critical capability before mid-2014. ...

At nuclear talks in Kazakhstan in February, Western negotiators reportedly focused on persuading Iran to curtail its production of 20%-enriched uranium and to export some of its existing stock. These goals are important but insufficient. As Iran increases the quality and quantity of its spinning centrifuges to the point of critical capability, a moratorium on 20%-enriched uranium will matter less and less. It will become easier for Tehran—after using some pretext to renege on a 20% moratorium—to rapidly make up for lost time in accumulating enough 20% enriched uranium that, if further enriched to weapons-grade (or about 90% enriched), would be enough for a bomb. Once Tehran had enough 20% material for a bomb, it could produce enough weapons-grade uranium for that bomb in a week or two.

...Currently, the IAEA inspects two Iranian enrichment facilities on average once a week, and a third facility every two weeks on average. With this rate of inspections, Iran would need to produce 25 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium (enough for one bomb) from its stockpiles of lower enriched uranium in less than one week. The window might be widened to two or three weeks if Tehran blocked one or two inspections on the pretext of an “accident” or a “protest.”

In short, when the amount of time to enrich enough 20% uranium to 25 kg of weapons-grade uranium 90% becomes less than two weeks, under the current inspection regime, then Iran for all intents and purposes can build a bomb whenever they want without fear of being caught.

This is assuming the IAEA is even aware of all Iranian centrifuge facilities. There is evidence that Iran may have started building at least one such secret facility in 2011, and all its other centrifuge facilities were built in secret without informing the IAEA ahead of time. This shrinks the two week window even further.

Even placing IAEA inspectors on site permanently might not be enough, as they could be used as hostages to dissuade any military option to stop enrichment.

In other words, this is the time to keep the pressure on Iran to destroy existing stockpiles of 20% enriched uranium, not to allow it.

But as the WSJ article points out:

By falling short of a complete shutdown of enrichment, the anticipated Iranian offer could divide the U.S. from its closest Middle East allies, particularly Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who have cautioned the White House against moving too quickly to improve ties with Tehran, according to American and Mideast officials.

And that is the entire point.

Iran still not blaming Israel for murder of cyber-warfare expert

From Fox News:

When a key Iranian scientist was gunned down last week, many observers figured Israeli spy agency Mossad had struck again. But new signs point to deadly intrigue within the rogue nation’s fractious leadership.

In the days since the body of Mojtaba Ahmadi, who worked on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ secretive cyberwarfare unit, turned up in a wooded area north of Tehran, the mystery behind his death has only deepened. As with five previous hits on top scientists, witnesses reported black-clad gunmen seen speeding away on motorcycles. But this time, the regime did not immediately point the finger at Israel. In fact, it hasn’t pointed the finger anywhere – despite an exiled group’s claim of responsibility.

“In the wake of a horrific incident involving one of the IRGC officials... the matter is being investigated and the main reason of the event and the motive of the attacker has not been specified,” read a statement from Revolutionary Guards to the state-controlled Sepah News.

The IRGC specifically ruled out an assassination, curious in light of witnesses who said Ahmadi was shot twice in the chest at close range in a nation where gun crime is virtually nonexistent. The murky circumstances, uncharacteristically deliberative approach of the IRGC and new President Hassan Rouhani’s recent overtures to the West have prompted speculation.

Since 2007, five Iranian nuclear scientists, as well as the nation’s ballistic missile program director, have been assassinated in attacks the regime routinely blamed on Israel. Typically, Israel has declined to comment on the assassinations, other than to convey off the record to reporters that it was not dismayed by such developments. But Yaakov Peri, former chief of Israel’s security agency, Shin Bet, and a current cabinet minister, told Israel Radio Ahmadi’s murder has the hallmarks of an “internal dispute.”

“The fact that a cyber commander or this or that scientist was wiped out or killed in this or that assassination does not necessarily mean that Israel’s hand is in the matter,” Peri said.

Other regime watchers have noted that Ahmadi’s team launched a cyber attack at the U.S. Navy that coincided with Rouhani’s trip to New York for the UN General Assembly, a move that some saw as aimed at undermining Rouhani, a self-styled moderate. Ahmadi’s death may have been Rouhani loyalists sending a message to hard-liners within the nation’s complex leadership matrix.

Interesting, isn't it?

Iranian MP warns foreign minister over saying "Israel"

From Trend.az:

Iranian MP, Mojtaba Rahmandoust has addressed a written notification to Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif due to his repeatedly use of word "Israel", Mehr news agency reported.

According to the report, Rahmandoust has stated that Zarif should use phrase "Zionist regime" instead the Israel.
He underlined that "Israel is a fictitious word".

Iranian media and officials speak of Israel in the news and statements as "Zionist regime" and "Occupied Palestine".

Rahmandoust seems unaware that Supreme Leader and Grand Poobah Ayatollah Khamenei has used the word "Israel" in 29 separate articles on his English website.

Bibi's speech was great, but just imagine...

...if Bibi had taken out an iPad and shown the General Assembly this video:

From Times of Israel:

In a video clip now gaining fresh attention as the international community seeks to assess his credibility, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani bragged on Iranian state television just four months ago that he and the regime utterly flouted a 2003 agreement with the IAEA in which it promised to suspend all uranium enrichment and certain other nuclear activities.

Rouhani, who was being interviewed by Iran’s state IRIB TV (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) on May 27, less than three weeks before he won the June 14 presidential elections, was provoked by the interviewer’s assertion that, as Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator in 2003-5, “everything was suspended” on the nuclear program under his watch.

Smiling but evidently highly irritated by the suggestion, Rouhani called it “a lie” that only “the illiterate” would believe, and said that “whoever is talking to you in your earpiece” was feeding false information. He proceeded to detail how Iran, in fact, had flagrantly breached the October 2003 “Tehran Declaration,” which he said “was supposed to outline how everything should be suspended.”

Although Iran issued a joint statement with visiting EU ministers in October 2003 setting out its pledged obligations under the Tehran Declaration, in practice, Rouhani said in the interview, “We did not let that happen!”

The interview, conducted by Hassan Abedini, was one in a series of shows in which the presidential candidates were questioned by the widely watched channel. The TV station is closely controlled by loyalists of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Rouhani clearly felt the imperative to underline that he was no Western pushover.

Far from honoring the commitment, in which Iran said “it has decided voluntarily to suspend all uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities,” Rouhani told the interviewer that all Iran did was merely suspend “ten centrifuges” in the Natanz enrichment facility. “And not a total suspension. Just reduced the yield.”

Unimpressed, interviewer Abedini asserted that work had been suspended at the UCF — the Uranium Enrichment Facility at Isfahan. Quite the contrary, Rouhani countered, detailing the completion of various phases of work at Isfahan under his watch in 2004 and 2005. He went on to state proudly that the Iranian heavy water reactor at Arak was also developed under his watch, in 2004.

“Do you know when we developed yellowcake? Winter 2004,” Rouhani went on. “Do you know when the number of centrifuges reached 3,000? Winter 2004.”

Incredulous at the notion that Iran had bowed to international pressure and halted nuclear activities in that period, Rouhani asked the interviewer, “We halted the nuclear program? We were the ones to complete it! We completed the technology.”

Iranian cyberwar chief assassinated (update)

Because firewalls cannot stop bullets....

Mojtaba Ahmadi, who served as commander of the Cyber War Headquarters, was found
dead in a wooded area near the town of Karaj, north-west of the capital, Tehran. Five Iranian nuclear scientists and the head of the country’s ballistic missile programme have been killed since 2007. The regime has accused Israel’s external intelligence agency, the Mossad, of carrying out these assassinations.

Ahmadi was last seen leaving his home for work on Saturday. He was later found with two bullets in the heart, according to Alborz, a website linked to the Revolutionary Guard Corps. “I could see two bullet wounds on his body and the extent of his injuries indicated that he had been assassinated from a close range with a pistol,” an eyewitness told the website.

The commander of the local police said that two people on a motorbike had been involved in the assassination.

Western officials said the information was still being assessed, but previous deaths have been serious blows to Iran’s security forces. Tighter security measures around leading commanders and nuclear scientists have instilled a culture of fear in some of the most sensitive parts of the security establishment.

The last victim of a known assassination was Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a chemist who worked in the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, who died when an explosive device blew up on his car in January last year.

The death of Ahmadi, a leading specialist in cyber defences, could be an extension of this campaign of subterfuge. Iran has been accused of carrying out a number of cyber attacks detected in the West.

The Revolutionary Guard has also been accused of lending its expertise to Syria’s regime, helping it to hack Western targets through a body known as the Syrian Electronic Army.

It wasn't the Mossad. It was Twitter!

(h/t Elder Of Lobby)

UPDATE: Iran's Revolutionary Guards are denying it was an assassination, calling the bullets in his heart an "accident."

Iran resumes support to Hamas; Hamas says US gave EU green light to talk to it

Palestine Today reports that after a freeze of some months, Iran has resumed supporting Hamas.

The two parties were at odds over Hamas' support of the rebels in Syria.

The rapprochement came after a senior Hamas official visited Tehran recently.

Hamas spokesman Ahmad Yusuf admitted Iranian support - presumably monetary and military - is not at the levels it reached previously.

He stressed that both Iran and Hamas understand each others' positions on Syria but they have a common enemy in Israel.

When asked whether Hamas had contacts with the U.S. administration, Yusuf replied: "There had been both formal and informal communications previously, but those close to U.S. President Barack Obama are wary of these contacts, in case the U.S. administration would get in trouble with Congress or with Israel....[However,] the Americans gave the green light for the Europeans to open talks with us. Europeans are more aggressive in dealing with us."

UN awards Iran key post - on disarmament committee

In July:

Iran is campaigning for a key position on a U.N. General Assembly committee that deals with disarmament and international security amid strong criticism from Israel and others who accuse Tehran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran is competing against Kuwait to be the rapporteur of the U.N. General Assembly's First Committee for its 68th session, which begins in October, U.N. diplomats said. The rapporteur reports on the proceedings of the 193-member committee.

A spokesman for Iran's U.N. mission confirmed the country's bid on Tuesday. Asked why Tehran was interested in the position, he said: "It's a normal routine by a member state."

The First Committee considers all disarmament and international security matters, cooperation in the maintenance of international peace and security, as well as principles governing disarmament and the regulation of armaments.

The UN approved it - an hour after Netanyahu's speech. From IRNA:

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been elected as rapporteur of the UN First Committee on Disarmament and International Security for the 68th annual meeting.

The election of a member of the Iranian delegation to the sensitive position in the UN took place despite months-long efforts by representative of the Zionist regime to prevent Iran’s election.

The Zionist regime representative issued a protest letter urging members not to let Iran be elected as a member of the commission’s presiding board.

The election took place in the site of the General Assembly just one hour after the Zionist regime prime minister vigorously criticized the attitude of the Iranian government during his remarks.

It is one thing to know that the UN is a joke, but to see it confirmed day after day after day is still remarkable.

(h/t Arsen/Arnold)