Video - Israeli Rabbi Deconstructs Obama's "What's the Diff If We Call It Radical Islam'?" Speech

HT And Source: Scaramouchee

Video - Arafat's Bodyguard: He Used to Lie When Denouncing Bombings in Israel

Video - The Muslim Agenda - Full Movie - Warning contains Disturbing images.

The Muslim Agenda - Full Movie - Warning contains Disturbing images.

NBT Films presents 'The Muslim Agenda', a movie which exposes the shocking truth about islam, it's incompatibility with western ideals and it's cult-like ideology. The contents of the film exposes the evil verses and teachings taken directly from the Quran and Hadiths and demonstrates it's sick doctrine of hate, gender inequality, intolerance of homosexuals, anti-semitism, racial discrimination and permission for muslim men to indulge in sex slavery, child rape and molestation.

The Muslim Agenda also exposes other diabolical facet's of the faith, including islam's culture of psychological indoctrination, guilt complex, and mind control which is imposed on young impressionable muslim men to commit jihad. The final end game through acts of jihad, is a worldwide controlled caliphate whereby Sharia law is forced upon all mankind and subjugation of all non-muslims must take place. This is the ultimate desire of all devout muslims who remain faithful to the divisive and destructive religious tenets set by Muhammad, the prophet of islam.

Please help NBT films by donating with Paypal on our channel.

Chapter contents:

1. Introduction

2. Islam 101

3. Sharia Law

4. Jihad

5. Islamic Caliphate

6. Legal enquiry

Hmmm.....I think there should be more focus on the Difference between a peaceful Muslim and an Islamist.

Related:

Poll: 'Islam in Europe' sends shivers down the back. 

"Moderate" Iran Rejects Reuters Report on Rouhani’s Willingness to Mend Ties with West

"Moderate" Iran Rejects Reuters Report on Rouhani’s Willingness to Mend Ties with West.(Fars).

Senior Iranian officials on Monday dismissed as “completely untrue” a Reuters report alleging that President Hassan Rouhani has underlined his willingness to improve ties with the West in an article in the German Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper, stressing that such an article basically never existed.

Reuters claimed in a Monday morning news report that the Iranian president has written “a contribution for the Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper” and said that “we want to rebuild and improve our relations to European and North American countries on a basis of mutual respect”.

“We are striving to avoid new burdens on relations between Iran and the United States and also to remove the tensions that we have inherited,” Reuters quoted the Iranian president as saying in Sueddeutsche Zeitung.

In response, Iran’s Presidential Advisor Mohammad Reza Sadeq strongly rejected the Reuters report, saying President Rouhani has not at all sent any note or article to Sueddeutsche Zeitung.

“Irrespective of the content, Dr. Rouhani has not sent any note or piece of writing to this German publication and attributing this contribution to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s President is a lie,” Sadeq told FNA Monday evening.


The Iranian media wired or released similar reports on the basis of the Reuters news item today, and Sadeq urged the Iranian media to contact the presidential office in such cases and avoid giving out news on the basis of foreign media reports on Iranian officials. 

Video - Iranian Political Analyst Al-Hosseini: If Not for the Geneva Deal, Obama Would Have Had to Kiss Nasrallah's and Khamenei's Hands to Prevent the Annihilation of Israel

Video - Iranian Political Analyst Al-Hosseini: If Not for the Geneva Deal, Obama Would Have Had to Kiss Nasrallah's and Khamenei's Hands to Prevent the Annihilation of Israel.
Following are excerpts from an interview with Mohammad Sadeq Al-Hosseini, former politicl advisor to Iranian President Khatami, which aired on Syrian News TV on December 11, 2013.

Mohammad Sadeq Al-Hosseini: Believe me, President Obama tried five times to get a free handshake from President Rohani, on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly – and he failed. He said: "I am prepared to discuss the issue of Bahrain, like Iran wants – but just give me that handshake."

This was because he was defeated at the gates of Damascus. The chemical weapons [deal] was not a victory for him. It was a trap in which we ensnared him. He lost that battle, and we won it. Those [chemical weapons] were a heavy burden, pieces of scrap metal that we should have thrown into the sea, but we gave them to them in a very smart diplomatic maneuver, which involved three elements: complete silence on the part of Hizbullah, the big stick of Iran, and a first-class diplomatic team in Syria, which has managed to remain steadfast in the face of all the onslaughts.

What happened to the Americans, on the other hand? Obama had to make a great retreat. He was forced to accept a handshake from President Rohani, whom he considered a kind of Gorbachev or Sadat, so that the day would not come when he would be forced to kiss the hands of Hassan Nasrallah and Imam Khamenei, so that they would hold their fire in the great war that was prepared to annihilate Israel.

All the operations... It has been revealed that our missiles can now very easily reach Tel Aviv. We have weapons that can make Israel go blind. Nasrallah, the leader of the resistance, managed to deliver a 17-minute speech, and the Israeli airplanes were unable to reach the southern suburb of Beirut, or to fly over Lebanon.

This is the first time that such a thing has happened. This means that we have a new strategic weapon in Syria, in Iran, and in the southern suburb of Beirut, which can prevent Israel from attacking.

There is no honeymoon. We are engaged in a fierce war with the Americans on all levels. This is the Treaty of Hudaybiyya in Geneva, and it will be followed by a "conquest of Mecca."

The Geneva agreement was achieved due to three things. The first was our strategic patience. Iran has maintained strategic patience for a very long time – 10 or 11 years. We have been patient, preparing for the day that comes after those 10 years. We were preparing a large quantity of enriched uranium, so that when it is reduced... Incidentally, for your information, when you conduct political negotiations with Iran, you lose even when you think you have won.

The [Iranians] have raised the level of uranium enrichment far beyond the level they really needed, so that when the level would be lowered, they would emerge victorious.

Saudi Arabia is on its way to perdition. Its role is over. Why? Because the Iranians have reached the Mediterranean Sea. You've begun to analyse the political situation correctly. There is a change.

The day Greece reached the Mediterranean coast, Persia fell to Alexander the Great for 300 years. Today, now that the Iranians are reaching the Mediterranean coast at Tyre, we are looking at 300 years of defeat for the Americans and the Westerners. HT: Memri.

Letter from Ayatollah Khomeini describes the need for additional weapons, including nuclear/atomic.

Letter from Ayatollah Khomeini describes the need for additional weapons, including nuclear/atomic. HT: Cfr.org.

Author: Ruhollah Musavi KhomeiniPublished 1988

More here.

Israeli Defense Minister Ya’alon: Iran Building Terror Infrastructure in Central and South America.

Israeli Defense Minister Ya’alon: Iran Building Terror Infrastructure in Central and South America.JNS.ORG.

Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said he believes Iran is building a terror infrastructure in Central and South America, using its embassies and local Shi’ite Muslim populations as bases.

“The Iranians use diplomatic mail [pouches] in order to transport bombs and weapons, and we know that there are states in South America, like Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Bolivia, where the Iranians have terror bases, both in the embassies and among the local Shi’ite Muslim populations,” Ya’alon said in a meeting with Guatemalan President Otto Fernando Perez, the Times of Israel reported.

Ya’alon believes these bases can be used to attack Jewish or Israeli interests in the region, or to stage attacks inside of the U.S. similar to the foiled 2011 attack on a Saudi ambassador in Washington, DC.

“[The Iranians] built this infrastructure for the eventuality that they will have to act against Jews, Israelis or Israeli interests, but it is important to them as an infrastructure that enables them to act within the United States,” he said.Hmmmm...........Hezbollah Sheikh Qassem: "slogan 'Death to America' will remain as Iran - US negotiations are proceeding."

Former Egyptian Politician Accuses West Of Selling Out The Region To Extremist Religious Movements.

Former Egyptian Politician Accuses West Of Selling Out The Region To Extremist Religious Movements.HT: Memri.

Mustafa Al-Fiqi, an Egyptian politician who held senior posts under Mubarak, including deputy foreign minister and chairman of the parliamentary foreign relations committee, recently devoted his regular column in the Egyptian daily Al-Yawm Al-Sabi' to a sharp attack on the U.S. for the nuclear agreement with Iran. Al-Fiqi accused the U.S. of betraying its Arab allies and surrendering to the unbending Iranian policy despite its status as the world’s strongest superpower. He claimed that the lesson that the Arabs should draw from this agreement is that the West, headed by the U.S., understands only the language of force.

"Iran has managed to score an interim achievement for its nuclear policy, and we must learn the lesson [from this], which is that the West understands only the language of force, and it signs an armistice with a brazen country more readily than it accepts the policy of a country that has been its ally for years.

"It is the West that has sold out the region to extremist religious movements; it is the West that wants the Arab and Muslim world to wallow in internal conflict that will keep [the Arabs and Muslims] away from it; it is the West that, in the final result, negotiated with Iran and signed a historic agreement with it despite [this country's] diplomatic measures that are provocative to the U.S., be it [Iran's policy] in Syria or the Gulf, or Hizbullah’s [behavior].

"Indeed, Washington respects only the language of force and the [opposing country's] sense that it is on a par with [the U.S.]. The U.S. understands that the word 'no' [that it heard from Iran] was meant as a warning… The Iranian nuclear agreement revealed the effectiveness of [Iran's] 'brinkmanship' diplomacy.

That is why Washington and its allies ignored Israel’s objections and preferred to go their own way: because they understood that sometimes there is an 'important' [interest] and a 'still more important' [interest].
"Additionally, the U.S. sold out the Christians of the East as part of dubious agreements with religious and terrorist forces, and did so for Israel’s benefit, and then it gradually sold out Israel for a strategic agreement with Iran. I think that this agreement is not the end of the road, and I will hazard to say that Israel is contemplating making some foolish military move against Tehran should the nuclear enrichment program continue to progress."

Iran to launch Kavoshgar-7 carrier carrying a living creature into space.

Iran to launch Kavoshgar-7 carrier carrying a living creature into space.(Taz).

Iran will launch Kavoshgar-7(Explorer-7) carrier, carrying a living creature into space from Imam Khomeini Space Centre near Semnan city in the north of the country next week, head of Iran's aerospace industries, Mehdi Farahi said, ISNA news agency reported on Dec. 10.

He went on to note that the carrier will orbit at an altitude of 120 kilometres.

Commenting on Iran's aerospace projects Farahi underlined that the Kavoshgar projects are steps towards sending astronauts into space.

Iran sent its first bio-capsule containing living creatures into the space in February 2010, using the indigenous Kavoshgar-3 (Explorer-3) carrier.
Iran sent a monkey into space aboard an indigenous bio-capsule code-named Pishgam (Pioneer) in January 2013.
The country successfully launched its first indigenous data-processing satellite, Omid (Hope), into orbit in 2009.
As part of a plan to develop its space program, Iran also successfully launched its second satellite, dubbed Rassad (Observation), into the earth's orbit in June 2011. Rassad's mission was to take images of the earth and transmit them along with telemetry information to ground stations.
Iran also launched its domestically-built Navid-e Elm-o Sanat (Harbinger of Science and Industry) satellite into orbit in February 2012. The records made by the telecom, measurement and scientific satellite could be used in a wide range of fields.
The country is one of the 24 founding members of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, which was set up in 1959.Hmmm......ICBM anyone?

Empowering Islam: ‘Taqiyya’ in the White House?

Empowering Islam: ‘Taqiyya’ in the White House? (JPost).By MARTIN SHERMAN

Was this really what well-meaning, gullible American Jews had in mind, when persuaded by Obama’s pledge that “I have Israel’s back,” they gave him their support—both at the ballot and the bank?            

That great scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis, caution[ed] that America risked being seen as harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend. The Obama administration seems to have raised the thought to the level of doctrine. What has hitherto been unclear is whether this was through design or incompetence.

– Mark Steyn, “Surrender in Geneva,” National Review, November 29.

These sobering sentiments expressed by Steyn, an incisive conservative columnist of Canadian origin, mirror with almost eerie accuracy those I articulated in my previous column “Will the West withstand the Obama presidency”, posted just one day earlier. In it I remarked: “the really chilling aspect of the Obama incumbency is that it is genuinely difficult to diagnose whether the abysmal results we see represent a crushing failure of his policies or a calculated success, the product of chronic ineptitude or purposeful foresight”.

‘Bungling stupidity cannot be ruled out’

Both pieces were written in response to the P5+1 deal brokered in Geneva on the Iranian nuclear program, largely under the stewardship of Obama’s Secretary of State, John Kerry, in which Tehran won significant gains – both economic and political – in exchange for…well, not a lot.

Given how incomprehensibly favorable the terms seemed to be for Iran’s tyrannical theocracy, Steyn was almost charitable in admitting that the possible explanation might lie in the realm of the stupid rather than the sinister. He concedes— caustically: “Certainly, John Kerry has been unerringly wrong on every foreign policy issue for four decades, so sheer bungling stupidity cannot be ruled out.”

This is charitable because with the passage of time, there is accumulating evidence that a more ominous possibility may be emerging as increasingly and disturbingly plausible.

The Geneva accord is so perplexingly perturbing, its terms so tenuous, so vague, so equivocal, so given to conflicting interpretation, that even some of Obama’s most sycophantic apologists have found themselves expressing unprecedented heretical doubts as to the soundness of its rationale. Some like Harvard Law professor, Alan Dershowitz, have been stridently blunt in expressing their misgivings.

Others, such as Jeffrey Goldberg, unkindly designated by some as Obama’s court-journalist, seemed almost contritely embarrassed for doing so, promising to balance his commendably well-argued censure of the deal in “a coming post”, in which “I will do my best to represent…the compelling arguments to be made in favor of this deal”.

But more on that later.

The ‘taqiyya’ thing

For those unfamiliar with the term taqiyya in the title, a brief explanation: The notion of taqiyya and its significance have been extensively discussed in the literature on Islam, so clearly we cannot encompass the full scholarly debate here. Accordingly a highly compressed account will have to suffice.

Historically, the Koranic-sanctioned practice was first codified by minority Shia Muslims and refers to the dissemblance (i.e. the act of concealing or disguising) of their religious faith to protect themselves from the persecution from the more powerful Sunni Muslims.

However today, as the well-known scholar of Islam, Raymond Ibrahim, tells us: ‘Taqiyya is not as is often supposed, an exclusively Shi’ite phenomenon.” To make the point he cites Islamic studies professor Sami Mukaram, author of over twenty books on Islam: ‘Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam. Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.’ Thus, Ibrahim asserts that taqiyya has come to be “deployed not as dissimulation but as active deceit… deceit, which is doctrinally grounded in Islam, [and] often depicted as being equal—sometimes superior – to other universal military virtues, such as courage, fortitude, or self-sacrifice.’
Taqiyya (cont)

Now, while I have no intention of engaging in the ideo-theological debate over the true significance and scope of taqiyya, in general, or the scholarly merits of Ibrahim’s widely quoted interpretation of it, in particular, one thing is indisputable: There is clearly a considerable body of opinion which holds that, in the modern era, taqiyya seems to have become a means not only to defend Islam against the infidels but to advance it among them—particularly in the West.

Indeed, in the public discourse the term has come to denote “active doctrinal deceit” not only for the purpose of preserving religious Islamic values but to advance political Islamic goals. It is in this sense that it has become commonly used in the ideo-political debate on Islam and the methods used to advance its objectives in the West.

It is in this sense I will refer to it here.

Of course, it would be unfair to imply that subterfuge is a purely Muslim stratagem. After all, it has been touted by non-Muslims for centuries. For example, over 2500 years ago, the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu wrote: “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive.”

Indeed even the Bible (Proverbs 24:6) prescribes that “By deception shall thy make war,” which for a while was the motto of Israel’s external intelligence service, Mossad.

However, in Islam, there seems to be a far greater doctrinal sanction for a wider, unabashed and overarching use of “active deceit” in contending with the infidel “other”— not so much in the interests of self-preservation among them, but of dominance over them.

Why ‘sheer stupidity’ is charitable

It is against the backdrop of the foregoing discussion that Steyn’s previously cited dilemma should be evaluated. For it provides the context to judge whether the Obama administration’s penchant for making America seem “harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend” is the result of “design or incompetence”; and a criterion for understanding why his assessment that “sheer bungling stupidity cannot be ruled out” tends to the charitable.

For as readers will recall from last week’s column, it is difficult to make sense of current US foreign policy unless we accept that, as Dinesh D’Souza, director of last year’s highest-grossing documentary, “2016: Obama’s America,” suggests: “Obama has no interest in weakening our adversaries while he does seem to have an interest in weakening our allies”. This is emerging as an increasingly plausible interpretation of the Obama-administration’s undisguised Islamo-philic propensities.

Of course the White House has been at pains—albeit not always spectacularly successful—to blur the nature of its true agenda. However, this endeavor is becoming increasing difficult to maintain, as a clear pattern emerges of intervention when this advances Islamist interests, and non-intervention when it does not. This is particularly true in the case of Israel, even more so in the wake of the P5+1 deal, which last week prompted Caroline Glick to charge: “The goal of Obama’s foreign policy is not to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power [but] to weaken the State of Israel.”

Indeed, the deal struck in Geneva is so implausible that is may actually prove to be a point of inflexion for many hitherto Obama disciples and a moment of revelation for them to grasp the ominous nature of his underlying political credo.

Dershowitz & the case for deliberate deception

It already sparked some uncharacteristic rumblings in usually Obama-supportive quarters.

Arguably, the most outspoken of these was Alan Dershowitz, who has authored several works with titles that begin with the words The Case for…. Indeed, Dershowitz was so scathing in his censure of the deal with the mullahs that one is tempted to wonder whether, in light of his vigorous rebukes, he might not be mulling over the possibility of a new book entitled: The Case for Deliberate Deception.

In weekend interviews immediately following the announcement he made the following acerbic assessment of its chances of success and the abilities of those who “cooked it up”: “When you do a risk-benefit analysis, the possibility that this will actually result in ending Iran’s nuclear weapons program is probably in the range of 10%…But when you weigh that against the 30 or 40% chance that they’re dead wrong–nuclear bomb wrong – then it’s a very bad assessment of risk and benefits…This is first-year negotiating theory, and this administration gets a D-minus with grade inflation” Elsewhere, he warned that the agreement “could turn out to be a cataclysmic error of gigantic proportions.” His concern was clearly reflected in an article he penned, warning that “This is not a liberal/conservative issue…

Indeed all reasonable, thinking people should understand that ..it is a prescription for disaster.” With evident exasperation, he asked: “Have we learned nothing from North Korea and Neville Chamberlain?” So if the Obama-administration’s policies appear immune to conventional reason and impervious to historical lessons, what could possibly explain its manner of conduct? Surely, then, the case for deliberate deception should not be discounted? Surely, the lawyer in Dershowitz would agree?

Is revolt brewing in the court?

Perhaps one of the most intriguing sources of criticism of the Iranian deal was none other than Jeffrey Goldberg, rumored to be among the journalists with the closest relations to the White House, at times even acting as a mouthpiece to convey messages on its behalf to the public.

It is, therefore, hugely significant that he, of all people, would produce a stingingly skeptical review of the accord.

In his very astute (seriously) “Six Reasons to Worry About the Iranian Nuclear Deal”, posted Wednesday on Bloomberg, Goldberg gives a masterful (seriously) critique of the agreement’s fatal weaknesses, which virtually ensure its calamitous failure—unless of course for the authors of the deal, failure is a not calamity, but an objective.

Here is a synopsis of Goldberg’s analysis and concerns:

1. The deal isn’t done…nothing was actually signed. The deal is not, as of this moment, even operational.

2. Momentum for sanctions is waning…many nations, many companies and the Iranians themselves are seeing this agreement as the beginning of the end of the sanctions regime.

3. The (still unenforced) document agreed upon in Geneva promises Iran an eventual exit from nuclear monitoring… This is not a comforting idea.

4. The biggest concession to the Iranians might have already been made… Essentially, Obama’s administration has already conceded, before the main round of negotiations, that Iran is going to end up with the right to enrich.

5. The Geneva agreement only makes the most elliptical references to two indispensable components of any nuclear- weapons program…Iran is free, in the coming sixmonth period…to do whatever it pleases on missiles and warhead development.

6. The Iranians are so close to reaching the nuclear threshold anyway—that freezing in place much of the nuclear program seems increasingly futile.

Was this really what well-meaning, gullible American Jews had in mind, when persuaded by Obama’s pledge that “I have Israel’s back,” they gave him their support— both at the ballot and the bank?

Think ‘taqiyya’

The Obama administration has been disingenuous in portraying virtually every element of the deal with Iran – from its (non)compliance with half a dozen UN resolutions, to its stipulations regarding the right to enrich.

The accord will have far-reaching geo-political and geostrategic implications for the region—and well beyond.

Whether these will result in a clustering of pliant client- states around a nuclear-armed theo-tyrannical Islamist hegemon, or in a spiraling pan-regional arms race, with Sunni Arabs and Turks scrambling to develop—or purchase— their own non-conventional capabilities to match that of the Shia Persians, the consequences will be bleak— especially for Israel.

For whatever the outcome, it is likely to find itself facing a greatly empowered Islamic menace with a nuclear veto on any coercive action it may wish to undertake to ensure its security from external threats (e.g. Hezbollah) or domestic law-and-order (e.g quelling rebellion in the Galilee or Negev).

So much for “having Israel’s back.

So for anyone struggling to make sense out of all this seemingly inexplicable confusion, here’s some advice: Think taqiyya—and the pieces will all fall into place.

And in case you missed it Khamenei Himself pointed out the Deal is Based on DECEPTION!

Khamenei: “A technical wrestler also shows flexibility for technical reasons sometimes, but he would never forget who his rival is and what his main goal is.“  In my view this can only mean WINNING!

Martin Sherman (www.martinsherman.net) is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.

(http://www.strategic-israel.org/)

Iran - Daily reflecting Supreme Leaders’ positions: Geneva agreement is not for reconciliation with U.S.

Iran - Daily reflecting Supreme Leaders’ positions: Geneva agreement is not for reconciliation with U.S.(NCRI).

Leading Iranian newspaper the Kayhan Daily - known for supporting the Supreme leader's views - has warned of excessive optimism over the Geneva nuclear deal.

In an editorial on November 28, the paper writes: "The interim six-month agreement in Geneva, with all its importance, is merely one stop for us on a journey and nothing more.”

"This negotiation is part of the larger puzzle in our confrontation with the great powers. It is part of a war front and not a market to make deals."

Kayhan criticised those inside the regime who said the agreement heralded better relations with the west, adding: "We should not go to sleep or allow the enemy and its agents to put people to sleep, saying 'We've had some misunderstandings with the West but it is over and now it is time for reconciliation, and that the taboo of negotiating with US and the resistance front has crumbled!' They should not think we are now over our dilemma and are on a honeymoon."

Kayhan’s article is also an example of reciprocal attacks by the regime’s two main factions that have intensified since the Geneva nuclear deal.Hmmm.....As Hezbollah said: "slogan 'Death to America' will remain as Iran - US negotiations are proceeding."

Video - Dr.Andy Bostom on Iran and Shiite-Sunni end time theology and Islamic inspired antisemitism.

Video - Dr.Andy Bostom on Iran and Shiite-Sunni end time theology and Islamic inspired antisemitism.

US congresswoman Rep Michele Bachmann says Iran’s nuclear facilities 'must be bombed'

US congresswoman Rep Michele Bachmann says Iran’s nuclear facilities 'must be bombed'.(Presstv).

Republican member of the House of Representatives Rep. Michele Bachmann says Iran’s nuclear facilities “must be bombed” despite a nuclear agreement between Iran and six major powers.

“It may be incumbent upon the Prime Minister [Benjamin Netanyahu] to make a decision he has no desire to make, and that would be to bomb facilities, that must be bombed, in Iran,” Bachmann said during a speech at a Zionist Organization of America gala.

On November 24, a six-month accord was sealed in Geneva between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — the US, Britain, Russia, France and China — plus Germany.

The House Intelligence Committee member said the nuclear deal was a deliberate effort to harm Israel’s security interests.

“That decision that was made by the P5+1 in Geneva had more to do with Israel than it had to do with Iran,” she said.

“Because, you see, the decision that was made could be the biggest cudgel that our president, and that the nations of the world, could use to prevent Israel from defending not only herself, but her right to exist,” the congresswoman claimed.

The Jewish group, the Zionist Organization of America, had earlier condemned the agreement and described it as “an appeasement deal.”

The former US presidential candidate pointed out that the deal has left Israel isolated.
Israel “may be forced now, when the greatest nations of the world have abandoned her, in her time of greatest need… to stand alone,” Bachmann said.

“It is one thing to be a friend of Israel when the sun is shining, and when times are good… it is another to be a friend of Israel and to make the case that Israel not only has the right to exist but the right to defend herself, and that right may possibly include the right to be able to bomb nuclear facilities and potential nuclear facilities in Iran,” she argued.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded angrily after the accord was struck, calling it a “horrible mistake.”

“For the first time the leading world powers agreed to allow Iran to continue enriching uranium, totally ignoring the UN sanctions,” Netanyahu said. “Israel is not obligated by this agreement.”

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama defended the agreement, pushing back against rising criticism from Israel and Congress.
“We cannot close the door on diplomacy, and we cannot rule out peaceful solutions to the world’s problems,” Obama said.


“We cannot commit ourselves to an endless cycle of conflict, and tough talk and bluster may be the easy thing to do politically, but it’s not the right thing for our security,” he added.

Iran nuclear freeze to start by January.

Iran nuclear freeze to start by January.(HD)

Iran's six-month freeze of its nuclear programme agreed with world powers in Geneva will start by early January, Tehran's envoy to the UN atomic watchdog said Friday.

"We expect that either at the end of December or the beginning of January we should start implementing the measures agreed by both sides," Reza Najafi, envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency, told reporters.

The breakthrough accord struck last weekend between Iran and the United States, China, Russia, Britain, France and Germany -- the P5+1 -- foresees Iran rolling back some of its nuclear programme temporarily in exchange for sanctions relief.

The six-month freeze is meant to make it more difficult for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon and to build confidence while Tehran and the P5+1 hammer out a long-term accord.

Iran has pledged to limit uranium enrichment to low fissile purities. It will also lower the purity of its stockpile of medium-enriched material, which is relatively easy to convert to weapons-grade, or convert it to another form.

Iran also committed for six months "not to make further advances" at its Fordo and Natanz uranium enrichment sites and at the Arak heavy water reactor, which could provide Iran with weapons-grade plutonium once operating.

The Islamic republic, subject to painful UN and Western sanctions, will continue enriching uranium to low levels and it will retain its stockpile of low-enriched material.

It has been unclear since Geneva, when the accord was due to take effect, with technical discussions between Iran, the powers and the IAEA, whose job verifying Tehran's compliance will be key, set to hammer out the details.

"We have had preliminary discussions with the agency with regard to the nuclear-related measures ... to be verified by the agency," Najafi said Friday. "We are going to continue those discussions." The IAEA already keeps close tabs on Iran's nuclear work, with personnel almost constantly in the country inspecting machinery and measuring stockpiles.

But under Sunday's deal this will go further, with daily IAEA visits to enrichment sites and access to centrifuge assembly sites, uranium mines, and more frequent trips to Arak -- in addition to verifying the enrichment freeze.

Iran will also have to provide information on plans for new nuclear facilities, descriptions of every building at nuclear sites and updated design information on the Arak reactor, according to the text of Sunday's deal.

This will mean an increased workload for the IAEA and its Japanese chief Yukiya Amano, who said Thursday that "some time" -- and more money -- would be needed to work out how to verify the deal.

"This requires a significant amount of money and manpower.... The IAEA's budget is very, very tight. I don't think we can cover everything from our own budget," Amano told reporters.

In exchange for the freeze, Iran will receive some $7 billion (5.2 billion euros) in sanctions relief and the powers promised to impose no new embargo measures for six months if Tehran sticks to the accord.

But the vast raft of international sanctions that have badly hobbled the Iranian economy, more than halving its vital oil exports and sending inflation soaring, remain untouched.

Iran's Top nuclear negotiator criticizes EU for re-imposing sanctions on Iran's companies

Iran's Top nuclear negotiator criticizes EU for re-imposing sanctions on Iran's companies.(Taz).

Iranian deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs and top nuclear negotiator, Abbas Araqchi criticized EU for re-imposing sanctions against Iranian companies, Mehr news agency reported on Nov. 29.

However he underlined that implementation of earlier imposed sanctions is not against new nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries.

"But it is contrary to the spirit of cooperation and goodwill," he added, underlining that the new deal does not include softening of some of the main sanctions imposed on Iran previously.

Iran and six world powers reached a breakthrough deal early on Nov. 24 on Tehran's nuclear program. The two sides have signed a joint "plan of action".

On Nov. 26, the EU re-imposed sanctions on a number lf Iranian shipping companies and one company involved in the development of nuclear reactors.

The companies include: Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, Bushehr Shipping Co. Ltd, Hafize Darya Shipping Lines (HDSL), Irano - Misr Shipping Co., Irinvestship Ltd, IRISL (Malta) Ltd, IRISL Club, IRISL Europe GmbH, IRISL Marine Services and Engineering Co., ISI Maritime Ltd, Khazar Shipping Lines, Leadmarine, Marble Shipping Ltd, Safiran Payam Darya Shipping Lines (SAPID), Shipping Computer Services Co., Soroush Saramin Asatir Ship Management, South Way Shipping Agency Co. Ltd and Valfajr 8th Shipping Line Co.

The U.S. and its Western allies suspect Iran of developing a nuclear weapon - something that Iran denies.
The Islamic Republic has on numerous occasions stated that it does not seek to develop nuclear weapons, using nuclear energy for medical researches instead.

'Washington Post': Obama 'admin' omitting facts about Iran nuclear deal.

'Washington Post': Obama 'admin' omitting facts about Iran nuclear deal.(JPost).

The White House is omitting key facts about the nuclear deal signed with Iran, which makes a number of important concessions to the Islamic Republic, The Washington Post argued in its editorial Friday.

Sunday’s accord is a six-month agreement with an option to extend, meant to limit the Iranian nuclear program as the P5+1 – the US, UK, Russia, China, France and Germany – try to hammer out a comprehensive accord with Iran. In return, Iran received some sanctions relief.

While Iran has agreed to cap uranium enrichment and delay completion of the Arak heavy-water reactor during the interim, six-month negotiation period, the text of the deal says that the final agreement will involve "a mutually defined enrichment program with mutually agreed parameters.”

In other words, according to the Post's Editorial Board, "the United States and its partners have already agreed that Iranian enrichment activity will continue indefinitely. In contrast, a long-standing US demand that an underground enrichment facility be closed is not mentioned."

According to the editorial, the most troubling aspect of the Geneva interim deal is that it provides for a "sunset clause" in the comprehensive agreement, meaning even the long-term deal would not be finite, and Iran could return to uranium enrichment and plutonium production at some point in the future after sanctions have been removed.

How "long-term" the final agreement will be is a point of contention, with Iran proposing a period as short as 3-5 years before it is able to have an "unrestricted nuclear program." Hmmmmm.....No really? You think this 'admin' would hide the truth?Read the full story here.

Follow the money: How lobby interests are spinning Iran nuclear deal.

Follow the money: How lobby interests are spinning Iran nuclear deal.(RT).

RT: As we see, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammed Zarif came out of the talks with different views. Why's there such diversity in the interpretation of the deal? 

Pepe Escobar: Because the spin war started at 3am in Geneva. It’s going to go on for another six months, until May 2014, that’s the duration of this “first step” deal.

[It’s] very important: Kerry had to say [this] so that he could appease the Israel lobby, the US Congress and the Wahhabi petrodollar lobby in the US, not to mention some neocons in the US as well, [who are] still very powerful.

In Iran it’s different. They are saying, “We still have our right to enrich uranium,” and this is correct, because they will keep enriching uranium to 5 percent for the next six months, [while] 20 percent [enrichment] is frozen. They will discuss… the next deal, which will be the definitive deal, starting from May 2014.

And all the 20 percent enriched uranium that they have is going to be diluted, so it cannot be used later on for weapons-grade material.

RT: As you’ve said, the spin war has started, but how that would affect the implementation of the deal now and six months down the road? Who will eventually benefit from it, if the two sides have such diverse opinions? Won’t it stall one day at some point?

PE: No, we have to follow the letter of the agreement. This means enrichment until 5 percent OK, no further enrichment till 20 percent for the next six months, no new centrifuges. If Iran follows this – they are abiding by the deal, no problem.

The thing is, if among these IAEA inspectors [who] should be in Iran practically on a daily basis from now on, if you had the usual Eiffel traders [Parisian residents who fraudulently “sell” the Eiffel Tower to unsuspecting visitors – RT] who start spinning something else.
I’m sure Iran won’t break their promises, it’s in their own interest not to break any promise.

RT: It's emerged that Washington was engaged in secret talks with Iran long before the Geneva agreement, and even their closest allies were unaware. What do you make of this?

PE: Look, this is an extremely complex negotiation. Can you imagine that you have sherpas going to Geneva a month or three weeks ago, and hammering out the final deal so [that] we have foreign ministers [who] can sign it? It’s impossible. Sherpas usually start such things months in advance and obviously we had America’s sherpas, Iranian sherpas and Russian sherpas, these are the ones that count. Britain and France are spectators; they don’t count at all.

France counts [regarding] the 20 percent [enriched uranium], because they have cornered the market in medical isotopes. If Iran reaches 20 percent enrichment and starts selling their own medical isotopes cheaper, especially to the developing world, it’s not a good deal for France. So for the moment France is protecting its business interests.

RT: Let’s turn to America’s assessment of the situation, specifically what President Obama said. Looking at the Geneva deal, he said this is just a first step to reach a comprehensive solution in the future. What in your opinion would make Washington consider a full agreement?

PE: Obama is correct when he said, “This is the first step.” But, very important, the way he said it was very condescending, in fact even insulting, to Iran. He said nothing about Iranians’ role in the deal, mentioning only the role of absurd sanctions, which should be dismantled, because most of the sanctions bypass the UN, like Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been saying for months in fact.
Very important, for the next few months: follow the money. The Americans say they are going to unfreeze some of the Iranian money, perhaps $32 billion or even more. There is $10 billion in European banks. These are not going to be unfrozen. If the US unfreezes $4 to $5 billion – Obama can do it by executive order, bypassing the US Congress.

RT: John Kerry believes the sanctions have done their job and were quite helpful in sealing this deal. To what extent do you agree with this?

PE: In fact, it is the Iranian population that is paying the price of the sanctions; the Iranian government has found ways to bypass it. They’re selling, or bartering or trading energy, especially with their Asian customers. You know how much money Iran has [with] mostly Asian clients, China, Japan, Turkey and South Korea? $50 billion, [yet] they still cannot bring that money to Iran, so they have to buy products from these countries. So this is something that must be hammered out in the next agreement.

For the moment we have a breakthrough – it’s going to last for six months. There will be all sorts of interests that will try to bombard this deal; I’m saying especially about Wahhabi petrodollar monarchy interests and the Israeli lobby as well.


But for the moment we have diplomacy in action, something that we haven’t seen, especially between Iran and the US, for 34 years. This is the major breakthrough at the moment. But we have to be vigilant.

Video - Iranian President Hassan Rouhani: Iran's Enrichment Activities Will Proceed Similar to the Past.

Video - Iranian President Hassan Rouhani: Iran's Enrichment Activities Will Proceed Similar to the Past.Memri.

Full Text of Iran-Powers Nuclear Deal

Full Text of Iran-Powers Nuclear Deal.Source: Fars.

TEHRAN (FNA)- After the White House released a modified version of the deal struck by Iran and the six world powers in Geneva early Sunday morning, the Iranian Foreign Ministry released the text of the agreement.

The full text of the deal is as follows:

Geneva, 24 November 2013

Joint Plan of Action (   )

Preamble

The goal for these negotiations is to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iran's nuclear programme will be exclusively peaceful. Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek or develop any nuclear weapons.

This comprehensive solution would build on these initial measures and result in a final step for a period to be agreed upon and the resolution of concerns. This comprehensive solution would enable Iran to fully enjoy its right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes under the relevant articles of the NPT in conformity with its obligations therein. This comprehensive solution would involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with practical limits and transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the programme.

This comprehensive solution would constitute an integrated whole where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. 

This comprehensive solution would involve a reciprocal, step-bystep process, and would produce the comprehensive lifting of all UN Security Council sanctions, as well as multilateral and national sanctions related to Iran's nuclear programme.

There would be additional steps in between the initial measures and the final step, including, among other things, addressing the UN Security Council resolutions, with a view toward bringing to a satisfactory conclusion the UN Security Council's consideration of this matter. The E3+3 and Iran will be responsible for conclusion and implementation of mutual near-term measures and the comprehensive solution in good faith. A Joint Commission of E3/EU+3 and Iran will be established to monitor the implementation of the near-term measures and address issues that may arise, with the IAEA responsible for verification of nuclear-related measures. The Joint Commission will work with the IAEA to facilitate resolution of past and present issues of concern.

Elements of a first step The first step would be time-bound, with a duration of 6 months, and renewable by mutual consent, during which all parties will work to maintain a constructive atmosphere for negotiations in good faith. Iran would undertake the following voluntary measures:

· From the existing uranium enriched to 20%, retain half as working stock of 20% oxide for fabrication of fuel for the TRR. Dilute the remaining 20% UF6 to no more than 5%. No reconversion line.

· Iran announces that it will not enrich uranium over 5% for the duration of the 6 months.

· Iran announces that it will not make any further advances of its activities at the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant1, Fordow2, or the Arak reactor3, designated by the IAEA as IR-40.

· Beginning when the line for conversion of UF6 enriched up to 5% to UO2 is ready, Iran has decided to convert to oxide UF6 newly enriched up to 5% during the 6 month period, as provided in the operational schedule of the conversion plant declared to the IAEA.

· No new locations for the enrichment.

· Iran will continue its safeguarded R&D practices, including its current enrichment R&D practices, which are not designed for accumulation of the enriched uranium.

· No reprocessing or construction of a facility capable of reprocessing.

· Enhanced monitoring:

o Provision of specified information to the IAEA, including information on Iran's plans for nuclear facilities, a description of each building on each nuclear site, a description of the scale of operations for each location engaged in specified nuclear activities, information on uranium mines and mills, and information on source material. This information would be provided within three months of the adoption of these measures.

o Submission of an updated DIQ for the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40, to the IAEA.

o Steps to agree with the IAEA on conclusion of the Safeguards Approach for the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40.

o Daily IAEA inspector access when inspectors are not present for the purpose of Design Information Verification, Interim Inventory Verification, Physical Inventory Verification, and unannounced inspections, for the purpose of access to offline surveillance records, at Fordow and Natanz.

o IAEA inspector managed access to:

centrifuge assembly workshops4;

centrifuge rotor production workshops and storage facilities; and,
uranium mines and mills.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_Footnotes:

1 Namely, during the 6 months, Iran will not feed UF6 into the centrifuges installed but not enriching uranium. Not install additional centrifuges. Iran announces that during the first 6 months, it will replace existing centrifuges with centrifuges of the same type.

_{2 At Fordow, no further enrichment over 5% at 4 cascades now enriching uranium, and not increase enrichment capacity. Not}

_{feed UF6 into the other 12 cascades, which would remain in a non-operative state. No interconnections between cascades.}

_{Iran announces that during the first 6 months, it will replace existing centrifuges with centrifuges of the same type.}

_{3 Iran announces on concerns related to the construction of the reactor at Arak that for 6 months it will not commission the reactor or transfer fuel or heavy water to the reactor site and will not test additional fuel or produce more fuel for the reactor or install remaining components.}

_{4 Consistent with its plans, Iran's centrifuge production during the 6 months will be dedicated to replace damaged machines.}

In return, the E3/EU+3 would undertake the following voluntary measures:

· Pause efforts to further reduce Iran's crude oil sales, enabling Iran's current customers to purchase their current average amounts of crude oil. Enable the repatriation of an agreed amount of revenue held abroad. For such oil sales, suspend the EU and U.S. sanctions on associated insurance and transportation services.

· Suspend U.S. and EU sanctions on:

o Iran's petrochemical exports, as well as sanctions on associated services.5 

o Gold and precious metals, as well as sanctions on associated services.

· Suspend U.S. sanctions on Iran's auto industry, as well as sanctions on associated services.

· License the supply and installation in Iran of spare parts for safety of flight for Iranian civil aviation and associated services. License safety related inspections and repairs in Iran as well as associated services.6

· No new nuclear-related UN Security Council sanctions.

· No new EU nuclear-related sanctions.

· The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the respective roles of the President and the

Congress, will refrain from imposing new nuclear-related sanctions.

· Establish a financial channel to facilitate humanitarian trade for Iran's domestic needs using Iranian oil revenues held abroad. Humanitarian trade would be defined as transactions involving food and agricultural products, medicine, medical devices, and medical expenses incurred abroad. This channel would involve specified foreign banks and non-designated Iranian banks to be defined when establishing the channel.

o This channel could also enable:

transactions required to pay Iran's UN obligations; and,
direct tuition payments to universities and colleges for Iranian students studying abroad, up to an agreed amount for the six month period.

· Increase the EU authorisation thresholds for transactions for non-sanctioned trade to an agreed amount.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_Footnotes.

5 "Sanctions on associated services" means any service, such as insurance, transportation, or financial, subject to the underlying U.S. or EU sanctions applicable, insofar as each service is related to the underlying sanction and required to facilitate the desired transactions. These services could involve any non-designated Iranian entities.

_{6 Sanctions relief could involve any non-designated Iranian airlines as well as Iran Air.}

Elements of the final step of a comprehensive solution*

The final step of a comprehensive solution, which the parties aim to conclude negotiating and commence implementing no more than one year after the adoption of this document, would:

· Have a specified long-term duration to be agreed upon.

· Reflect the rights and obligations of parties to the NPT and IAEA Safeguards Agreements.

· Comprehensively lift UN Security Council, multilateral and national nuclear-related sanctions, including steps on access in areas of trade, technology, finance, and energy, on a schedule to be agreed upon.

· Involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with mutually agreed parameters consistent with practical needs, with agreed limits on scope and level of enrichment activities, capacity, where it is carried out, and stocks of enriched uranium, for a period to be agreed upon.

· Fully resolve concerns related to the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40.

No reprocessing or construction of a facility capable of reprocessing.

· Fully implement the agreed transparency measures and enhanced monitoring. Ratify and implement the Additional Protocol, consistent with the respective roles of the President and the Majlis (Iranian parliament).

· Include international civil nuclear cooperation, including among others, on acquiring modern light water power and research reactors and associated equipment, and the supply of modern nuclear fuel as well as agreed R&D practices.

Following successful implementation of the final step of the comprehensive solution for its full duration, the Iranian nuclear programme will be treated in the same manner as that of any non-nuclear weapon state party to the NPT.

_{* With respect to the final step and any steps in between, the standard principle that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" applies.}

   

Allen West: "Pres Obama has just empowered the number one state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, to pursue its nuclear goals and objectives."

Allen West: "Pres Obama has just empowered the number one state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, to pursue its nuclear goals and objectives."HT: AllenWest.

Nothing good happens late at night, and America just had a modern-day Neville Chamberlain moment. At 3 am in Geneva, Iran and 6 major powers agreed to “temporary relief” of sanctions in return for Iran stopping or scaling back parts of its nuclear program. President Obama has just empowered the number one state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, to pursue its nuclear goals and objectives.

This is not diplomacy, this is abject surrender and appeasement. Iran loses nothing, not a single facility, not any capability to enrich uranium, but we have conceded the one best non-military option: economic sanctions.

President Bill Clinton promised the same in regards to North Korea, and did that have any effect? Not to mention that North Korea has taken an 85-year-old Korean War veteran into detention, and of course we have done nothing.

Iran has held American Christian minister, Saeed Abedini, in prison for nearly a year, and President Obama said nothing about his fate, nor demanded his release. Israel and Saudi Arabia have lost all trust and confidence in America as a credible ally.

Secretary Kerry said the objective is “to require Iran to prove the peaceful nature of its nuclear program.” Yeah, right. We have fallen for the biggest deception ever. Perhaps these inept progressives should study the model for Islamic totalitarian negotiations, Muhammad’s Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. As well, they need to understand the principle of taquiyya – lying to “infidels” to promote the advancement of Islamic conquest and objectives.

The goal of the sanctions was to bring Iran to its knees and force them to surrender their march towards a nuclear weapon capability — not to get them to negotiate. The agreed-upon measures are in effect for six months, then what?

Right, another red line, that ends up not being a red line, and then we do nothing. Iran already has a capability and are close to having the requisite plutonium. Who in the international community will verify?

The Obama administration is in such a hurry to have SOMEthing going right, they’ve done something that will go very wrong.

We are promising relief along with the lifting of economic sanctions, but this should not have been promised until after complete verification of the terms of nuclear capacity reduction, at minimum over the period of a year.

We will never be able to gather the international support to restart the sanctions, not after open trade has begun. We have just guaranteed the continuation of the theocratic Islamic totalitarian regime. Jimmy Carter could not have botched this up any worse.

Now liberal socialists and the media are going to chime in saying Obama has achieved peace — so said Sir Neville Chamberlain upon return from his “negotiations” with Chancellor Adolf Hitler. Some people only understand strength and might. For them weakness is enticing. The better alternative? Crush the mad mullahs.