Deal reached with Iran

[Michael Jordan.]

Discuss sons

[boutons_deux]

Bibi's gonna nuke 'em anyway.

[scott]

Patriot John Cornyn says what all the other patriots were thinking:
@ JohnCornyn
Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care
9:15 PM - 23 Nov 2013 from Austin, TX, United States

[boutons_deux]

Patriot John Cornyn says what all the other patriots were thinking:
@ JohnCornyn
Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care
9:15 PM - 23 Nov 2013 from Austin, TX, United States

yeah, heard the same Repug bullshit when they were harassing Clinton and Clinton was shooting cruises at OBL.

Repugs ignored OBL and terrorists (because that as a Dem thing, and Repugs don't do Dem things), and now Repugs are guilty of allowing OBL to succeed in the only attack on US soil in a couple 100 years. Thanks, Repugs.

[SnakeBoy]

WASHINGTON — President Clinton on Tuesday approved a deal reached by U.S. negotiators in Geneva to stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, saying the agreement “will make the United States, the Korean peninsula and the world safer.”

Clearly delighted by what he considers a victory for his foreign policy, the President appeared before television cameras to hail the agreement as “the first step on the road to a nuclear-free Korean peninsula.” He instructed Special Ambassador Robert L. Gallucci, the Administration’s lead negotiator with North Korea, to sign the accord Friday in Geneva.

However, the White House refused to release the text Tuesday, and Administration officials said that it will not be made public until after it is signed. Instead, Gallucci and other U.S. officials briefed reporters on what they said are its principal elements.

The accord, concluded Monday in Geneva, gives North Korea a series of economic and political benefits in exchange for promises to freeze and eventually dismantle its current nuclear facilities, which the CIA believes have been used to make the material for one to two nuclear weapons.

“The North Koreans do have an interest in a political and economic opening. They do have long-term energy needs. And we are addressing those needs,” Gallucci told reporters at a White House briefing. “They are giving up a nuclear program that posed an enormous risk to South Korea, to Japan, to Northeast Asia and to the international non-proliferation regime.”

North Korea will dismantle two large nuclear reactors now under construction, which would have had the potential to make enough fuel for hundreds of nuclear weapons. Operations of an existing, smaller reactor at Yongbyon will also be stopped, and it too will eventually be dismantled, U.S. officials said.

[Drachen]

yeah, heard the same Repug bullshit when they were harassing Clinton and Clinton was shooting cruises at OBL.

Repugs ignored OBL and terrorists (because that as a Dem thing, and Repugs don't do Dem things), and now Repugs are guilty of allowing OBL to succeed in the only attack on US soil in a couple 100 years. Thanks, Repugs.
1993 says hello

[baseline bum]

1993 says hello

Apparently boutons doesn't know about Pearl Harbor either :lol

[spurraider21]

https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1479526_611069962286056_1849789805_n.jpg

[Double-Up]

^ Sounds like the entire Middle East not just one nation.

[m>s]

https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1479526_611069962286056_1849789805_n.jpg

we could learn a thing or two from Iran

[Splits]

If Bibi and the Saudi's don't like the deal, it must be good.

[mercos]

Positive first step. They still have to come up with a broader deal in the next six months. Seems like a fairly even deal. They get about $7 billion in sanctions relief, and they have to get rid of their 20% enriched uranium and not manufacture anymore of it. Of course, the devil is in the details, namely keeping them to their word. We won't know how that is accomplished or if it can be successful for a while though. For now I'll remain optimistic.

[exstatic]

If Bibi and the Saudi's don't like the deal, it must be good.

[Winehole23]

http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/r14/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2013/1124/The-Iran-nuclear-deal-s-test-of-motives

[Winehole23]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/iran-deal-could-change-the-strategic-calculus-100304.html

[SupremeGuy]

Fuck the Middle East. The "West" should just let Israel and the rest of the desert terrorist pussies go to war and kill each other.

[SupremeGuy]

https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1479526_611069962286056_1849789805_n.jpgIt's only bad if White Christians are doing it, didn't you know?

[Winehole23]

doing what?

[SupremeGuy]

Being bigoted fools?

Fucking context man, context.

[Winehole23]

there's no creedal restrictions on that that I can see

[Winehole23]

bigotry certainly isn't peculiar to Christians

[SupremeGuy]

The fuck? Are you retarded? That wasn't the implication at all, fucking idiot.

[boutons_deux]

Patriot John Cornyn says what all the other patriots were thinking:
@ JohnCornyn
Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care
9:15 PM - 23 Nov 2013 from Austin, TX, United States

IRAN’S SUPREME LEADER HOPES NUKE DEAL DISTRACTS ATTENTION FROM OBAMACARE


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/borowitz-khameini-290.jpg

The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told reporters today his nation agreed to a deal on its nuclear program in the hopes that it would distract attention from the trouble-plagued rollout of Obamacare.

“It’s true, we’ve resisted any deal on nukes for over three decades,” the Ayatollah said. “But when we saw how much trouble Obama was having with his Web site, we realized it would be uncaring of us not to try to help him out.”

The Ayatollah said he was not “overly optimistic” that signing a nuclear treaty with the West would be sufficient to distract attention from the President’s Obamacare woes, but, he added, “You never know. Every little bit helps.”

He said that he and Iran’s leaders will be putting their heads together in the days and weeks ahead to see “if there’s anything else we can do to help Obama out of this health-care mess.”

“One idea we’re tossing around is to get the Iranian people to stop chanting, ‘Death to America,’ the way they have for the past thirty-four years,” he said. “At the very least, maybe dial it back until he gets that Web site straightened out.”

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/11/irans-supreme-leader-hopes-nuke-deal-distracts-attention-from-obamacare.html?utm_source=tny&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=borowitz&mbid=nl_Borowitz%20(3)

[m>s]

Saudis making threats they're going to fight Iran alone lol

[Winehole23]

The fuck? Are you retarded? That wasn't the implication at all, fucking idiot.what were you implying?

[pgardn]

Both sides are having to spin this so the intransigent party's that want a continual conflict are drowned out.

Israel was just fine with Iran's path before Hassan Rouhani; Iran was suffering and giving Israel reasons to strike.

[pgardn]

Patriot John Cornyn says what all the other patriots were thinking:
@ JohnCornyn
Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care
9:15 PM - 23 Nov 2013 from Austin, TX, United States

We can't have peace breaking out while Obama's record is tainted.

[scott]

IRAN’S SUPREME LEADER HOPES NUKE DEAL DISTRACTS ATTENTION FROM OBAMACARE


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/borowitz-khameini-290.jpg

The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told reporters today his nation agreed to a deal on its nuclear program in the hopes that it would distract attention from the trouble-plagued rollout of Obamacare.

“It’s true, we’ve resisted any deal on nukes for over three decades,” the Ayatollah said. “But when we saw how much trouble Obama was having with his Web site, we realized it would be uncaring of us not to try to help him out.”

The Ayatollah said he was not “overly optimistic” that signing a nuclear treaty with the West would be sufficient to distract attention from the President’s Obamacare woes, but, he added, “You never know. Every little bit helps.”

He said that he and Iran’s leaders will be putting their heads together in the days and weeks ahead to see “if there’s anything else we can do to help Obama out of this health-care mess.”

“One idea we’re tossing around is to get the Iranian people to stop chanting, ‘Death to America,’ the way they have for the past thirty-four years,” he said. “At the very least, maybe dial it back until he gets that Web site straightened out.”

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/11/irans-supreme-leader-hopes-nuke-deal-distracts-attention-from-obamacare.html?utm_source=tny&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=borowitz&mbid=nl_Borowitz%20(3)




Borowitz Report: still only funny to people too stupid to understand The Onion

[Winehole23]

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-unlikely-to-breach-interim-deal-says-top-israeli-analyst/

[lefty]

lol World Leaders toying with people

US and Iran have been best fwiendz 4 life for a long time

[boutons_deux]

something like $100B of Iranian funds frozen outside of Iran.

And what gives any country, even Corporate Imperial America, the right to bully, dictate another countries internal actions?

[cantthinkofanything]

something like $100B of Iranian funds frozen outside of Iran.

And what gives any country, even Corporate Imperial America, the right to bully, dictate another countries internal actions?

manifest destiny or imminent domain or WalMart or something

[pgardn]

something like $100B of Iranian funds frozen outside of Iran.

And what gives any country, even Corporate Imperial America, the right to bully, dictate another countries internal actions?

When a country threatens to eventually wipe another country off the map.

So you think a deliverable nuclear weapon in the hands of the Iranians is safer than a nuke in France, England, India? How about Israel , you think they would use a nuke BEFORE one is used on them? So every country should have the right to have Nukes? Because after all, there really is no difference in the stability of different countries? We don't need monitors, mutually assured destruction has already worked with the Soviets?

And that bullying just resulted in one step forward. You think Iran would let an international organization come on site and inspect without sanctions? What brings Iran to this sit down? Why now?

Boutons... Corporate America likes open markets. You think businesses told to stop with exports to Iran really want to lose that market? Really?

[m>s]

Iran never threatened to wipe anyone off the map. They challenged the legitimacy of the Jewish state by saying it should not even be listed on the map. People misquoting that gets old tbh.

[pgardn]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html

Decide for yourself. Seems like extreme hatred and threats.
It's hard to fathom a Nazi nitpicking about extermination and genocide of vermin.

[m>s]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html

Decide for yourself. Seems like extreme hatred and threats.
It's hard to fathom a Nazi nitpicking about extermination and genocide of vermin.

i'd stand up for israel if they were actually wrongfully under attack or threat, we must all be civilized. talk about exterminating all jews and all that are just that, nonsense

[Nbadan]

i'd stand up for israel if they were actually wrongfully under attack or threat, we must all be civilized. talk about exterminating all jews and all that are just that, nonsense

He's right...Can't believe I just typed that to a m>s post.....

[angrydude]

In other hilarious news today a hollywood producer admitted to being a spy for Israel.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/11/25/hollywood-producer-arnon-milchan-admits-double-life-as-israeli-spy/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBiVeMOyPGQ&feature=youtu.be

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlPsC8sOmRA&feature=youtu.be

[Nbadan]

http://assets.amuniversal.com/39e8db90389301314898001dd8b71c47.jpg

[boutons_deux]

When a country threatens to eventually wipe another country off the map.

So you think a deliverable nuclear weapon in the hands of the Iranians is safer than a nuke in France, England, India? How about Israel , you think they would use a nuke BEFORE one is used on them? So every country should have the right to have Nukes? Because after all, there really is no difference in the stability of different countries? We don't need monitors, mutually assured destruction has already worked with the Soviets?

And that bullying just resulted in one step forward. You think Iran would let an international organization come on site and inspect without sanctions? What brings Iran to this sit down? Why now?

Boutons... Corporate America likes open markets. You think businesses told to stop with exports to Iran really want to lose that market? Really?

Iran knows, ever their religion-crazed mullahs (similar to America's religion-crazed Christians), that a nuke on Israel would destroy Muslim shrines in Israel with the counter-attack destroying Iran.

iow, it's all mullah bullshit to inflame their bubbas, much like Repugs and Fox inflames their bubbas with bullshit and lies.

The only interest USA has in Iran is its oil and markets, NOT protecting Israel. But you're welcome to your self-deception, being inflamed by the mullah's bullshit just like a Irannian bubba.

Where is the equivalent, huge, urgent USA/world pressure to disarm OIL-less NK?

[boutons_deux]

Americans Back Obama On Iran Deal

A Reuters/Ipsos poll (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/27/us-usa-iran-poll-idUSBRE9AQ01420131127) released on Tuesday finds that Americans favor the U.S.-brokered nuclear deal with Iran (http://www.nationalmemo.com/imperfect-iran-deal-may-be-u-s-s-least-bad-option/) — an issue on which Congress and world powers are split.

According to the poll, 44 percent of Americans support the deal reached between six world powers and Iran reached over the weekend; just 22 percent oppose the deal.

Reuters notes that although there is “little trust among Americans toward Iranian intentions,” Americans still hope to avoid any U.S. “military entanglements.” Even if Iran fails to honor the deal, only 20 percent of Americans surveyed in the poll want the United States to use military force against the Islamic republic; 49 percent say they would want the nation to increase sanctions, and another 31 percent believe the U.S. should continue to push for diplomacy.

An overwhelming majority of Americans — 65 percent — say that unless the country is “directly threatened,” it “should not become involved in any military action in the Middle East.” Only 21 percent disagreed.

The poll’s findings are good news for President Barack Obama, who has seen his popularity decline (http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-public-losing-trust-in-president-obama/) over the past several weeks among Americans. Though he still faces harsh criticism from both Democrats and Republicans wary of Iran, the public support for the nuclear deal — which places restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions — may keep Congress from approving new sanctions (http://www.nationalmemo.com/obama-to-ask-senators-to-hold-off-on-iran-sanctions/)that would jeopardize the deal.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-americans-back-obama-on-iran-deal/

[boutons_deux]

Americans Back Obama On Iran Deal

A Reuters/Ipsos poll (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/27/us-usa-iran-poll-idUSBRE9AQ01420131127) released on Tuesday finds that Americans favor the U.S.-brokered nuclear deal with Iran (http://www.nationalmemo.com/imperfect-iran-deal-may-be-u-s-s-least-bad-option/) — an issue on which Congress and world powers are split.

According to the poll, 44 percent of Americans support the deal reached between six world powers and Iran reached over the weekend; just 22 percent oppose the deal.

Reuters notes that although there is “little trust among Americans toward Iranian intentions,” Americans still hope to avoid any U.S. “military entanglements.” Even if Iran fails to honor the deal, only 20 percent of Americans surveyed in the poll want the United States to use military force against the Islamic republic; 49 percent say they would want the nation to increase sanctions, and another 31 percent believe the U.S. should continue to push for diplomacy.

An overwhelming majority of Americans — 65 percent — say that unless the country is “directly threatened,” it “should not become involved in any military action in the Middle East.” Only 21 percent disagreed.

The poll’s findings are good news for President Barack Obama, who has seen his popularity decline (http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-public-losing-trust-in-president-obama/) over the past several weeks among Americans. Though he still faces harsh criticism from both Democrats and Republicans wary of Iran, the public support for the nuclear deal — which places restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions — may keep Congress from approving new sanctions (http://www.nationalmemo.com/obama-to-ask-senators-to-hold-off-on-iran-sanctions/)that would jeopardize the deal.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-americans-back-obama-on-iran-deal/



meanwhile, the Repugs, tea baggers, right-wing LIE machine have gone Godwin, saying the deal is worse appeasement than Munich! :lol

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-y-GOLrcJ290/TV8FvtJTKnI/AAAAAAAAAvA/Nh3lhvL9Rvc/w611-h361-no/MRJoyous.jpg

[TDMVPDPOY]

the iran surpreme pizza leader has 100b under his wealth management, is that also frozen?

[boutons_deux]

Heroic Diplomacy: How Barack Obama Finally Earned That Peace Prize

Finally, Barack Obama may prove deserving of his Nobel Peace Prize by joining with England, France, China, Russia and Germany in negotiating an eminently sensible rapprochement with Iran on its nuclear program. Following on his pullback from war with Syria and instead, successfully negotiating the destruction of that country’s supply of chemical weapons, this is another bold step to fulfill the peacemaking promise that got him elected president in the first place.

As Obama reminded his audience at an event Monday in San Francisco, he was fulfilling the pledge from his first campaign to usher in a “new era of American leadership, one that turned the page on a decade of war.” As a candidate in 2007, he committed to engage in “aggressive personal diplomacy” with Iran’s leaders, and he has now done just that.

This is potentially an international game changer comparable to Richard Nixon’s opening to Mao’s Red China and Ronald Reagan’s overtures to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, two examples of heroic diplomacy that combined to destroy the underpinnings of the Cold War. Those who continually call for regime change in Iran as a condition for improved relations with that country, as Obama’s critics are now doing, ignore that history.

Obama’s critics clearly prefer the murky unknown of rank speculation to the reality check of on-site inspection when it comes to preventing nuclear proliferation. How can it be a bad thing to call Iran’s bluff—if that’s what it is—on its nuclear program being designed for peaceful purposes?

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/heroic_diplomacy_how_barack_obama_finally_earned_t hat_peace_prize_20131125

[m>s]

This agreement is nothing more than the set up for the coming attack, so they can say they tried diplomacy first tbh.

[Spurs da champs]

This agreement is nothing more than the set up for the coming attack, so they can say they tried diplomacy first tbh.

I agree. An attack leading to war on Iran is inevitable, sadly.

Even if it was legit, I'd figure their would be sabotage on part of the Israelis.

[Winehole23]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-the-nuclear-deal-with-tehran-could-change-the-world-a-936620.html

[Rogue]

The Persians are a people believing in peace and non-violence (unlike most countries of West Asia, or even the entire Asia), so I have absolutely no doubt that a long term harmony can be maintained between the Iranians and the Western world tbh. The US is fucking owned and ruled by Zionists who have been controlling everything in the headquarter of this country, but I believe that Americans who have brains will not always believe whatever the media tells them. Israel is the only country in that region who has nuclear weapon so that other countries feel threatened. If another country (like Iran) also acquires nuclear weapon it'd only help maintain the relative peace in the middle east rather than break it imho, because the balance of military power which had been jeopardized by Israel's possession of nuclear weapon would be reachieved and enhanced with another nuke possessor in that region. But sadly, the Zionist-controlled US would never allow it to happen, tbh.

[symple19]

Wow, if true (from the spiegel article posted by WH)


The Geneva deal is creating surprising new alliances. The backward-looking, theocratic Saudi monarchy and modern, pluralistic Israel have discovered mutual interests. The two countries allegedly even have coordinated attack plans, in which Israeli fighter jets would not only be allowed to fly through Saudi Arabian airspace in the event of an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, but could also depend on logistical support from Riyadh.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs are planning to go Benghazi on the Iran deal, fabricating outrage, holding hearings, voting on a House bill, etc, etc, including nuking Iran ...

Republicans Grossly Out Of Touch With The Public On Iran
http://www.nationalmemo.com/republicans-grossly-out-of-touch-with-the-public-on-iran/

[boutons_deux]

GOP Rep. Uses Self-Described ‘Hyperbole’ To Justify His Iran War Authorization Bill (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/10/16/2790401/franks-iran-hyperbole/)


A House Republican who introduced a bill this week (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/10/10/2761951/franks-iran-war-authorization/) that seeks to provide authorization for the use of military force against Iran had trouble last week explaining the motives behind the measure and instead had to resort to what he himself described as “hyperbole” in order to justify it.

Rep. Trent Franks’ (R-AZ) bill, introduced on Tuesday, “provides consent to the necessary and appropriate use of force against legitimate targets in Iran” in order to deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons and degrade Iran’s capabilities to produce nukes (experts say (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/09/13/842061/iran-report-attack-regional-war/) an attack would actually have the opposite (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/11/10/366866/panetta-iran-attack-delay-consequences/) effect (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/03/04/1665431/israeli-officials-war-iran/)).

When asked last week on a conservative radio program (http://securefreedomradio.podbean.com/2013/10/10/rep-trent-franks-fred-fleitz-michael-auslin-rafal-rohozinski/) to explain his motivations for introducing the measure, Franks said he wanted to “strengthen the United States’ negotiating position” in upcoming talks with Iran (President Obama and members of his administration have already said many times that “all options are on the table”) and then reverted to what he described as “hyperbole” to expound on his reasoning.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/10/16/2790401/franks-iran-hyperbole/

Of course, it would be racist, crazy fucking AZ.

[Winehole23]

Some advocates of war seem gripped by Thirties Envy, a longing for the clarity of the 1930s, when appeasement failed to slake the dictators’ thirst for territorial expansion. But the incantation “Appeasement! (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/11/20/who-will-stand-up-to-iran-and-against-obamas-appeasement/)” is not an argument. And the word “appeasement” does not usefully describe a sober decision that war is an imprudent and even ultimately ineffective response to the failure of diplomatic and economic pressures to alter a regime’s choices about policies within its borders.http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-f-will-better-a-contained-iran-than-an-all-out-war/2013/12/04/e4dcb1aa-5c4b-11e3-95c2-13623eb2b0e1_story.html?hpid=z2

[Winehole23]

Back in October, in response to the Saudis taking their toys and going home from the UN, I warned (http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/10/24/if-the-saudis-take-their-toys-and-go-home-have-they-still-won-the-arab-spring/), “I worry they disengaged from the UN because they are considering alternative means of pursuing their interests, means that would be loudly condemned in that body.”



Yesterday, Dick Cheney lackey John Hannah wrote a remarkable screed (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/29/iran_saudi_arabia_nuclear_war_obama?page=full) about Saudi complaints. It starts by warning that Obama’s Iran deal’s “greatest impact is not ensuring that Iran doesn’t get the bomb, but that the Saudis will.” In part to support this, he describes Mr. Tip of the Spear’s close consultations with the Pakistanis (who not only have the bomb but have thousands of our troops held hostage to supply lines through Pakistan).




Bandar is now clearly the tip of the spear in King Abdullah’s efforts to combat the Iranian threat around the region — not to mention the principal point of contact in the kingdom’s thick relationship with Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment.




Then after laying out the Saudi complaints (basically, that the US is not serving as meat in its efforts to extend its hegemony over the region), and after condemning John Kerry with a mix of emasculation and Saudi distrust, Hannah issues the threat Bandar likely suggested he issue:




An atmosphere this poisonous is dangerous, to say the least. The incentive for the Saudis to engage in all kinds of self-help that Washington would find less than beneficial, even destructive, is significant and rising. Driven into a corner, feeling largely abandoned by their traditional superpower patron, no one should doubt that the Saudis will do what they believe is necessary to ensure their survival. It would be a mistake to underestimate their capacity to deliver some very unpleasant surprises: from the groups they feel compelled to support in their escalating proxy war with Iran, to the price of oil, to their sponsorship (and bankrolling) of a much expanded regional role for Russia and China at America’s expense.




Ultimately, Hannah is warning that the Saudis will get — and, the suggestion is, with his language about “a very, very high price in blood, treasure, and U.S. interests,” use — the bomb.

http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/12/04/bandar-is-now-clearly-the-tip-of-the-spear/

[pgardn]

The fear of Jews.

Unbelievable.

There is no doubt the lobby is very powerful, but the Semitic phobia is amazing. I say the NRA runs the country, so let's kill all the WASPS. m>s thinks there are Jews hiding under his bed.

[Winehole23]

The International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, confirmed (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/17/us-iran-nuclear-idUSBREA3G0FL20140417) last week that Iran had effectively eliminated that “second stage” of uranium enrichment, as required by the interim deal negotiated between Iran and the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China. And news reports over the weekend hinted that a second path to the bomb may be blocked as well.http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/04/the-iranian-nuclear-deal-is-working/361066/

[Winehole23]

Negotiations are working:


When Netanyahu spoke, Iran had roughly 190 kilograms of medium enriched uranium and was making more every week. “That’s why I speak today with such a sense of urgency,” he said, “And why everyone should have a sense of urgency.” He predicted Iran would cross his red line by the summer of 2013.


It did not. When Hassan Rouhani became president of Iran in June 2013, he stopped expanding Iran’s uranium enrichment capability. The interim deal (http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2013/11/deal-real/74399/) the U.S. and other nations secured with Iran last November rolled it back, directly addressing Netanyahu’s main fear. Iran agreed not only to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent, but to get rid of all it had made.


That goal has now been effectively reached. The IAEA report last week confirms that Iran cut its stock of medium enriched uranium by three-quarters. It has completely diluted half its stock down to low enriched uranium, and it has converted half of the remaining amount into reactor fuel, all ahead of schedule. It would be extraordinarily difficult and time-consuming to reverse these processes.


In short, Netanyahu’s bomb has been drained. His red line has been implemented. Even if Iran were to break the deal today, it would take it many months to make enough uranium for one bomb, and the world would see them doing it. Nor is there any indication that Iran is about to break off negotiations. In fact, the prospect that negotiators can work out a final agreement “now may be better than 50-50,” said (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/04/16/3427427/petraeus-iran-deal/) David Petraeus, former CIA director and former U.S. Central Command commander, “which is not something we would have said even a few weeks ago, much less months ago.” According to Think Progress, Petraeus said at a talk at Harvard University, “I’m actually starting to believe that an agreement is possible and it could be that it’s possible before this particular six-month deadline expires,” referring to the target of concluding an agreement by July 20.

same

[The Reckoning]

time to get my motha stuffin pistachio and saffron fix

[Winehole23]

Mossad breaks with Netanyahu, cautions US Congress against new sanctions:


The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad has broken ranks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, telling U.S. officials and lawmakers that a new Iran sanctions bill in the U.S. Congress would tank the Iran nuclear negotiations.http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-22/netanyahu-mossad-split-divides-u-s-congress-on-iran-sanctions

[boutons_deux]

Here's the CIA "fixing up the data" to match political objectives (like MI6 did before Iraq invasion for oil)

CIA-planted ‘evidence’ may force IAEA review of Iran’s alleged nuke arms program

Doctored blueprints for nuclear weapon components supplied to Iran by the CIA 15 years ago could force the IAEA to review its conclusions on Iran’s atomic program, which was potentially based on misleading intelligence, Bloomberg reports.

The details of the Central Intelligence Agency operation back in 2000 were made public as part of a judicial hearing into a case involving Jeffrey Sterling, an agent (http://rt.com/news/226455-sterling-cia-iran-guilty/)convicted of leaking classified information on CIA spying against Iran.

“The goal is to plant this substantial piece of deception information on the Iranian nuclear-weapons program, sending them down blind alleys, wasting their time and money,” a May 1997 CIA cable submitted to the court reads.

The intelligence in question pertains to fake designs of atomic components that were transferred to Iran in February 2000.

Now it turns out the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) could be forced to reassess their earlier conclusions regarding Iran’s atomic program, the publication quoted two anonymous Western diplomats as saying. Part of the IAEA’s suspicions about the alleged Iran's nuclear weapons program relies on information provided by multiple intelligence agencies.

“This story suggests a possibility that hostile intelligence agencies could decide to plant a ‘smoking gun’ in Iran for the IAEA to find,”Peter Jenkins, the UK’s former envoy to the Vienna-based agency told
Bloomberg. “That looks like a big problem.”

In the latest quarterly report (http://rt.com/news/234235-iran-netanyahu-iaea-nuclear/), the atomic watchdog said that the team of experts is still concerned about Iran’s nuclear intentions, prompting an immediate reaction from Israel.

“The agency remains concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear-related activities involving military-related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile,” it reads.

http://rt.com/news/234271-cia-nuclear-evidence-iran-iaea/

CIA/deep state fabricating a foreign threat, the best CIA "reality" of all, to justify its existence.

[m>s]

supposedly there were some leaked cables today that showed that bibi knew before his famous speech holding up his little bomb drawing that iran actually truly was not building a bomb.

[boutons_deux]

Saudis Said to Aid Israeli Plan to Bomb Iran

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/02/25/saudis-said-to-aid-israeli-plan-to-bomb-iran/

[Infinite_limit]

Saudis Said to Aid Israeli Plan to Bomb Iran

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/02/25/saudis-said-to-aid-israeli-plan-to-bomb-iran/



I'd applaud another 9/11 if this occurred